Rat Bastard, or just interesting?

[hong]

Add in two things. 1) The party has a gnome member. 2) The adventure prior to this involved the PCs learning of orcs invading the human lands, and two PCs had a protracted, heated discussion about whether or not they should kill an unconscious orc.

So, am I an evil rat bastard, or is this just an interesting scenario?

Did your group enjoy the protracted, heated discussion about killing the unconscious orc? If so, it's an interesting scenario. If not, it's a dumb idea.

 

[Privateer]

It's interesting.

Now, making the orcs the ones who killed one of your PC's parents (as per the cliche)... that's rat bastard.

 

[Elephant]

It's a cool quest for a temple of mercy.

Want to have a lot of fun? Make the gnomish contingent nuetral evil. Make the orcs nuetral evil or chaotic evil. In an evil vs evil situation, whose side is the party on anyway?

Gnomes are typically neutral good, and you want an entire village of exceptions? Hmm...

 

[Sigurd]

Gnomes are typically neutral good, and you want an entire village of exceptions? Hmm...

An entire village of outcasts might be only slightly more rare than a few individuals. Magic curse, gold lust, diety influence lots of possibilities, esp if the village is remote.

Sigurd

 

[Pielorinho]

Gnomes are typically neutral good, and you want an entire village of exceptions? Hmm...

One of the joys of being the DM is that you get to choose the exceptions. If that's a serious problem, the DM can always create an entirely new monster, the gnömes, with stats exactly similar to gnomes except with a neutral evil alignment .

Daniel

 

[Lord Pendragon]

One of the joys of being the DM is that you get to choose the exceptions. If that's a serious problem, the DM can always create an entirely new monster, the gnömes, with stats exactly similar to gnomes except with a neutral evil alignment .

Daniel

Yes, but that defeats the purpose. There'd be no conflict, then, as the gnome party member would feel no kinship, and the good party members would feel no torn loyalties.

I'd suggest keeping the gnomes good. That's what makes it difficult to choose a side. The gnomes are good, but showing no mercy. How do you promote mercy without siding against good creatures, who have a valid right to vengeance?

If the gnomes are evil and the orcs are evil, it's no big deal. Do what the Temple of Mercy wants, get your favor, and move on.

 

[Pielorinho]

Pendragon, that's a very good point; I was just suggesting that the Monster Manual shouldn't prevent Mercule from having evil gnome towns. Moral dilemma considerations are a whole nother kettle of kuo-toa.

Daniel

 

[Mercule]

Hmm... The gnomes would have to stay generally good, and the orcs evil. Also, I don't think I want to add any "special" orc prophets, etc. The point of it is that the temple wants Mercy administered for its own sake, not for any greater purpose. Besides, I'm not sure how knowingly sparing someone specifically so he can later cause thousands of deaths fits in with the god of Mercy's portfolio.

The gnomes are important, too, for two reasons. One, someone mentioned that they didn't feel gnomes had been developed much in my setting (they're probably right). Two, there is a certain irony to having to save the big-bad, tough orcs from the diminuative gnomes.

Unfortunately, I don't think I'm going to get to use this adventure, anyway. One of the PCs remembered something that took them a completely different route to get things solved.

 

[Rel]

Unfortunately, I don't think I'm going to get to use this adventure, anyway. One of the PCs remembered something that took them a completely different route to get things solved.

Told ya'.

 

[Laurel]

Unfortunately, I don't think I'm going to get to use this adventure, anyway. One of the PCs remembered something that took them a completely different route to get things solved.

Darn... this sounded like somthing my DM would come up with!! He likes the dilemmas