Legal Battle!

[Malimar]

So in my Pathfinder Spelljammer campaign, the party has been fighting the Rakshasa Mafia, who are exactly what they sound like -- a mafia of rakshasa, involved in organized crime and the drug trade and the slave trade and all sorts of bad stuff, primarily in Greyhawk but they also have spelljammers, provided to them by mysterious other bad guys. The party has invaded a couple Rakshasa Mafia bases, stolen a spelljammer, destroyed another spelljammer, captured a shipment of illicit drugs, killed several mafia Rajas and a bunch of mooks, and generally made nuisances of themselves.

So the Rakshasa Mafia, realizing they're losing to the party in violence, decides to sue the party in a court of law. They sent their lawyer (Gibbetyorb, Attorney at Law, a beholder) to deliver a court summons. The party hired a lawyer of their own (Jack Jackson, Attorney at Law, Specializing in Interspecies Law, Also an Adventurer), and they're all set to have a court battle next session.

I'm not too fussed about getting legal details accurate to Earth life -- the mafia is doing a weird combination of suing the party for damages and trying to get them locked up for murder and vigilanteism. I think the party has the better case, but the judge is bought and paid for by the mafia (I don't think there's a jury, just the judge). I haven't decided who's going to win -- I haven't even decided how I'm going to decide who wins.

My main question is this: Given that it's going to primarily be two NPC lawyers arguing against each other, what can I do to make the courtroom scene interesting for the party?

[Phenrix]

As the court moves forward, make each player be called to the stand. Have them on the spot answer questions about the case, gauge the reactions.

Have a few twists, like half way through some new evidence is found.

Continuations, lol.... make the party sweat. They cant leave town, they cant go anywhere without being watched. And the must go back to the courthouse on time*

If they get "held up" while out of court, and dont show for the proceedings>?

Hope that helps

[Jowgen]

FC II p. 25 has some details on how court cases in Baator are handled. It boils down to Diplomacy, Knowledge (the planes), and Perform (acting) checks made by both sides, with the highest total result winning.

There is also a particular adventure in Dragon or Dungeon where the adventuers take the stage in an inter-planar trade summit and have to argue against a whole bunch of different factions to get a Diamond mine to fix the prison in Elysium. It's quite an interesting one, wish I could remember the name...

[Nibbens]

So in my Pathfinder Spelljammer campaign, the party has been fighting the Rakshasa Mafia, who are exactly what they sound like -- a mafia of rakshasa, involved in organized crime and the drug trade and the slave trade and all sorts of bad stuff, primarily in Greyhawk but they also have spelljammers, provided to them by mysterious other bad guys. The party has invaded a couple Rakshasa Mafia bases, stolen a spelljammer, destroyed another spelljammer, captured a shipment of illicit drugs, killed several mafia Rajas and a bunch of mooks, and generally made nuisances of themselves.

So the Rakshasa Mafia, realizing they're losing to the party in violence, decides to sue the party in a court of law. They sent their lawyer (Gibbetyorb, Attorney at Law, a beholder) to deliver a court summons. The party hired a lawyer of their own (Jack Jackson, Attorney at Law, Specializing in Interspecies Law, Also an Adventurer), and they're all set to have a court battle next session.

I'm not too fussed about getting legal details accurate to Earth life -- the mafia is doing a weird combination of suing the party for damages and trying to get them locked up for murder and vigilanteism. I think the party has the better case, but the judge is bought and paid for by the mafia (I don't think there's a jury, just the judge). I haven't decided who's going to win -- I haven't even decided how I'm going to decide who wins.

My main question is this: Given that it's going to primarily be two NPC lawyers arguing against each other, what can I do to make the courtroom scene interesting for the party?

Deadlands supplement books had quite a bit about this. I never got into them, but if you could find some of these resources out there, these books would certainly help you in your quest to turn the game into a "courtroom battle."

Ultimately, it sounds fun! Regardless what you decide to do, I'd actually like to hear the outcome and details of what happens in this session!

[Studoku]

If you think the party would find arguing in a courtroom interesting, have their lawyer "disappear". It's certainly something I can imagine interplanar mafia doing.

If the party don't feel like presenting their own case, this is still a potential hook for a more conventional adventure- rescuing their lawyer.

[Gildedragon]

There are two parts to the legal thing:
One is the stuff related to the courtroom itself: the arguments, strategy, etc. Using contacts or Gather Information to find character witnesses and folk you have helped; knowledge (local) and (nobility) and Search to dive through the archives to find pertinent legal information, craft (writing) and perform (oratory) to write out arguments and speeches, and deliver them in court; and perform (acting) and bluff to lie...
Extended aid another rules ought be in play; let the lawyer have a base roll and the PCs help boost their check, and the lawyer coaches (aids) them in giving their testimony.

The second thing is the out of the courtroom drama: the mafia cowing witnesses, tampering with the jury, destroying evidence, maybe even kidnapping the lawyer: the party needs to solve these issues without being too obvious (otherwise it will look like they are the ones being underhanded).

[Elder_Basilisk]

I think the most interesting way to handle a court case in game would be to keep most of the action outside the courtroom.

Now, that sounds a little counter-intuitive, but that's how a lot of legal thrillers work too. In a lot of John Grisham's novels, the courtroom and the legal machinations serve as a motivation, complication, or explanation for the investigation, action, etc that is the true driving force of the novel.

So, for example, you could summarize some opening arguments with a single paragraph of text and then have the players' lawyer explain to them, "we have to prove that the Rakshasa are running illicit drugs; if we can do that, their claim to have been innocent travelers who you ruthlessly assaulted without provocation will be less credible." (Motivation for the adventure to get the proof). And then, "But we also need the proof to be admissable in court--if you just steal some incriminating documents from them, we won't be able to prove that the documents are legitimate and accurate, so we need to satisfy the requirements of evidence as well" (complication).

Requiring or allowing the PCs to give testimony or be deposed might be interesting too, but could be a game-cheapening farce if done poorly.

Of course, any of this would probably require a fair amount of legal expertise and a defined legal system in your campaign/setting. The American (and pretty much any modern western legal system) is unusual in the history of the world, so it might be more credible to use a more ancient legal system to drive such an adventure, though doing so credibly would require even more specialized expertise and knowledge.

[daremetoidareyo]

First thing is venue. What set of inter dimensional law applies? Maybe some PCs have to file a severance due to their racial type or subtype.

Then, who is the judge? Maybe the PCs have a few judges in their sector, but the PCs lawyer only has connections to one. Perhaps the PCs need to hire some dirt diggers to embroiled judges in scandals or outright kill them. Rakshasas should be trying to game this too.

Then, I would make breakpoints. Court sessions that end with a point of the rules that PCs broke and give the PCs overnight to come up with or fabricate evidence that supports their defense. Prolly 3 breakpoints is the max.

Rakshasas claims probably turn on negligence, and so PCs will have to demonstrate that their actions were actually legal. So you will need some RAW as to the specific claims. Rakshasas are probably tryin to use court to eat up time. PCs should run a PR campaign because they do sound heroic.

Anything dealing with spelljammers probably has its own legal code and inter dimensional treaties. What dimension is the spelljammer flagged in? Usually pirates get their licensure from pandemonium, as the labor restrictions are nil, and the taxes are only collected on the sale of a ship to a pandemonial flagging agency. In return, all pandemonium ships are considered pirates, legally speaking, and the only rule that applies to them is that upon transfer of vehicle registration, not captainhood, the owner must pay the githyanki lich queen a few thousand to register. She coordinates the pandemonium governance of inter dimensional law of the Crystal spheres for the entire plane and is the only ambassador to ever meet to discuss treaties in the interest of pandemonium petitioners.

If PCs are found guilty of shorting the githyanki lich queen, well, let's just say that her debt collectors have silver swords.

[Bullet06320]

they could ask for a continuance, use bluff, diplomacy or Profession (Barrister) checks
then skip out on bail?

kill, kidnap or otherwise make unavailable any witnesses

even if the judge is already bought and paid for, try and bribe him bigger, blackmail him, kidnap his wife, parents or children

get a pardon from the local mayor, baron or whatever locals powers that be, before the trial

become the local mayor, baron, etc, and change the laws in your favor?

[BWR]

Excellent suggestions so far. I would, however, start at the other end: the legal and judiciary system. Determine exactly what the laws are, where they apply, who creates/enforces/interprets them, and how this is supposed to apply to the PCs. Once you know the laws and system you can easily determine approach the mafia will use, and how to use this for scenes and situations.
To some degree you can assume certain semi-universals: murder, assault, arson, theft and similar tend to be illegal almost everywhere but the definition of and punishments for said crimes may vary drastically.

I have as a DM messed up in similar situations because I just kind of assume that it works like a mishmash of real life stuff here, real life stuff in other countries and whatever show I happen to think of. Things fell apart because that didn't actually make sense with the situation at hand. My players have also messed up because they assume that the system works the way real life stuff does (Profession: lawyer or Knowledge: law can be very important).

[Ninjaxenomorph]

You mentioned this is Pathfinder... Have you taken a look at the Verbal Duel rules from Ultimate Intrigue?

[Malimar]

Hokay, so, just got back from running this. I used several of your suggestions, which made it better! Thanks! (I looked at a couple of the suggested rulesets for adjudicating social encounters of this sort, but in the end decided to more or less wing the crunch aspect of the proceedings.)

First, Gibbetyorb and Jack Jackson outlined the facts of the case.

The plaintiffs' case was basically that the Rakshasa are fine, upstanding businesscats and even if they weren't, the defendants' actions constituted vigilanteism, because the party didn't have an adventurer permit.

The defendants' case was basically that the Rakshasa are mafiosos, slavers, drug dealers, demon summoners, and all around bad dudes, and there are some crimes bystanders need to step up and stop even if they don't have permits. Also, the party got adventurer permits as soon as they learned they needed them.

This part worked out better than I expected because the players felt free to lob suggestions for arguments their lawyer ought to make.

There was some disagreement as to who, exactly, currently owns the party's spelljammer, and whether the rakshasa could claim it in lieu of the 100,000gp in damages they were demanding.

Then the two sides called NPC witnesses. (The witness stand was under the effect of a zone of truth spell.) The party was alarmed when Gibbetyorb hauled a Rakshasa corpse up to the stand, used speak with dead, and had him identify his killers. The party called some NPCs they had saved.

Then the judge called a recess! (Which was also an out-of-game recess, as it had been a couple hours and also one of the local cats needed his diabetes shot.)

When the court was called back to order, Jack Jackson didn't come back from the bathroom!

The judge announced that court would proceed with or without the defendants' lawyer, so the PCs' captain called himself to the stand and started Perform(oratory) to tell a largely irrelevant story to delay while a couple other party members searched.

The summoner had his eidolons on the roof, and they saw a spelljammer take off nearby. One of the eidolons flew to the spelljammer, the summoner used a spell (I don't recall the name of the spell) to swap places with his eidolon, he located Jack Jackson, and dimension doored back to the courthouse with him. So the "rescue the lawyer" mini-quest only took a few rounds, not as long as I expected. But that was fine.

Then they called the party members as witnesses. Most of them made their saves vs zone of truth but most of them didn't do much lying anyway. I solicited player suggestions for what Jack Jackson should ask the party members on the stand. Gibbetyorb asked some probing questions. I had each party member make a diplomacy check for their testimony.

Through a highly technical process, taking into account arguments made, evidence presented, bribes tendered, and so on, I... pulled a number out of my butt (actually I averaged the PCs' Diplomacy checks and one from their lawyer, multiplied that by three, and subtracted that from 100. But that process was pulled out of my butt).

Whether the judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff or the defendants came down to a single d% roll: 44 or higher and the PCs get off scot free. I made a show of selecting the d10s I was going to roll, shook them in my hand until there was silence, and rolled... sixty-something. Good enough!

The party offered to bring the judge to safety if he feared retaliation from the Rakshasa Mafia, but he said he figured the PCs had pretty much broken the mafia's back in the city and nobody would have to fear them any longer.

Then the party went back to their ship and had a celebration and got wicked boozy.

[daremetoidareyo]

I love it. Well done.

[Gildedragon]

Sounds GREAT fun! Good job!

[Dousedinoil]

I'm glad everything worked out :)

Personally, I absolutely hate any sort of legal dispute in D&D. Not only can it take away from the fun of the game but it usually turns into a pissing match out of character. I would never have brought it up in the first place. But if it already happened, I would have had the opposing lawyer or mafia members assinated before the trial every happened.

[ZeroiaSD]

What a fantastic session :)

[GreyBlack]

There should be two parts to this setpiece. In the first, the NPC lawyer should be asking the PCs about what has been happening, with the PCs rolling out the encounter; do they remember events exactly? Do they tell the lawyer the truth? Do they try and have the jury bribed? Stuff like that. You'll have to remember the results of this section, because, after that, the NPC lawyer should try to make a case for the PCs based on what they tell the lawyer.

Then, you have the courtroom scene. Here, all of the events brought up and the case made by the lawyer will come into play. Have the lawyers bring up character witnesses and have the PCs come up for different reasons. Maybe the PC is going to try and lie to the jury, maybe they'll try to plead with the jury. Maybe the bribes help them out.

However, the big thing is DON'T JUST ARBITRARILY DECIDE WHO WINS. Make the PCs actually work for their victory. If they lose, then they get sent to prison. Maybe they'll have to plan a jailbreak from there? :smallwink:

[Segev]

This has already been, in part, suggested, but perhaps you should have "flashbacks" for the PCs' actions.

The court case is being revealed, and the PCs' lawyer is missing! Maybe Bob the Bard is the only one present, even, as somebody on the Rakshasa side taunts them. Flashback to a few hours before, when the PCs couldn't find Mr. Jackson, and started hunting for him. Run a short adventure where they find where he's being held and release him - race against the clock to get him there. Bob's only present at the court to prevent the party from defaulting on the case automatically.

Next, a star witness for the Rakshasa is brought forth. Their testimony is damning. Flashback to the PCs doing something that will specifically provide a counter-witness or evidence proving the witness is lying.

Back at the court scene, their lawyer smugly presents this to thwart it.

The PCs have some evidence being presented or a friendly witness on the stand. As the witness begins talking, flashback to the PCs interacting with him or finding the evidence. They find something is up, and confront more nefarious activities by the mafia. IF they fail, the court scene reveals how the mafia spoiled this evidence or compromised/intimidated the witness. If they succeed, the court scene reveals the mafia representatives' ire as their careful ploy is sundered by the evidence and/or testimony going exactly as the PCs planned.