Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 8006346" data-attributes="member: 6795602">Rest later, this first. I think that perhaps I and others aren't doing a good part of linking our points together because the answer to your question IMO should have been self evident.The answer in detail is:The insulting PCs action could have resulted in any number of equally realistic reactions from the NPC.  The DM chose a reaction which then caused another PC to choose an action to attempt to take him hostage.  So then we work backwards and see whose actions were justified. The player that attempted to take the NPC hostage - were his actions justified?  From a fictional perspective, I think so.  From a game perspective - any escalating action that is in direct response to a direct threat toward a party members survival seems justified in the game to me.Was the NPC's actions justified?  From a fictional perspective, I think so.  From a game perspective, a single insult in a peaceful negotiation should really not be leading directly toward something that can be perceived as a threat on the PC survival.  That's where the NPC's actions fail to be justified.Was the PC's actions that insulted the NPC justified?  From a fictional perspective, I think yes.  From a game perspective, I believe they were justified because there is no indication that a single insult will directly lead to a threat to PC survival.  In fact, given our analysis above it actually shouldn't have led to that at all. Thus, I don't see any reason that we can fault either player for what happened.</blockquote>

Verification