Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ThoughtBubble" data-source="post: 1514967" data-attributes="member: 9723">I agree. In fact, I feel that everyone should have to deal with re-precussions with their actions. With one caviat. And that's that consiquences are within the scope of the campaign's feel. And here's why I can agree with your choice of actions. This isn't his first deviation, so it's not like you're coming down on him like a ton of bricks, or out to screw him. It's just his unpaladinishness making him unpaladinish.Because if you hit someone hard as the first level of consiquence, they're likely to just leave the situation entirely. So, instead of trying to play more carefully and shape up, they just stop playing a paladin. And the trust issue is only an outcome of the consiquences of roleplaying, not a cause. But, in my expierence, it's relatively easy to start assuming that any action will meet with horrendous consiquences if it happens a couple of times in a row. So, under normal circumstances, I'm saying "Don't come down like a ton of bricks too many times in a row." The problem is that the paladin situation of losing all abilities all at once is a fairly strong hit and a fairly radical one (in terms of both numerical and role-play/character development) I tend to use the kid gloves and do things by baby steps. It gives my players enough time to shape up.</blockquote>