Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaculata" data-source="post: 8931003" data-attributes="member: 6801286">Complex moral questions can be fun to include in an adventure, especially if the DM does not make a ruling what the good and bad decissions are. As soon as the DM rules what the good ending is, I feel it takes away some of the player's agency.Consider for example this situation, which I introduced in my campaign. A zealous religious group controls a large city, whose main export product is lumber. But in expanding their lumbering operation, they unknowingly cut down the sacred grove of a small group of druids. Furious with this act, the druids start a long campaign of violence against the city. Basically terrorism; which also hurts a lot of innocents. They poison the water supply, send a vengeful forest spirit to attack the workers, and place a horrible curse on the leader of the church. The leader's son has to take over his now bedridden father's position, and intensifies actions against the druids. Eventually one of the druids gets caught, and is thrown in prison.Eventually the players get into a battle against the entire church, and seek to remove them from power. But first, they must spring their allies from prison. It is here that they meet the imprisoned druid, who proves a useful ally in their prison break. However, it is pretty clear that once he is free, he will continue his actions against the city. What do you do?As a DM, I stayed clear from making any moral judgement here. The grievances of the druids are understandable, especially against a much more powerful foe. But they have taken their lust for revenge beyond what is reasonable, and are hurting innocents in the process. On the other hand, the church's rule must end. But taking a whole city is no easy chore, so the players need all the help they can get. It's an interesting question.</blockquote>

Verification