Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9543577" data-attributes="member: 29398">Maybe.Depending on your level and-or resources, and on whether the DM was willing to allow you to think outside the box, another option could have been in play, namely to retreat in the moment and then do two things:1. Come back later with more people and bigger guns and wipe those fey off the face of the planet, and2. Using a Wish, True Resurrection, or similar, bring the child back to life (and if possible, erase its memories of that whole incident!); paid for if needed with the loot you took off the fey you just killed.This sounds like flat-out bad DMing.This, though?  It's on the DM to let you play your characters as you will, even if said DM doesn't understand or agree with your (in or out of character) motivations for so doing.I mean, I love it when characters take reckless risks for laughs and gold.  More, please!  But if you players want to save lives instead then so be it; it;s your choice, and if doing so costs your characters their lives (which taking those reckless risks could just as easily have done) then so be that too.I sort of agree with this, in that I'd like to see the high-risk play (when successful) be rewarded more than the lower-risk play, regardless of why that play is being made, because otherwise there isn't much incentive to do anything other than the safe boring routine thing.An example from two nights ago: our party was fighting a bunch of very tough foes in a dungeon's "boss battle".  The boss was a massive great frog-like thing, big enough to swallow people whole on a whim.  We put what seemed like boatloads of damage into it but it wasn't having much if any effect, so one of our Fighters decided to try something rash: he intentionally jumped into the frog's mouth and let himself be swallowed so he could chop it up from the inside.  And, somewhat amazingly, he pulled it off: the Fighter survived the stomach acid just long enough to kill it, then got hauled out before dying.High risk action.I'll leave the opinions on whether that Fighter should get a higher reward to others as I have a conflict of interest: the Fighter who did this was Lanefan, my PC. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I'm fine with both of those characters, other than (sometimes) the "let his friend be killed" part.  Sometimes when a character's going to die anyway there's no point in sticking around so two characters can die instead; but often it can be a choice of leaving one character to die or sticking around and having nobody die, and those are the ones that hack me off.</blockquote>

Verification