Who was right

[fba827]

I do not agree that the guy owes you for the shield.

He does not owe for every one-time used magic items (potions) used, nor every spell component consumed, nor every charge out of a magic wand, nor any items sundered, nor the cost of a whetstone and rags to sharpen and clean blades dulled by bone and covered in blood. Both sides entered combat, both sides assumed risk. And I disagree that any real world court would agree with your case because it was a combat (purposely physical aggressive) situation.

While not trying to sidetrek with real world comparisons, Would a boxer be able to sue his opponent for an injury sustained even if both boxers were playing by the rules? Would a robber shot in the leg by the homeowner while attempting to break-in be able to sue for the leg injury? If two gangs met at midnight to settle a score, does the loser owe the winner for each bullet fired (or the winner owe the loser)?

Not even counting real-world examples, the PCs (if living in a typical fantasy-inspired world) live in a world much more aggressive than ours, where danger is a constant and the PCs are actively seeking out dangerous situations and gearing themselves accordingly.

If I were in the group, I would not side with you; my choice is not out of greed, but because I don't agree with your arguments on the opposing view.

 

[Crothian]

Crothian, people come in here with their gaming troubles all the time. Helping people figure these things out is part of the reason to have these boards. I haven't seen any identifying information about the party - it is all reasonably anonymous, as is proper. There's nothing wrong with what he's done.

I'm just saying if I was one of of the people in his group I'd be upset with him. If he got their permission and they were able to present there side of things that would be different.

 

[RedShirtNo5]

"Yeah, we went into the goblin lair. Farfel the elf opened the door and got hit by a crossbow trap. We retreated back to town, and consulted our lawyer. He said that even though we were tresspassing, we could file suit against the goblins for intentional injury, since the crossbow trap was intended to cause normal damage rather than non-lethal damage. Unfortunately, it later turned out that before building the dungeon the goblins had incorporated as a limited liability corpration."

 

[Teflon Billy]

I cant present the logic of the party because the party didnt actually use any logic to defend their case. They just said anything on the bad guys was party treasure. They didnt make one argument in their defense. Not one analogy or legal reference. Just a, "It works this way because I say so" argument.

Well, if you all agreed it worked that way, then that is a very compelling argument.

I'm not sure what "legal reference" you are hoping for (Unless your game takes place in the Moder day United States)

 

[Chimera]

No sympathy from me.

I'd happily vote against you. No matter how you slice it (haha), demanding recompense out of the gross receipts *IS* greedy and does impact one's fellow adventurers.

And if the group wanted to get rid of you for the way this is all going down (the demands, the selfishness, the 'taking it to a message board'), then I have already set my own precedence in voting to remove such individuals.


I'm very curious, by way of a real world example here. If you're SCA and your weapons or armor get broken in combat, can you go after the other party for it? Or is it, as I suspect, just part and parcel of the game and your own tough luck?

 

[Teflon Billy]

People keep saying that he was defending his life and had a right to break my shield. I would love to see someone have a shootout with the cops and claim he had to kill those cops because they were trying to shoot him.

They could very easily claim exactly that if the cops were, say, mercenaries without any recognized legal authority. Like PC's

I was wrong to break into the bad guys hideout? Are DEA agents wrong to busting into the mansion of a Columbian drug lord to arrest him? And Is that drug lord justified in shooting the people who are breaking into his home.

Yes, if they are just some schmoes who make their living killing drug lords and rifling their homes for valuables.

Like PC's.

You work for the ACLU don’t you?

No, I'm a barber.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

"Yeah, we went into the goblin lair. Farfel the elf opened the door and got hit by a crossbow trap. We retreated back to town, and consulted our lawyer. He said that even though we were tresspassing, we could file suit against the goblins for intentional injury, since the crossbow trap was intended to cause normal damage rather than non-lethal damage. Unfortunately, it later turned out that before building the dungeon the goblins had incorporated as a limited liability corpration."

OMFG.

Bloody Brilliant.

 

[Teflon Billy]

In response to Kalis' asserstion that we went after these guys for vengance. I must quote the great Frank Castle.

"This is not vengeance. Revenge is not a valid motive, it's an emotional response. No, not vengeance. Punishment"

...and now your paragon of law and good is quoting The Punisher

 

[ejja_1]

Dude! Now I want to head up north just to have the legendary Teflon Billy cut my hair!
Like traditional barber? Shave and a haircut? Not a salon barber right?
What would you charge to do a mohawk?

 

[Teflon Billy]

I also notice that almost every post against me is based is saying that the party doesn’t owe me anything or that I shouldn’t take from party gold. None of these arguments are valid. I never said the party owed me gold. I am not saying that the party should give me 25,000 gold of their treasure. I am saying that the 25,000 gold is mine and not theirs. I hope you can see there is a difference here. I am not asking for what is theirs but what is mine...

You are arguing semantics. The results for the rest of the party are identical, no matter how you doll up the phrasing.