D&D 5E Is it right for WoTC to moralize us in an adventure module?

[Emoshin]

Because there is a high probability that they need to free her or do something significant for prisoner 13 in order to get the information. Talking to her like that 1) fails, and 2) alerts the prison that there is outside interest in prisoner 13, and 3) makes prisoner 13 suspicious of anyone in the future coming to "help" her.

Lawful good is not lawful stupid. Doing what you suggest is just dooming themselves to failure.

What do you mean? I was not actually suggesting that the adventurers should do that.

 

[Maxperson]

What do you mean? I was not actually suggesting that the adventurers should do that.

I doesn't matter who does it. If they go through the proper channels they set themselves up on the path to failure.

 

[Faolyn]

How else are you going to get the info. The staff at the Panopticon is not going to just let you walk in and interrogate the inmates.

Heh. So, ages ago, I was playing in a GURPS adaptation of a Pathfinder-setting adventure (I'm not sure if it actually a Paizo game or if the DM had just set it in Golarian--he used Greyhawk gods, so who knows). We desperately needed to retrieve a magic item a long-dead adventurer had put in an extradimensional bank. The game assumed a heist.

Instead, we found the dead adventurer's grave, hired a lawyer, I cast the GURPS equivalent of speak with dead, and we got the dead soul's permission to use the item for the duration of the crisis we needed it for. We never even thought about pulling the heist. (I should probably mention that at the time, we were also carrying around the pickled head of one of our dead enemies, so it's not like we were a group of pacifists.)

So basically, in an RPG, anything's possible.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Because there is a high probability that they need to free her or do something significant for prisoner 13 in order to get the information. Talking to her like that 1) fails, and 2) alerts the prison that there is outside interest in prisoner 13, and 3) makes prisoner 13 suspicious of anyone in the future coming to "help" her.

Lawful good is not lawful stupid. Doing what you suggest is just dooming themselves to failure.

Lawful Good requires more good faith than that, I'd suggest.

That said, the issue though is actually decently-explained (albeit completely implausible) in the adventure.

The quest-giver is a bizarre idiot. He's done ultra-detailed research on the prison. Figured out a plan to get in and out. Got supplies together. Got transport together. Got the PCs a magic map which allows them to defeat the prison. Knows an insane amount about the prison. But just does not remotely understand Prisoner 13 or really know anything about her, so blithely and utterly mindlessly determines that she will need to be broken out in order to help the adventurers. It's a huge assumption and baseless, and means the PCs go in with absolutely zero leverage on Prisoner 13, where leverage would be more important than half the stuff they do have. So basically have to chat her up and get out of her what she really wants. I can't say there aren't people with the same sort of mentality as the quest-giver IRL - there absolutely are - but the adventure doesn't call him out for being an idiot, which it probably should.

I doesn't matter who does it. If they go through the proper channels they set themselves up on the path to failure.

Reading the adventure that's not necessarily true. If they'd tried harder through proper channels, they could have got a lot more info, frankly, and at the very least realized Prisoner 13 doesn't actually want to be broken out (which is one of the few genuinely fun things about the adventure).

 

[Maxperson]

Lawful Good requires more good faith than that, I'd suggest.

That said, the issue though is actually decently-explained (albeit completely implausible) in the adventure.

The quest-giver is a bizarre idiot. He's done ultra-detailed research on the prison. Figured out a plan to get in and out. Got supplies together. Got transport together. Got the PCs a magic map which allows them to defeat the prison. Knows an insane amount about the prison. But just does not remotely understand Prisoner 13 or really know anything about her, so blithely and utterly mindlessly determines that she will need to be broken out in order to help the adventurers. It's a huge assumption and baseless, and means the PCs go in with absolutely zero leverage on Prisoner 13, where leverage would be more important than half the stuff they do have. So basically have to chat her up and get out of her what she really wants. I can't say there aren't people with the same sort of mentality as the quest-giver IRL - there absolutely are - but the adventure doesn't call him out for being an idiot, which it probably should.

He doesn't actually assume that she needs to be broken out. He simply says that if that's what it takes, he's okay with it. I'm also not sure just how much research needed to be done. Varrin represents one of the governments that uses that prison, so they would have been provided a great deal of information about it on that basis alone.

Reading the adventure that's not necessarily true. If they'd tried harder through proper channels, they could have got a lot more info, frankly, and at the very least realized Prisoner 13 doesn't actually want to be broken out (which is one of the few genuinely fun things about the adventure).

We do know that from the Adventure Background.

Spoiler

They captured Korda and interrogated her, but she never revealed the location of the stolen fortune, even under magical compulsion. The Axebreaker dwarves used their influence to have her sentenced to life in prison at Revel’s End. There, Clan Axebreaker was hopeful Korda would eventually break and reveal the location of the stolen wealth. This played right into Korda’s hands, since she had made copious enemies who can’t move against her while she’s incarcerated.

Korda, now known as Prisoner 13, prepared for her imprisonment by laying the groundwork for a new spy and criminal network, which cost her much of her stolen fortune. She now runs her operations from the prison. Using her magical tattoos, she telepathically coordinates agents throughout Faerûn and beyond, none of whom know the identity of their employer.

She went to prison rather than give them the information that they wanted AND she doesn't want to leave.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

He doesn't actually assume that she needs to be broken out. He simply says that if that's what it takes, he's okay with it. I'm also not sure just how much research needed to be done. Varrin represents one of the governments that uses that prison, so they would have been provided a great deal of information about it on that basis alone.

???????

Which government does he work for? You seem to be going by implication, because they got her imprisoned in the first place, but the way that's phrased it seems like someone did them a corrupt/extrajudicial favour. If it was any I'd expect Mirabar or Mithral Hall but I can't find that stated. Could you point me to the text that says that?

Also every time I read this guy's spiel the idea that he's LG gets funnier.

We do not that from the Adventure Background.

They captured Korda and interrogated her, but she never revealed the location of the stolen fortune, even under magical compulsion. The Axebreaker dwarves used their influence to have her sentenced to life in prison at Revel’s End. There, Clan Axebreaker was hopeful Korda would eventually break and reveal the location of the stolen wealth. This played right into Korda’s hands, since she had made copious enemies who can’t move against her while she’s incarcerated.

Korda, now known as Prisoner 13, prepared for her imprisonment by laying the groundwork for a new spy and criminal network, which cost her much of her stolen fortune. She now runs her operations from the prison. Using her magical tattoos, she telepathically coordinates agents throughout Faerûn and beyond, none of whom know the identity of their employer.

She went to prison rather than give them the information that they wanted AND she doesn't want to leave.

???????????????

You literally said the same thing as me.

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

I feel the nature of a published adventure will probably always lean towards having a 'good'/'optimal' end. Modules started out as competitive races at conventions, after all - or at least big ones like the Slave Lords. In that case, you need a way to say one party did 'better' than the other. In home games, there's not that kind of pressure to have one end seem 'better' and a DM has more leeway to let it take as long as it takes and the rewards be what the DM feels is appropriate

I haven't read the adventure other than in this thread, but I feel like it's something that happens in a decent amount of home games: you're setting up a 'heist' or skullduggery, and you give the party ways into these places probably so they don't spend six hours real time on planning, but the table takes that as a signal to brute-force their way through, putting the focus more on the dungeon-aspect instead of the roleplay part. I think as DMs we tend to signal things accidentally, or have players read imaginary signals based on their tropes and experiences.

 

[Maxperson]

Which government does he work for? You seem to be going by implication, because they got her imprisoned in the first place, but the way that's phrased it seems like someone did them a corrupt/extrajudicial favour. If it was any I'd expect Mirabar or Mithral Hall but I can't find that stated. Could you point me to the text that says that?

"A representative of the clan, Varrin Axebreaker, wishes to hire the characters to learn how to access the treasure.", and "Varrin Axebreaker (lawful good, dwarf noble)" and "My name is Varrin Axebreaker, and I have a proposition for you. My clan has located wealth stolen from us many years ago, but it’s sealed in a vault that’s magically locked. If you can recover the key—whatever it is—you’ll gain the undying gratitude of Clan Axebreaker."

He's a representative of a clan who is a noble bearing the name of the clan and who has the authority to grant clan wealth and gratitude. He works for that government.

There is no Axebreaker clan associated with Mithril Hall. That clan was Battlehammer.

"Revel’s End is controlled by the Lords’ Alliance, a loose confederation of settlements whose current members include the cities of Baldur’s Gate, Mirabar, Neverwinter, Silverymoon, Waterdeep, and Yartar; the towns of Amphail, Daggerford, and Longsaddle; and the dwarven stronghold of Mithral Hall."

The Lords' Alliance includes those named there, but also others. The FR wiki has an incomplete list of 15 members. The adventure says "All 10" for members, but there are more than 10. Chalk that one up to poor research and/or "there's no such thing as canon."

If Clan Axebreaker is using that prison, they would also be part of the Lords' Alliance.

Also every time I read this guy's spiel the idea that he's LG gets funnier.

Is Varrin LG? I don't get the impression that he is a member of the Golden Parachute, er Golden Vault. He's just the guy who went to them.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

"A representative of the clan, Varrin Axebreaker, wishes to hire the characters to learn how to access the treasure.", and "Varrin Axebreaker (lawful good, dwarf noble)" and "My name is Varrin Axebreaker, and I have a proposition for you. My clan has located wealth stolen from us many years ago, but it’s sealed in a vault that’s magically locked. If you can recover the key—whatever it is—you’ll gain the undying gratitude of Clan Axebreaker."

He's a representative of a clan who is a noble bearing the name of the clan and who has the authority to grant clan wealth and gratitude. He works for that government.

There is no Axebreaker clan associated with Mithril Hall. That clan was Battlehammer.

"Revel’s End is controlled by the Lords’ Alliance, a loose confederation of settlements whose current members include the cities of Baldur’s Gate, Mirabar, Neverwinter, Silverymoon, Waterdeep, and Yartar; the towns of Amphail, Daggerford, and Longsaddle; and the dwarven stronghold of Mithral Hall."

The Lords' Alliance includes those named there, but also others. The FR wiki has an incomplete list of 15 members. The adventure says "All 10" for members, but there are more than 10. Chalk that one up to poor research and/or "there's no such thing as canon."

If Clan Axebreaker is using that prison, they would also be part of the Lords' Alliance.

So you're inferring it, like I suggested you were?

But that's a pure interference, there's nothing to support it beyond the circular logic that because he used the jail, he's part of one of these governments. If he was part, he'd have enough pull to at the very least talk to Prisoner 13.

Why would the adventure avoid saying he was a member of the government? It's bizarre.

And it says:

"The Axebreaker dwarves used their influence to have her sentenced to life in prison at Revel’s End."

To "used their influence" is firstly creepy and extrajudicial, and secondly, to me suggests they were not actually one of the official members of the Revel's End Imprisonment Club.

Is Varrin LG? I don't get the impression that he is a member of the Golden Parachute, er Golden Vault. He's just the guy who went to them.

Yes, rather nonsensically he is "Lawful Good Dwarf Noble". Chaotic Good would make 1000% more sense. He's not a member of the Golden Parachute. It's very unclear why they're helping him, too, because their "just go good" motto doesn't really seem to apply - they're here just liberating a surprisingly moderate amount of gold (47k by my maths, assuming Varrin isn't cheating the PCs, which would be even funnier), for a bunch of dwarves who don't appear to actually need it. I wouldn't even agree that giving Clan Axebreaker that gold is a Good act at all, in fact. It's undoubtedly somewhat Lawful, but good? If they were starving or in desperate need or something, sure. But there's absolutely no sign of that.

 

[FrozenNorth]

That's what I mean - alignment leads to all these dumb arguments about what counts as what. Instead of the story focusing on what behaviours make sense for the characters in that situation, players have to contort their motivations to fit these weird boxes. That's not how morality works in the real world. No one is actually "lawful good." It's just a strange game convention. Which is not a problem in itself, if it made the game better. For me, it does the opposite - it takes us out of the story.

I agree, and to quote @pemerton from another thread, it tends to lead to engaging with the rules rather than engaging with the fiction.