Town adventures and consequences

[GMforPowergamers]

Ok, so I am working on some town idea's, and it has come up... what do your characters carry in town.

OK, comeing into town, or a new one you are only staying in over night you may just stay fully equiped... but what about when you are 'home'?


Here is my problem. I have a PC who wears Chain armor, has an excution axe, a Long bow, and a full back pack. If he is going to the local bar, to celebrae his brother's 'becomeing a man' 15th birthday, why is he decked out the same as going into a dungeon???

Now this is just an example (One from my roommate game a few months ago so not out of nowhere) but since I am now working on a new level 1 game and I want the PCs to act naturaly...so here is what I sent them:

There was a time I would not have felt this needed to be said…but we have all kind of worked out our own wave length of thought…so here we go.

SO what sort of cause and effect am I talking about. I am talking about the difference between town and dungeon adventures. In dungeons it is (atleast 9 times out of 10) kill or be killed. In towns things are different. In towns you need to decide if killing is worth it.

In the real world you can’t pull out a gun and shoot a drunk in a bar for spitting in your face without going to jail. In the real world even the fist fight you start will most likely mean a hassle by the cops if not a ride downtown…

Now apply this to the game world… if people are not using lethal force on you, and you do there will be consequences.

In the real world people might carry a pistol around, but you don’t see people carrying AK 47’s, or Law rocket launchers…

In game you might OWN an execution axe, or a staff, or a full blade… but you don’t walk around town in it… You might own full plate, or scale, or even hide armor… but if you walk around every day in it there are consequences.

Now lets talk out of game, social contract type thing. As the DM I promises 9 time out of 10 you will face lesser combat problems in town (Inless you go looking for trouble). So you don’t need everything…

I will also include a few extra +X cloth and leather armors if you will limit yourself to them…


To give you an example (And maybe a hint toward my game) If a bunch of trouble makers are doing public bad things, and you stop them using non lethal, or even non combat ways, then you can always track them back to a more private place to (Lets say dispose of) them.

so what do the rest of you think?

I don't just mean in D&D eaither... we had soem problems with heavy (and illgal) weapons being carryied around in our WoD games, and I have even seen a PC in a star trek game carry a phaser rifle over his shoulder well on a ship, in dock over vulcan...

 

[Slander]

This is one of those instances where you've gotta decide how much and what kind of verisimilitude you want to create.

IMO, a "normal" response to someone going around fully armed and armored in "civilized" places is going to be distrust, suspicion, NPCs "having an important engagement somewhere else", hassle by the local law, and the like. Doesn't matter if he's in town for a day or a year ... if a character looks like trouble, or like he's expecting trouble, it's going to elicit an appropriate response. A guy freely displaying an executioners axe would look like trouble.

Characters like that could hang out in the rough parts of town w/o that kind of hassle. But then the character has to deal with everything that comes with being in the rough part of town.

The question is, do you have the energy and desire to enforce this kind of reality every time? It sounds like you want to in this case. But if you didn't do it all the time, I know I'd personally feel jerked around. I'd simply be waiting for you to spring a fight where I'm not equipped.

My group uses more of an anime vibe in that respect. People, PCs and NPCs alike, wander around all the time w/ weapons and it's considered normal. But the players in my group typically don't have an interest in being in one place all that long. It's simply easier to allow them to wander around as is, ask their questions, get their repairs, and move on.

 

[Mark]

I don't have the core books in front of me but isn't there something in them on roleplaying in a town?

 

[Celebrim]

My player's equip their characters however they want in town.

However, there can be in game consequences to walking around looking like you just came off a battlefield and are looking for a new one.

For high level PC's who developed a good reputation, this generally isn't a problem. Nobody is going to question much a famous hero (once you are recognized as such) for walking around with the in game equipment of a M-16 with a M-203 slung under neath it and a bandoleer of grenades. However, doing so is probably hazardous to your stealth. You are going to attract alot of attention, even if it is positive.

For low level PC's who haven't developed a reputation, walking around decked out for battle all the time means lots of problems. Most towns are going to refuse strange mercenaries entry if they are wearing a bunch of iron mongery. If you want to go around openly armed, then you better have proof of noble rank or a permit to travel armed from the appropriate magistrates. Most establishments are going to refuse you service, average starting reaction may decrease, and people are going to give you a wide berth. Unless you've got some sort of status to reassure people with, you will be the equivalent of the gang of blackhatted horsemen with the six-shooters slung low riding into town, and will be treated as such. You can fix this with sufficient charisma and related skills, however, you can't fix the bigger problem.

If you walk around like you are looking for a fight, you are likely to find one. Bravos, rakes, and toughs are going to want to try you to see if you really are as fearsome as you look. Your presence is going to be commented on, and since commented on, will soon bring itself to the attention of pretty much every potential enemy in the city. This might sound like fun, but its going to be alot less fun when you are dragging into town low on spells and hitpoints. Also, the general attitude of the law to violence is going to be to prosecute whoever is left standing on the grounds that they are probably the dangerous ones.

And beyond that, there are going to be alot of times where it is just socially inappropriate to be hauling around armor, missile weapons, and a backpack. Most nobles are going to wear a sword and dagger, and so a personal weapon you can easily get away with, but showing up in full battle gear when invited to dine in the house of a local lord is likely to give you more initial reaction problems. There are just likely to be sometimes when you are going to fight defensively simply because you don't have your armor on. Take solace in the fact that you are bad-ass and probably won't need it against most foes.

I generally don't give alot of specific metagame guidance to players. My advice to all players is imagine this is real and act how you would act if your character was real. If the PC is going to do something that I believe he would know better than to do, I usually make a quick wisdom or knowledge check (as appropriate) on the characters behalf and then try to explain to the character what the consequences of the action might be. After that, it's out of my hands, and its up to the player to decide what's appropriate for his character.

As for what I think, most of the time my experience is that players engage in that sort of behavior because it is heavily rewarded and greatly punished if departed from. Generally speaking, if you get away from the 'ever foe fights to the death'/'every fight is an ambush'/'every fight is against foes who are awesome threats' paradigm, and avoid seeing the PC's engaging in normal activity as an oppurtunity for ambush, then you'll train it out of them.

One particular thing to avoid is, "It's only worth RPing out if its about to lead to combat." In many campaigns players will recognize, "We are playing out the RP in town." as a marker which means, "The DM plans to ambush us shortly." Don't fall into the trap of handwaving everything except when its about to lead to combat, or otherwise you are telling your players that the game is really about combat and they should be always prepared for it. If you do that, don't blame the character for what is, in your game, intelligent behavior.

 

[JoeGKushner]

As soon as you mentioned "the real world", I stopped reading.

A lot of it is going to depend on the local and how much the players trust you. To me, that essentially said, "I wish to screw with your players."

It's rare to read older fantasy materal and think about such things. Rarely did I pick up a Robert E. Howard book and find Conan going, "Damn the city for taking my things." or otherwise regreting his lack of weapons and material. Ditto for Fafrd and the Grey Mouser.

Even in more 'modern' games, in the Forgotten Realms, the North is a hazardous place and has a very fronteir like atmosphere. The Moonsea region is filled with mercenaries. Ver and far away are the places where going about in arms and armor might not be appropriate. Weapon bindings might be standard in some of the more 'civilized' places with fees and other bits being appropriate, but if the characters are 'professional' adventurers, they probably have the city's leave to use such items, espeically if they've done any work for the city in the past.

Remember that when you start talking about the 'real world', what you really mean is in your experience... generally as applied to the United States, Britain or other 'civlized places Let's not forget that south of the United States, the Mexican government is using the Army to fight the Familia who goes around with military grade weapons and RPGs and thinks nothing of declaring war of the locals. That indeed, in many parts of the world, your weapons can be a sign of manhood. Parts of Africa are rife with easy to gain weapons, laid out in the streets and market for ease of purchase.

Hell, even in places like Chicago, there are places its best not to go unless you have relatives, friends, or supreme self confidence in your ability to handle a situation. Places that cops don't go alone.

City does not necessarily mean 'safe.'.

Edit: It also generally tends to be a screw you to the fighters, something that 4e went to a whole new system to avoid. Wizards, Swordmages and other non-armored characters, especially those that don't use traditional weapons, are going to wind up getting the benefit of the freebies for something they normally do already.

 

[Dausuul]

As soon as you mentioned "the real world", I stopped reading.

...

Remember that when you start talking about the 'real world', what you really mean is in your experience... generally as applied to the United States, Britain or other 'civlized places.

It's far from limited to modern nations; there's a reason the founders of the United States felt it necessary to enumerate a "right to bear arms" in the Bill of Rights. (Please note that I'm not trying to debate the exact meaning of the phrase, just pointing out that they wouldn't have put it in if they hadn't already seen instances of the government restricting access to weaponry.)

Lots of medieval nations restricted who could have access to what in terms of arms and armor. If you've got an oppressed underclass and have to face occasional revolts, the last thing you want is to let that underclass get its hands on quality weaponry.

Edit: It also generally tends to be a screw you to the fighters, something that 4e went to a whole new system to avoid. Wizards, Swordmages and other non-armored characters, especially those that don't use traditional weapons, are going to wind up getting the benefit of the freebies for something they normally do already.

This is a more serious issue. Even if you treat a wizard's staff as equivalent to a sword, that simply puts staff wizards in the "ghetto" while orb and wand wizards get a pass, and armored PCs remain at a huge disadvantage compared to both.

In the real world, full plate and a big sword are better than leather armor and a dagger - vastly so. This makes weapon and armor restrictions sensible. In the D&D world, a guy in leather can actually go toe-to-toe with a guy in plate and not get turned into chutney.

For this reason, I generally handwave the whole business. Most of the time it doesn't matter anyway.

 

[Gilladian]

I'm going to mention two different settings, and situations within those settings, as providing a range of "what I do".

Ptolus campaign - large city, adventurer-rich, adventurer-friendly on the whole. I let the PCs run around with most of their armor and weapons most of the time. If they try to enter a public building, or the noble's quarter, they get told to leave the armor and weapons behind before they can enter. Otherwise, they get a pass.

My Homebrew campaign - mostly small cities, towns and wilderness. Settled areas are not particularly adventurer-friendly, and adventurers are rare. If they're passing through a town or village, they don't have to worry about their weapons and armor. If they're staying more than a day, then they'd best stop looking like "lowlife scum adventurers" and dress like regular people. However, depending on the community, this can still include small blades, light armor, and some gear.

There are a couple of places, however, in my campaign world, where simply showing up dressed like an adventurer will get you in trouble. In one region there's considerable civil unrest, and laws have been passed that disallow weapons and armor in the hands of anyone except the watch and the guard. In the far south, where the Old Empire's collapse was much mitigated, there are laws requiring all weapons to be peace bonded, and all bearers of armor/weapons to have legal documents permitting them to carry such.

I try not to "ride" players for such details, but I do make the occasional reminder to them of the local customs, and their adherence or lack thereof. They know from experience that I'm not "out to screw them" and will go along because they know it is something that I enjoy (that level of verisimilitude).

 

[Raven Crowking]

Celebrim is wise.


RC

 

[Celebrim]

As soon as you mentioned "the real world", I stopped reading.

Then, if you aren't going to read, I wish you wouldn't respond to that which you didn't read. I'd rather you responded to that which you had informed yourself about, than responding reflexively to something you might not fully understand.

To me, that essentially said, "I wish to screw with your players."

Seeing as you by your own admission didn't read it, it would seem to me to be a bad idea to draw conclusions about it.

It's rare to read older fantasy materal and think about such things.

I don't think that means what you think it means. I agree that it is rare to think about such things.

Rarely did I pick up a Robert E. Howard book and find Conan going, "Damn the city for taking my things." or otherwise regreting his lack of weapons and material. Ditto for Fafrd and the Grey Mouser.

Rarely did I read Conan where he wasn't in direct conflict with the local inhabitants. Rarely did I read Fafrd and the Grey Mouser where they weren't in direct conflict with the local inhabitants. In point of fact, the characters you site were often as not treated as criminals and rogues. Conan in particular is often in direct cultural conflict with 'civilized' people who find his barbarian sword swinging behavior uncouth and intimidating. More to the point though, none of the characters you mention are frequently found in the stories wearing mail shirts and carrying cocked crossbows around with them. When Conan is found wearing mail and carrying more weapons than a single sword, typically it is in a story where Conan is actually on the battlefield (or leaving it). When Conan is 'in town' and not The King, he's generally carrying minimal warmaking gear.

Likewise, Aragorn is not at all opposed to the wearing of mail and carrying a shield and in fact wears mail for pretty much the second half of the book, but he goes around the original 'The North' carrying little more than a sword and departs on his great quest carrying little more than the same. The fact that the dwarf is wearing mail openly is unusual enough to be remarked on.

Remember that when you start talking about the 'real world', what you really mean is in your experience...

I very much disagree. In context, whenever I start talking about 'the real world', I mean 'the world of the past as informed by my reading of history'. Broadly, that usually refers to Europe between 500 and 1700 AD (often depending on how much magic=technology plays a role in the specific culture of the locale), and with a particular focus on the period from 1100 to 1500 AD (usually sans firearms) which is the default cultural setting of D&D historically, with occasional dips into Africa, Arabia, Persia, and other 'exotic' cultures. If I make analogies with the real world of some other period, including the present, it's purely with the intention of communicating with the reader or player something which might be more familiar to them. Hense, if I say something like, "Showing up to dinner wearing platemail and carrying a two-handed sword and a longbow strapped to your back, is like showing up to dinner wearing full battle-dress uniform, kevlar body armor, and an assault rifle with attached grenade launcher.", I don't mean that there is a direct correspondence between the culture of the game and the modern world. I merely trying to highlight to the reader/player the incongruity of the situation and getting them to try to feel what the NPC is probably feeling seeing you garbed thusly.

Let's not forget that south of the United States, the Mexican government is using the Army to fight the Familia who goes around with military grade weapons and RPGs and thinks nothing of declaring war of the locals. That indeed, in many parts of the world, your weapons can be a sign of manhood. Parts of Africa are rife with easy to gain weapons, laid out in the streets and market for ease of purchase.

This would turn into an argument over who knows modern global culture the best, and it really isn't even relevant. As I said, when I refer to 'the real world', modernity isn't really even in my thoughts.

City does not necessarily mean 'safe.'

I'm afraid I don't see what that has to do with anything.

It also generally tends to be a screw you to the fighters...

Or clerics. Or Paladins. Possibly even Barbarians. I seriously doubt that Clerics in town all go around dressed for battle all the time. A clergy that walks around like a bunch of toughs ready to pounce on people it doesn't agree with is probably going to wear out its welcome. However, the very fact that you think that the purpose of this is 'screw you' I think demonstrates my point. You seem to think the purpose of 'town' is primarily to provide another environment to ambush the players with combat. I think I made clear that I didn't find that to be its primary point. Besides which, if you start getting worried about cultural 'screw you' being class specific, then its very easy to consider that the staff wielding, robed, guy with the arcane symbols on his big fat books probably has some equivalent (or worse) cultural 'screw you' to overcome as well. If the Bard or Rogue finds themselves relatively advantaged in urban environments for cultural reasons, what exactly is surprising or undesirable about that?

 

[ExploderWizard]

Celebrim is wise.


RC

Yes. I must spread some XP around first.

Players sometimes need to realize certain activities are not really appropriate in civilized areas.

From an old game with a necromancer PC:

Town marshal: " Nobody's saying you can't raise a zombie. Nobody's saying you can't command a zombie. All I'm sayin is that you can't command a zombie in town."