Maxymiuk
2007-01-28, 05:25 PM
Ok, I've recently started running a more serious D&D game where I've discarded a fair number of assumptions that the Core makes - in this case, that particular creatures are evil by default. The players were warned of this before game started.
After 3 sessions the first adventure is drawing to a close (they'll be done during next game) and I have to say that they've so far did a great job.
The plot is thus: the party arrived at a village where they found out that a band of goblins has stolen all the food supplies. The time is in late autumn, after harvest (and taxes) so the villagers have little means to survive. The protagonists of course undertook the quest and set off into the woods.
Once they encountered the goblins it turned out that they don't want to fight. Their chief told the players that his tribe tried to live in this forest without interfering with anyone, but a dragon has moved into a nearby cave and begun depopulating the forest of its game. When the goblins protested, it killed off most of the delegation and torched half their village. Thus they were forced to steal from humans. The chief knew this would inevitably bring out adventurers that he could appeal to for help (not to mention that he could keep the stolen supplies if the adventurers botched the dragon slaying).
While I was prepared for the party to start the fight right there and then, they decided to go and appeal to the dragon. They had a goblin guide with them - a bit of a pushover, whom I used to play the sympathy card, when on the way they've ran into the corpse of his mate, who was part of the delegation.
When they met the dragon, it turned out to be an artist - a sculptor in wood to be exact. The reason it attacked the goblins was because they dared to attack him after his refusal, and knocked over one of his creations. I played the dragon as a bit of a nerd and rather reluctant to fight - fighting "upset his muse" - but it was clear that he'd go berserk if anyone so much as touched his work. In fact he offered the party a hefty reward if they could get rid of the goblin nuisance once and for all. Now, the players were very reluctant to fight a dragon (being level 3 does that to you) and the goblins haven't even offered them anything outside return of the supplies for the deed, so I strongly suspected they'd be all for it.
Not so.
They flat out refused to commit what they called murder. I have only myself to blame here for making the goblins too, well, human (not that I mind). This got the dragon understandably angry and the characters left in a hurry at this point. But not before getting a chance to explore some more of his cave, finding a statue of a dragoness of unpararelled beauty in the dragon's "lair proper."
The session ended with them coming up with a plan that, to them, is "the lesser evil." My homebrew setting has something called a Bloodoath - a ritualistic oath that once made cannot be taken back as going back on it results in the death of the oathbreaker. It's a piece of ancient magic that even the gods cannot defy. The party's plan is to threaten the dragon's most prized statue and force him into a Bloodoath to stop eating animals or killing goblins. Then force the goblin chief to make a similar Bloodoath. Now, by taking all factors into account, I have to say that they have a rather good chance of succeeding. It's a good plan (with plenty of places for a clever GM to poke holes in which makes it even better), and the whole group continually pleasantly surprised me with their level-headedness, decision making skills, and willingness to talk instead of fighting.
The problem is, the dragon won't be happy about the arrangement, the goblins won't be happy about the arrangement; the peasants will be happy, but they have nothing to give. By trying to be the "good guys" the group is cheating itself out of a significant amount of loot. So my question is, how can I reward them for their efforts without making it look contrived? Or should I - and this fits the theme of the campaign better, I must admit - let them know that being touchy-feely boyscouts doesn't put food on your table?
After 3 sessions the first adventure is drawing to a close (they'll be done during next game) and I have to say that they've so far did a great job.
The plot is thus: the party arrived at a village where they found out that a band of goblins has stolen all the food supplies. The time is in late autumn, after harvest (and taxes) so the villagers have little means to survive. The protagonists of course undertook the quest and set off into the woods.
Once they encountered the goblins it turned out that they don't want to fight. Their chief told the players that his tribe tried to live in this forest without interfering with anyone, but a dragon has moved into a nearby cave and begun depopulating the forest of its game. When the goblins protested, it killed off most of the delegation and torched half their village. Thus they were forced to steal from humans. The chief knew this would inevitably bring out adventurers that he could appeal to for help (not to mention that he could keep the stolen supplies if the adventurers botched the dragon slaying).
While I was prepared for the party to start the fight right there and then, they decided to go and appeal to the dragon. They had a goblin guide with them - a bit of a pushover, whom I used to play the sympathy card, when on the way they've ran into the corpse of his mate, who was part of the delegation.
When they met the dragon, it turned out to be an artist - a sculptor in wood to be exact. The reason it attacked the goblins was because they dared to attack him after his refusal, and knocked over one of his creations. I played the dragon as a bit of a nerd and rather reluctant to fight - fighting "upset his muse" - but it was clear that he'd go berserk if anyone so much as touched his work. In fact he offered the party a hefty reward if they could get rid of the goblin nuisance once and for all. Now, the players were very reluctant to fight a dragon (being level 3 does that to you) and the goblins haven't even offered them anything outside return of the supplies for the deed, so I strongly suspected they'd be all for it.
Not so.
They flat out refused to commit what they called murder. I have only myself to blame here for making the goblins too, well, human (not that I mind). This got the dragon understandably angry and the characters left in a hurry at this point. But not before getting a chance to explore some more of his cave, finding a statue of a dragoness of unpararelled beauty in the dragon's "lair proper."
The session ended with them coming up with a plan that, to them, is "the lesser evil." My homebrew setting has something called a Bloodoath - a ritualistic oath that once made cannot be taken back as going back on it results in the death of the oathbreaker. It's a piece of ancient magic that even the gods cannot defy. The party's plan is to threaten the dragon's most prized statue and force him into a Bloodoath to stop eating animals or killing goblins. Then force the goblin chief to make a similar Bloodoath. Now, by taking all factors into account, I have to say that they have a rather good chance of succeeding. It's a good plan (with plenty of places for a clever GM to poke holes in which makes it even better), and the whole group continually pleasantly surprised me with their level-headedness, decision making skills, and willingness to talk instead of fighting.
The problem is, the dragon won't be happy about the arrangement, the goblins won't be happy about the arrangement; the peasants will be happy, but they have nothing to give. By trying to be the "good guys" the group is cheating itself out of a significant amount of loot. So my question is, how can I reward them for their efforts without making it look contrived? Or should I - and this fits the theme of the campaign better, I must admit - let them know that being touchy-feely boyscouts doesn't put food on your table?