Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What would you have done?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Amal Shukup" data-source="post: 2156329" data-attributes="member: 6291"><p>Your points are well taken, but expecting PCs to follow these rules (I realize that you aren't proposing this, but for puroses of discussion) requires the presumption that a Nation State or similar context exists against which this party's decision is being made. </p><p></p><p>If such a context existed, it hasn't been communicated to us. At least two elements would be required:</p><p></p><p><strong>A) Rules/Guidelines:</strong> Modern armies have them, you had them, Crusaders and Saracens had them too (observed more in the exception, perhaps, but absolutely there). The Party? I don't know. I presumed NOT - most campaigns against evil in D&D seem to be more along the lines of Total War ('Warre', 'war to the knife', 'war with an absence of all restraint') rather than a 'contentious state' between Nation States with a deep and abiding interest in moving towards a lasting peace (under new and excitingly favorable terms, of course) and cohabiting in a fraternity of nations.</p><p></p><p>At any rate, if DMs WANT their parties to behave with the 'restraint' (sick coff) of a modern army or even that of a medieval force, then Guidelines have to be provided. An understanding between the Zhentarim and wherever the PCs are from that is habitually observed, say. </p><p></p><p><strong>B) Support:</strong> A Huey/Other Party/Depot that could maybe take the Prisoners off the party's hands? Sure, you (and lotsa folks) had to walk prisoners back (_after_ your mission!) or transport them by truck. To those who would expect the same of our PCs, I point out that you had both a Truck and a place to drive it to. Not to mention a logistical supply chain and units that operated in support. PCs in D&D often (usually??) have no such support. (at higher levels, magic DOES open up a number of options - but even with Geas and Teleport, you need to know a) where you're supposed to take them and b) you actually need a place to take them to).</p><p></p><p>It's NOT at all like an army conducting operations in theatre. It's more like <em>'Guns of Navarrone'</em> or<em> 'Where Eagles Dare'</em>. Clint (who is already violating a dozen 'laws of war' by wearing an enemy uniform behind enemy lines and, under those laws, can expect nothing better than summary execution if captured - much like certain PCs I could mention.) is supposed to take captives and transport them back over enemy lines before proceeding with their mission? I don't think so.</p><p></p><p>A lot (most) of the campaigns I've seen involve PCs in conflicts that are distressingly absolute. Given a background with no context of restraint (basically Total Warre) and a complete lack of Guidelines and Support, it certainly does NOT surprise me that PCs quickly throw rules of civilized behavior out the window. </p><p></p><p>The 'problem' is NOT the PCs - who are simply acting as people DO when put in situations like that (QED). Context is the responsibilty of the DM... Expecting one response while presenting context that pretty much mandates another response is a tad unfair.</p><p></p><p>All that said - I think it would be very interesting to play/DM a campaign where the PCs and the Baddies were both subscribed to some overriding set of rules that they could both - in the main - be expected to follow. Orcs/Zhents (mindflayers??) could surrender, give their parole and expect to make it back to their homelands someday. PCs would be expected to accept that parole, tend wounds, keep prisoners fed and watered, and make good faith efforts to get prisoners back to base. PCs could surrender...</p><p></p><p>Be a fabulous environment for role playing...</p><p></p><p>But a party of characters, grievously wounded, undersupplied, under fire, under pressure to complete a mission against an implacably evil enemy, hunted by groups of equally implacable, (yet completely different) enemies, in a hostile environment, with defiant prisoners, NO Guidelines, and NO base of support?</p><p></p><p>...And they're expected to do what, exactly? Take 'em where? How? At what cost? </p><p><em>Almost certain death at the hands of enemies PLUS the failure of their mission and the likely the capture/death of a Village the party is trying to protect? At higher levels, it's often 'the end of the world'...</em></p><p></p><p>Nope. That's a recipe for dead prisoners.</p><p></p><p>A'Mal</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Amal Shukup, post: 2156329, member: 6291"] Your points are well taken, but expecting PCs to follow these rules (I realize that you aren't proposing this, but for puroses of discussion) requires the presumption that a Nation State or similar context exists against which this party's decision is being made. If such a context existed, it hasn't been communicated to us. At least two elements would be required: [B]A) Rules/Guidelines:[/B] Modern armies have them, you had them, Crusaders and Saracens had them too (observed more in the exception, perhaps, but absolutely there). The Party? I don't know. I presumed NOT - most campaigns against evil in D&D seem to be more along the lines of Total War ('Warre', 'war to the knife', 'war with an absence of all restraint') rather than a 'contentious state' between Nation States with a deep and abiding interest in moving towards a lasting peace (under new and excitingly favorable terms, of course) and cohabiting in a fraternity of nations. At any rate, if DMs WANT their parties to behave with the 'restraint' (sick coff) of a modern army or even that of a medieval force, then Guidelines have to be provided. An understanding between the Zhentarim and wherever the PCs are from that is habitually observed, say. [B]B) Support:[/B] A Huey/Other Party/Depot that could maybe take the Prisoners off the party's hands? Sure, you (and lotsa folks) had to walk prisoners back (_after_ your mission!) or transport them by truck. To those who would expect the same of our PCs, I point out that you had both a Truck and a place to drive it to. Not to mention a logistical supply chain and units that operated in support. PCs in D&D often (usually??) have no such support. (at higher levels, magic DOES open up a number of options - but even with Geas and Teleport, you need to know a) where you're supposed to take them and b) you actually need a place to take them to). It's NOT at all like an army conducting operations in theatre. It's more like [I]'Guns of Navarrone'[/I] or[I] 'Where Eagles Dare'[/I]. Clint (who is already violating a dozen 'laws of war' by wearing an enemy uniform behind enemy lines and, under those laws, can expect nothing better than summary execution if captured - much like certain PCs I could mention.) is supposed to take captives and transport them back over enemy lines before proceeding with their mission? I don't think so. A lot (most) of the campaigns I've seen involve PCs in conflicts that are distressingly absolute. Given a background with no context of restraint (basically Total Warre) and a complete lack of Guidelines and Support, it certainly does NOT surprise me that PCs quickly throw rules of civilized behavior out the window. The 'problem' is NOT the PCs - who are simply acting as people DO when put in situations like that (QED). Context is the responsibilty of the DM... Expecting one response while presenting context that pretty much mandates another response is a tad unfair. All that said - I think it would be very interesting to play/DM a campaign where the PCs and the Baddies were both subscribed to some overriding set of rules that they could both - in the main - be expected to follow. Orcs/Zhents (mindflayers??) could surrender, give their parole and expect to make it back to their homelands someday. PCs would be expected to accept that parole, tend wounds, keep prisoners fed and watered, and make good faith efforts to get prisoners back to base. PCs could surrender... Be a fabulous environment for role playing... But a party of characters, grievously wounded, undersupplied, under fire, under pressure to complete a mission against an implacably evil enemy, hunted by groups of equally implacable, (yet completely different) enemies, in a hostile environment, with defiant prisoners, NO Guidelines, and NO base of support? ...And they're expected to do what, exactly? Take 'em where? How? At what cost? [I]Almost certain death at the hands of enemies PLUS the failure of their mission and the likely the capture/death of a Village the party is trying to protect? At higher levels, it's often 'the end of the world'...[/I] Nope. That's a recipe for dead prisoners. A'Mal [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What would you have done?
Top