Emoshin
So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish
In the recent Prisoner 13 adventure, to me the adventure submits that there is a morally "better" ending and the other endings are morally problematic.
Spoilers for non-DMs or whomever plans to play this adventure:
Unfortunately, the adventure offers exactly zero guidance here for DMs and players. It moralizes us with the different endings without context or assurance that the "good" ending is actually the morally correct one.
One could say that the author themselves is not trying to moralize which ending is good or bad, as it is only conveyed as the opinion of the organization in the fiction.
However, even if that were so, it is interesting that the adventure utterly fails to provide any guidance or clarity on the consequences of the PCs action should they choose the "good" ending. Can the PCs know this outcome is "good" if they don't or can't assess the consequences of aiding and abetting a criminal mastermind?
I have felt a similar serious cognitive dissonance with the presumptuously singular ending of The Wild Beyond the Witchlight, and of course the controversial moralizing in Mazfroth's Mighty Digressions of Candlekeep Mysteries.
I know many gaming tables are comfortable with whatever-goes/chaotic PC actions, or shades-of-grey plot lines. I also understand that some D&D players prioritize redemption arcs over accountability for evil actions. So I acknowledge this moral quandary may not be a quandary for everyone.
However, for me, I am seriously disturbed by what's happening out there in the real world. Horrible awful things are happening every day, over which I have no control. D&D is my escape from reality. I get to day-dream a fictional world where good people can effectively bring more good to the world. At my gaming table, I simply don't feel comfortable putting my players in a position that affects their conscience. Which means I have to lean through that discomfort, futilely wish that WoTC had been more intentional or nuanced with their moralizing, and rewrite the adventure for my table.
If/when your moral code does not jive with a moral position that is implied in a WoTC adventure, how do you react? What would you like to see ideally?
Spoilers for non-DMs or whomever plans to play this adventure:
The "good" ending is that the PCs aid and abet the Neutral Evil criminal mastermind with a ledger of all the names, crimes, and prisoner numbers of everyone ever incarcerated at this prison. In exchange, the client gets their stolen gold back.
In this ending, the mastermind criminal then relays the information to her agents for later use. What exactly will happen as a result is unclear. Maybe the information will be sold and enable a mass murderer to escape the prison one day to torture more innocents. Who can know for sure? There's nothing in the adventure that allows PCs to ascertain or trust what exactly would happen, but it seems like whatever it is, it nets out to be "good" because the client will get their stolen treasure?
Meanwhile, the "bad" ending is bad because it is gruesome to hurt or kill the criminal mastermind, and "the organization would not approve of this method" so the PCs get no reward at all.
In this ending, the mastermind criminal then relays the information to her agents for later use. What exactly will happen as a result is unclear. Maybe the information will be sold and enable a mass murderer to escape the prison one day to torture more innocents. Who can know for sure? There's nothing in the adventure that allows PCs to ascertain or trust what exactly would happen, but it seems like whatever it is, it nets out to be "good" because the client will get their stolen treasure?
Meanwhile, the "bad" ending is bad because it is gruesome to hurt or kill the criminal mastermind, and "the organization would not approve of this method" so the PCs get no reward at all.
One could say that the author themselves is not trying to moralize which ending is good or bad, as it is only conveyed as the opinion of the organization in the fiction.
However, even if that were so, it is interesting that the adventure utterly fails to provide any guidance or clarity on the consequences of the PCs action should they choose the "good" ending. Can the PCs know this outcome is "good" if they don't or can't assess the consequences of aiding and abetting a criminal mastermind?
I have felt a similar serious cognitive dissonance with the presumptuously singular ending of The Wild Beyond the Witchlight, and of course the controversial moralizing in Mazfroth's Mighty Digressions of Candlekeep Mysteries.
I know many gaming tables are comfortable with whatever-goes/chaotic PC actions, or shades-of-grey plot lines. I also understand that some D&D players prioritize redemption arcs over accountability for evil actions. So I acknowledge this moral quandary may not be a quandary for everyone.
However, for me, I am seriously disturbed by what's happening out there in the real world. Horrible awful things are happening every day, over which I have no control. D&D is my escape from reality. I get to day-dream a fictional world where good people can effectively bring more good to the world. At my gaming table, I simply don't feel comfortable putting my players in a position that affects their conscience. Which means I have to lean through that discomfort, futilely wish that WoTC had been more intentional or nuanced with their moralizing, and rewrite the adventure for my table.
If/when your moral code does not jive with a moral position that is implied in a WoTC adventure, how do you react? What would you like to see ideally?
Last edited: