Kill All the Hostages! (We'll bring them back...)

[Darklone]

Right

As I said. Shoot the horse, even if he manages to fall down without problems AND hold the girl, coup de grace is still a full round action. One round to at least distract him.

I have to admit that shooting the horse endangers the girl too. She might as well die from the fall. But I have the impression that the rogue didn't care about the girl at all, he wanted to get the villain. That's evil for me.

 

[Wolfspider]

I think that the father of the girl would have an easier time forgiving the rogue for his daughter's death if an arrow was sticking out of the horse's corspe instead of two arrows protruding from HER chest....

 

[xjp]

Well the girl was only 1/4 cover and +3 arrows were used in conjunction with a +3 longbow. So the odds were good, and the scenario of hitting the girl was not really detrimental. But you gotta take the shot. Attempts to take out the horse could have made the girls' situation much worse, possibly ruined her and her sister's chance of being resurrected. I wouldn't change the player's alignments for going for the horse, though.

 

[Wolfspider]

Well the girl was only 1/4 cover and +3 arrows were used in conjunction with a +3 longbow. So the odds were good, and the scenario of hitting the girl was not really detrimental.

Well, an attacker going after the horse would have suffered no such penalties and would have merely been required to successfully hit its Armor Class (which was probably significantly lower than the villians).

Attempts to take out the horse could have made the girls' situation much worse, possibly ruined her and her sister's chance of being resurrected.

Ummm...how?!?

 

[Darklone]

Possibilities

What about web? Would have caught horse and girl without problems. Sure he could have tried to kill her or burn the web, but why didn't they try anything?

Trying to grasp her with a whip. Animate rope. Something!

About cover or not... There's a feat in the EVIL campaign book: Living shields... lets villains use hostages as living shields quite effectively. Would you risk shooting at her if you even considered he could have something similar?

Ok, I am ranting about ideas here. I been sitting often enough as player on a table without ideas. I do know how it feels like and we often kept on bashing our way through the army of fanatics. I got no idea what kind of horse it was or whatever made him shoot at that guy (I mean which villain is gonna be taken down by a few arrows +3?)

But hey, the players are the good guys. They are meant to care about someone. And no again, letting someone be killed and raise him is not acceptable for me.

 

[Wolfspider]

I mean which villain is gonna be taken down by a few arrows +3?)

This is a really good point. Killing the villian this way would have taken several rounds at least, time during which he could have easily killed the girl if he wanted. It is a tactic doomed to failure. Other options would have proven more effective.

Let me clarify something. I've made plenty of stupid mistakes while gaming myself. I don't always make the greatest tactical decisions while in the heat of the moment. But the reason why I'm so passionately debating this issue is that several people have claimed that attacking the villian was a GOOD tactic when it clearly was a poor idea.

It's quite alright to make bad decisions when you own up to them. But don't praise them as being brilliant....

 

[xjp]

Well I have no idea what spells they had left/available. But in a world with resurrection it is far more responsible to risk saving someone at the cost of their own life when they have the power to bring them back than it is to risk letting someone being killed permanently. The party did not intentionally kill her they had a good chance of rescuing her alive. They played those odds. She was accidentally killed. They brought her and her sister back at considerable expense to themselves. The villian was defeated. The girls are alive.

 

[Wolfspider]

They brought her and her sister back at considerable expense to themselves.

Awww, how heroic of them, whipping out those bags of gold to ease their consciences!

I'm sure many a bard is going to sing about that one:

"Oh! The party left with their wallets a lot thinner!
I guess they shouldn't have stuck those arrows in her!"

 

[Darklone]

Hmmm.

Well I have no idea what spells they had left/available. But in a world with resurrection it is far more responsible to risk saving someone at the cost of their own life when they have the power to bring them back than it is to risk letting someone being killed permanently.

That's what I don't like: My spells are gone, lets go home. - But we have to save the world now!? - We'll do it tomorrow.

I think me and Wolfspider want to state that we don't like the solution of the party and that it's not good. It's a solution, but a weak and bad one. And the intention of the party is important to me. They didn't try to rescue the girl, they wanted to kill the villain.

I don't know how you guys handle it, but those intentions are for me what makes a player alignment, not what's written on his sheet.

 

[Darklone]

Another thing

In one of those evil sourcebooks they write:

- Why are characters evil? Cause they can.

That's what I am talking about. The players are powerful. They start to do evil things cause they can. And they don't care, they don't even notice anymore. In their mind, everythings alright. They saved the world. And don't understand why noone loves them for it.

That's how your villains started.