PDA

View Full Version : So a PC is doomed(or if nothing else has written me into a corner)



Jayngfet
2009-08-25, 09:41 PM
So I'm DMing a low magic game, the plot so far:

The PC's stopped some bandits, who were revealed to be part of some rebellion. They managed to capture a leader of the local section of the rebellion. However before he was hanged he managed to perform(oratory) and incite the population, martyring himself.

After that the local feudal lord was murdered, once again this session they managed to catch the killers. The problem is now one of them went down to question some other rebels.

The problem is where it went from there.

When the prisoners were unable to do what he wanted he slit their throats, with a guard nearby, I've also mentioned several other guards around the fortress.

Essentially the problem is he's a second level threat (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Threat_(3.5e_Class)#Mighty_Blow) who just angered the halberd/glaive wielding guards, in the middle of their own fortress. Barring Deus Ex Machina I've no idea how to make this work with him not coming out a corpse.

quick_comment
2009-08-25, 09:46 PM
Have a paladin/knight offer him quarter. If he doesnt take it, sucks to be him.

If he surrenders, the paladin/knight will hold him prisoner for the courts, as their oaths demand.

sadi
2009-08-25, 10:04 PM
The no back down from a challenge thing, means he can attempt to intimidate them at something ridiculously high. He can attack them, and flee the area. Or he can die. Just because the player did something that has to quality as extremely evil and stupid shouldn't mean he gets a free pass. He has options, most of them will, and should lead to his death.

Mando Knight
2009-08-25, 10:23 PM
He can die. He acted like an idiot and overstepped his bounds. He is a murderer, so he can be treated like one.

Kylarra
2009-08-25, 10:25 PM
Have him forcibly conscripted into some dangerous quest. :smalltongue:

wykydtron
2009-08-25, 10:34 PM
I would agree with the above, the pc shouldn't run but fights until he *wink, wink* comes across a secret passage way that will lead him, if not out of the castle atleast further from the prison. *Wink, wink*

Seffbasilisk
2009-08-25, 10:34 PM
Threats look like stupid barbarians. He slit throats of prisoners under official protection, so, the guards should work to take him down to negatives, stablize him, and bring him before the courts.

If you really don't want him to die for his actions, then deus ex machina. I don't recommend such, as then PCs will have less fear of death.

I say cut him down, heal'm up, and make him dance the hemp fandango.

The other PCs can attempt a daring rescue, find a local hero to do so, or find someone to replace him.

Jayngfet
2009-08-26, 02:52 AM
Then there's the alignment issue.

When I said odds are this would shift him into evil he claimed it was a mercy kill(they showed clear signs of torture). He however mentioned nothing of it being a mercy kill when he actually killed them, or during the actual session.

PId6
2009-08-26, 03:20 AM
Evil. No question about it. Offer surrender; if he refuses, oh well, bye bye. If he does surrender, quick trial and gallows at noon. Problem solved.

PinkysBrain
2009-08-26, 03:25 AM
I don't see why they would kill him and at this level fudging the rolls to avoid taking him below -10 should be easy ... given the unstable political situation it doesn't seem impossible for him to be pardoned of this, desperate time, desperate measures.

If he manages to kill guards and they raise the alarm things get a little more difficult (but the new guards won't necessarily know right away he killed their brethren, if he gets out of sight of the bodies they still won't go for the kill). Once he is in a cell some dark and shadowy character can always come in to offer to spring him in return for a couple of favours (signing a magical contract which works like Geass).

Killer Angel
2009-08-26, 03:56 AM
After that the local feudal lord was murdered, once again this session they managed to catch the killers. The problem is now one of them went down to question some other rebels.
When the prisoners were unable to do what he wanted he slit their throats, with a guard nearby, I've also mentioned several other guards around the fortress.


I'm not sure I've understood all.
The guards were at the service of the murdered lord?
If yes, then I don't think they will react too hard on someone who slits the throat of the killer: the PC has done something they will have done by themselves, if not for orders.
Offer the pc to surrende and a trial... with a sentence very soft.
In real life, no government punish too hard peoples which kill the enemies of said government.

The alignment changing is another issue...

Jayngfet
2009-08-26, 04:21 AM
I'm not sure I've understood all.
The guards were at the service of the murdered lord?
If yes, then I don't think they will react too hard on someone who slits the throat of the killer: the PC has done something they will have done by themselves, if not for orders.
Offer the pc to surrende and a trial... with a sentence very soft.
In real life, no government punish too hard peoples which kill the enemies of said government.

The alignment changing is another issue...

I've explained poorly. They did manage to already get the killers, however they only said as such to the authorities less than half an hour ago, so not many people would know about it. Meanwhile these guys being killed attempted to break into the manor the next day.

Killer Angel
2009-08-26, 04:43 AM
I've explained poorly. They did manage to already get the killers, however they only said as such to the authorities less than half an hour ago, so not many people would know about it.

Ah, OK.
Then, if you want to be kind, the guard will ask to surrender, otherwise, they simply beat the crap out of him (with the flat side of the swords?).
Later, he will have time to explain his reasons...

Jayngfet
2009-08-26, 04:53 AM
Ah, OK.
Then, if you want to be kind, the guard will ask to surrender, otherwise, they simply beat the crap out of him (with the flat side of the swords?).
Later, he will have time to explain his reasons...

He kinda already did

When the guard went "What the hell"

He simply said "They were in the way and couldn't do what I want, so they're obsolete"

PId6
2009-08-26, 05:03 AM
"Take down the maniac serial killer. Use lethal force if necessary."

kamikasei
2009-08-26, 05:15 AM
When I said odds are this would shift him into evil he claimed it was a mercy kill(they showed clear signs of torture). He however mentioned nothing of it being a mercy kill when he actually killed them, or during the actual session.

He was employing a tactic known as "lying".

So, this lunatic not formally under anyone's authority just murdered prisoners for not having the information he wanted, while the guards were watching, and justified it as "a mercy killing" and "they were obsolete". The guards' proper reaction should be just as PId6 describes.

Out of character, point out to the player that his character is not omnipotent and cannot afford to act as if no one else in the game world can hurt him, and that he himself should not be bringing a slavering sociopath to the table.

Shpadoinkle
2009-08-26, 05:21 AM
He can die. He acted like an idiot and overstepped his bounds. He is a murderer, so he can be treated like one.

Seconded. If a PC does something incredibly stupid, he dies. This PC meets the requirements.

lord_khaine
2009-08-26, 05:44 AM
the guards should ask for his surrender, if he accepts, he ends up in jail, and the rest of the party might be able to talk him out.

if he refuses, he gets the honor of going down in a blaze of glory.

Grey Knight
2009-08-26, 05:59 AM
If you're feeling generous, the comment by several posters about having a knight offer him a chance to surrender could open up some plot possibilities for you, depending on your world. Think of it as an opportunity! Say he gets sentenced to life imprisonment on The Rock. Only one man has escaped from The Rock before --- but, oops! He's the leader of the rebel movement that the PC killed members of. How can the PCs convince/trick him to talk? Or: while imprisoned awaiting trial, he uncovers a ghost, or a concealed half-completed escape tunnel from a former prisoner.

Farlion
2009-08-26, 07:04 AM
Your credibility as DM is at stake! Don't let him get away with this! Imprison him, then hold trial. But remeber, that the fact that he brought back the killers speaks for him.

Have him sentenced to some years in prison, maybe even slave labor or fighting in the arena!

Then have some lord sneak down to him and set him free with the words: "I'm on your side. He was a bastard anyway, he deserved to die. I would have done the same thing in your position. Go now, but remember, you're in my dept. I'm known to collect them"

1. Nice story hook
2. your player may be a bit pissed about being put to jail first
3. the dept will surely be collected (and it won't be a pleasant one)


And don't forget to shift the characters alignment to evil. (If you play with alignments)

Cheers,
Farlion

Leewei
2009-08-26, 07:56 AM
The guards were willling to torture prisoners, so the PC probably wasn't doing anything they'd find objectionable. They'd probably want to bring the PC before the lord's heir to find out what to do. If the heir likes the PC, he'll literally get away with murder. If the heir dislikes him, he gets to take the place of the rebels (clearly being a co-conspirator who killed them to keep them quiet).

Either way, make the heir as sarcastic as possible. Belittle the PC for his cowardly act. "So, brave hero, slit any more prisoners' throats today? I've a dragon that you might fell. Allow my men to bind it properly for you, first!"

Make it clear to the player that his decision was downright slimy, and that playing a character who had a bit more idealism could be quite a bit more fun for him.

kamikasei
2009-08-26, 08:14 AM
The guards were willling to torture prisoners, so the PC probably wasn't doing anything they'd find objectionable.

You might not take very good care of your stuff, but I bet if someone came in to your house and started smashing it up you'd be annoyed at them. Killing prisoners removes any use you may have been able to put them to - having someone doing it on an unpredictable whim is extremely problematic.

RagnaroksChosen
2009-08-26, 08:22 AM
Seeing as the pc is level 2 in a low magic game.
I would allow him to throw down with the guards if thats the path he chooses. Just make sure he can escape(open window daring run what have you.) if the campain goes tword I'm running away from this organization then so be it.. all th emore fun for your players.

Project_Mayhem
2009-08-26, 10:11 AM
He can die. He acted like an idiot and overstepped his bounds. He is a murderer, so he can be treated like one.

Thirded. My group have always played with real consequences for poorly thought out actions, and while it can seem harsh, it increases verisimilitude and makes players really think about what they do. Or die repeatedly.

DragoonWraith
2009-08-26, 10:17 AM
I really can't imagine a situation where a PC has more justified his character's death.

Knaight
2009-08-26, 10:23 AM
Capture, quick trial, draw and quarter in the public square. Describe this in great detail. Death in combat or hanging doesn't make enough of a point about how truly idiotic this is.

Actually, have them interrogate first, and mention him being "obsolete" right before the drawing and quartering. Poetic justice always makes a point.

Primal Fury
2009-08-26, 10:24 AM
My first DM did something I always hated: All guards in any given town (regardless of it's size) were always infallible and invincible. I now realize that he made it that way to prevent this kind of crap from happening. Stealing stuff was hard, but so was commiting murder. If he's going to act like a murderous, sociopathic butt-hole, treat him like a murderous, sociopathic butt-hole: Kill'em.

BRC
2009-08-26, 10:28 AM
Throw him in the cells, to be executed at dawn.

If nothing happens, he dies, his player makes a new character, and his ghost returns, angry at the party for not springing him.

If he escapes on his own he runs off, perhaps to join the rebels, perhaps to flee the country, whatever. Under this scenario, the Player makes a new character, and the old one returns, perhaps as a friend, perhaps as a foe.

If the PC's spring him, they all flee, perhaps they join up with the rebels.

Alternitivly, he is captured, but the king offers him a quest to atone for his crimes. The party can help him out and get a reward, but he dosn't get diddly. Make it somthing humanitarian like escorting refugees or supplies through dangerous territory.

kamikasei
2009-08-26, 10:35 AM
Capture, quick trial, draw and quarter in the public square. Describe this in great detail. Death in combat or hanging doesn't make enough of a point about how truly idiotic this is.

I'd be inclined to go the opposite route - "They attack and subdue you. You're slapped awake right before you're hung - you get about two seconds of consciousness before you die. Moving along..."

Don't indulge stupidity like this with attention and spotlight time. Make it a matter of "Mmmm, you did something stupid in a childish plea for attention? Your character is now gone. That's all there is to it." Now, this isn't general advice any time a player does something stupid - in this case, having the guards actually subdue him in a real fight, and actually describing his death or giving him a chance at redemption, would be reasonable. I'm speaking more to the case where a player is being deliberately disruptive in order to remain centre stage.

Keshay
2009-08-26, 11:31 AM
How did the PC slit the prisoner's throat with his bare hands?
I know he didn't have a weapon with him when the guards let him into the prisoner's cell to question him, I mean that would just be totally incompetent and foolish on the part of the guards to let a guy they (apparently) hardly know into a protected area without first disarming the individual.

Even if he did have a weapon, was he alone and unmonitored with the prisoner in the cell? If not does he have Quick Draw and an insane initiave modifier?

I would say that a player may have reasonably expected to be able to act with impunity in this situation since you had already let him do so up to this point. Simply taking (or trying to take) player's weapons away in a social situation clearly sends the message that "Hey you're not supposed to kill this guy" pretty clearly. You apparently did not do that. Now if he had a hidden dagger on him and killed the prisoner with that after handing over his other weapons, that's a different story. Hang the dumbass or go with any of the other fine ideas presented here on how to get out of the situation.

Not that it takes any of the responsibility off the shoulders of the player for doing the incredibly stupid act, but consider your part in allowing the situation to arise. Sure, you may not have expected your player to kill a guy in custody in cold blood, but unfortunately it is your job to anticipate these sorts of things. Be better prepared in the future. In the very least take weapons away when entering a prison. Regardless of militarty, law enforcement or Player Character affiliations, the only people allowed to be armed in a prison are the guards, that's just common sense.

Tiki Snakes
2009-08-26, 11:35 AM
How did the PC slit the prisoner's throat with his bare hands?
I know he didn't have a weapon with him when the guards let him into the prisoner's cell to question him, I mean that would just be totally incompetent and foolish on the part of the guards to let a guy they (apparently) hardly know into a protected area without first disarming the individual.

Even if he did have a weapon, was he alone and unmonitored with the prisoner in the cell? If not does he have Quick Draw and an insane initiave modifier?

I would say that a player may have reasonably expected to be able to act with impunity in this situation since you had already let him do so up to this point. Simply taking (or trying to take) player's weapons away in a social situation clearly sends the message that "Hey you're not supposed to kill this guy" pretty clearly. You apparently did not do that. Now if he had a hidden dagger on him and killed the prisoner with that after handing over his other weapons, that's a different story. Hang the dumbass or go with any of the other fine ideas presented here on how to get out of the situation.

Not that it takes any of the responsibility off the shoulders of the player for doing the incredibly stupid act, but consider your part in allowing the situation to arise. Sure, you may not have expected your player to kill a guy in custody in cold blood, but unfortunately it is your job to anticipate these sorts of things. Be better prepared in the future. In the very least take weapons away when entering a prison. Regardless of militarty, law enforcement or Player Character affiliations, the only people allowed to be armed in a prison are the guards, that's just common sense.

I almost agree.
It is the guards job, however to insure the well-being of their prisoners.
I vote subdue, but let off with a quest/warning. the guards take the legal responsibility and are gruesomely executed for their failings.

Keshay
2009-08-26, 11:59 AM
I almost agree.
It is the guards job, however to insure the well-being of their prisoners.
I vote subdue, but let off with a quest/warning. the guards take the legal responsibility and are gruesomely executed for their failings.


How is that almost agreeing? It seems like full agreement to me. The best way to ensure the safety of thier prisoners is to disarm, then closely monitor any interaction outsiders have with prisoners. The guards apparently failed to do even these most basic things to secure the safety of thier prisoner.

This seems to be akin to the scene in Dark Knight where Batman was left alone in the interrogation room with the Joker. He assumed he had impunity to act as he pleased. Suprise, he did!

I agree, the character should face reprocussions, but the DM should also take more care in the future to avoid these sorts of situations. I've always DMed with the philosophy that every dumb thing my players do is somethign I have allowed to happen. Whether its through lack of an adequate description, poor plannig or what-have-you. If a player gets into a bad spot, I do take it as a personal failing. Then again, everyone I've ever played with I've known pretty well and have known them to be fairly intelligent guys. I suppose you could run into a mentally deficient player who regularly does stupid things regardless of logic or rationality, but I doubt I'd ever play twice with an individual like that.

arguskos
2009-08-26, 12:01 PM
This seems to be akin to the scene in Dark Knight where Batman was left alone in the interrogation room with the Joker. He assumed he had impunity to act as he pleased. Suprise, he did!
Eh, that's just because he's the Goddamn Batman(tm)! Then again, players often assume they too are the Goddamn Batman(tm) and act accordingly. It's a good habit to break players of (unless, of course, they're playing the actual Goddamn Batman[tm], in which case your game is way more interesting than mine).

Leewei
2009-08-26, 12:02 PM
You might not take very good care of your stuff, but I bet if someone came in to your house and started smashing it up you'd be annoyed at them.

The "stuff" in this case was part of a conspiracy that killed the local lord. The guards may well have been wishing they could do exactly what the PC did. Yes, it isn't rational. There's no need for an initial reaction to be well-reasoned. The guard may be fearing retribution from his new lord and offer up the PC to appease him. Even so, immediate hostility from the guards isn't all that likely to follow. The PCs had been previously helping subdue the uprising, after all.

Tiki Snakes
2009-08-26, 12:02 PM
I agree, the character should face reprocussions, but the DM should also take more care in the future to avoid these sorts of situations. I've always DMed with the philosophy that every dumb thing my players do is somethign I have allowed to happen. Whether its through lack of an adequate description, poor plannig or what-have-you. If a player gets into a bad spot, I do take it as a personal failing. Then again, everyone I've ever played with I've known pretty well and have known them to be fairly intelligent guys. I suppose you could run into a mentally deficient player who regularly does stupid things regardless of logic or rationality, but I doubt I'd ever play twice with an individual like that.

Very nearly full agreement, I just don't quite agree with the above here. Partially, probably, because I do regularly play with a player or two who...regularly do stupid things reguardless of logic or rationality. :)

From my point of view, if the DM/s blame themselves every-time these two or three get an idea, well, we'd lose a lot of DM's, really. ;)

Sipex
2009-08-26, 12:12 PM
I say offer this in a tier stepped solution:

1) Leave an opening for the player to explain himself/bluff whatever

2) If that doesn't work give him the option of surrendering peacefully.

a) He surrenders, good, lock him up and treat him as a prisoner, give him a court date and if found guilty (probably) a sentence of sorts (death or life in prison, whatever). If the party wants to help him they will.

b) He attacks, he'll probably lose. Have the guards fight to incapacitate him but if they're forced to (or if he becomes a bigger threat) give him the coup de grace. He should feel that his actions have consequences.

c) He flees. If he knows the entire layout of the prison let him use it, if he runs into uncharted territory maybe think up some escape routes for him to possibly take.

Umael
2009-08-26, 01:08 PM
What is best for the game?

If you want the PCs to have (even ocassionally) the chance to break the rules and get away with it even when they shouldn't, make sure there is the possibility to get away. If you want to enforce the law and that the PCs are supposed to be the heroes, don't.

How should the guards react?

If they are charged with upholding the law, then they need to be holding up the law. If the law makes it clear that you are not suppose to go around slitting the throats of prisoners, then they need to deal with a murderer. If the law says you are supposed to deal with a murderer with lethal force, go for it. If you are supposed to offer them a chance to surrender first, do that. If you are supposed to use the minimum force necessary to apprehend a suspect, that's your goal.


Personally?

I assume you want the guards to enforce the law of the land (and show that as a DM, actions have consequences).

I would have the guards order the PC to surrender. Assuming the PC does not, they would attack with enough force that they can either bring the PC to the negatives or use subdue to knock the PC out. If the PC is not dead, the guards will restraint and bandage the PC, then throw the PC in a secure jail. I would make it clear that the security is appropriate so that if the other PCs want to make a go at rescuing their comrade they can - but that it will not be easy, and failure could get them captured as well... or killed. I would remind them that if they want to rescue their comrade, they will be doing an unlawful and likely evil act .

If the other PCs want to rescue the PC, having ignored my warnings, I would let them suffer the consequences, up to and including a TPK. If not, then the question is, what to do with the PC in jail.

If the PC has proven to be dangerous (resisting arrest using lethal force, possibly even killing one of the guard members), then I would have a herald or some such announce the impeding execution of the PC. I would continue the storyline if necessary, seeing if anyone has anything they want to do before the execution day. I would describe in detail without lingering the festivities that surround an execution and the events leading up to the execution itself.

If any of the players ask if they can do something, I would ask them back if they want to actually do something. In other words, I would give the PCs enough rope to hang themselves - oh, look, someone already is about to do just that!

If the PC complains that he wants to live, I would counter, calmly and in-character, with "then you should have thought of that before you murdered someone." If the PLAYER complains, then I would ask him what he thought was going to happen after his character murdered someone.

Depending on the player, I may gloss over the torture (if there is one) before having the character actually executed. But I would execute the character.

Then I would turn to the player and ask, "do you think what happened was fair?" If the player complains, then I would explain that we have a difference of opinion of what happens in my game world and that I play the world where actions have consequences. Then, I would ask if he is unhappy with what happened, and if so, how he intends on changing that.

Because, ultimately, it is up to the players to play their characters intelligently and responsibly - not the DM.

Kylarra
2009-08-26, 01:12 PM
When the guard went "What the hell"

He simply said "They were in the way and couldn't do what I want, so they're obsolete"
Er yeah. That's sort of not the mindset that anybody is going to trust from anyone. I'll go ahead and throw in another vote for the whole jail -> death thing that everyone else is promoting.

Optimystik
2009-08-26, 01:16 PM
This seems to be akin to the scene in Dark Knight where Batman was left alone in the interrogation room with the Joker. He assumed he had impunity to act as he pleased. Suprise, he did!

The difference is that Batman is a tiny bit higher than level 2, certainly higher than the mooks guarding the Joker were. Oh, and the whole not murdering thing. Had he killed the Joker rather than roughing him up a bit, the cops would probably have gotten all up in his tights.

Murderous Hobo
2009-08-26, 01:23 PM
(...)



Can you tell me some more about the setting and his character? Because I don't directly see the problem. While right now in modern days and mostly western cultures simply executing prisoners without trial is just not done, it's not a historical oddity.

I agree with the majority here that there should be consequences, but without knowing the setting I wouldn't advocate killing the player on sight or a trial & execution.

I can imagine the person owning the prisoners is probably going to be pissed though. They might still have had use to him, you could task the player with replacing that use.

Kylarra
2009-08-26, 01:26 PM
Well, he apparently missed his chance to justify his murder to the guards. It would've been loads better if he'd just lied about why he'd done it, semi-plausibly beyond, "well he was useless to me, so I killed him", despite not being his prisoner etc.

Porthos
2009-08-26, 01:26 PM
While it's all fun and games to join the cries of Kill The Stupid PCtm, there are few things to consider. :smallsmile:

First and Foremost: Do you care if players choose "stupid" actions?

No, really. Do. You. Care?

By that I mean, if players decide to have their characters take actions that would, under first blush, be monumentally stupid and you want to "break" them of that, then by all means, throw the book at the character.

However, if you really don't care if characters do stupid things (and, believe it or not, it's a viable game philosophy), then there are certainly ways out for the PC.

At the very top of the list is that these prisoners are either responsible, or are connected in someway, to people who committed noblicide. Depending on the setting, that might make the prisoners very unsympathetic figures.

How did the guards feel about their Lord? Did they love him? Do they feel fury at his murder? Or are they slightly sympathetic to the rebels? Or does Justice override all other considerations?

This might mean all of the difference in the world between subduing the PC and killing him.

Next, how does justice really work in you world? Is it just a convenient means to an end, or do they really believe in the judicial process. Just how upset would they really be if a prisoner or three died in their cells?

Finally, and given the political situation you described I think I know the answer, how paranoid is the ruling class? Could they think that the PC killed the prisoners in an attempt to stop them from spilling their guts? Could they even, if just for a moment, wonder if the PCs are "in on it" on some level? Could go very badly for the PCs if the new Lord had thoughts in those directions.

So what's the solution?

Well, here's mine:

1) Have the guards subdue the PC in question. Even if he fights back, they should clearly be able to take him out without killing him.

Maybe rough him up a bit. That's pretty much up to you.

2) Let him stew in prison for a while in real time. Don't flash forward a few hours. Discuss the cramped dank conditions. Lay it on for a while how unpleasant things are. Make him (and the rest of the players around the table) realize that this isn't a place they want their characters to be.

If the PC tries to communicate with the guards, have them ignore him. If he tries to escape, describe in loving detail how useless it is. If the rest of the players try to break the other players PC out of jail, either stall them or remind them that not much time has passed.

3) Have either a representative of the new Lord, or even the Lord himself in disguise (in a hooded cloak - gotta love the classics after all) show up and present the PC with a deal:

Find the Rebel Leader and bring me his head within three months (which gives plenty of game time to Level Up) or be banished from my lands. Then say that the consequences of failure is that if the party does not flee the countryside (i.e. accept banishment) then they will be declared Outlaws (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlaw), in the Old School sense of the term.

What this does is several things at once. First if they kill the (new) rebel leader without having him have the chance of becoming a martyr (and thus perpetuating the cycle), that's all well and good. If the party gets themselves killed while trying to find the rebels, also good. And if the party is chased out of the countryside... Well that's an unstable element that is removed from his long list of troubles. :smallwink:

In fact, really go to town on the whole selling of the deal. Have the guards escort the Disguised Lord into the prison cell. Have the Lord make a big show of how he is sympathetic and appreciative that these Rebel Scum are dead. But then have him sigh and admit that it's bad if people just die in jail without a "fair" trial. Especially in times of Open Rebellion.

Then have the Lord order the guards to leave the room, leaving the Lord alone with the chained prisoner. Have the Lord mention to the Guards that they are to leave the Jail Area entirely. Then have one of the guards place a weapon on a table in the jail cell. Preferable the murder weapon in question. Have the Lord offer the deal, but have him make commentary throughout that underscores just how precarious the situation is for the PC.

Then start having him mention how much trouble the Lord is in. Have the Lord mention how good it would be for all concerned if this rebellion was dealt a fatal blow. Mention that things might be overlooked, or even forgotten, for the Heroes that crushed the rebellion. Mention how useful it would all be to him.

Then have him ask the imprisoned PC: Or are you just obsolete to me? :smallcool:

Some might call this "Railroading". I call it "Rescuing Players From Their Own Stupidity". :smalltongue:

And if the PC refuses the Offer He Can't Refuse? Have the Lord sigh. Have him pick up the weapon, pause, and then calmly walk out of the room....

... And have the guard come in 2 minutes later and kill the PC.

DM mercy has it's limits, after all. :smallamused:

But if one must be merciful, flash forward to the Execution Scene the next day, and see if the rest of the PCs can stage a daring rescue. But, really, the PC at this point really wouldn't deserve it.

============

As for Alignment Shift of the PC in question. Well that goes without saying. Whatever he was before, he certainly isn't Good now. :smallwink:

Murderous Hobo
2009-08-26, 01:38 PM
Then have him ask the imprisoned PC: Or are you just obsolete to me?

Speaking of pure awesome.

Dead should be memorable though, I don't think a x minute narration will do that. Might be worth doing something with the new gained evil alignment in prison though.

Makes a note to kill a bunch of prisoners on the next game.

Swordguy
2009-08-26, 01:38 PM
Have the guards call for surrender. If he refuses, they attack him with non-lethal force (subdual damage, etc). If he swings back at them at all, they'll pull out all the stops and flat-out kill him.

Guards (and cops, etc) are generally going to try and uphold the laws first, and thus try to take him alive for trial. They aren't going to try to kill him right off the bat. However, once he's proven himself a threat to them, you'd better believe they'll drop him.

Don't get me wrong, the character richly deserves death for Extreme Stupidity, and I think he'll get it. But just wiping the floor with his character won't teach anything; having him ignomiously executed for murder (no public hanging, no grand death speech, just "*shove a dagger into the nape of his neck* and done following a scrupulously fair audience before the magistrate, where the guards say, "he killed him" and the magistrate says "OK, we're done here") might.

Keshay
2009-08-26, 01:41 PM
The difference is that Batman is a tiny bit higher than level 2, certainly higher than the mooks guarding the Joker were. Oh, and the whole not murdering thing. Had he killed the Joker rather than roughing him up a bit, the cops would probably have gotten all up in his tights.

True, but the fact still holds that both individuals were permitted access to a prisoner with a reasonable expectation of autonomy based upon the lack of concern/attention exhibited by the guards.

Using your logic, a Great Dane and Toy Poodle have nothing in common. Arguments to minutae can do that. I'll assume you were attempting to appear more clever by poining out the obvious differences rather than accept the equally obvious similarities to the two situations.

So I guess I have to ask, what is it that led you to the conclusion that I'm a moron that could not tell the difference between the two situations and needed you to point them out for me? I guess I should be glad you're here to tell us all these things, I'm so very glad there's someone so much more insightful and intellignet than myself here to point out obvious differences between things.

Porthos
2009-08-26, 01:47 PM
Speaking of pure awesome.

Thanks. :smallcool:


Dead should be memorable though, I don't think a x minute narration will do that.

Well, as I said, it's all down to whether or not you want to stop players from doing Monumentally Stupid Things. :smallsmile:

Personally, I prefer the carrot and stick approach myself. I'm giving the character (if not the player :smallwink:) an opportunity to learn from his mistakes. And if it helps move the plot along the Lord in Question solve his little Rebellion problem, so much the better.

And, besides, I'm a sucker for The Classics. And having Someone Of Importance go into a jail cell and Give An Offer That Can't Be Refused To A Condemned Man is right at the top of the list of fabulous tropes.

mistformsquirrl
2009-08-26, 01:48 PM
He can die. He acted like an idiot and overstepped his bounds. He is a murderer, so he can be treated like one.

I tend to agree.

I am merciful to my players; but stupidity is stupidity and it can and will kill you (or at the very least, leave you in terrible shape).

Optimystik
2009-08-26, 02:45 PM
Using your logic, a Great Dane and Toy Poodle have nothing in common. Arguments to minutae can do that. I'll assume you were attempting to appear more clever by poining out the obvious differences rather than accept the equally obvious similarities to the two situations.

So I guess I have to ask, what is it that led you to the conclusion that I'm a moron that could not tell the difference between the two situations and needed you to point them out for me? I guess I should be glad you're here to tell us all these things, I'm so very glad there's someone so much more insightful and intellignet than myself here to point out obvious differences between things.

"Minutiae?" Rubbish. The player's low level is not incidental here; it is central to his conundrum. A higher-level character (your "great dane") could easily slit the throats of those prisoners and either battle his way out of the prison or escape by other means more readily available to high level adventurers, such as boots of teleport. It's the same reason that both Belkar and Nale are free to be sociopathic mass murderers in the strip without getting curb-stomped by the authorities.

Furthermore, would you mind toning it down a notch? I didn't even mention you in my previous post, never mind claiming anyone was a "moron." Don't be so sensitive.

DMBlackhart
2009-08-26, 04:18 PM
Hello all, this is the afformentioned PC. So anyways, I wish to clarify a few points jayngfet happened to miss. ( Although, he did describe it fairly thouroughly, so this isent a defensive maneuver on my part, it's me only shedding a little light on WHY my actions were so F'd up)


For starters, I by no meens believed our characters were invincible, the DM saw to that by making almost every other fight in the game so far, deadly as possible. (Seriously, a lv 1 warrior and lv1 adept at the start almost wasted us, then the fight after was even harder. )

As for the killing itself, yeah, I feel stupid, dumb action. I can only attribute that to lack of sleep, slightly imperfect perception on the situation (had given blood recently, which makes me horrbiyl "loopy") and a short part on the DM thanks to either poor description of the situation, or simply a miss read on the situation on my part, hardly matters eitherway.

As far as my character went, he was supposed to teeter on the edge of good and evil, make evil actions every so often on impulse to weigh out the good actions he does ( trying to keep him TN) And so, I figured with all the good he had done for this town (brought in I believe 2 different bounties and killed off numerous threats to they're city, including a bandit ambush party that the DM said had kept travlers from using that route.) So again, I assumed he was due for a "evil" action, not the best moment to pick one mind you, which leads me to why I tried to both lie IC and OoC about it being a mercy killing, so I wouldent take the full blow from my very moronic action.

So I wrote my character off as having killed two men who the DM described as both enemies to this town (breaking/entering) and who had clearly been in a horribly unfair spot FOR they're considerably light crime. (The DM describes them as heavily battered from interrogation) I assumed that ment two men who only broke into the fortress, with no FULL evidence they did much more then break in, were beaten and interrogated. Again I only used this as a meens to keep my character from taking the entire reprocussions from my increadibly poor moment of judgement, so I understand if the DM gives me even death as a punishment, just wanted to clear some points on WHY this stupid action was made.

sadi
2009-08-26, 04:19 PM
He kinda already did

When the guard went "What the hell"

He simply said "They were in the way and couldn't do what I want, so they're obsolete"

Are the gaurds lawful and or good? If the answer is yes, he deserves immediate death, or short imprisonment followed by death. Unless he can somehow intimidate the guards into covering up the matter.

Umael
2009-08-26, 05:29 PM
Hello all, this is the afformentioned PC. So anyways, I wish to clarify a few points jayngfet happened to miss....As for the killing itself, yeah, I feel stupid, dumb action. I can only attribute that to lack of sleep, slightly imperfect perception on the situation (had given blood recently, which makes me horrbiyl "loopy") and a short part on the DM thanks to either poor description of the situation, or simply a miss read on the situation on my part, hardly matters eitherway.

Ah!

Well, in that case, might I suggest that when the guards take your character away, give him a bad case of the remorses. Have him plead for his life and say that he is sorry. Have him beg for forgive and blame a tortured, troubled youth and obviously being under the influence of evil magics. Ask the magistrate if there is ANYTHING you can do. Subtly mention that your character is wealthy and that you are sure they are somehow related. Don't forget to mention your PC's wife and five children - one of them just born and not yet named.

Roll really well on your Bluff.

...

Then roll up a new character.

DMBlackhart
2009-08-26, 05:33 PM
Lol, im ready to roll up a new character, don't worry. However, I won't be playing my character off as "sorry" I originally planed for him to be fairly emotionless, a cold, logically thinking, "monster" of sorts. (but not directly evil, just a mixture of good and evil) So he will be fighting his way out, and if worse comes to worse, I have 3 characters on standby

Grey Knight
2009-08-27, 03:19 AM
So I guess I have to ask, what is it that led you to the conclusion that I'm a moron that could not tell the difference between the two situations and needed you to point them out for me? I guess I should be glad you're here to tell us all these things, I'm so very glad there's someone so much more insightful and intellignet than myself here to point out obvious differences between things.

Ah, yes. I knew there was a reason I stopped hanging around these boards, but couldn't think what it was. This sort of thing.

kamikasei
2009-08-27, 03:52 AM
As far as my character went, he was supposed to teeter on the edge of good and evil, make evil actions every so often on impulse to weigh out the good actions he does ( trying to keep him TN)

This is a recipe for disaster.

Kylarra
2009-08-27, 07:32 AM
This is a recipe for disaster.
Which apparently succeeded beyond his wildest dreams here.


"Yes your honor, I'm a neutral character, so my bad side was due a hit. "

Name_Here
2009-08-27, 09:38 AM
Is there any problem with just saying "No you don't"? Or even backing up the story to the point that everything flew out of control?

I've always found that phrase to be an incredibly powerful statement whenever my player starts something up in game that his character would know not to do or that I find far far too psychotic and insane for my table. I mean you shouldn't whip it out for them messing with your storyline or picking option c when you really only planned for options a and b but sometimes you just have to put your foot down when the rogue coup de graces the rest of the party.

Optimystik
2009-08-27, 09:45 AM
As far as my character went, he was supposed to teeter on the edge of good and evil, make evil actions every so often on impulse to weigh out the good actions he does ( trying to keep him TN) And so, I figured with all the good he had done for this town (brought in I believe 2 different bounties and killed off numerous threats to they're city, including a bandit ambush party that the DM said had kept travlers from using that route.) So again, I assumed he was due for a "evil" action, not the best moment to pick one mind you, which leads me to why I tried to both lie IC and OoC about it being a mercy killing, so I wouldent take the full blow from my very moronic action.

Without being too harsh... that is a terrible way of being neutral. It's okay to stay neutral by vacillating, but not when you include senseless murder as a balancing tool.

Any character that says "well that's enough good deeds for now, time to slit some throats!" is evil, plain and simple.

Also if you ever catch yourself "lying IC and OOC" in a session, that's a very good time to stop and talk things out with your DM.

Kylarra
2009-08-27, 10:32 AM
Also if you ever catch yourself "lying IC and OOC" in a session, that's a very good time to stop and talk things out with your DM.Yeah, lying IC is all well and good, but OOC is kind of, eh, like casting mage's disjunction or any other gentleman's agreements being violated.

Lost Demiurge
2009-08-27, 11:53 AM
Yeah, definitely sounds like a decision made after sleep deprivation, and general "loopiness". Glad you're being a sport about it, and have alternate characters ready.

Fair warning... Might want to make the next one less of a sociopath. Or at least, sneakier about his sociopathy. That's tricky as hell to play without disrupting things.

Primal Fury
2009-08-27, 12:09 PM
So you were trying to stay neutral by doing good things and evil things? Alignment does not work that way. This isn't Neverwinter Nights where you get points towards either alignment based on what you do. If you murder people because they aren't of any use to you, that's not "conflicted", that's just straightup evil. You can't balance that with good. At all.

Unless your playing an flatout evil character, it's best to avoid those sort of actions.