Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hathur" data-source="post: 3299246" data-attributes="member: 40823">The party didn't kill him on the spot only because they had adventured a lot before hand, and the barbarian wasnt a FB then... so they had a good rapport with the character... but when he suddenly turned on the party with no evidence of magical or supernatural influence and tried to kill them, they wanted to subdue him if possible... the paladin didn't see it as just to kill him, seeing as how the barbarian had done a great deal of good before the incident... however, despite their friendship, attempted murder could be no tolerated by the paladin (nor the other mostly Lawful characters), so they did what they felt was right and turned him in.A neutral party would have just (rightfully) killed the FB on the spot.As a DM, I can't see how any character could travel with a FB... the players are no longer role playing and are clearly using game knowledge to take advantage of the situation. &quot;It's ok, we know he'll go nuts but we;ll use magic to try to stop him until he calms down... he makes a good tank.&quot; .... in reality, no party would accept this - they'd ditch the lunatic on the spot, kill him or tie him up and leave him on the side of the road.Would you, personally, ever knowingly travel with someone that you knew would slit your throat if you said something to upset him? An evil party might use the FB as a puppet, a tool... but otherwise, most other adventurers would never risk their lives to traveling with a FB -- they have enough trouble to worry about without having to constantly look over their shoulders because the FB stubbed his toe on a rock and entered a murderous frenzy.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hathur, post: 3299246, member: 40823"] The party didn't kill him on the spot only because they had adventured a lot before hand, and the barbarian wasnt a FB then... so they had a good rapport with the character... but when he suddenly turned on the party with no evidence of magical or supernatural influence and tried to kill them, they wanted to subdue him if possible... the paladin didn't see it as just to kill him, seeing as how the barbarian had done a great deal of good before the incident... however, despite their friendship, attempted murder could be no tolerated by the paladin (nor the other mostly Lawful characters), so they did what they felt was right and turned him in. A neutral party would have just (rightfully) killed the FB on the spot. As a DM, I can't see how any character could travel with a FB... the players are no longer role playing and are clearly using game knowledge to take advantage of the situation. "It's ok, we know he'll go nuts but we;ll use magic to try to stop him until he calms down... he makes a good tank." .... in reality, no party would accept this - they'd ditch the lunatic on the spot, kill him or tie him up and leave him on the side of the road. Would you, personally, ever knowingly travel with someone that you knew would slit your throat if you said something to upset him? An evil party might use the FB as a puppet, a tool... but otherwise, most other adventurers would never risk their lives to traveling with a FB -- they have enough trouble to worry about without having to constantly look over their shoulders because the FB stubbed his toe on a rock and entered a murderous frenzy. [/QUOTE]

Verification