Lord or Tyrant?

[LostSoul]

I have to go with the DM here - it seems like he ran the NPCs in a believable manner, that he called for skill checks when there were conflicts, and that he went with the results of those skill checks.

Question for the players: do you think the NPCs aren't acting in a believable manner?

What if you looked at this as an encounter that you failed (ie. missed skill checks)? In that light - these are challenges - do you think they are too difficult to succeed at? Or that this sort of thing shouldn't be a conflict/challenge at all?

Question for the DM: Are you giving out XP for things like getting into the gate, getting access to the armoury, etc.?

 

[Mishihari Lord]

Meh to all of ya. The PCs are basically in the right. They're getting hostility from the milita when their bosses already agreed to an alliance. One of their members is attacked and rather than getting an apology they get yelled at by the militia commander. Then the militia abandon their duties and hide in the basement in a fit of pique. If my PC were there I would be considering whether these turkeys deserve saving at this point.

 

[Phlebas]

Although i appreciate the party PC's might not be happy with the way things turned out, I'd say the DM did a reasonable job of working out how scared people would react - ie not 100% logical, not calm and the party (by also getting annoyed - in character as well) fanned the situation into where it is now. Stuff happens and all that and it seemed a reasonable consequence of the actions

The question as to how much respect well know 'noble' adventurers should get largely depends on the background to your campaign and also what your local reputation is. Only the PC's / DM can answer that one and even then what your reputation is will depend a lot on what the NPC sees with his own eyes. If you had statues of your PC in the town square and blessings from the local high whatdjamacallit its a lot different from "being involved in that demon business the other side of the mountains". Even noble means different things in different cultures - from 'daddy was a pirate so don't mess with me or else' to 'daddy was the favourite of the queen due to his lute playing so don't mess with me or i'll cry'. Of course, in a fantasy setting where power may or may not equal nobility it gets even more confusing but having seen how 'most' PC's tend to interract with the world you could understand why local jobsworths would be resentful as much as respectful.

Back to the OP question tyrant vs lord. Technically a tyrant is an absolute ruler whereas a lord is constrained by certain obligations / customs / rules. Since the players aren't in their homelands they're effectively guests of the local officialdom and should respect the local chain of command.... if they don't do that, for good or bad reasons then they are behaving more like absolute rulers / tyrants.

sounds an interesting game btw, and kudos to the group for thinking things through to the level they're doing rather than just finding & killing things!

 

[Elf Witch]

Meh to all of ya. The PCs are basically in the right. They're getting hostility from the milita when their bosses already agreed to an alliance. One of their members is attacked and rather than getting an apology they get yelled at by the militia commander. Then the militia abandon their duties and hide in the basement in a fit of pique. If my PC were there I would be considering whether these turkeys deserve saving at this point.

First a cleric use wind walk to come up to a keep that is being attacked by undead and vampires they see the cleric coming out of the mist very much like a vampire can do so they fire arrows. Personally I would have done the same thing it makes sense. The PC cleric made an error of judgement he did not take into account how his actions would be perceived. He is the one that needs to apologize.

Second the cleric that got into it with the guard was not this cleric but another one who after yelling at the guards to stop firing got into a shouting match with the guard then another heavily armed PC came out and joined into the fracas and admits that he threw his weight around and challanged the man to a duel one that they both knew that the guard had no chance of winning. At that point the pCs were acting like bullies.

I don't blame the guards for saying enough and leaving their posts to try and hide why would they have any reason to trust that this group would do anything in their best interest.

 

[DM_Matt]

Calling him out was the exact right thing to do, from a macro-societal perspective; you reinforced the fact that there are people flatly better and more capable than the militia-leader in the world, and that ignoring them has consequences.

Is this the same robertliguori who starts flame wars on ATT like every other week about why the only moral and rational form of governance in a comic book universe is the domination of normals by superbeings?

 

[Vocenoctum]

1) I agree, the players were bullies and didn't try to defuse a situation with allies, but instead sought to overcome these allies.

2) Seriously, were these magical arrows of slaying? This is a D&D world, and if that cleric was even fazed by a couple arrows hitting him (and, really, how the hell did they hit him? His AC must suck!) he's a wuss. Ducking behind cover and casting a CMW would have basically made him as good as new. (Sure, appearing from mist and healing instantly from wounds might make him even more vampiric, but...)

Polite would have said "find cover, try diplomacy", but the demonstration of power or logic seemed to be off.

 

[werk]

Self-empower much?

I'm with the DM, there is no reason for these people to grovel and kowtow to the PCs every demand, especially since they didn't try to build any kind of rapport or working realtionship other than the UNSTATED "Do exaclty as I say without question and we'll get along fine."

Also consider that they are men at arms...what is their Int and Cha? These are peasants, not diplomats. The PCs, on the other hand, should have a little more wherewithal and could find these people very easy to control with a little finesse. Effort, just a little, works wonders.

Also consider that what the PCs know, the NPCs probably do not know much unless you explain it to them. I've run into this many times IMCs where the party is on Step 7 and interacts with an NPC at Step 2 and can't figure out why the NPC is being so difficult...it's because the NPC is roleplaying!

But no. Bark orders, shout em down, and then make an example of them. Tyrant is the least of what you could call them.

 

[Numion]

I don't think there's any big issue here, of tyrantism or anything else. A low level NPC tried to punk a high level PC, and a lord to boot, and got called on it. You can't let these NPC types walk all over you, it sets a bad precedent. And if you think this advice is harsh, just think about how many times PCs have got into trouble when they've treated an NPC lord with the same amount of disrespect?

I think the player gave the NPC even too much leniency when he challenged a duel; just kicking the crap out of the insolent NPC would've also been correct. Challenging a duel hinted at equality - and that wasn't a case here.

The only thing the PC did wrong was allowing the NPC to continue his insolence by not taking part in the defense later on. That action should be punished at next opportunity. Demote the guy or just kick him out of the fort, is my suggestion.

 

[Deset Gled]

I think both sides were acting unreasonable. The militia leader was definetally making some bad desicions by refusing to honor a previous agreement and let the party through the gate, by attacking someone obviously much more powerful than he without any attempt at identification, and not listening to the Priestess. The PC in question was not respecting the militia leader's authority to make (bad) decisions. As is often the case when two people act unreasonable, it ended in violence. The one plus is that it seems like that violence was limited to a fair, non-lethal duel.

I would expect that when the higher-ups return, both sides should be scolded for the altercation. The militia leader should be demoted, and the PCs would be warned that the only reason they are still are still being given hospitality at the keep is that they knocked the militia leader out instead of killing him. In the end, the party hasn't really hurt their reputations much (to anyone but the militia leader), but hasn't gained any trust or kind words, either. Consider it a lost opportunity to get a good reputation, but not a reason to be branded with a bad one. Everything should be just as it was the day before, until the party truly proves themselves (or until they return a few years later to find the militia leader promoted to leader of the entire keep ).

 

[Elf Witch]

I don't think there's any big issue here, of tyrantism or anything else. A low level NPC tried to punk a high level PC, and a lord to boot, and got called on it. You can't let these NPC types walk all over you, it sets a bad precedent. And if you think this advice is harsh, just think about how many times PCs have got into trouble when they've treated an NPC lord with the same amount of disrespect?

I think the player gave the NPC even too much leniency when he challenged a duel; just kicking the crap out of the insolent NPC would've also been correct. Challenging a duel hinted at equality - and that wasn't a case here.

The only thing the PC did wrong was allowing the NPC to continue his insolence by not taking part in the defense later on. That action should be punished at next opportunity. Demote the guy or just kick him out of the fort, is my suggestion.

That works to and when the high level lords of the keep get back from talking to their allies then they can kick the crap out of the PCs who mistreated their miltia. After all they are either the same level or higher than the PCs and it is their keep.

It never ceases to amaze me that people think having a high level in a game gives you the right to mistreat other people. If a high level lord NPC mistreats my PC when she is at a lower level then I may swallow it at the time but I will go out of my way to do everything in my power to circumvent and betray this Lord.

If you treat people badly you have to expect that they will either run away or do everything in their power to bring you down.

In my game my players know that there are consquences to their actions both good and bad. In my games NPCs are as important as PCs and PCs who abuse and bully NPCs will eventually find themselves without allies and sometimes facing some retribution. But sp far my players play there PCs as heroes and because of their actions they have made many allies. Right now they are wanted in the killing of a druid. It was in self defence. One of the towns in the druids area of power knows the PCs and have out and out lied to the druids and hidden the PCs from them risking bringing down the wrath of the druids on themselves all because the PCs treated the twon folk well and helped them out without lording it over them.