Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Flyspeck23" data-source="post: 1394115" data-attributes="member: 10648">Everything that's happening is in some way the DM's doing. So what's wrong with asking what repercussions&nbsp; this kind of behavior might cause in the campaign?I think both solutions (people asking for help and believing the paladin can do almost anything, and other dragons being angry at the paladin) would make sense, and neither would mean that the DM (me) lays the smack down on the paladin.Behavior should have consequences... if not, than we're essentially talking &quot;one dungeon crawl after the other&quot;.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;By singlehandedly I wanted to say: he was the only one who dealt damage to the dragon. He was not alone in the fight, nor was he the sole target of the dragon. He isn't lying when he says he killed the dragon, but he couldn't have done it alone, so it's at least an exaggeration.In the same fight, another player singlehandedly (by the same meaning as above) defeated a lv8 sorcerer. Should that PC now call himself &quot;Sorcererslayer&quot;?This boils down to: would people in the campaign world take him seriously? Most people know that dragons exist, and know that they are a lot larger than a horse when grown up, so if this &quot;dragonslayer&quot; (who can't lie) tells them the dragon was as large as a brown bear, will they laugh at him?&nbsp;To make it clear: it's not forbidden or anything for the players to call themselves any way they want (how could it be?), but as said before: a name of such &quot;grandeur&quot; should have consequences - even if these consequences are just a slightly different attitude of some NPCs.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;It's no &quot;one-upsmanship&quot;, nor is he disrupting the game, so there's no danger to the campaign. And I think the player wouldn't mind for &quot;warts and all&quot; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Flyspeck23, post: 1394115, member: 10648"] Everything that's happening is in some way the DM's doing. So what's wrong with asking what repercussions this kind of behavior might cause in the campaign? I think both solutions (people asking for help and believing the paladin can do almost anything, and other dragons being angry at the paladin) would make sense, and neither would mean that the DM (me) lays the smack down on the paladin. Behavior should have consequences... if not, than we're essentially talking "one dungeon crawl after the other". By singlehandedly I wanted to say: he was the only one who dealt damage to the dragon. He was not alone in the fight, nor was he the sole target of the dragon. He isn't lying when he says he killed the dragon, but he couldn't have done it alone, so it's at least an exaggeration. In the same fight, another player singlehandedly (by the same meaning as above) defeated a lv8 sorcerer. Should that PC now call himself "Sorcererslayer"? This boils down to: would people in the campaign world take him seriously? Most people know that dragons exist, and know that they are a lot larger than a horse when grown up, so if this "dragonslayer" (who can't lie) tells them the dragon was as large as a brown bear, will they laugh at him? To make it clear: it's not forbidden or anything for the players to call themselves any way they want (how could it be?), but as said before: a name of such "grandeur" should have consequences - even if these consequences are just a slightly different attitude of some NPCs. It's no "one-upsmanship", nor is he disrupting the game, so there's no danger to the campaign. And I think the player wouldn't mind for "warts and all" ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification