[REALMS] How would you handle this?

[Numion]

-Of course, even if the guards trusted the Ranger, they still should have insisted on the surrender of his sword. Pretty stupid of them considering.

In the realms rangers of Mielikki are widely known for their good deeds instead of random bloodbaths and wholesale slaughter. Maybe thats why the guards trusted him.

That may change though in this campaign.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Yeah; I'm not exactly supportive of the ranger's actions here.

scalwith: Talk to your players, especially the ranger. Remind them of all of the times that those honorable companions in the LotR trilogy surrendered their weapons or even their persons to those in authority, even when they were motivated by higher goals and had higher lineage and greater authority to command and judge morality. Ask them to think about whether it was moral to slay the guards as the ranger did, instead of striking for subdual, running away, or at least issuing a warning. If need be, have this discussion in game through the persona of the Tyrran cleric, who should know a bit about justice!

And Lucian: I'd assume that you're on the run from the law now, and that while you want to set things right, you're not exactly ready to put your head onto the chopping block. It's probable that the penalty for slaying city guardsmen in a city like Starmantle is death, or life imprisonment at best. I'd turn yourselves in to the Tyrran priest and hope for the best, as you suggested. Good luck!

 

[Abraxas]

Counterpoints:
1. So killing is warranted in all situations? Either everyone is clearly a lackey of BBEG, or one in disguise. With your logic you could kill anyone and still consider it a good act.

Ummm... No.
Your reading way to much into what I wrote.
There were not a lot of details given, thus the questions...

2. How did the guards know the rangers level, or even their own? Metagaming isn't any good even it is done by the DM. Your logic here might be more appropriate if the ranger had first threatened the guards, like "Let me go or I'll kill you." Instead he just pounced on them.

Well perhaps its just the way we game. Most times our DM's descriptions give hints that let us know (approximately) when someone is merely competent (guards that are 1st or 2nd level warriors) vs a hardened adventurer (8th level ranger). This works both ways.

And without more details we don't know if the ranger threatened them first - thus agian - the question.

So don't read into my questions any horrible metagaming killem all let God sort em out types of motives

If a cop tries to arrest you in real world, you shoot him, would you then expect it to be the cops fault, since he was the one who didn't run away?

If I was a murderous type armed with a M-60 machine gun, which the officer let me carry, I would say it wasn't very smart - which is pretty much what I was saying about the guards.

I'm not defending the rangers actions but I'd like to know more about how the DM set the situatiion up before deciding that the rangers actions were completely off the wall. Every once in a while a DM shows up here and only gives part of the story portraying the players in the worst possible light because they don't care for what was done. That certainly doesn't seem (at this time) to be what happened here but without details you can never know.

 

[Bard Lucian]

And Lucian: I'd assume that you're on the run from the law now, and that while you want to set things right, you're not exactly ready to put your head onto the chopping block. It's probable that the penalty for slaying city guardsmen in a city like Starmantle is death, or life imprisonment at best. I'd turn yourselves in to the Tyrran priest and hope for the best, as you suggested. Good luck!

Let me stress that the elf killed nobody, nor even attempted to. In his original escape, he used a sleep spell. In the rescue attempt, he used a color spray to take out several of the guards, while other characters struck for subdual damage.

That doesn't exempt him from a possible charge of accessory however, but if the Ranger agrees to submit to judgment, then it may be possible to have the accessory charges removed. It depends on what the DM has in mind and how good our diplomacy checks are.

 

[nHammer]

The guards approached him very politely, and in fact let him keep his sword while they accompanied him to the prison. It was while they were on their way that he decided to change his mind and resist. It was at that point he drew the sword they let him keep.

If the good aligned characters know this to be true, I would say they should turn the ranger in. And if I was the DM, I'd be changing the ranger's alignment and his God would cut him off.

 

[Bard Lucian]

We were trying to figure out during the game how to deal with his god's displeasure. The DM stressed several times that he could feel a disconnection. At the same time, the ranger didn't completely lose his spells. We tried to come up with a mechanic to make them harder to cast, to signify the diety's distance. We had him roll a concentration check, with the DC indicating the deity's displeasure with the situation.

 

[nHammer]

I would say just lower the number of spells he can cast in a day.

 

[scalwith]

quick update

The next session has come and gone and I thought I'd share how things went down.

The party, after some soul searching, decides that they must face their accusers and attempt to divine why they were framed. They left the homocidial ranger behind while they attempted to negoiate their way into the city. Unfortunately, things didn't run smoothly.

The city guard was, strangely enough, guarding the gate when they came back through with wizard backup. Rather than allow a noncombatant into the fray they sent him away ... drawing the ranger into the fray.

He... in the player's words, "failed a saving throw" for what I'm still not sure, but he immediately placed himself in situation where not only did the wizard attempt to end his life, but his own party helped.

Consequently, the ranger is dead, slayed by his own friends who felt he'd crossed the line one too many times. The rest of the party is facing the original charges.. plus some other more recently added charges due to their escape.

Unfortunately for the party, as a direct result of their original actions it will be much more difficult to prove their innocence. I'm looking forward to seeing how they get out of it. (They're quite clever usually) and what character the player will bring in.

Thanks for the adivice, I'll update again once we play again... in a month.