Players gone wild in Hommlet - RTTOEE

[Vaxalon]

I agree.

Barbarian and cleric should probably be executed. Judging from the severity of the crimes, messily. Drawing and quartering works nicely for that.

The fighter and the rogue should have completely ruined reputations. Depending on how vicious the justice is in the area (and it ought to be) being thrown into a dungeon for the rest of their lives may not be fair, but it's realistic.

Tell everyone to make up new characters. Ask them if they want to play in a mature fashion, and if they don't, as was suggested earlier, have their adventures take place in the wilderness where these kinds of fiascoes won't be a weekly occurrence.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Really? What are you trying to say here?

Most Americans support the death penalty and we are good lawbiding people.

LAwful Good does not mean Lawful pansy. It means doign what is right and obeying the law. If that law says one executes murderers then there is nothing wrong with a LG person carrying out that sentance.

As an example the Knights of Solamnia were a LG organisation on Krynn and they always executed traitors to the Knighthood. They did this by slitting the traitors throat with his own sword.

If Rufus is the preciding "law of the land", his LG alignment would not condone execution. At most the barbarian would serve a very long life imprisonment, perhaps being paroled after a certain amount of time served.

This is D&D, so magical punishments such as high-level curses could be a semi-permanent solution.

However, I would again emphasize that a LG-based society would not condone execution. Make the punishment harsh enough to reflect the severe nature of the offense.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

I would agree if the town was ruled by frontier hicks. The town though is ruled by two much smarter more experienced former adventurers with a large known problem in the area.

The last thing Rufus and Burne was to do is execute or imprison a fighter who really did nothing wrong other be at the wrong place at the wrong time and having the wrong friends. If word got around then the steady supply of adventurers needed to clear out the temple again may decide to go elsewhere.

Doc the Fighter did actively resist arrest and was part of the group that murdered the woman. In the eyes of a 'frontier' town like Hommlet is susposed to be I would say that is more than enough to make him an accomplice to murder.

Probably in today's society a case could be made that the Fighter didn't do anything and is therefore not responsible for the actions of his friends but I just don't think that would stick in this case.

 

[Carnifex]

I'd agree with DocMoriartty - especially in a medieval style environment like D&D. Law is harsh - mutilation and execution were common punishments in the medieval period, even advocated by people whom you could consier LG.

 

[Dieter]

I never said lawful good=lawful pansy. I'm basing lawful good on the notion of "what would a paladin do under these circumstances?"

He/she would bring the criminals to justice and obey whatever law which governs the land. If the code of law warrants capital punishment, that's fine and dandy. The paladin would be morally correct in cutting their throats. However (going back to the comment), if the law only permits life-imprisonment for murder, the paladin would be obligated to uphold that ruling.

So I guess it would be a DM ruling under Rufus' code of laws. What would Rufus do? I have run TtoEE in so long, so I don't know Rufus' background.

 

[Storm Raven]

One has to actually participate to get hit with aiding and abetting which is what you are trying to railroad the fighter into a charge of. All the fighter really did was defend himself from attack and even then as the origional post says he only struck to subdue.

Wait a second. If you want to start getting technical, then the fighter's crimes include resisting arrest, assault upon lawful authority and being an accomplice after the fact (resulting from his efforts to disable the town watchmen so his murderous companions could get away). That is just for starters. I could probably come up with any number of other crimes he is guilty of under standard modern US law.

But we aren't dealing with standard modern US law, so using those rules is excessively generous to the fighter. I'd call him an accomplice to murder of the town guards the cleric fried (using the felony murder rule that existed in traditional common law, and is still in force in the US today), since he was clearly assisting the cleric's felonious actions at that point.

I would bet that the two quasi-elders as former adventurers will look on his actions as simple self defense in a no win situation.

No win?

How about the fighter noticing his companions have engaged in several nasty crimes, and when the town watch shows up saying something like "I surrender, I didn't kill anyone here, and didn't help these guys. A trial will exonerate me, but I will submit to arrest to prove my innocence"? That way he isn't helping his companions try to escape, or assaulting lawful authority. He also has a decent chance of being let off relativley lightly at that point.

Instead he runs up and starts beating on watchmen with his companions (who slaughter several from the description). Even if he only struck to subdue the guards, he assisted the others in killing several guards by participating in the fracas.

Would an execution be warranted for what he did in the scenario set out in the initial post? I don't know. Maybe, maybe not. But a stiff sentence of some sort is clearly warranted unless Rufus and Burne are insane (since condoning random violence in their town is tantamount to surrendering all claims of authority they might have). I'd suggest prison for the fighter. For a long time.

The rogue didn't participate. He should have a sullied reputation for associating with a group of known criminals, but no legal punishment seems to be warranted.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Rufus is a former adventurer who helped clear out the Temple of Elemental Evil the first time around. He risked his life and killed lots of things to protect Homlet.

That beign said I doubt he has any problem with the death penalty.

 

[Pielorinho]

At a certain point in RttToEE, we became convinced that everyone in Hommlet who had a name was part of the temple's cult network. We decided to go door to door and ask people, "Who are you?"

If they stammered, "I'm, I'm the, uh, the baker," then they were fine, and we'd leave.

If they said, "I'm Ember" or something, then Blammo! We'd let them have it.

The difference between your party and ours, of course, is that we didn't follow through on our scheme. Instead, we headed back out to the moathouse, where everything seemed much safer.

I think you handled things right. Consider a geas on the less-offensive players: they need to pay to bring their victims back from the dead, and compensate their victims 3,000 gp apiece, or else be sold into slavery for ten years, proceeds from the sale going to their victims.

Considering Hommlet's troubles, however, Rufus & Bern might be willing to interrogate their victim who showed up as evil; if she turns out to be part of the temple, they might very well be lenient.

Make it hurt, definitely, but make sure the players can still have fun.

Daniel

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

hang the Barbarian & the Cleric.
Put the fighter in jail for a few years
hunt down the thief.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

As per the origional post:

the fighter subdues the 3 watchmen that are attempting to grapple him

Sounds like the fighter was merely defending himself to me. The further on it states that the fighter even helps give medical attention to any unconcious guardsmen.

So at no point does it say he ran up and started beating on anyone. Don't make up facts to feed your statements. Go with what was given to us.

Also nowhere does it say he aids his companions other then when he aids the cleric in treating the unconcious watchmen. So again you are making things up.

No win?

How about the fighter noticing his companions have engaged in several nasty crimes, and when the town watch shows up saying something like "I surrender, I didn't kill anyone here, and didn't help these guys. A trial will exonerate me, but I will submit to arrest to prove my innocence"? That way he isn't helping his companions try to escape, or assaulting lawful authority. He also has a decent chance of being let off relativley lightly at that point.

Instead he runs up and starts beating on watchmen with his companions (who slaughter several from the description). Even if he only struck to subdue the guards, he assisted the others in killing several guards by participating in the fracas.

Would an execution be warranted for what he did in the scenario set out in the initial post? I don't know. Maybe, maybe not. But a stiff sentence of some sort is clearly warranted unless Rufus and Burne are insane (since condoning random violence in their town is tantamount to surrendering all claims of authority they might have). I'd suggest prison for the fighter. For a long time.

The rogue didn't participate. He should have a sullied reputation for associating with a group of known criminals, but no legal punishment seems to be warranted.