PDA

View Full Version : Encouraging RP when it's detrimental



JellyPooga
2013-02-17, 07:15 AM
I've recently started playing in a new AD&D 2ed game and everyone, by coincidence rather than design, has opted to play Good aligned characters (of various flavours). We've only played one session so far, but it's already looking like the guy who normally plays something of a bloodthirsty mercenary, is reverting to type; which hardly fits the paradigm of the character he professed to want to play this time round. Not only that, but the group as a whole (which I should point out includes a Paladin) has already completed a short mission which is not exactly rating high on the Good-o-meter. It's a bit of a grey area, but definitely not up there with feeding the homeless...more kind of butchering the homeless because they're also criminals. In short; we took on a fledgling thieves guild.

Now, the upshot of the mission is that we'll be collecting a bounty reward, but we've also found a stash of loot; 200gp and several items (including an amulet of some kind, a dagger and other bits and bobs). Now, I can't help but think that our group should not keep the loot. Maybe the gear, but certainly not the money. To my mind (or at least my characters), it's someone elses dosh that's been stolen and we're being paid (fairly significantly) for the deed, so we don't need to keep it; maybe donate it to a temple or something.

So, I'm thinking that the Paladin might well be up for the idea and maybe the Cleric (though he is a Cleric of a war deity); they might need some persuading, but I think I could bring them round to the idea. The Good-not-good guy, on the other hand, is almost certainly going to protest.

I know I shouldn't be dictating how other people should play their characters based solely on the somewhat flimsy Alignment system of D&D, but how can I persuade the Player to show his characters Good-side, even though it's technically detrimental to his level of wealth?

ArcturusV
2013-02-17, 07:34 AM
Well, I wouldn't harp on it. Want to make sure it's a One and Done sort of conversation. You take one shot at convincing him and just don't mention it again... unless maybe something happens to highlight how his Greed is not Good and bringing him suffering. Then just kind of an "I told you so" and drop it again.

Mostly I'd just point out the intangible benefits of doing the right thing. Or even the less than intangible benefits. "Well you know if you donate it to the Temple of the Platinum Dragon the priests will look favorably on you... maybe cast some healing on you later free of charge since they know you're a good soul..."

That might be the sort of tact to take. Whether your DM goes for something like that or not... it at least SOUNDS logical. And is the sort of line that you can drop to convince a Neutral person to do a Good thing in general. "Not only is it a good thing... there's a benefit for you too."

Even works for evil people actually.

Ranos
2013-02-17, 07:47 AM
You work on a system of shares, don't you ? Use your share for good, see if you can convince other party members of it too. If they give their share up, that's fine. If they prefer to keep it, that's fine too.

Now what's important is what happens next. If there are visible repercussions down the line, then next time around maybe your friend will be more inclined to imitate you. It doesn't have to be anything big. That construction worker whose resurrection you paid for tips you off to something shady going on at his work, that kid whose debilitating disease you had cured finds you in a pinch and saves you with a distraction, etc.

Of course if all you did was go to the temple, give your money, cross a number off your sheet and that's the end of it, without getting yourself involved in anything, he'll probably want to hear none of it.

Jay R
2013-02-17, 09:23 AM
It's a little self-serving for a priest to recommend giving it to a temple, since she's affiliated. I recommend giving it to an orphanage.

Rhynn
2013-02-17, 09:38 AM
Do you get XP for GP? Ask the DM for some variety of carousing rules (originally from Dragon #10, but just Google "carousing rules"), where you either only get XP for GP by spending it on carousing or the equivalent, or get an extra 1 XP per GP by doing this - and a good variant of carousing is donations to your temples. Moral quandary solved, benefits gained!

Surfnerd
2013-02-17, 11:23 AM
Slippery slope. First murdering potentially redeemable thieves, collecting their stolen goods for your own.....Next kicking dogs and throwing garbage at orphans, good luck in Ravenloft when the mists take your.:smallbiggrin:

I kid. But as a player even one trying to adhere to a good paradigm I could see myself getting on board with this suggestion. Like Ranos said if i did it and the DM was like great heh heh heh.... and just looked at it as us self penalizing our characters I'd probably never do it again.

If the DM did use it to reward your player for RPing and possibly using it as a hook, that would be awesome.

It would be super easy for the head cleric at the church you went to to take one look at the amulet, squint his eyes and look back up at you,"This belonged to Mthenan, maybe you heard. Psshh, course not, well before your time, it was. Sit I will pour some tea. Now Mthenan......."

Or any number of hooks. It allows the players to keep the amulet without the DM just going its fine no one cares.

JellyPooga
2013-02-17, 11:54 AM
Thanks for the replies; they're much more useful than I (honestly) expected!

We haven't really settled on any kind of loot division yet, but I agree that the simplest solution is to let each character do what he will with his share and hope that one characters actions will inspire anothers. Having said that, though, there is an argument that the loot should not be divided, because it doesn't belong to the group in the first place...

I like the idea of gaining a less tangible benefit by forgoing the gold (Surfnerd: I totally want to play in one of your games!), so I'll have a little word with the GM. It's supposed to be something of a sandbox game anyway, so this kind of stuff should be what the game's all about.

ArcturusV: I totally agree about not harping on about it (unless you're playing a Harper, I guess...that's kind of their job, I suppose!). This isn't something I want to labour at, but rather see if we can "fix" (though I hate to use that particular terminology) the problem quickly or not at all. The GM has already said that his actions were definitively out of alignment and that an alignment change is either imminent or going to be retroactively applied!

Scow2
2013-02-17, 12:48 PM
I'd say you should probably keep the 200 GP, but try to track down the owners of the other items - or, check back with the guards to see if any of them match Stolen Items reports.

A 5-gp bauble might be worth only 2.5 gp to you (Its sell value), but a priceless heirloom to its original owner. Find the smith of the dagger, to see who he crafted it for - If it was the guild, keep it as rightfully yours. Otherwise, it belongs to someone else.

What you lose in coinage, you should more than make up for in contacts, quest hooks, gratitude, XP, and good standing with the community.

Put it in Out-of-character terms of Investment, not "Loss" - While you may not be killing the Goose that lays the golden egg, it might be better to hatch the egg into another Goose that lays Golden Eggs... metaphorically speaking.

Slipperychicken
2013-02-17, 01:04 PM
Put it in Out-of-character terms of Investment, not "Loss" - While you may not be killing the Goose that lays the golden egg, it might be better to hatch the egg into another Goose that lays Golden Eggs... metaphorically speaking.

More like throwing it away, then hoping a loving god will throw it back.

Hyena
2013-02-17, 01:13 PM
we took on a fledgling thieves guild.
Uh... I fail to see what's exactly wrong with that.

Rhynn
2013-02-17, 02:49 PM
Uh... I fail to see what's exactly wrong with that.

Maybe they practiced organized crime without the threat of violence to back them up?

Or, more seriously, maybe they weren't a guild in the sense of "exclusive privilege to practice a trade", but rather "voluntarily fraternity to advance a trade" ... the former tends to be the standard, though. (That's why multiple guilds in one city will either war over territory, or agree to divide it - much like other organized/professional criminal groups.)

Raimun
2013-02-17, 04:15 PM
Uh... I fail to see what's exactly wrong with that.

What's wrong with it?! :smalleek:

Everyone knows that thieves guilds only accept lovable, dashing rogues in their ranks. Any of which would make fine and upstanding Disney-movie protagonists. And they only steal from those who are rich and Lawful Evil!

None of that criminal element that deals with things such as slavery, drugs, muggings, protection rackets and occasional assassinations, mind you.

Irony.

JellyPooga
2013-02-17, 04:24 PM
Uh... I fail to see what's exactly wrong with that.

As I say, it's grey area. We're not talking about dozens of hardened criminals, grizzled thieves and thugs who will just as happily slit your throat as mug your granny; it was a guy who'd recruited a bunch of kids (i.e. young people, not specifically children) who aren't exactly upstanding law-abiding citizens. The odd picked pocket, cut purse and robbery isn't exactly going to threaten the city, but is clearly a potential threat somewhere down the line. Acting like a bunch of stereotypical murder-hobos in this situation was probably not the best approach from a moral standpoint.

Surfnerd
2013-02-18, 12:58 AM
@JellyPooga thanks for that. Thankfully I'm a player for a spell instead of DM right now.

I'm curious to know how this pans out. Keep us posted on the outcome and how your DM deals with returning the treasure.

navar100
2013-02-18, 01:24 AM
The suggestion is fine, but the others wouldn't be wrong if they don't do it. Adventure treasure could be considered the adventurer's salary. The bounty is extra gravy, but your party is literally risking their lives. How much is a life worth? Being wealthy is not evil. Neither is stopping a fledgling thieves' guild before it becomes a lot more than just a fledgling.

Xuc Xac
2013-02-18, 04:18 AM
You slaughtered a bunch of pickpockets and kept their stolen goods for yourselves? Wow. Even in Riyadh, they just cut off a thief's hand and return the stolen goods to the owners.

Hyena
2013-02-18, 05:56 AM
What's wrong with it?!

Everyone knows that thieves guilds only accept lovable, dashing rogues in their ranks. Any of which would make fine and upstanding Disney-movie protagonists. And they only steal from those who are rich and Lawful Evil!

None of that criminal element that deals with things such as slavery, drugs, muggings, protection rackets and occasional assassinations, mind you.
Wait, wait. I am so confused right now. Did the party KILL the thieves? Or did it RECRUIT the thieves? I assumed they did the first, but it seems I misread something.
If they recruited bandits, well, then you're right, the party stepped into very... grey area, and if I was the op, I would call them out.

Lorsa
2013-02-18, 08:04 AM
I once had a player that was playing a paladin and he had problems keeping any loot or gold, thinking he should donate it to those in need. Except those items that were evil which he destroyed as a sacrifice to his deity (and incidentally fueling his ancestral relic weapon at the same time). Now luckily he had picked up a rather smart and persuasive travel companion (which later became his wife) that convinced him of the necessity to keep some things for himself if he was going to be able to battle the forces of evil on a long term basis. Told him that giving away 10% of his income was quite enough and most of the time not even that was necessary. A poor farmer is quite happy with just a few gold.

ArcturusV
2013-02-18, 08:30 AM
Plus a smart paladin realizes socking some money away for a Keep, some land, a village, etc., means that he can Justly and Goodly rule over an area, and spread Good in another way when he gets up in years and no longer feels fit to adventure. But you can't do that if you don't save some serious coin.

Rhynn
2013-02-18, 09:23 AM
I once had a player that was playing a paladin and he had problems keeping any loot or gold, thinking he should donate it to those in need. Except those items that were evil which he destroyed as a sacrifice to his deity (and incidentally fueling his ancestral relic weapon at the same time). Now luckily he had picked up a rather smart and persuasive travel companion (which later became his wife) that convinced him of the necessity to keep some things for himself if he was going to be able to battle the forces of evil on a long term basis. Told him that giving away 10% of his income was quite enough and most of the time not even that was necessary. A poor farmer is quite happy with just a few gold.


Plus a smart paladin realizes socking some money away for a Keep, some land, a village, etc., means that he can Justly and Goodly rule over an area, and spread Good in another way when he gets up in years and no longer feels fit to adventure. But you can't do that if you don't save some serious coin.

You could always go the historical route, too - your paladin is donating all these things to his holy order of knighthood (or equivalent), which is a temporal power (like such orders, and churches and temples, always were) that holds lands in the form of manor villages and castles; when time comes for the paladin to get his own domain, he's appointed ruler of one by the order, rather than needing to pay for building a castle etc.

Adapt as necessary for other needs. Of course, if you're a lone paladin bringing justice to the wilderness, you probably do need someone savvy with finances to help. (Unless you're literally a Templar...)

Also, a poor farmer is probably going to be far happier about having less monsters around to drive him off his farm or kill his family and laborers, or causing a increased taxes to pay for combating them, or with magically improved weather helping with crops, than with a few coins here and there. For one, if everyone in the region is suffering from the same problems, a few coin aren't going to buy him the food he needs to get out of his fields to feed his family... so, really, the sensible thing to do is to use that filthy lucre on large-scale projects to combat evil (or social injustice - orphanages, poor houses, etc. - or even just on civic projects like aqueducts, sewers, etc.).

Slipperychicken
2013-02-18, 07:37 PM
Plus a smart paladin realizes socking some money away for a Keep, some land, a village, etc., means that he can Justly and Goodly rule over an area, and spread Good in another way when he gets up in years and no longer feels fit to adventure. But you can't do that if you don't save some serious coin.

If looting the stuff counts as stealing, then it's an Evil Act as per BoVD and the Paladin falls. Otherwise, loot away.

JellyPooga
2013-02-23, 07:39 AM
I'm curious to know how this pans out. Keep us posted on the outcome and how your DM deals with returning the treasure.

Well, for the sake of the update, it went pretty much as well as I could have hoped. We agreed to keep the items and a small amount of the gold for ourselves (mostly because none of us even had the cash to pay for food and lodgings!) and split the rest between two different temples as a donation.

The guy who went all murder-hobo-rage seems to have realised that he wasn't exactly playing up to the character archetype he was going for and reigned it in significantly.

As it happens, it was the Paladin who seemed the least interested in having anything to do with the loot, whether to keep it or donate it. I'm not sure why, but I think he was more interested in finding out about a mission we're planning to do for the temple.

Thanks again for all the replies, guys.