How cruel would this be?

[Hazrond]

I was thinking of DMing a campaign and had an idea for a low level adventure, the party is asked by (insert town name here)'s mayor to deal with a dragon that has been terrorizing the town's livestock so they fight their way through the cave/dungeon/etc and reach the dragon who attacks them on sight snarling "NO! I won't let this happen again" (young, possibly wyrmling dragon here) the party kills the "evil" dragon and is going through her hoard when they find her journal detailing her life including about a month ago when her mother was killed, and then how she stole from the village to feed herself and her baby brother after they drove her away when she tried to get food peacefully (think "ahhhh dragon kill it kill it" when they first saw her) then as they read it the previously locked door across the room opens to reveal a small child with a teddy bear "Sissy, would you read me a-…" sadness and guilt ensues and the party now has to protect the small dragon boy or they get a huge black mark on their alignments and who knows maybe the dragon child becomes important?

Edit: leaving the child is grounds for paladin fall as well as possibly even trouble for the cleric if they worship a good diety, any good char that leaves the child is gonna be put very close to shifting to neutral, etc. they would be LEAVING A CHILD TO DIE

[Segev]

I was thinking of DMing a campaign and had an idea for a low level adventure, the party is asked by (insert town name here)'s mayor to deal with a dragon that has been terrorizing the town's livestock so they fight their way through the cave/dungeon/etc and reach the dragon who attacks them on sight snarling "NO! I won't let this happen again" (young, possibly wyrmling dragon here) the party kills the "evil" dragon and is going through her hoard when they find her journal detailing her life including about a month ago when her mother was killed, and then how she stole from the village to feed herself and her baby brother after they drove her away when she tried to get food peacefully (think "ahhhh dragon kill it kill it" when they first saw her) then as they read it the previously locked door across the room opens to reveal a small child with a teddy bear "Sissy, would you read me a-…" sadness and guilt ensues and the party now has to protect the small dragon boy or they get a huge black mark on their alignments and who knows maybe the dragon child becomes important?

Well...

Be prepared for players to feel railroaded if they don't get a chance to react to the "sissy's" declaration, or if she doesn't react in a way that gives even the slightest hint that she's aggrieved.

Recall that player characters can have things like Sense Motive, Detect Evil, and even (depending on level) Charm Monster effects, not to mention that they might have a rogue who scouts out the lair and could discover the li'l sibling.

The scenario is an interesting one. But absolutely do not railroad the PCs into being "accidental murderers." It is an option, of course, but they had best be able to look back and see how the signs were available to be seen. (They may not have a chance to have seen them...but that should be due to the composition of the party or bad luck on die rolls or choices they made, and not the unavailability of the signs.)

reply to edit: Technically, wyrmling dragons are fully capable of supporting themselves...but they're not likely to do so in an ecologically nor culturally friendly manner.

[Hazrond]

Well...

Be prepared for players to feel railroaded if they don't get a chance to react to the "sissy's" declaration, or if she doesn't react in a way that gives even the slightest hint that she's aggrieved.

Recall that player characters can have things like Sense Motive, Detect Evil, and even (depending on level) Charm Monster effects, not to mention that they might have a rogue who scouts out the lair and could discover the li'l sibling.

The scenario is an interesting one. But absolutely do not railroad the PCs into being "accidental murderers." It is an option, of course, but they had best be able to look back and see how the signs were available to be seen. (They may not have a chance to have seen them...but that should be due to the composition of the party or bad luck on die rolls or choices they made, and not the unavailability of the signs.)

reply to edit: Technically, wyrmling dragons are fully capable of supporting themselves...but they're not likely to do so in an ecologically nor culturally friendly manner.

This is like 3-4 month old, no idea how to survive, technically a wyrmling but more like a toddler

[Segev]

This is like 3-4 month old, no idea how to survive, technically a wyrmling but more like a toddler

You can house rule that in, if you like, but IIRC the RAW state that a wyrmling fresh from the shell can hunt for itself. Some of the evil dragon types have to, as parents just don't stick around to wait for hatching.

[Kazudo]

This sounds to me like a bit of a hit or miss.

The players might not feel like they are required to take care of yet another dragon of typically evil alignment. Pelor help you if someone's playing a Dragonborn of Bahamut, who would actually be more in trouble by NOT being able to just outright kill the thing regardless of its relative innocence.

EDIT FOR CONTENT: And actually, if the dragons are of a typically good-aligned variety, then you really have to examine the players. They may not care about the other creature.

[Hazrond]

This sounds to me like a bit of a hit or miss.

The players might not feel like they are required to take care of yet another dragon of typically evil alignment. Pelor help you if someone's playing a Dragonborn of Bahamut, who would actually be more in trouble by NOT being able to just outright kill the thing regardless of its relative innocence.

This wouldn't be one of the evil dragons, I was thinking to use one of the neutral gem dragons

Edit: possibly emerald so it could be mistaken for a green by the villagers

[HighWater]

Throwing curveballs occasionally can be nice, just make sure the players have the option of finding out that the situation is not what it seems before they start killing dragons. In that case, if they don't investigate and ignore the odd statement made by the dragon, they will feel much more guilty than if you railroad them into it. As you already suggested, the villagers do not have to be evil, or even wrong, for this conundrum to come to pass: trying to protect your stocks from a dangerous thief is not an evil act, nor is driving away a dangerous scaly monster before it can kill you (or before you find out that it doesn't want to).

Be sure to mix this kind of mission up with the straight forward "real bad guy killing", to keep your players on your toes, but always allow them a chance to find out something's wrong before committing the act. This kind of missions also requires a bit more fluent approach to alignment: don't immediatly go alignment-changing, paladin-falling and cleric-severing. If your players have anything resembling a soul, they will try to do the good thing without such punishment. :smallwink:

Edit: Getting rid of "colour-coded good/bad for your convenience" in my view greatly enhances dragons. But then again, I also prefer to say humanoids are -usually- of the listed alignment (but definitely not always). There will be clues.

[Kazudo]

Ah. Well that's somewhat different. Be careful that your players don't also mistake it for green, especially the ones without knowledge checks. It might also help to make sure your players' characters know what that variety is so that there's some way to know. If you describe it as having green scales, they'll probably nuke it for its hoard. Magical murderhobos, you know.

If they do kill both, make it a plot point for later. Maybe it's one of the last surviving members of its kind (which is why it was killed so quickly, no one's familiar with it) and now the party needs to find what became of its remains for a specific macguffin.

[Red Fel]

I was thinking of DMing a campaign and had an idea for a low level adventure, the party is asked by (insert town name here)'s mayor to deal with a dragon that has been terrorizing the town's livestock so they fight their way through the cave/dungeon/etc and reach the dragon who attacks them on sight snarling "NO! I won't let this happen again" (young, possibly wyrmling dragon here) the party kills the "evil" dragon and is going through her hoard when they find her journal detailing her life including about a month ago when her mother was killed, and then how she stole from the village to feed herself and her baby brother after they drove her away when she tried to get food peacefully (think "ahhhh dragon kill it kill it" when they first saw her) then as they read it the previously locked door across the room opens to reveal a small child with a teddy bear "Sissy, would you read me a-…" sadness and guilt ensues and the party now has to protect the small dragon boy or they get a huge black mark on their alignments and who knows maybe the dragon child becomes important?

Edit: leaving the child is grounds for paladin fall as well as possibly even trouble for the cleric if they worship a good diety, any good char that leaves the child is gonna be put very close to shifting to neutral, etc. they would be LEAVING A CHILD TO DIE

Let me start by observing that I love giving players moral quandaries; villains who are not entirely villainous and heroes who are less than heroic, situations where there are no easy answers. So kudos for trying it out.

That said, the first rule of entertaining is "Know your audience." Do your players like moral quandaries? Or are they likely to simply kill or ignore the child, and ignore the penalties? Will they feel imposed upon?

Next, what's your purpose, other than offering a tough moral choice? Do you have a particular reason to saddle them with an infant dragon? Or are you doing it explicitly to mess with them or force them to suffer alignment penalties? (I get giving PCs moral issues to wrestle with, but I'm not really cool with doing it explicitly to mess with them.)

Here's the big problem. You've painted this whole scenario in your head - PCs get hired to kill the dragon, PCs kill the dragon, PCs discover they've done something wrong, PCs have to protect a baby dragon. Let's look at all the ways the PCs could ruin your scenario: The PCs don't get hired. They ignore the mayor, or pass by the town, or refuse to take the job. ("Dragon? Are you kidding? We'll die!") The PCs don't fight the dragon. Maybe they take the job, take an advance on pay, and split town. Maybe they sneak in while the dragon is asleep, or put it to sleep, and discover the truth. Maybe they approach peacefully from the outset. The PCs fight the dragon, but don't kill it. Maybe they start to fight, but one asks the dragon about its "not again" comment, or they roll well on Sense Motive or Spot or something, and they call a ceasefire. The PCs kill the dragon, but don't find the journal. Maybe they don't find the hoard, or maybe they don't loot it, or maybe they loot it but neglect the book, or maybe they assume the book is booby-trapped. The PCs don't protect the kid. Maybe they flee before you can produce the kid, or maybe they fire as soon as the door opens, or maybe they kill it anyway (because evil dragon), or maybe they abandon it anyway (because dragon, and seriously, isn't taking a kid adventuring even worse than leaving it in a safe cave?).
There are plenty of ways this scenario could go off the rails. Do you plan to force the PCs back onto the rails? Or will you let them get away with it?

Because if you plan to force them - "No, you have to take the job," "No, the dragon wants to kill you, you have to kill it first," "Suddenly, the book falls open and you find yourselves reading it," - then you might as well simply narrate the session, from them taking the job and killing the dragon to their alignment penalty when they ditch the kid.

What is it, precisely, that you want to do with this idea? That's my question.

[Hazrond]

Let me start by observing that I love giving players moral quandaries; villains who are not entirely villainous and heroes who are less than heroic, situations where there are no easy answers. So kudos for trying it out.

That said, the first rule of entertaining is "Know your audience." Do your players like moral quandaries? Or are they likely to simply kill or ignore the child, and ignore the penalties? Will they feel imposed upon?

Next, what's your purpose, other than offering a tough moral choice? Do you have a particular reason to saddle them with an infant dragon? Or are you doing it explicitly to mess with them or force them to suffer alignment penalties? (I get giving PCs moral issues to wrestle with, but I'm not really cool with doing it explicitly to mess with them.)

Here's the big problem. You've painted this whole scenario in your head - PCs get hired to kill the dragon, PCs kill the dragon, PCs discover they've done something wrong, PCs have to protect a baby dragon. Let's look at all the ways the PCs could ruin your scenario: The PCs don't get hired. They ignore the mayor, or pass by the town, or refuse to take the job. ("Dragon? Are you kidding? We'll die!") The PCs don't fight the dragon. Maybe they take the job, take an advance on pay, and split town. Maybe they sneak in while the dragon is asleep, or put it to sleep, and discover the truth. Maybe they approach peacefully from the outset. The PCs fight the dragon, but don't kill it. Maybe they start to fight, but one asks the dragon about its "not again" comment, or they roll well on Sense Motive or Spot or something, and they call a ceasefire. The PCs kill the dragon, but don't find the journal. Maybe they don't find the hoard, or maybe they don't loot it, or maybe they loot it but neglect the book, or maybe they assume the book is booby-trapped. The PCs don't protect the kid. Maybe they flee before you can produce the kid, or maybe they fire as soon as the door opens, or maybe they kill it anyway (because evil dragon), or maybe they abandon it anyway (because dragon, and seriously, isn't taking a kid adventuring even worse than leaving it in a safe cave?).
There are plenty of ways this scenario could go off the rails. Do you plan to force the PCs back onto the rails? Or will you let them get away with it?

Because if you plan to force them - "No, you have to take the job," "No, the dragon wants to kill you, you have to kill it first," "Suddenly, the book falls open and you find yourselves reading it," - then you might as well simply narrate the session, from them taking the job and killing the dragon to their alignment penalty when they ditch the kid.

What is it, precisely, that you want to do with this idea? That's my question.

If they don't decide to bring the dragon with them they deal with the consequences of that action if they do they deal with THOSE consequences, as for the book I would tell them they found it in the hoard and make it very obvious they should read it, also the cave is by no means safe the kid would die without big sissy to protect him or maybe he doesn't and becomes an enemy in the future, who knows, I'm prepared to play each scenario out but I expect that killing the big sis is most likely to happen based on how party's work

[Kazudo]

So what would the consequences be?

Do you already have a party dynamic drawn up? What is everyone playing if you don't mind my asking?

[Hazrond]

By the way, a paladin would fall HARD if he left the child, I consider leaving a child (no matter the race) to die a very evil act myself

[Pan151]

the kid would die without big sissy to protect him

Why would a wyrmling dragon need anyone to protect him?

Dragons are born with full knowledge of both the world they come in and their own abilities and limits thereof, to the point where they are even able to fluently speak in multiple languages within 24 hours from birth. They are not puppies.

[Kazudo]

It's a houserule that's in effect from what I can tell.

[Hazrond]

So what would the consequences be?

Do you already have a party dynamic drawn up? What is everyone playing if you don't mind my asking?

Consequences range from falling paladins to vengeful dragon enemies

As for party, I have yet to make the campaign so no set group yet, though I would only pull this on a predominantly good party

[Hazrond]

Why would a wyrmling dragon need anyone to protect him?

Dragons are born with full knowledge of both the world they come in and their own abilities and limits thereof, to the point where they are even able to fluently speak in multiple languages within 24 hours from birth. They are not puppies.

Like I have said earlier, I would not play it like that, he would essentially be a very young child and have no survival skills or inborn knowledge

[Kazudo]

Consequences range from falling paladins to vengeful dragon enemies

As for party, I have yet to make the campaign so no set group yet, though I would only pull this on a predominantly good party

Ah. Ok. Just wanted to make sure.

So if you don't have anyone with a moral code even though they're good aligned, the consequences would be annoying at best and VERY good for WBL later on. Get a wand of shivering touch and go to town.

[Hiro Protagonest]

By the way, a paladin would fall HARD if he left the child, I consider leaving a child (no matter the race) to die a very evil act myself
Yeah, no. A wyrmling right out of the egg is as intelligent as a grown adult and knows how to hunt for itself. Even if you say it doesn't know learned skills, its sister would've taught it and it would've learned very quickly. It won't die unless villagers actually come after it to kill it, which is off the paladin's hands unless he tells them to.

[Kazudo]

It's been discussed that he's houseruling that they aren't like that.

[Hazrond]

Yeah, no. A wyrmling right out of the egg is as intelligent as a grown adult and knows how to hunt for itself. Even if you say it doesn't know learned skills, its sister would've taught it and it would've learned very quickly. It won't die unless villagers actually come after it to kill it, which is off the paladin's hands unless he tells them to.

Like I said, I'm houseruling that dragons, like most sentient beings do not have knowledge from birth and this particular one has been very sheltered up till now

[Hazrond]

So any thoughts on how to make this encounter more interesting/compelling/emotional/etc?

[Segev]

The biggest thing is to make sure you're not railroading them. Make sure they have chances to realize something is up.

It will not feel compelling if they feel like they had no choices.

Honestly, if they're good-aligned, soft-hearted types and they do figure out what's going on, they may try to adopt BOTH of them. Don't discount that possibility.

Your scenario is fine, as long as you don't think of it as "they have to kill the big sister" and "they have to find things out exactly as I outlined."

That may be what you think is the most likely course of events, but be prepared for them to do things differently.

This will be at its most compelling if the players feel they had agency in it and that their choices brought about whatever outcomes occur. They will feel cheated and flat if they feel like they were forced into "screwing up."

[Kazudo]

The way you describe it would work on any number of specifically geared parties, yes.

You could always have an npc join the party as a sort of "escort mission". An expert on dragons. An old guy. Who gets really upset when any dragon at all is harmed, much less the good ones. Get him separated from the party for some reason, maybe by a roving monster who captures him and carries him deep into the dungeon. Make it appear that the doomed sibling is in control of it. The group kills the doomed sibling, then finds the other one in the hands of the NPC weeping over the loss of its sister, blaming the group telling them they have to make it right somehow.

Then you leave the dragon in the hands of an NPC to avoid the Scrappy Effect.

EDIT: Not that this is what's going to happen a la railroading, but rather a likely course of events that will make it appear that the players were responsible not that you had it planned this way from the start.

[Hazrond]

Honestly, if they're good-aligned, soft-hearted types and they do figure out what's going on, they may try to adopt BOTH of them. Don't discount the possibility.

I would LOVE to see this happen and it would be interesting if it did, but sadly I doubt they could convince the sister with anything less than spectacular roleplaying and diplomacy, she is very anti-adventurer since they killed her mother

[Mellack]

This "child" is a dragon, correct? They are tougher than most humans and really don't need protecting. Even houseruling they do, a quick detect can tell if it is evil. If yes, killing is accepted, if not, dump it at the local church. Either way is not much of an effort, and a I see no reason they would feel guilty. They were working with the info they had.

[Hazrond]

Either way is not much of an effort, and a I see no reason they would feel guilty.

Might I point out that they killed a young girl (draconic or otherwise) that had been merely trying to provide for her little brother!? That's like saying you should kill orphan gutter rats because they steal food, they did something wrong yes, but can you really blame them considering the circumstances?

[Nilehus]

Honestly, this seems like a railroad to "See what bad people your characters are!" I'd be irritated if my DM pulled this, to say the least.

I'm all for consequences coming back to bite you, but this just seems very forced. Especially since you said it'd be near-impossible for the party to talk the sister down.

[Hazrond]

Honestly, this seems like a railroad to "See what bad people your characters are!" I'd be irritated if my DM pulled this, to say the least.

I'm all for consequences coming back to bite you, but this just seems very forced. Especially since you said it'd be near-impossible for the party to talk the sister down.

Not near impossible just hard, they could probably avoid conflict altogether if they play their cards right

Edit: it also shows that morality is not always "u did sometin bad naow u gunna die" it ain't always black and white, so what are you gonna do with grey?

[Mellack]

Might I point out that they killed a young girl (draconic or otherwise) that had been merely trying to provide for her little brother!? That's like saying you should kill orphan gutter rats because they steal food, they did something wrong yes, but can you really blame them considering the circumstances?

They killed a dragon that attacked them after terrorizing the local village. It is all in the perception.

[Hazrond]

They killed a dragon that attacked them after terrorizing the local village. It is all in the perception.

Yes it is a matter of perception, but that perception is shattered when they find out the whole truth, the gutter rats were a perfect example, from one view they are thieves another view they are scared children trying to survive

[Mellack]

Why is this dragon taking livestock anyway if it is not evil? Dragons are powerful enough to hunt in the wild. They do not need to take a farmers animal, and should be smart enough to realize the trouble it will bring and the hardship it would cause most peasants.

[Hazrond]

Why is this dragon taking livestock anyway if it is not evil? Dragons are powerful enough to hunt in the wild. They do not need to take a farmers animal, and should be smart enough to realize the trouble it will bring and the hardship it would cause most peasants.

As i mentioned earlier these two dragons were young and rather sheltered by their mother, the sister MIGHT be able to hunt for herself if shes lucky but she is not nearly skilled enough yet to hunt for herself and her brother

[heavyfuel]

You should also be prepared to face the likely fact that your PCs are amoral murderhobos that just don't care about the Lil dragon

[Hazrond]

You should also be prepared to face the likely fact that your PCs are amoral murderhobos that just don't care about the Lil dragon

Im prepared for that, if they do that there is a chance the Lil dragon may become a vengeful enemy of the party as he grows up, possibly even tailouring his build to combat them

Edit: oh and dont say "Wand of Shivering Touch" if he gets to that point he WILL have prepared against such common dragon defeating mechanisms

[Nilehus]

There are many, many ways to avoid black and white morality that don't involve "Woops, you guys accidentally created an orphan! Good job."

Even a Paladin is allowed to kill in self-defense, and 'sissy' attacks on sight. Saying she had a crippled orphan brother after the fact isn't deep, it's a cheap shot at the players. Unless you want them to spend 15 minutes trying to talk down every monster they come across, just on the off-chance.

[Hazrond]

There are many, many ways to avoid black and white morality that don't involve "Woops, you guys accidentally created an orphan! Good job."

Even a Paladin is allowed to kill in self-defense, and 'sissy' attacks on sight. Saying she had a crippled orphan brother after the fact isn't deep, it's a cheap shot at the players. Unless you want them to spend 15 minutes trying to talk down every monster they come across, just on the off-chance.

She wont really attack ON SIGHT, so much as if they seem hostile enough, if they try peaceful negotiations from the beginning they may be able to talk her down, as for the brother there will be hints and such to the hidden backstory spread through this little quest a farmer mentioning that a few months back they were rid of the nearby dragon by a group of powerful adventurers, the journal maybe being hidden farther up in the dungeon before they encounter the sister, if they start combat the entire time she will be dropping little lines like "I wont let you butcher us like your kind did our mother" and such.

[heavyfuel]

Im prepared for that, if they do that there is a chance the Lil dragon may become a vengeful enemy of the party as he grows up, possibly even tailouring his build to combat them

Edit: oh and dont say "Wand of Shivering Touch" if he gets to that point he WILL have prepared against such common dragon defeating mechanisms

You should also prepare for your PCs to be methodic enough to just kill him to leave no loose ends.

On a side note, maybe I should get a new group :smallbiggrin:

[Hazrond]

You should also prepare for your PCs to be methodic enough to just kill him to leave no loose ends.

On a side note, maybe I should get a new group :smallbiggrin:

if they kill the little dragon they should be prepared for me to open the Libris Mortis and find the most powerful and appropriate template for this situation :smallamused:

[Kazudo]

Wow. Ok, so this is getting a tad vengeful for my tastes. It's obvious to me that you're gonna just do whatever.

To answer, it's not really cruel but it can be unfun, especially when you turn it into a vendetta like that. Basically what it sounds like is "you'll take my scrappy under my terms or you'll live to regret it" which, while sometimes can be alright, a lot of times it ends up feeling very forced and starts breeding terms like "The DM is out to get us" and "Don't you get that it's us versus him/her" etc.

[Nilehus]

She wont really attack ON SIGHT, so much as if they seem hostile enough, if they try peaceful negotiations from the beginning they may be able to talk her down, as for the brother there will be hints and such to the hidden backstory spread through this little quest a farmer mentioning that a few months back they were rid of the nearby dragon by a group of powerful adventurers, the journal maybe being hidden farther up in the dungeon before they encounter the sister, if they start combat the entire time she will be dropping little lines like "I wont let you butcher us like your kind did our mother" and such.

If they find the journal first, it'd make the situation a LOT more compelling. Choosing to try and peacefully talk down the dragon, or just killing her for the horde of gold? That's a lot more gripping. :smallsmile:

[Mellack]

Im prepared for that, if they do that there is a chance the Lil dragon may become a vengeful enemy of the party as he grows up, possibly even tailouring his build to combat them

Edit: oh and dont say "Wand of Shivering Touch" if he gets to that point he WILL have prepared against such common dragon defeating mechanisms

If it can become an enemy as it grows up, you have shown it didn't need them. That means there is no reason they should feel any need to protect it.

These things are DRAGONS. Look at their stats. Right out of an egg, they are a reasonable fight for several starting adventures.

That is also where your gutter rats comparison fails. Children steal because they cannot survive otherwise. When they get older, if they do that they gey throw in jail or worse. Dragons are able to easily fend for themselves from the time they emerge. If you claim otherwise, i must assume the sister fight will be extreemy short as easy as these dragons are so weak and helpless.

[Hazrond]

Basically what it sounds like is "you'll take my scrappy under my terms or you'll live to regret it"

im not trying to be that way, if they find a way to get rid of the young dragon without being a bunch complete jerks to it then the thing probably wont come after them, if they on the other hand leave him alone in the cave then he will be vengeful as he grows up, if they kill him then he has all the more reason to rise as a vengeful undead. the trick is to not be a complete and utter jerk and you can get away from this without any trouble or a vengeful dragon/ undead dragon after you.

[Hazrond]

If it can become an enemy as it grows up, you have shown it didn't need them. That means there is no reason they should feel any need to protect it.

These things are DRAGONS. Look at their stats. Right out of an egg, they are a reasonable fight for several starting adventures.

That is also where your gutter rats comparison fails. Children steal because they cannot survive otherwise. When they get older, if they do that they gey throw in jail or worse. Dragons are able to easily fend for themselves from the time they emerge. If you claim otherwise, i must assume the sister fight will be extreemy short as easy as these dragons are so weak and helpless.

1. it is a CHANCE, i will either roll for it or bring it in when i feel it is appropriate but in no way is it guarenteed

2. while she may be able to fight off monsters and or adventurers, like i already explained she is nowhere near skilled enough to provide food for the both of them, just because she can rip you in half doesnt mean she knows how to stalk and kill animals for food without them just running into the brush

Edit: 3. Remember these two are NOT evil, they wouldnt just raze the town for the food, she is only enough to survive not enough for a feast

[Hazrond]

If they find the journal first, it'd make the situation a LOT more compelling. Choosing to try and peacefully talk down the dragon, or just killing her for the horde of gold? That's a lot more gripping. :smallsmile:

sounds like a good idea, i will move the journal up in the dungeon, maybe in a small library a few chambers away from the sister herself:smallbiggrin:

[Segev]

Honestly, there's no reason it'd come back as undead barring DM vindictiveness. Unless every kobold and goblin they thrash is likely to.

Also, it takes centuries for dragons to grow up; the party'll be long dead by the time it could be powerful just due to age to the point that they're feeling overwhelmed.

[Hazrond]

Honestly, there's no reason it'd come back as undead barring DM vindictiveness. Unless every kobold and goblin they thrash is likely to.

Also, it takes centuries for dragons to grow up; the party'll be long dead by the time it could be powerful just due to age to the point that they're feeling overwhelmed.

Well some undead are actually caused by emotions from the dying creature, for instance a strong willed adventurer that is killed can, with enough willpower and a reason, become a ghost to hunt down his killer, or do whatever his reason was.

Edit: also if you read the draconomicon the younger age categories actually on last a couple years each, you dont get to the huge stuff till it gets really old

Edit 2.0: i probably wont raise the thing as an undead unless i need to, i am now also contemplating having the BBEG use a spell or something just before the final fight to psych out the party by being like "Look upon the faces of those you have ended, those you have ruined, and those that gave themselves for you" cue dramatic flashbacks of EVERY SINGLE FACE in each category

[Segev]

I'm sorry, I just keep getting the niggling feeling that you're viewing this too much from a "it WILL go this way or THEY WILL PAY" sort of lens. Maybe I'm reading you wrong. But that's why I keep being leery of your idea of this.

The scenario itself is fine. I just think you need to be more open to the fact that players' choices should be meaningful, and that they should have opportunity to succeed at whatever (reasonable) course they decide upon. It might be hard, but don't be surprised if a good diplomancer can charm the scales off the big sister. How many HD is she? She might fall under the level where Hypnotism could shift her attitude two steps in the positive direction for one suggested course of action, such as "let us take you in."

And then there's cold, hard logic. "Look, we were hired because you're terrorizing innocent farmers who think you're a horrible beast. If you don't let us help you and your baby brother, another set of adventurers will come, and another, until one of them kills you and - if he's lucky - leaves your brother to fend for himself." Alternatively, "Don't make us kill you, too!" if she's insistent on fighting. She, at least, should stop a moment to think about her brother being left all alone...


Now, that's not to say there aren't ways your party could play it just as you envision it. But don't try to force it, and don't be surprised if (when) they do something totally off-the-wall.

[Hazrond]

I'm sorry, I just keep getting the niggling feeling that you're viewing this too much from a "it WILL go this way or THEY WILL PAY" sort of lens. Maybe I'm reading you wrong. But that's why I keep being leery of your idea of this.

The scenario itself is fine. I just think you need to be more open to the fact that players' choices should be meaningful, and that they should have opportunity to succeed at whatever (reasonable) course they decide upon. It might be hard, but don't be surprised if a good diplomancer can charm the scales off the big sister. How many HD is she? She might fall under the level where Hypnotism could shift her attitude two steps in the positive direction for one suggested course of action, such as "let us take you in."

And then there's cold, hard logic. "Look, we were hired because you're terrorizing innocent farmers who think you're a horrible beast. If you don't let us help you and your baby brother, another set of adventurers will come, and another, until one of them kills you and - if he's lucky - leaves your brother to fend for himself." Alternatively, "Don't make us kill you, too!" if she's insistent on fighting. She, at least, should stop a moment to think about her brother being left all alone...


Now, that's not to say there aren't ways your party could play it just as you envision it. But don't try to force it, and don't be surprised if (when) they do something totally off-the-wall.

If they do decide to go off the wall i am prepared to play out whatever situation they create, also if they try hypnotism spell, then it would only bring her to indifferent, which while not quite as hard to diplomacize as before, is still not a cakewalk and i dont care about the diplomacy rules i will not allow her to be talked into something that is OBVIOUSLY harmful (AKA taking her in to the village of people who want her DEAD) without some pretty good reasoning

Edit: just read hypnotism, she has too many HD unless they empower it or something

[Segev]

So, I take it the villagers can't be talked into anything, either, no matter what? Or could the party offer to serve as go-betweens and negotiators?

After all, I know what I'd be doing in this situation with many of my good-aligned PCs is trying to work out an arrangement with the village. Food for cooperation on protection, or even having her join human hunting parties for wild game and splitting the rewards. A friendly dragon as a citizen in a village can be very useful.

But that's me.

Anyway, as I've said, your scenario seems fine, as long as you let the players react to it rather than trying to force an outcome.

[Hazrond]

So, I take it the villagers can't be talked into anything, either, no matter what? Or could the party offer to serve as go-betweens and negotiators?

After all, I know what I'd be doing in this situation with many of my good-aligned PCs is trying to work out an arrangement with the village. Food for cooperation on protection, or even having her join human hunting parties for wild game and splitting the rewards. A friendly dragon as a citizen in a village can be very useful.

But that's me.

Anyway, as I've said, your scenario seems fine, as long as you let the players react to it rather than trying to force an outcome.

The party could totally negotiate like that if they think of it, but im just saying there is no way you are talking her into entering that town while the villagers are still mad

[Segev]

That seems reasonable.

[Nilehus]

Yep. Just make it clear the dragon does NOT want to fight. She's in the horde room, yelling at them to get out, but instead of protecting her horde, she's guarding a tunnel deeper into the cavern or something.

Play it right, it could be interesting, play it wrong, and your players will get bored and resent the situation very quickly.

[Segev]

Nilehus brings up a good point. How the sister plays this is going to be key.

If she reacts with initial violence, that's fine. But it should be clear she's trying to drive them out. Focus on bull rushing and positioning to block advancement. The moment she starts taking any serious damage (even a quarter of her hp), she should start to be more concerned about keeping them OUT than driving them away. She needs to back in to a tunnel and try to limit their access to her, relying on her breath weapon, but backing away only reluctantly. She's keeping them from her baby brother.

If any of them try to flank her, she should be less concerned with them getting on her flanks than with preventing them from going towards the tunnel down which her brother can be found. Any sign that they're down there should get an all-out assault to remove them.

Her tactics need to tell the story, if the party is heeding it: she's protecting something more dear to her than her own life. Give a hint of desperation to it. She doesn't necessarily expect to win this. She's scared, and she's trying to scare them away.

Do NOT have her pursue if they retreat. Yelling "and don't come back!" or the like would be suitable. Constant imprecations to "go away" or "leave us alone" or the like are also appropriate.

[Hazrond]

Nilehus brings up a good point. How the sister plays this is going to be key.

If she reacts with initial violence, that's fine. But it should be clear she's trying to drive them out. Focus on bull rushing and positioning to block advancement. The moment she starts taking any serious damage (even a quarter of her hp), she should start to be more concerned about keeping them OUT than driving them away. She needs to back in to a tunnel and try to limit their access to her, relying on her breath weapon, but backing away only reluctantly. She's keeping them from her baby brother.

If any of them try to flank her, she should be less concerned with them getting on her flanks than with preventing them from going towards the tunnel down which her brother can be found. Any sign that they're down there should get an all-out assault to remove them.

Her tactics need to tell the story, if the party is heeding it: she's protecting something more dear to her than her own life. Give a hint of desperation to it. She doesn't necessarily expect to win this. She's scared, and she's trying to scare them away.

Do NOT have her pursue if they retreat. Yelling "and don't come back!" or the like would be suitable. Constant imprecations to "go away" or "leave us alone" or the like are also appropriate.

Thanks for the tips, i honestly didnt have any idea how i would play her if combat started but this makes alot of sense, she would be doing things like bull rushing people towards the exit and collapsing a tunnel between her and them (with another way around of course), anything to keep them from her brother, thanks for the help your pretty cool :smallcool:

[Pan151]

As i mentioned earlier these two dragons were young and rather sheltered by their mother, the sister MIGHT be able to hunt for herself if shes lucky but she is not nearly skilled enough yet to hunt for herself and her brother

Just out of curiosity, what exactly are the dragons' stats? Do they not have wings? Claws? Jaws? A breath weapon? Spell-like abilities? In what way exactly are they inferior to vanilla dragons?

Because, if a dragon is powerful enough to terrorise a village, even by merely stealing livestock, I'm just not buying that she can't manage hunting a deer or something every now and then. If she can't even manage a deer, she would never be able to manage an angry farmer with a pichfork in the first place...

[firebrandtoluc]

I recommend using a different monster rather than house ruling the creature that is half of the name of the game. If anyone in your group has experience, or might end up playing in other groups in the future, this will confuse them. There are piles of monsters you could use for this.

[Hazrond]

Just out of curiosity, what exactly are the dragons' stats? Do they not have wings? Claws? Jaws? A breath weapon? Spell-like abilities? In what way exactly are they inferior to vanilla dragons?

Because, if a dragon is powerful enough to terrorise a village, even by merely stealing livestock, I'm just not buying that she can't manage hunting a deer or something every now and then. If she can't even manage a deer, she would never be able to manage an angry farmer with a pichfork in the first place...

Its not a question of power, its one of skill, she may have the claws but how is she gonna find the deer in the first place? essentially she has a low survival skill, she can kill a deer but finding one is much harder

[Pan151]

Its not a question of power, its one of skill, she may have the claws but how is she gonna find the deer in the first place? essentially she has a low survival skill, she can kill a deer but finding one is much harder

Does she have wings? Does she have a breath weapon?

If she has those two then hunting is trivial. She flies over the forest at very high speed, and when she eventually sees something edible she swoops down, breathes on it, then takes it home and eats it.

Skill is necessary when your prey can outrun and/or outfight and/or outsmart you. When you are a flying superintelligent magical seprent that can one-shot most things just by breathing on them, you don't need skill. As long as there is prey to be found, it will be found and it will be killed.

[Mellack]

Dra
Its not a question of power, its one of skill, she may have the claws but how is she gonna find the deer in the first place? essentially she has a low survival skill, she can kill a deer but finding one is much harder

Dragons have better senses than humans. Add that with flying to scan large areas and it should be easy. Then she sweeps down and breathes. Really should get a deer before it even reacts.

I also looked it up, and wild animals and dragons don't heve survival skill.

I would agree with the other person who suggested a different creature that does not require you to houserule it as much.

[Dimcair]

If the sister attacks them first it is a case of self-defense.

If the sister dies in said self-defense scenario, it is NOT the paladins responsibility to care for the brother of a creature which just attacked them unless his code directly dictates him to care for his enemies children personally.


Now lets assume the dragon is asleep and the party makes use of the surprise effect and attack the sister "unprovoked".

The paladin was still doing what he believed was the right and good thing, slaying the monster that endangers the nearby village.
If he was mislead by the mayor, who somehow failed to point out that the dragon asked for food in a very civil manner, the paladin was not intentionally committing an evil act. Paladins are allowed to be wrong.

He then could go execute the mayor for misleading/lying to him. Forcing the village to pay for the dragons expenses. Then he leaves.

Stop the falling paladin bullcrap. We just had another thread about this...
Sb who is of good alignment doesn't just change alignment when tricked into doing something evil and then not taking responsibility.

[awa]

they can also eat nearly anything, another thing you would need to house rule away to make it plausible. I second the idea that you should use a different monster. A hill giant or something would make a much better choice.

Also there size small how much live stock are they eating that hiring adventures is cost effective? A quick look online says a whole chicken is good for 4 meals so being size small and they will likely eat the bones and organs lets assume the pair can go for 4 days on one chicken (logically the number should be much higher). At that rate it would take 200 days before the losses caused by the dragon exceeded one gold.

A young hill giant could be as tough as an ogre but even an adult has an int of 6 and lousy hunting abilities. Being bigger also means its going to need to eat more thus why its damge is great enough to make hiring heroes necessary.

Come to think of it a dragon is probably one of the worst possible choices for this not many monster explicitly state that even the newborns are so dangerous they can be the boss monster of a dungeon.