Courtroom Drama

[Andrian]

Okay, so I'm GMing a 5th Edition game in a generic homebrew setting. During our last session, one of my players cast Thunderwave in a crowded street in the capital, nearly killing six civilians. He has since been arrested by the Watch, and now I have to figure out how to play out a courtroom scene.

I'm honestly feeling way out of my depth with this scenario. It's way outside the usual scope of a DnD adventure. I know very little about law and courtroom proceedings, much less how the presence of magic would affect things. One of my players suggested that Zone of Truth would likely be used to ensure that witnesses are honest. Since there was a death (of a hostile orc), we might also employ Speak With Dead, at least as part of the investigation. If this were a smaller or poorer province, of course, these kinds of things might not be available (I imagine that casters able to pull off third-level spells shouldn't be that common, after all), but in the capital city, I expect law enforcement should be top notch.

There's a lot of stuff I probably haven't considered. This is why I come to you, internet friends! How would you handle a courtroom proceeding involving a PC? What kinds of spells, potions, magic items, etc. should be employed by such a court?

Also, from more of a GMing perspective, what would be the best way to handle the scene so as to keep it interesting for the players? I don't want to spend all my time talking to myself with little to no player input.

[War_lord]

A few points, if I may.

Assuming this generic setting is the typical Medieval one, there's no need for courtroom drama. Serious crimes can be punished with death, minor crimes punished with compensation for the victims(Wergild). You don't need anything more complex then that. I doubt magic would be deployed for a case as minor as this one, they didn't kill any nobles after all. Nor would there be any investigation, because there's no "preponderance of evidence" clause and there's plenty of witnesses.

I would strongly urge you not to go forward with a long courtroom scene. It has a huge danger of turning into either the DM talking to himself all session, with the players sitting on their hands. Or one player doing a tonne of roleplaying with the DM... and everyone else sitting on their hands. Both of those are great game enders, or at the very least, pace killers.

[JoeJ]

For a quasi-medieval setting, you don't need anything that resembles a modern court. The king, duke, local lord, or whatever just hears the case. The accuser makes the charge, the accused gives their defense, and the lord makes a decision. You can have the witnesses just be a small group of people who confirm what the accuser says, there's no need to play out individual testimony.

[BW022]

+1 for War_lord

Most D&D games are fantasy. No one really wants to be in a 'real world' setting nor make drawn out roleplaying sessions for something fairly minor.

Assuming the PCs are good/neutral and were attacked...
Mundane watch and investigation (interviewing survivors, investigating the attackers, etc.) should quickly determine that they were criminals or otherwise attacked the PCs. PCs were defending themselves... maybe a minor punishment for being reckless with spells and harming people, but otherwise I won't waste a lot of time on it. Banish the players from the city/town/kingdom if it was really careless, short term banishment or something less stupid, and maybe give them a quest to help the family if just a bad accident.

If the PCs started it, weren't attacked, etc...
Then quickly execute the person.

In neither case does it require a big trial. Most would just have the magistrate run a quick investigation and then present the information to a lord where the PCs can briefly tell their side. Small towns likely don't have access to spell casting nor are larger cities going to waste their time unless it was something really important.

[EvilAnagram]

Generally, in a Medieval court, you tried to convince the ruling lord that you didn't break any laws, and if you didn't you were guilty. Modern criminal justice in the West is an eighteenth century invention, though civil law has been highly developed for over a thousand years.

Anyways, if your city has an advanced bureaucracy and standing police force, then it has an advanced criminal justice system and real courts. Here are some things about criminal courts you should think about:


If the presumption is innocent until proven guilty, the prosecutor has to prove that the defendant is guilty.
If innocence is not presumed, then the defendant has to prove they are not guilty of a crime. He stands before a judge and says why he shouldn't go to prison.
Perjury is when you lie under oath. You are only guilty of perjury if they can prove you lied under oath.
Magical ways of attaining secrets are easy to fake with illusions. Zone of Truth might not be utilized.
Court always boils down to this: you try to convince people that there is reasonable doubt. Is there doubt because it was self-defense? Is there doubt because the specific charge requires intent? Is there doubt because something else?


Anyways, I never do courtroom scenes because I hang out with too many lawyers and have spent too much time in legal philosophy classes.

[Draco4472]

I agree with War_Lord. I mean, the court scenes in OoTS take at least 20 panels.

Have the ruling king/noble hear the case, and decide the punishment. If a resident Cleric is available, Zone of Truth and Speak w/ dead are usable if the case is important enough, otherwise I'd recommend the caster losing his hands as murder of the first degree with weaponized magic, this being said caster's first offense against the law, and otherwise a merciful punishment versus death, as they could attempt to find the gold to pay a cleric to grow them new limbs.

What of the rest of the party? Are they associates to murder? Did they partake in the act or watch the scene unfold?

[EvilAnagram]

It's worth pointing out that the most common punishment for accidentally causing death or injury in Northern Europe at the height of the Middle Ages was a fine to the victims' families.

[War_lord]

otherwise I'd recommend the caster losing his hands as murder of the first degree with weaponized magic, this being said caster's first offense against the law, and otherwise a merciful punishment versus death

That's actually a rather inaccurate portrait of medieval justice. Germanic law (which was the go to standard for the commoners of medieval Europe) had the concept of Wergild as the go to punishment for all crimes, up to and including murder. Which basically meant a fine paid to the victim or their family, the more severe the offense, the higher the payment required. If the guilty party couldn't (or wouldn't) pay the price for their crime, the victim's family then had the right to extract justice through bloodshed, which historically had a nasty habit of starting dynastic blood feuds. This is actually where the idiom "pay the price for your actions" comes from.

[Andrian]

What of the rest of the party? Are they associates to murder? Did they partake in the act or watch the scene unfold?

The PC who committed the crime is not yet a part of the party. I'm trying to get him to join up with them, but it's been difficult. The other PC's showed up and acted like big damn heroes, saving the lives of the fallen and putting an end to the fighting without endangering anyone innocent. The orc threw down an AoE spell that caused the civilians to fail a death save, so the PC's were justified in taking him out. They didn't witness the beginning of the fight, though. They have a good alibi and their actions were witnessed by members of the city watch, so they're pretty much off the hook.

As for the setting, I've already established that this country is ruled over by a fair and good king. In this particular case, where it's actually unclear what happened, at least from the point of view of officialdom, I think a trial is appropriate. My players are also kinda excited for a courtroom drama, and I don't want to disappoint.

Should the truth come out about what happened, the PC will be found guilty of Reckless Endangerment. I don't think that should be a capital offense, but I do think that should at least be worthy of a lengthy prison sentence. My player may end up having to roll up a new character because of this incident.

[War_lord]

If people actually got hit, it'd be X number of assault cases PLUS reckless endangerment. Not that I want to encourage applying modern American legal terms from the 1800's to D&D kingdoms.

[Andrian]

If people actually got hit, it'd be X number of assault cases PLUS reckless endangerment. Not that I want to encourage applying modern legal terms from the 1800's to D&D kingdoms.

Ah, yes, that's a good point. There would be assault charges as well. Now, the comments about fines are interesting to me. This gives me a potential way to keep the character in the game while still penalizing them for their behavior. I could take all their gold, for example, or maybe require them to do something in service of the kingdom that could serve as an adventure hook.

[EvilAnagram]

Ah, yes, that's a good point. There would be assault charges as well. Now, the comments about fines are interesting to me. This gives me a potential way to keep the character in the game while still penalizing them for their behavior. I could take all their gold, for example, or maybe require them to do something in service of the kingdom that could serve as an adventure hook.
That's a solid approach. The weregeld (literally man-gold) was an all purpose punishment designed to compensate victims and prevent blood feuds. Using service to the kingdom is a solid approach.

[JoeJ]

Ah, yes, that's a good point. There would be assault charges as well. Now, the comments about fines are interesting to me. This gives me a potential way to keep the character in the game while still penalizing them for their behavior. I could take all their gold, for example, or maybe require them to do something in service of the kingdom that could serve as an adventure hook.

That would be more appropriate for a medieval setting anyway. In the real world, prisons were where they kept people who were awaiting trial, not people who had been convicted.

[EvilAnagram]

That would be more appropriate for a medieval setting anyway. In the real world, prisons were where they kept people who were awaiting trial, not people who had been convicted.

They were also for people someone accused of something who never received a trial.

[Once a Fool]

I think a trial scene could be fun, but only to establish a new and ongoing external threat. Someone rigs the trial against them - or in their favor! - and suddenly they have a new enemy, or a new unsolicited patron who demands some recompense.