|
|
Post by scottanderson on Sept 18, 2017 22:42:41 GMT -5
The niece of our patron has been kidnapped by who we assume are random bandits. Provided we can rescue her (very likely), she will be worth far more to our patron than mere gold or even magic items.
My character has secretly decided that he's going to get a barony out of this operation. Either he gets a barony (or, ideally, a march), or nobody gets anything from him. He is very serious, and again, this is completely secret both from the players/DM and the characters.
I didn't get a conclusive answer before so to ask it another way: in the worst-case scenario, what do you think about murdering the young woman in front of everyone?
|
|
|
|
Post by mao on Sept 19, 2017 6:16:45 GMT -5
If I were playing, I would fireball your ass and say"oops, My bad!"
|
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Sept 19, 2017 6:23:54 GMT -5
For me personally, you might want to bring this idea up with your DM. Let them know what your aim is. I'd also want to gadge their skill. This can be seen as a d--- move, we don't want to have our fun at the expense of others.
Titles can be bought, killing a lady will change your reputation, and endanger the reputation of your company.
Dropping this bomb onto everyone is going to get a gut reaction, and it might not be in your favor.
I wouldn't do it alone, unless I planned on leaving that adventure party.
It is always hard to give player advice. DMs are all different, and yours is the final judge. If you are asking if this might piss him off, yeah, it could.
|
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 19, 2017 7:18:43 GMT -5
Negotiating with your Patron secretly for a Barony, upon the successful rescue and return of the daughter, without the rest of the players' knowledge would be still be fun. And, it would still provide a nice twist and shocking moment for the table. They would all receive their gold and adulation, while you get the land. This would still accomplish your goal of one-upping everyone while making secret deals in the background, without becoming a villain. My 2 CP.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimhthan The Great on Sept 19, 2017 7:20:10 GMT -5
IMC my players and I would pick you up and toss you out the front door and tell you never to come back. IMC protecting women and children first and honor second are of the highest priority. Your character would die a slow painful death and the party would be shamed and have to atone for their honor being besmirched by your action of murdering an innocent young women.
|
|
|
|
Post by mao on Sept 19, 2017 7:22:16 GMT -5
IMC my players and I would pick you up and toss you out the front door and tell you never to come back. IMC protecting women and children first and honor second are of the highest priority. Your character would die a slow painful death and the party would be shamed and have to atone for their honor being besmirched by your action of murdering an innocent young women. This! |
|
|
|
Post by scottanderson on Sept 19, 2017 10:45:50 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback. This is something I've considered too. I'm still not sure about whether to do it. When I am able to speak to my DM, I will do so. I should gauge his reaction.
I'm very happy with the other characters reacting how they do. But I don't want to unduly upset the players.
EDIT - UPDATE
I just wrote a long letter to my DM explaining what my ideas are, and asking him if he thinks it's OK to try it or if I should pull the plug because it wouldn't be fun or might hurt someone's feelings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimhthan The Great on Sept 19, 2017 11:22:01 GMT -5
IMC my players and I would pick you up and toss you out the front door and tell you never to come back. IMC protecting women and children first and honor second are of the highest priority. Your character would die a slow painful death and the party would be shamed and have to atone for their honor being besmirched by your action of murdering an innocent young women. This! The first sentence is hyperbole, we would just give him a hard time living down those actions. The rest of it represents to month of game time he would be sitting out until he gets to bring a new character into the game. And it would be played out just that way. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Sept 19, 2017 11:29:25 GMT -5
The first sentence is hyperbole, we would just give him a hard time living down those actions. The rest of it represents to month of game time he would be sitting out until he gets to bring a new character into the game. And it would be played out just that way. Nobody gets a second chance after this. |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Sept 19, 2017 15:45:01 GMT -5
Doctors and nurses as a general rule make horrible patients. I prefer to DM and am a horrible horrible player. I overanalyze the game, I critique the DM, and I do things just like what you describe. I don't intend to do any of this stuff, it just happens. I am very critical of my own skills, I am ashamed to admit that I am worse with others. I'm used to being the DM. Having lots to do, and role-playing a huge cast of characters; focusing on just one character and leaving that DM mentality of causing movement behind is very difficult.
I have four DMs at the table, but they prefer to play and I never was that way. I enjoy the prep work, I enjoy design, and I enjoy the execution. I like making sure that all of the players are engaged, I love watching them play, and even though I am playing their opponents I am still a part of their group. I think that the problem is that as DM I am always hiding my hand and playing poker. The DM is a liar, and they have to be a very good one. As a player, you can't do this. You've got to let the DM know what you are doing. It is a completely different game from the other side of the screen.
When I have a DM/Player at the table, I make sure that they are engaged by giving them their own objectives if they want. Make the game more challenging for that person, but only if that is something that they want to do. It allows them to keep playing poker and helps them focus on the game.
As DM, if I heard what you told me, I would be into it, but I wouldn't allow you to upset the other players. If violence and killing the girl was the only option, I'd have you construct a plan. How are you going to murder this woman without getting caught? If this plan needs to be ran, it would be a one-on-one game, but hopefully we could just figure out percentages and use the dice. If this is counter to what I really want to happen, we could have that comversation too. I would have to know what is going on so I can factor everything into the game. If you are a double agent, fine. That can be an interesting turn of events. If you could convince your fellow adventurers to betray your benifactor and work for a more powerful one, that is cool too. Usually, there has to be some sort of compromise, but once I know that you are interested in titles, and political power, I would be able to factor this into my design and make it more meaningful for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by mormonyoyoman on Sept 19, 2017 18:14:31 GMT -5
You would be a fun GM to rolegame with, Mr 187. I like the way you evidently raise your next evil emperor from the ranks of your players. It could get one or more of your players killed, not just their characters. I recommend playing on a washable or disposable tablecloth in a room with a tile floor.
Wait - isn't this how Ming the Merciless got started? Or am I thinking of Brian van Hoose?
|
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Sept 19, 2017 19:06:03 GMT -5
mormonyoyoman I don't think what he is doing is going to put him at odds with his party, not if executed well. Failure would be catastrophic for him, but success would have an equal reward. Death and politics go hand-in-hand, it isn't personal. Today's political enemies may be tomorrows allies. It would allow the party to explore that world, he won't have time to be an evil emperor, he's still a small fry. Everybody has a boss. scottanderson has ambition and I would rather grant titles in the game than treasure. He wants to enter a very dangerous world, especially considering the route that he is thinking about taking if it really is a dangerous route. Who knows what this benefactor is? Maybe he is a traitor to the crown? Maybe his niece is, and it is just better for everybody to remove her off of the board now than let her realize her full potential? These aren't questions which are asked by loyal servants. If this new benefactor is a little on the twisted side but offers you a place in his ranks, why not take it? The trick is keeping him convinced that you are still useful to him. In politics, people rarely are what they appear to be. If he plays his cards right, he might be able to use both men, and if he is smart, it won't blow up in his face! One of my dream campaigns is to have good heroes serving a horrendously evil nation without their knowledge. How long would it take before they realize it? Would they be willing to commit treason to do the right thing? How far would they be willing to go? Natives to Greyhawk's Great Kingdom, and proudly serving the crown! Convinced that what you are doing is the right thing to do. One isn't waging war against an Elvin Nation, they are freeing the people from oppressive and inhuman monsters. It would be a trip, man!
|
|
|
|
Post by mormonyoyoman on Sept 19, 2017 20:50:47 GMT -5
Sounds like good clean fun! It's similar to Ken St Andre's campaign, where various good heroes end up serving an evil continental ruler for the sake of species harmony.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2017 21:33:06 GMT -5
Lord Gronan says, "I would follow you the length of your days."
"And I will find you."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2017 21:34:23 GMT -5
You need to explain how murdering an innocent woman would get you what you want, because from your brief sketch it just sounds like you're doing it for no good reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottanderson on Sept 20, 2017 0:16:21 GMT -5
You need to explain how murdering an innocent woman would get you what you want, because from your brief sketch it just sounds like you're doing it for no good reason. Killing her is the last thing he wants! It doesn't advance him at all. All it does is stall out the political alliance between two nearby lords. That's fine but it's a atopgap measure and it makes him their mutual enemy. Nobody wins. But if he can make that credible threat, and she is as important to both men as she seems, then he has a chance to parlay that into something very big. And if things go very badly, then yes, it makes sense to kill her. But that would be after everything else goes bad. |
|
|
|
Post by Dartanian on Sept 20, 2017 11:27:36 GMT -5
You need to explain how murdering an innocent woman would get you what you want, because from your brief sketch it just sounds like you're doing it for no good reason. Killing her is the last thing he wants! It doesn't advance him at all. All it does is stall out the political alliance between two nearby lords. That's fine but it's a atopgap measure and it makes him their mutual enemy. Nobody wins. But if he can make that credible threat, and she is as important to both men as she seems, then he has a chance to parlay that into something very big. And if things go very badly, then yes, it makes sense to kill her. But that would be after everything else goes bad. This is what an assassins guild is for, he gets what he wants and then defends against assassins for the rest of his remaining short life. |
|
|
|
Post by scottanderson on Sept 20, 2017 14:40:14 GMT -5
So this is very interesting!
The question started as "what will the other people at the table think?" And then on this thread we're talking about "what would I think?" And "what would my character do,"
And it seems like people's characters would be going out of their way to punish this guy. A righteous vendetta. That's juicy! I would relish a spy versus spy or tower-defense style game.
It's another eventuality to plan for. And maybe it changes what happens in the moment. I had this picture os a Shakespearean assassination in the middle of everyone - very dramatic turn to leave jaws on the floor.
Maybe instead he leaves her with his goblin and just never brings her back. That would not necessarily require a murder at all.
This is really good stuff guys!
|
|
|
|
Post by mormonyoyoman on Sept 22, 2017 12:51:58 GMT -5
Normally, I disavow PC-on-PC conflict due to having a major DragonQuest campaign utterly derailed by the spillover fury by two of the major players. If your group can handle high tragedy and adventure objectively, this would indeed make for an epic adventure. Either an epic death of your "sneak diplomat" or an epic origin of a major villain (Did Egg of Coot start this way?) - either possibility is still epic, and would make the sort of story which would be repeated around mugs of Diet Caffeine-free Dew for decades!
This character undoubtedly looks and speaks like Basil Rathbone.
|
|
FaerieGodfather
Wanderer
Returned Home. Still returning to Humanity.
Posts: 46 
|
Post by FaerieGodfather on Sept 25, 2017 9:44:42 GMT -5
There's a reason I don't use the alignment rules and the only general rules about IC conduct are to avoid making the players uncomfortable.
Unless a character is breaking magically-binding oaths, there are no consequences for PCs in my games that are not the natural consequences of other characters' reactions. That includes PvP.
If I'm a player in that game, playing according to my typical moral standards, my apology to our patron would include your PC's head. Out of character, I'm not going to be angry... but in character, I'm going to do what my character would do in the situation you've left him in. You can roll up another character and hopefully we've all learned an important lesson about friendship and teamwork. It's a bonding experience!
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 25, 2017 11:27:21 GMT -5
The niece of our patron has been kidnapped by who we assume are random bandits. Provided we can rescue her (very likely), she will be worth far more to our patron than mere gold or even magic items. My character has secretly decided that he's going to get a barony out of this operation. Either he gets a barony (or, ideally, a march), or nobody gets anything from him. He is very serious, and again, this is completely secret both from the players/DM and the characters. I didn't get a conclusive answer before so to ask it another way: in the worst-case scenario, what do you think about murdering the young woman in front of everyone? I pretty much let the players do what they want, but that does mean that they have to accept the consequences of their actions. Having read the whole thread through this point in time, I agree with many and as a player my character would try to take your character down for this clearly evil act. If the patron is a bad guy do what you need to take him out, but IMC killing innocents is an evil act. IMC, in addition to what the other PCs may or may not do, you also have to consider the authorities and that would include NPC Paladins. Plus as mentioned, such an act may put assassins on your doorstep. IMC you would have other options (if you thought of them) that would leave you on the right side of the law and give you a much higher chance of getting a barony. What level and class is your PC and what rules set are you playing under? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2017 11:58:50 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm STILL not seeing how the "killing the girl" gets the PC anything worth having.
Marry her instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 25, 2017 12:03:10 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm STILL not seeing how the "killing the girl" gets the PC anything worth having. Marry her instead. Maybe he has a death wish?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2017 13:39:08 GMT -5
Dunno. All I know is, acquiring a fief by marrying an heiress is "business as usual" in the real Middle Ages. Wouldn't even raise an eyebrow.
And convince her FATHER, not her. "Love" had nothing to do with medieval marriages among the nobility.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 25, 2017 14:03:54 GMT -5
Dunno. All I know is, acquiring a fief by marrying an heiress is "business as usual" in the real Middle Ages. Wouldn't even raise an eyebrow. And convince her FATHER, not her. "Love" had nothing to do with medieval marriages among the nobility. Absolutely! |
|
|
|
Post by mormonyoyoman on Sept 25, 2017 14:53:09 GMT -5
Dunno. All I know is, acquiring a fief by marrying an heiress is "business as usual" in the real Middle Ages. Wouldn't even raise an eyebrow. And convince her FATHER, not her. "Love" had nothing to do with medieval marriages among the nobility. Boy howdy, I've been handing out Exalts freely as if they didn't cost me anything. This is what happens when I use the Big Boy computer instead of a phone or tablet. |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Sept 25, 2017 15:40:56 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm STILL not seeing how the "killing the girl" gets the PC anything worth having. Marry her instead. I thought about that too, but I didn't have enough information. No better way of keeping somebody a prisoner/hostage legally than to marry them. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 25, 2017 16:08:22 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm STILL not seeing how the "killing the girl" gets the PC anything worth having. Marry her instead. I thought about that too, but I didn't have enough information. No better way of keeping somebody a prisoner/hostage legally than to marry them. And with those kind of alliances the urge to do you in is less (hopefully) of a factor. |
|
|
|
Post by hengest on Sept 26, 2017 10:57:25 GMT -5
I woule be very uncomfortable with this as a player or DM. It kinds of gives me the feeling that it's some sort of power trip being shoehorned into the game. I'm not saying that's the OP's motivation, but that would be my response at the table if it went to murder. Especially since it's a young woman NPC.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 26, 2017 17:40:41 GMT -5
I split the threads, please continue with the OP from here and go here for the alignment discussion. |
|
