I Just Couldn't Bring Myself to Do It

[Planesdragon]

Fair enough, though I don't think it was over powered.

Well, remember that the assassin was going to try and get the dwarf alone--a 4th level dwarf PC by himself is only EL 2 or 3, not 4. But, in any case...

An experienced proffesional Assassin clubbing a sleeping Dwarf in a hold filled with 30+ men and then dragging the body up the hold ladder back to his employer through the harbor...? Er... kinda hard for me to get on the same page with you on this one, but still, I'd really like to see how you would pull it off. Keeping in mind this is a lower magic game of course, maybe a bag of holding and a silence stone in a more typical D&D game?

I'd have the assassin take the long-term route. Hide out in the ship's hold until he sees an opportunity, then ambush the dwarf and take him back. Some forged documents as a "Sherrif" or somesuch would probably help this alone.

And then there's always the "mascarade as a dcotor" bit. If the dwarf recognizes the assassin, another of the assassin's guild can sneak in, gain the PC's trust, and then ambush them at the dramatically appropriate time.

And, OOC, kidnapping PCs is always better than murder, because a kidnapped PC can still be played, while a dead PC in a low-magic game is just, well, dead.

 

[3d6]

A 4th level PC dwarf by himself is an EL 4. (A single CR 4 creature is an EL 4 encounter.) A party of four 4th level PCs is an EL 8.

 

[twofalls]

Well, all the talk about EL and CR is fine, and I understand the gist of folks meaning, but I really don't think it matters all that much. I think the CR system is really more a way of helping new GM's balance encounters and avoid either TPKing groups or boring them with endlessly pathetic encounters. I've been running games since... well the dawn of time it seems sometimes, and I'm pretty good at just eyeballing it, particularly at lower levels.

I can see the kidnapping approach, but I wouldn't use it myself. I think it's interesting to hear that you would handle it that way though. I'm not at all worried about the other players becoming interested in the future about being given outs if a character is dying, I can handle it. I run a gritty game, and in fact we spent some time at the start of Fridays session talking about what that meant. In this case I just wasn't comfortable with the Coup de Grace. Dying in a desperate fight against heavy odds is heroic, dying in bed from an Assassin's blade isn't. The character chose the crippling wound, and the story was made more interesting, that was one of the goals I achieved.

It seems the majority of posters either wouldn't have let the situation happen this way, or would have let the PC die because of the failure of his comrades. I find that very interesting. I try to keep an internal consistency of logic in my games and ask myself "what would this personality do next", which is what I explained to Grendel's player when I pulled him aside and told him what was happening. I said to him "I'm doing everything I can to kill your character, but I'd really rather not see him die", the confused look on his face was classic. My biggest concern, knowing this player’s personality, was that he not feel that I was picking on him to be spiteful or mean for some reason. That was the other goal I achieved. All in all I was quite pleased with the night’s events, and the way things worked out.

Thanks for your viewpoints, they were interesting to read.

 

[sniffles]

I get that you feel a bit bad with having the assassin stab the wounded dwarf in the dark and make his escape without the player ever having gotten to roll (except the Fort save vs. Coup de Grace). But that's really no different than a PC failing his Initiative roll and dying to a couple lucky crits in the opening round of a combat. Sometimes that's just the way the dice fall.

As a player (not DM) I can't agree with that. If I fail my initiative and get killed by the first attack, at least I know what's happening, and there's a chance one of my fellow PCs can help me out. If I get killed in my sleep and no one knows until they wake up in the morning, I'm screwed. I hate feeling helpless. Failing my initiative is not helpless. It's just too slow.

I don't think giving the PC a permanent ability score decrease is being "soft". Being soft would be fudging the dice roll so that nothing really happened to him; he lost a few HP and the party cleric heals him later, that's soft.

It also occurs to me that perhaps they PCs aren't so at fault for not setting more guards. Did they know the dwarf was poisoned by an assassin? Did they have good reason to think the assassin was sent by the merchant? Hindsight is always 20/20.

 

[twofalls]

As a player (not DM) I can't agree with that. If I fail my initiative and get killed by the first attack, at least I know what's happening, and there's a chance one of my fellow PCs can help me out. If I get killed in my sleep and no one knows until they wake up in the morning, I'm screwed. I hate feeling helpless. Failing my initiative is not helpless. It's just too slow.

I'm hardly afraid to kill a PC, though I don't enjoy it. When a carefully crafted and beloved PC dies exploring a murky fetid swamp, spelunkering, or sacrificing himself to save his companions then okay, that makes for good storytelling. Being poisoned by a dagger in the market was even acceptable. The attacker had to roll to hit and the PC failed two saves he had a 50/50 chance to make, a big fuss was made by the people both in the market and in the building he was entering at the time, that made for a good story too. Cut down in his sleep because of a night of terrible dice rolls with no one to witness, with one die roll at less than 50% chance of success to allow him to live... I'm not okay with that.

Would I have been justified? The overwhelming response on this thread says yes, but would it have made the game more "fun" for everyone involved? No. I don't have a reputation for saving PC's at hazardous moments and this one mercy isn't going to endager me in that regard either.

I don't think giving the PC a permanent ability score decrease is being "soft". Being soft would be fudging the dice roll so that nothing really happened to him; he lost a few HP and the party cleric heals him later, that's soft.

Thank you for pointing that out Sniffles, I didn't feel I was being soft either.

It also occurs to me that perhaps they PCs aren't so at fault for not setting more guards. Did they know the dwarf was poisoned by an assassin? Did they have good reason to think the assassin was sent by the merchant? Hindsight is always 20/20.

After the whole trial that dominated the evening, and their confrontations with Papas Calindrino, it wasn't a tremendous leap of faith to see him behind the Assassin's dagger. The city watch is certainly going to be investigating it, and the Calindrino name and money is going to sheild him from any fallout. The party leader explained to me later that he had assumed the Captian of the Hyperion would have the gaurd doubled... such assumptions are poorly made. I leave decisions like that to the PC's.

 

[Falkus]

As a player (not DM) I can't agree with that. If I fail my initiative and get killed by the first attack, at least I know what's happening, and there's a chance one of my fellow PCs can help me out. If I get killed in my sleep and no one knows until they wake up in the morning, I'm screwed. I hate feeling helpless. Failing my initiative is not helpless. It's just too slow.

I agree, I hate helplessness like that. Happened to me last week, though it was a case of DM railroading. The DM may be the boss of the game, but I will maintain that a weapon that causes unconciousness on hit with no save is in no way a balanced item to use against a third level party.

 

[twofalls]

I agree, I hate helplessness like that. Happened to me last week, though it was a case of DM railroading. The DM may be the boss of the game, but I will maintain that a weapon that causes unconciousness on hit with no save is in no way a balanced item to use against a third level party.

Eh? Heck no. Not unless its a cursed item that causes it's WIELDER to fall unconcious... even then I'd expect a save... it's one of the basic standing principles of 3.x.

 

[toberane]

I don't think that anyone has mentioned this yet, but was the assassin created strictly using the core rules? According to the SRD, an assassin has to have 8 ranks of Hide and 8 ranks of Move Silently, which would be impossible for a rogue of less than 5th level. Prestige classes in general are supposed to be set up so that you have to be at least 5th level to take one.

So, by these rules, your assassin would have to be minimum 5th level rogue, and if he was a 2nd level assassin, that would make him a CR7. If he was created with one less level of rogue than he was supposed to have, then it is hard to really say what his challenge rating is, since he was given the more powerful Assassin skills one level before he should have had them.

There may be other rules allowing for this in other books that I haven't read, but to my understanding, the prerequisites of a prestige class are supposed to require a minimum of 5th level.

As DM, obviously, it is up to you to decide if you want to change the prerequisites, but to be fair, the players should know about this and probably have the option of bumping their power levels up in the same manner. This is the only thing that would have me crying "Foul!" if I were a player in your campaign.

 

[Romnipotent]

quite frankly, you did it perfectly. I also play in a Kalamar game, and dammit everytime I hear about games set in Kalamar they're always well done.

I like to think failed coup de grace where the victim is "dead" gives a great reappearance. Had a house rule that gave them a small chance of still being alive, but left behind out of neccessity in the group. When the character re-emerged it was... interesting

 

[twofalls]

So, by these rules, your assassin would have to be minimum 5th level rogue, and if he was a 2nd level assassin, that would make him a CR7. If he was created with one less level of rogue than he was supposed to have, then it is hard to really say what his challenge rating is, since he was given the more powerful Assassin skills one level before he should have had them.

I wanted to use the Assassin PrC, but didn't think going more than two levels over the party average was fair. Grendel the Dwarf btw, is a 5th level character. So I just tweaked it a bit and made a 4th level rouge, 2nd level Assassin.

As DM, obviously, it is up to you to decide if you want to change the prerequisites, but to be fair, the players should know about this and probably have the option of bumping their power levels up in the same manner. This is the only thing that would have me crying "Foul!" if I were a player in your campaign.

Meh. I just don't agree. I think GM's have the right to twist, tweak, bend, and pretty much take a crowbar to the rules in the game so long as the are consistant and fair. I've heard the arguements that the encounter was unfair... and to be certain the way things played out is why I handled it the way I did. I rolled with the dice until the dice said one of my player's character was to suffer an ignoble and unhappy end. Then I decided to give the player a choice. I presented it the way I did to him because he is a GM, and I knew if I put it on the line that way he'd understand from similar experience. It worked.