PDA

View Full Version : Consequences for terribly evil actions



Ludence
2017-05-16, 05:35 PM
Hello everyone! I am pretty new to GMing, having ran a few sessions with a group of friends. I stumbled upon a little dilemma during our last session..
The group consists of three CE (yeah, I know) characters. They just entered the basement of a building (a slave-worker place disguised as a prison) and witness around twelve kids standing around a longtable. There were three teenage boys in the back, supervisors, who carried spears. They immedeatly charged, and the priest jumped up on the table, and channeled negative energy. In this process, he oneshots all the children aswell as he harms the 'guards'.

Now, I think its acceptable as he is CE.. However, after they finished the adventure during the same session, I have been thinking of what the consequences will be... I do believe there has to be a punishment/reward (or both) for doing such an evil act. Any tips for what I should follow up with?

Anonymouswizard
2017-05-16, 05:48 PM
This is why I dislike alignments. Chaotic Evil and Neutral especially, but just in general.

First off, that sounds highly stupid evil, an intelligent evil character would have saved the kids and worked to have a decent reputation (at the very least 'he's a bastard, but even he wouldn't hurt kids'). So first of, in this case the party has probably taken a bad reputation hit when someone finds out about this (and someone will it work out they weren't careful enough).

RazorChain
2017-05-16, 07:12 PM
Everybody despices child killers. If you end up in prison as a child killer you should hope that you spend the rest of your sentence in isolation.

Now think what happens if people find out the truth about this guy. This has nothing to do with punishment but consequences. You shouldnt punish players only invoke consequences.

The Eye
2017-05-16, 07:34 PM
Well, it's kind of your own fault that the kids died isn't it?

I mean he used the spell to kill the guards not the kids, the spell only "Hit" the kids becuase youw anted it to hit the kids.

So the only child killer is YOU! The DM!

Nerd-o-rama
2017-05-16, 07:38 PM
Well, it's kind of your own fault that the kids died isn't it?

I mean he used the spell to kill the giards not the kids, the spell only "Hit" the kids becuase youw anted it to hit the kids.

So the only child killer is YOU! The DM!

Excellent Chaotic Evil roleplaying. "The only people responsible for the welfare of or harm dealt to others are people who aren't me."

Anyway yeah expect literally everyone who hears about this instance except weirdo death worshippers (maybe) to despise them just on a general instinctive level. Especially any other slaves in the area they decide to pick a fight with, that might have more levels.

Slipperychicken
2017-05-16, 07:39 PM
Your group's problem is a common one. The first and most important thing you can do is realize that this is an out-of-character (or "OOC") problem. That means simply plotting in-game vengeance might sound like a gratifying proposition, but it's ultimately not going to address the deeper issues, and may well make things harder. People can easily waste precious years of their roleplaying careers pursuing vendettas in-game to no avail. Your concerns need to be addressed outside the game, in the big scary world of real human interactions.

Next, you need to do a bit of soul-searching and get honest with yourself about what kind of game you want to run. Do you really want to spend your evenings seething at people describing how they murder imaginary children that you put time into writing? Because you don't have to. Roleplaying gets better than this. A lot better than this. Think about which of your players are even worth playing with. Players are a renewable resource. Don't spend your free time with people you hate.

Also, realize that you are the GM. You have some social power here. You can pause the session to talk to players about things before they unfold. If a player shouts "I stab the baby!", then you don't have to let that happen. You have the power to stop the game, talk about that, and even cancel ak player's actions in the most extreme circumstances. You can choose to exclude undesired people from your games and look for higher-quality people.

From there, you have some options. My most recommended is to, outside of game sessions, start a frank and open conversation with your players about what sort of game you want to run and how the players are conducting themselves, and ways that you can have fun. That may well be your best bet to move toward a more fun and fulfilling game, but it is a very hard thing to do, I know because I myself have struggled with it. That conversation can lead into a few different directions, and one of those may well be a conclusion that you do not want to run games for these people.

A lot of people online are going to goad you to pursue an in-game grudge against the players. Emotionally that is an easy and tempting reaction because it helps you to ignore the out-of-game sources of grievance. However it almost certainly detrimental to the reasons you wanted to start GMing in the first place. Did you really sign up for GMing to passive-aggressively write grudge-encounters to thwart people you despise in real life? I suppose this counts as a warning to avoid this path, because it can lead to a lot of frustration, spitefulness, wasted creativity, wasted time, and even burnout.

Piedmon_Sama
2017-05-16, 07:48 PM
Everybody despices child killers. If you end up in prison as a child killer you should hope that you spend the rest of your sentence in isolation.

Now think what happens if people find out the truth about this guy. This has nothing to do with punishment but consequences. You shouldnt punish players only invoke consequences.

Exactly. I don't know what kind of community (if any) this sweatshop was in the middle of, but at the very least once a period of time passes with no one going in or out of the building someone is going to discover the bodies.

The innocent victims won't have any marks, indicating they were killed by magic, while the slain guards presumably will bear wounds. If I was whatever NPC law enforcement this community has, my guess would be this was an act of gang violence or a raid by a rival criminal group (I'm presuming this sweatshop was an illegal enterprise?) Thus the law will be looking for a gang of mixed spellcasters and warriors. If the sweatshop was in the middle of a neighborhood it won't be unlikely someone witnessed the party entering and leaving the place, and maybe even heard noises of the battle.

This is where you want to ask if your setting is essentially using modern law enforcement style techniques or something closer to the historical period that Dungeons & Dragons (very loosely) coincides with. Medieval/early modern law enforcement was not so much about "justice" as it was about "keeping the peace." There were laws written up that basically ensured suspicious/shady types could be straight-up kicked out of town for no reason; in most towns/cities it was literally illegal not to instantly report a crime you witnessed (as it was often called, "raising a hue and cry.") The law was, essentially, a blunt instrument.

So if you have this neighborhood and the authorities have reason to suspect that there's trouble/violence going on there, you're probably not going to get a manhunt for specific perpetrators. The constabulary (an anachronistic term but you know what I mean) would probably just send in a Brute Squad (to use the Princess Bride's term) and go house-to-house and toss out/imprison anyone who even looked suspicious and couldn't give a perfectly good reason for being there.

If you want a more modern style of law enforcement (and one that would generally be more Good Aligned) they will probably go door-to-door in the neighborhood and try to gather witnesses and take deputations instead. Depending on the population of this neighborhood/city(?) I'd make it a high or medium percentile roll to see if there's even a good witness for the authorities to find. The longer the players stay in this city, the more they should begin to feel the noose tighten---there are armed patrols on every street corner, their weapons and armor are causing people to look at them suspiciously or keep a distance, they hear whispers behind their backs everytime they enter a tavern.... finally after a period of time you feel is reasonable, they may be outed as the culprits of the massacre. They might see their faces printed up on handbills posted on taverns and street-posts; city watch/serjeants might begin to accost, harass or attempt to detain/search them (honestly your PCs sound like the type who would go to all-out war if so much as confronted so bear that in mind).

Things to bear in mind:

+The more the authorities and the forces of law and good turn against or come after your PCs, perhaps the more likely other factions (especially nefarious ones--perhaps whatever cult your evil Cleric belongs to) will approach them as potential agents, allies or just useful pawns. Are there any rival or evil authorities within this city?

+How big/powerful is the organization running the sweatshop? Is there a powerful Thieves' Guild (or even just a "street gang") in this city? Are they aware of who crashed their sweatshop operation? Perhaps rather than trying for direct revenge (generally criminal organizations do NOT like to get into open wars) they might try to maneuver or lure the PCs into fighting the authorities.

Piedmon_Sama
2017-05-16, 07:54 PM
Also yeah, obvs the first thing to ask yourself is if you are happy running this kind of game, where the PCs are criminals/evil bastards who do evil things to people that don't deserve it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with not liking that kind of game. I find it emotionally draining to run myself. If that's the case just say "hey, I'm here to run Dungeons & Dragons the game of Heroic Fantasy where you explore Dungeons and slay Dragons, not the game where you are ******* gangster-pirates who murder people, how about you make some Dungeons & Dragons characters instead?"

Mark Hall
2017-05-16, 08:11 PM
How public is the knowledge of what happened? From what it sounds like, the party killed all the witnesses, and so if the crime isn't pinned on them, there may be no real consequences.

If you want consequences? Since they were killed with a bunch of negative energy, you might have child revenants who come after the priest.

solidork
2017-05-16, 08:35 PM
Slipperychicken has the right of it.

The Eye
2017-05-16, 08:43 PM
Excellent Chaotic Evil roleplaying. "The only people responsible for the welfare of or harm dealt to others are people who aren't me."

Anyway yeah expect literally everyone who hears about this instance except weirdo death worshippers (maybe) to despise them just on a general instinctive level. Especially any other slaves in the area they decide to pick a fight with, that might have more levels.

I mean the DM has total control here. He could have said, "As the kids see you approaching, the get down as negative energy blast thought the guards damaging their physical bodies and souls."

The kids didn't have to be harmed the Dm made it happen.

Tanuki Tales
2017-05-16, 09:02 PM
I mean the DM has total control here. He could have said, "As the kids see you approaching, the get down as negative energy blast thought the guards damaging their physical bodies and souls."

The kids didn't have to be harmed the Dm made it happen.

That's probably not how that ability works.

If this is Pathfinder, it nukes every living thing in a set radius.

Piedmon_Sama
2017-05-16, 10:10 PM
Your group's problem is a common one. The first and most important thing you can do is realize that this is an out-of-character (or "OOC") problem. That means simply plotting in-game vengeance might sound like a gratifying proposition, but it's ultimately not going to address the deeper issues, and may well make things harder. People can easily waste precious years of their roleplaying careers pursuing vendettas in-game to no avail. Your concerns need to be addressed outside the game, in the big scary world of real human interactions.

Next, you need to do a bit of soul-searching and get honest with yourself about what kind of game you want to run. Do you really want to spend your evenings seething at people describing how they murder imaginary children that you put time into writing? Because you don't have to. Roleplaying gets better than this. A lot better than this. Think about which of your players are even worth playing with. Players are a renewable resource. Don't spend your free time with people you hate.

Also, realize that you are the GM. You have some social power here. You can pause the session to talk to players about things before they unfold. If a player shouts "I stab the baby!", then you don't have to let that happen. You have the power to stop the game, talk about that, and even cancel ak player's actions in the most extreme circumstances. You can choose to exclude undesired people from your games and look for higher-quality people.

From there, you have some options. My most recommended is to, outside of game sessions, start a frank and open conversation with your players about what sort of game you want to run and how the players are conducting themselves, and ways that you can have fun. That may well be your best bet to move toward a more fun and fulfilling game, but it is a very hard thing to do, I know because I myself have struggled with it. That conversation can lead into a few different directions, and one of those may well be a conclusion that you do not want to run games for these people.

A lot of people online are going to goad you to pursue an in-game grudge against the players. Emotionally that is an easy and tempting reaction because it helps you to ignore the out-of-game sources of grievance. However it almost certainly detrimental to the reasons you wanted to start GMing in the first place. Did you really sign up for GMing to passive-aggressively write grudge-encounters to thwart people you despise in real life? I suppose this counts as a warning to avoid this path, because it can lead to a lot of frustration, spitefulness, wasted creativity, wasted time, and even burnout.

Okay but


Hello everyone! I am pretty new to GMing, having ran a few sessions with a group of friends.[emphasis mine]

Presumably these aren't just some dudes who answered a wanted ad Ludence put up. They're his friends, and he's playing a game with them. You don't have to torture yourself running a game you hate but you really shouldn't be like "yarr, it be my way or the highway!" to your friends either.

Sometimes it is the case that someone who is otherwise a really good friend of yours just isn't a good fit for D&D because you and he get enjoyment out of the game for radically different reasons. I've experienced that. On the other hand it also sounds like Ludence and all his friends are fairly new players. It could be very much early days to start going "incompatible playstyles! sever!"

If your players want to play evil alignment, and you're basically cool with that but you don't like the idea of them hurting children or stuff like that, give them something to focus on: maybe some [good] worthy adversaries to face. Put a Lawful Good constable in their town who's a 9th-level fighter and have taking him out become their goal, or something. I dunno, there's a lot of ways you can meet them halfway without the game having to meet only your vision or the players'.

Koo Rehtorb
2017-05-16, 10:41 PM
Being stalked by creepy undead children seems appropriate.

Mr Beer
2017-05-16, 10:48 PM
Being stalked by creepy undead children seems appropriate.

"Are you my mummy?"

[creepiness intensifies]

Tanuki Tales
2017-05-16, 10:51 PM
"Are you my mummy?"

[creepiness intensifies]


https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/cb/b6/21/cbb62107a62b5c67559675e19e83eb35.jpg

sktarq
2017-05-16, 11:56 PM
They could just sucked into ravenloft the way this seems to be going.

but really do they need consequences? Why? A: if you're not okay with letting them do this, don't play this kinda game. Talk to them OOC to fix this kind of thing. Do you want them to focus on going against worse evil than themselves? To grow their own power? What are your own comfort levels?

Use Session 0 (a sessions for planning, character creation, and getting people on the same page in terms of expectations and the like) to help with this.

but really do they need consequences? Why? B: Because you think having consequences for this could be a fun twist to the game? Well then. That could be gold mine. Undead children, perhaps one had a priest or other spellcaster relative who on finding out what happened to them decides on revenge. The authorities get involved and grab innocent people as the culprits (and do the PC do anything about it). A dark temple gets blamed and starts hunting them in order to clear their name. Have an imp show up trying to bring them into a LE direction in order to claim their souls. Or a Demon Lord of your choice sends a wee minion to use the party as a tool. -see what they do with either.

Ludence
2017-05-17, 07:13 AM
Thanks everyone, for the responses. To clarify: I am okay with running a game like this, for now. Also, the two other CE PCs were in the same room, and they wouldnt have any trouble dealing with the guards alone. What the priest did was to jump up on the table, and nuke everyone in a large radius. (Pathfinder selective channel) leaving his allies unharmed.

I was also thinking the consequences to be part of (possibly) a new adventure. Just something to show my players that evil actions will bear consequence. I like the undead children idea. I am by no means tryimg to set up a TPK or anything like that, I just want to give them a memorable experience :)

thamolas
2017-05-17, 09:59 AM
Only one of the kids needs a wealthy relative who can hire powerful magic-users to track down the party. And hire mercs to kidnap them and exact revenge. Actions should always have consequences.

GloatingSwine
2017-05-17, 11:46 AM
Only one of the kids needs a wealthy relative who can hire powerful magic-users to track down the party. And hire mercs to kidnap them and exact revenge. Actions should always have consequences.

You don't need to go that far.

The original setup was that the kids were in some kind of slave barracks.

That means someone is going to be upset about their property. Someone just as unpleasant or more so than the party, but probably with considerably more resources.

And the party is going to be very short of allies.

Mastikator
2017-05-17, 12:49 PM
Okay but
Presumably these aren't just some dudes who answered a wanted ad Ludence put up. They're his friends, and he's playing a game with them. You don't have to torture yourself running a game you hate but you really shouldn't be like "yarr, it be my way or the highway!" to your friends either.

Sometimes it is the case that someone who is otherwise a really good friend of yours just isn't a good fit for D&D because you and he get enjoyment out of the game for radically different reasons. I've experienced that. On the other hand it also sounds like Ludence and all his friends are fairly new players. It could be very much early days to start going "incompatible playstyles! sever!"

If your players want to play evil alignment, and you're basically cool with that but you don't like the idea of them hurting children or stuff like that, give them something to focus on: maybe some [good] worthy adversaries to face. Put a Lawful Good constable in their town who's a 9th-level fighter and have taking him out become their goal, or something. I dunno, there's a lot of ways you can meet them halfway without the game having to meet only your vision or the players'.

Oh come off it. Having a frank discussion with your friends about what kind of game everyone wants to play is not the same "my way or the highway" and you know it. If you can't have an honest and open conversation with someone then that someone is not your friend.

Karl Aegis
2017-05-17, 03:52 PM
The consequences are: they suddenly don't find themselves in situations where legendary teenage swordsmen and babies can be murdered for a while. Seriously, if teenagers can survive a nuke like that they are pretty much legendary teenage swordsmen. You put them in a situation where Terribly Evil Actions (TM) could happen. They did Terribly Evil Actions (TM). Now, you have realized the error of your ways.

lunaticfringe
2017-05-17, 04:25 PM
I'm gonna have to side with the Eye on this one. Don't put kids in dangerous areas. It's one thing if your PCs are breaking into orphanages & stabbing babies, but this is a horse of different color. Also in a pseudomedival standard fantasy setting kids die all time of Being Poor & neglected. I don't think anyone of note will care if some nameless slave kid was collateral damage. It's not like it's modern developed country Earth or anything.

Ludence
2017-05-17, 04:39 PM
The consequences are: they suddenly don't find themselves in situations where legendary teenage swordsmen and babies can be murdered for a while. Seriously, if teenagers can survive a nuke like that they are pretty much legendary teenage swordsmen. You put them in a situation where Terribly Evil Actions (TM) could happen. They did Terribly Evil Actions (TM). Now, you have realized the error of your ways.

I did put them in the situation, but I dont feel like that was an error on my part. As a GM I just want every action to have a consequence. Especially Terribly Evil Actions (TM). That way makes them feel like they can actually impact the world around them, not just be bystanders.

Ludence
2017-05-17, 04:42 PM
I mean the DM has total control here. He could have said, "As the kids see you approaching, the get down as negative energy blast thought the guards damaging their physical bodies and souls."

The kids didn't have to be harmed the Dm made it happen.

In pathfinder rules, everything in the radius is harmed by negative energy. IMO there was no way to stop it.

Kane0
2017-05-17, 04:54 PM
Is everyone having fun? Then there is no problem.
Evil campaigns can be an absolute blast (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?325177-Cattle-Driving-Necromancers-Bizarre-Campaign-Journal).
Coincidentally, Kaveman is also a wellspring of ideas for interesting game consequences.

lunaticfringe
2017-05-17, 05:11 PM
I did put them in the situation, but I dont feel like that was an error on my part. As a GM I just want every action to have a consequence. Especially Terribly Evil Actions (TM). That way makes them feel like they can actually impact the world around them, not just be bystanders.

I don't think Every Action Has A Consequence Style is going over as well as you think. Why? Most of your players rolled the IDGAF alignment. That is usually a sign players are growing tired of being railroaded into Heavy Handed Moral Quandries. You play Evil because you want to have fun. Consequences will be stabbed, just like everything else. No 5 minute speeches about Doing the Right Thing required.

Whyrocknodie
2017-05-17, 05:32 PM
To fit into the chaotic evil theme, I'd have the party encounter an allied evil entity who is currently purchasing child slaves for a premium. They totally killed the golden goose, wasting all those potentially valuable slaves.

P.S. Make sure the evil entity is in a hurry or they'll go find some more!

Ludence
2017-05-18, 11:40 AM
I don't think Every Action Has A Consequence Style is going over as well as you think. Why? Most of your players rolled the IDGAF alignment. That is usually a sign players are growing tired of being railroaded into Heavy Handed Moral Quandries. You play Evil because you want to have fun. Consequences will be stabbed, just like everything else. No 5 minute speeches about Doing the Right Thing required.


Well, it is the only campaign we have played, so they can't be tired of something they never have experienced :P I don't wish to straight up "punish" or stop their Evil "Fun Run". As stated, I want them to feel see consequences of doing these actions, in form of anger of the good gods, or rewards from the evil gods. I'm mainly just asking for inspiration :))

RazorChain
2017-05-18, 12:30 PM
Well, it's kind of your own fault that the kids died isn't it?

I mean he used the spell to kill the guards not the kids, the spell only "Hit" the kids becuase youw anted it to hit the kids.

So the only child killer is YOU! The DM!



I'm gonna have to side with the Eye on this one. Don't put kids in dangerous areas. It's one thing if your PCs are breaking into orphanages & stabbing babies, but this is a horse of different color. Also in a pseudomedival standard fantasy setting kids die all time of Being Poor & neglected. I don't think anyone of note will care if some nameless slave kid was collateral damage. It's not like it's modern developed country Earth or anything.

You put on those sexy clothes and went drinking, of course you got raped!

Blaming the DM for the death of those children is as stupid as victim blaming.

The DM's job is run the game in an non arbitrary manner, so changing the rules to save the children is taking away players agency. The guy who killed the children probably knew what was going to happen.

The PC's are evil
Solution: Run an empty world so they cant rape, murder and pillage?
Doesnt sound like much of a game to me

Gtdead
2017-05-18, 01:40 PM
You have to keep the story consistent. If there are witnesses, then it's obvious. Everyone learns about it and the locals stop cooperating.

If no one was left alive, you don't do anything. A player has the right to do whatever he wants to as long as it doesn't harm the relations between the players.

These casualties don't mean anything to the players and they shouldn't really mean anything to you personally. The only thing that matters is the rules of your setting. For example, let's assume that one of the kids were a sorceror prodigy that absorbed the negative energy and then vanished. Now the party will have to be on the lookout because they don't really know what happened and how this will come back, and it doesn't break the consistency by punishing them for reasons that have nothing to do with the game.

It's easy to create moral dilemmas and motives for good natured characters. Evil ones require a different kind of thinking but it's all the same in the end, a conflict that affects the party and forces them into action.

Mastikator
2017-05-20, 04:57 PM
I did put them in the situation, but I dont feel like that was an error on my part. As a GM I just want every action to have a consequence. Especially Terribly Evil Actions (TM). That way makes them feel like they can actually impact the world around them, not just be bystanders.

If you actually want in game consequences then just make the PCs infamous, every time they arrive at a town they'll find that everyone is hiding or has escaped from fear of death. Nobody wants to deal with them and the only ones who dares face them are the ones who think they can stand up to them.

They'll quickly find that not having anyone to trade with-, offload loot, even a fence (since they'd be afraid to be murdered) they'll slowly run out of resources.

Any city with walls will be closed to them as they're all branded as extremely dangerous raiders.

dps
2017-05-20, 06:59 PM
You have to keep the story consistent. If there are witnesses, then it's obvious. Everyone learns about it and the locals stop cooperating.

If no one was left alive, you don't do anything. A player has the right to do whatever he wants to as long as it doesn't harm the relations between the players.

These casualties don't mean anything to the players and they shouldn't really mean anything to you personally. The only thing that matters is the rules of your setting.

Yeah, I largely agree with this. You've chosen to allow the PCs to be Evil aligned (and even if you weren't playing a system that uses explicit alignment, clearly these PCs are not nice people), and something like this is entirely appropriate for Evil characters to do. So any consequences that they face should be based on the setting an situation. First question is, "Who's going to know about what happened?". At first, only the PCs and the guards are going to know. If the guards eventually ended up dead as well, then nobody but the PCs will know. Eventually, other people will notice that the guards and slaves are missing--they won't even necessarily know that they're dead unless the party just leaves the bodies laying, and won't know exactly what happened or who did it without doing some investigating (assuming the PCs don't brag about it in a tavern or anything, which, who knows, they might do). That leads to the next question--is this a setting and a society that cares about some slaves and their guards getting killed? Presumably the owner of the slaves will not like loosing their property, but if it's someone who owns hundreds or thousands of slaves, they'll likely just write it off as part of the cost of doing business unless these particular slaves were of unusual value. If slavery isn't quite legal or is looked down upon in the setting, even the owner might not try to hard to find out what happened and take action against the PCs, at least publicly. And frankly, as for the slaves being kids, if the society allows them to be enslaved in the first place, it's likely no one is going to give a darn about what happens to them as individuals, or be concerned that they were just kids. They weren't just kids, they were just slaves.

Tanuki Tales
2017-05-20, 08:28 PM
There would be nothing out of line for this to have created some form of undead that may or may not target the group.

Seeing as this exact kind of scenario is one of those "grisly murders" that have a tendency to spawn undead in the first place.

Nerd-o-rama
2017-05-22, 12:33 PM
I mean the DM has total control here. He could have said, "As the kids see you approaching, the get down as negative energy blast thought the guards damaging their physical bodies and souls."

The kids didn't have to be harmed the Dm made it happen.

I mean, by that logic, the DM is the only one who makes anything in the game happen. Player charges a Balor/Solar and gets vaporized? GM shouldn't have put the Balor/Solar there. Player flubs a Move Silently check and gets caught by the guards? DM shouldn't have asked for a roll, or shouldn't have put guards there. Players murder the king and declare themselves God-Emperors of Bumpkinia? DM shouldn't have had the king agree to a face-to-face, or should have had him wear a Ring of Plot Armor, or or or etc.

The players made a choice to throw out an AoE spell with civilians around. That's on them, and makes enough sense as Chaotic Evil roleplaying, and if the DM wants that to have in-universe consequences, it makes perfect sense to me. In-character actions have in-character consequences.

Karl Aegis
2017-05-22, 01:02 PM
Red = Dead is a valid philosophy for any alignment. Children that showed red are valid targets to get dead. Such is the way of the world.

SirBellias
2017-05-22, 01:05 PM
It seems to me that the OP isn't having any problems with what is going on, and is just looking for some fun ideas to introduce some TV Karma.

In his world, actions have Consequences. For whatever reason. Metaphysical balance of energy, gods warring over mortal souls, whatever.

I also approve of the undead children gimmick. If you are looking for an ongoing adventure hook, then the owner of the slaves now has a real problem with these folks. There's always a way of listening in and seeing people if you look hard enough.

Have fun!

sleepy hedgehog
2017-05-22, 01:16 PM
One question, what exactly was their goal in breaking into this place, and killing everyone?
For kicks? Because they were hired?
If I was hired to go into an enemy stronghold and dispose of everyone there, I'd consider kiling the kids, because otherwise, I'm not technically filling the contract.
Next time they could get a 10 page document over what they should do and shouldn't do to accomplish their goal.
"Oooh, you want the no civilian's killed upcharge? That'll be an additional 30%. What do you consider a civilian?"

Secondly, if slaves are a common thing, then people may not evenly react outraged if they knew. They are effectively property, it would be like going around a breaking all the furniture, and defacing the walls. Sure it's a waste, but not entirely unexpected.
Imaginge them getting an offer to buy the kids from them. They are already trained, they are valuable.


Though to stay in line with the other posters, I'd imagine that they wouldn't be hired for covert or delicate missions.
They would be a hammer, and optimally a hammer that is used faaaaar away from here.

Bohandas
2017-05-25, 01:19 AM
Everybody despices child killers.

Well these days they do. But in ancient times it was the basis of several religions

Katrina
2017-05-25, 01:37 AM
First of all, you really shouldn't punish a player for playing their alignment or character even if the character in question is stupid evil. That will only start more fights about "but this is what my character would do, he's a priest of Rivengog the destroyer!" (Golarion's go to evil destroy the world god.) Madness that way lies.

What you should have is logical consequences for their actions. Someone owned this slave barracks. Someone was paying these teenagers for the stuff they were doing. That person is now out a supplier because one death cleric couldn't keep his murder boner down. (Channel Negative Energy in Pathfinder is a "Harms every living creature in a 30 ft radius unless they make a Will Save" ability. It specifically takes a feat to exclude anyone but yourself from the blast. The player was more than likely aware of this. If not, then its a learning experience and doesn't really belong here. ) That person will make things difficult for the new Evil in town because Evil isn't United. It doesn't play well with others, even others that are evil. Also, these kids had families or relatives who were looking for them. What happens when those questing adventurers track everything down to the slave barracks and find them dead.

Thirdly, I'm not sure who said kids killed by negative energy would have no marks on their body. Spells in Pathfinder are very obvious, see the Ultimate Intrigue if you need clarification. While there is nowhere in RAW that I know of that states what negative energy damage looks like, I feel it is completely RAI to have negative energy damage have a wasting or shriveling effect on the body that would be easily identifiable with the correct knowledge check (Arcana or Religion). Any town with a guard team worth its salt will have at least one Rogue or Investigator acting as a sort of detective, or a cleric or adept kept on as a consultant in magical cases.

If you don't want to run games where this is an issue, as others have said; that's what Session Zero is for. Talk to your players out of game and make sure you are all accepting of where the game is going to go and what's the lines for everyone. They may be looking for some sort of murder fest or horrible evil style game, and more power to them if they want it. I won't say I haven't enjoyed an evil campaign or two over the years. (still catch flak for that assassin I played.) But the game should be enjoyable by all the players.

Yllin
2017-05-25, 03:43 AM
The slave owners got their property damaged and might start an investigation.

Whatever the children's job was, it was never finished. If it was something urgent (i.e. the owner promised to finish a customer order by tomorrow), there might be consequences as well (trade partnership questioned).

Could priests of good gods feel the negative energy being channeled? If yes, they could also do something.

I don't think there's anything about line of sight in the channel energy description, and the player "nuked everything in a large radius" while standing in a basement of a building. Could there be casualties in the building?

Yora
2017-05-25, 05:40 AM
This seems more like some everyday collateral evil to me. Angry slavers and little ghosts are the two most logical consequences here, but I would keep it only to one encounter or small side track at a later point in the campaign. Something to remind the players of the scene and create the appearance of a larger and dynamic world, but nothing that is going to be a big deal for the campaign.

Bohandas
2017-05-25, 10:15 AM
This seems more like some everyday collateral evil to me.

I agree with this assessment


To fit into the chaotic evil theme, I'd have the party encounter an allied evil entity who is currently purchasing child slaves for a premium. They totally killed the golden goose, wasting all those potentially valuable slaves.

P.S. Make sure the evil entity is in a hurry or they'll go find some more!

That's funny. Do that.