Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KidSnide" data-source="post: 6382324" data-attributes="member: 54710">First, I don't see why the players are being shamed into doing something.  Their characters may be, but the players have a choice.Second, Option 2 is totally heroic.  I don't understand you definition of "heroism" if willingly facing a night-unwinnable fight doesn't qualify as "heroic."Third, you left off Option 4: use magic, roleplaying and cleverness to "win the no-win scenario."  Your description of how you got around it sounded great!  Sure, it required some cooperation from the DM, but all good creative options require a DM that's willing to let you do it.  A DM that totally shuts down out-of-the-box thinking isn't a good DM.What you have here is a sadistic NPC (albeit one who follows his own code of honor), who is giving the PCs a sadistic choice.  Responding to it is a difficult moral decision that will get different responses from different PC parties.  I love difficult moral decisions in my game.  Letting a new set of players with new characters work that out is the kind of role-playing moment that will set the intra-party dynamic for the rest of the campaign.  You know... Bruno is the guy who doesn't trust the enemy to keep is word and is willing to make the tough decision of letting a few innocents die to preserve our ability to fight back while Charis is the one who would rather risk her own life than let the innocents die.Maybe I'm wrong, but you seem to be interpreting this scenario as a railroad event in which the PCs are obliged to respond in a particular way.  Maybe your DM made it seem that way.  But it's not.  It's just an evil NPC doing a classic evil maneuver.  The PCs can react however they want.-KS</blockquote>

Verification