NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="humble minion" data-source="post: 8272273" data-attributes="member: 5948">Medieval law is one thing, game-world law is another.  D&D world very rarely operate by real-world medieval law.  There's much less serfdom, for one thing.  The 'one could call it justice' line, yeeeaah ... one could also call it cold-blooded murder, and I'd probably be inclined to side with the latter group.  Premeditated killing of an acquaintance in vengeance for a non-violent act IS murder, by almost any definition you care to name.  Justice is something that's done by courts and legal processes, not by poisoned wine.But I get where you're coming from.  The wizard is a character who might commit that particular kind of cold-blooded premeditated murder, given the right situation. Questions for the wizard: is killing the only vengeance you ever enact?  What about proportionality?  Humiliation for humiliation, for example?  (If killing and violence and similar over-the-top massive retaliation ARE the only ways of satisfying this PCs vengeful streak then that's a horrifying control-freak sociopath, and is an evil character by almost any definition, but again, if that's what the wizard wants to play and the group is ok with it, go for your life...)Second, if the wizard is really really set on killing, then i'd strongly encourage his player to go to the GM and the player of the rogue PC and discuss this out of character.  Say that, if this goes ahead, then at the very least there's no way the wizard and rogue can continue in the same party.  Make sure all the cards are unambiguously on the table ahead of time.  Don't just hint, make the stakes 100% clear out of character. I'm not sure what the rogue's in-character motivation for doing all this is, maybe the player just thinks it'd be a laugh and is unaware of how seriously it would be taken by the wizard's player.  If that's the case, then expectations on all sides need to be make clear pronto. (Also, consider the fact that you don't know why the rogues is doing this.  Consider the possibility that there is a GOOD reason that you don't know yet.  Is she being blackmailed to do it by one of your enemies?  Mind controlled? )If all else fails, a good GM who's aware of the player's attitudes could possibly split the difference and resolve the situation in-character.  Maybe the rogue PC could have a bit of fun prancing about in the wizard's body, before being caught out when someone at the ball asks her something the 'wizard' would know, or asks the 'wizard' to cast a spell for some reason, and the imposter is revealed and the real wizard suffers no reputational damage.  Or hell, how is a PC dressed that silly going to get past the door guards at the ball anyway?  And remember this is a fantasy world where magic is an accepted part of life - when a dignified, polite person starts acting wacky, it's quite reasonable that people might immediately assume that magic is somehow involved rather than just taking it all at face value.But these are really last resort measures.  This needs to be addressed in person between real people like grown ups.  The idea of an rpg is to have fun with one's friends and sometimes that means compromising a bit, on both sides.  In this game, it sounds like the rogue wants to have fun at the expense of the wizard's player, and then the wizard's player will get back at them by ruining the rogue player's fun.  And then I assume the party paladin or whatever will vigorously investigate the murder of their friend the rogue (because, in-character, it's what they'd do!) and the wizard will end up on the gallows?   The wizard isn't the only one who gets to play their character to the hilt, and if you sow the wind...When I've GMed, i've been lucky enough that this situation has never come up.  I do have a house rule that if there's intra-character issues, then the evil PC leaves, and that was applied once (a bad-tempered dwarf killed a gnome navigator whose incompetence led to a shipwreck) and the dwarf PC became an NPC at the earliest opportunity.  And the player was ok with this because the consequences had been made clear beforehand.  If it was my game and i was the GM, I'd talk to both players, and make it clear to both that they need to sort it out between themselves or the likely consequences is both characters leaving the game permanently (the rogue through being poisoned, the wizard for being an evil poisoner).  Also, the implied gendered nature of the humiliation the rogue intends to inflict bothers me and I'd make that really clear to the rogue's player.  If it's something that makes the wizard's player uncomfortable out of character, I'd be pulling out the big DM stick and saying 'rule zero, don't make people uncomfortable in real life' and just flat-out disallowing it.This all sounds like a whole lot of not fun to me, frankly.  Obsessive vengeance-seekers don't play well in a cooperative game, any better than PCs who like to humiliate other PCs for giggles.  But to each their own, some people like to play Punisher: The Waterdeep Years. ..</blockquote>

Verification