Want to motivate players? Take away their stuff.

[DRD1812]

Players don't care about death. They can always get a rez. What really makes them sit up and take notice is threatening their stuff. I found this out the hard way. Here's the story of the time a T-Rex tried to eat my party’s treasure. (http://www.handbookofheroes.com/archives/comic/race-to-the-finish)

What about the rest of you DMs out there? Have you ever had thieves make off with the party's loot? Have you ever thrown rust monsters at your plate-wearing fighter? And most importantly: was it an effective motivational tool?

[Catullus64]

I did try this once, out of academic curiosity. It's not an approach I''m fond of. It was, in a sense, effective at getting the players to seriously worry about in-game perils, but in a very cheap sort of way.

If players are more afraid of loss of treasure than of character death, that represents a serious divide between what the characters are feeling, and what the players are feeling (unless the characters they are playing are mad people who are willing to die for treasure). Targeting treasure, as I did by throwing in a treasure-devouring monster (and clearly telegraphing that characteristic), simply exacerbates that divide, rather than mending it.

However, for the record, when I tried the same thing in a game with much newer players, they actually deliberately fed it a pile of gold and jewels to make it fall asleep. I love new players.

[Tanarii]

If you want this, instead of having thieves take away their stuff just implement some house-rules for object damage. Losing your stuff used to be a staple in AD&D & BECMI. IIRC it could happen on a failed saving throw.

[Pex]

There is a reason why players don't like to lose their stuff beyond greed. It's personal. Treasure accumulation is a symbol of time and effort the player put into the game. Messing with treasure is a sense of disrespect. When the DM is stingy that's why players feel unappreciated. The DM doesn't think they're worth it. When the DM is Monty Hall that's why it feels cheap. It's too much gain for too little effort.

When you take away a player's stuff the time and effort they spent accumulating it is what's really being stolen. When it happens naturally as part of campaign happenstance or otherwise fair and logical, players are disappointed but don't feel cheated or taken for granted. That is true motivation and the fun of the game to deal with and remedy it. When it happens because of DM fiat or to purposely make the players upset "to motivate", that's the DM being a donkey cavity taking advantage of his position. That is not to be encouraged.

[Unoriginal]

Taking the PCs's stuff should only be done by the rules, and make sense in the world.

On the other hand, yes, it can be an efficient reality check. A smart enemy won't let you keep your toys if they can avoid it, for example.

Somewhat related annecdote:

In the ToA game I run, one of the PC befriended a Tabaxi minstrel, and he guided the group toward the city's main inn. When they reached it, the Tabaxi joke-complimented the PCs on not getting their stuff stolen, as they weren't paying attention to that. He then told them that he "made sure of that" when they confirmed that they indeed didn't get anything stolen. At least one of the PCs (and May's the players as well) took it to mean that he had influence in the local thieves's guild, when in fact the Tabaxi just meant *he* was paying attention to catch any attempt at robbing them.

So they didn't learn the right lesson from the experience (which is in character for one of them, who is a prodigious idiot of a Paladin).

[Tanarii]

There is a reason why players don't like to lose their stuff beyond greed. It's personal.On the other hand, that's what makes it such an effective motivation for players. They will totally make the world burn to get their stuff back, or get revenge.

On the gripping hand, the players might direct their anger and fury at the DM, instead of channeling it in-game through their PCs.

[Laserlight]

I wouldn't take away a player's stuff unless it was organic to the story (the bad guys you were fighting anyway have captured you) and temporary (when you break out, you can find and retrieve your stuff). To motivate them, I'd rather mess with their prestige and relationships.

[Regitnui]

Personally, I find the rust monster all sorts of fun. My players are the sort to think around a problem too, so a rust monster is almost as effective as a wall in stopping them in their tracks.

Of course, they also spent a half-hour trying to figure out if fog was going to kill them, so that's maybe just healthy paranoia.

[PopeLinus1]

Taking away a players stuff? That’s awful. No respectable DM would actually do something cruel like that, and I defiantly wouldn’t play with them.



Hahahahahahahahaha, just kidding, do whatever you want.

[Gryndle]

Used sparingly, targeting a PC's stuff CAN be motivational. Overused, or used clumsily it can come across very poorly and can be received as more of an attack on the PLAYER rather than the character.

IF I were to use this with my current party, all which are mostly mature adults, I would NOT handwaive anything. I would roll everything out, just as if it were something they were attempting to do. Anything I did behind the scenes without their knowledge would be written down, with appropriate rolls noted. Whatever NPCs I used would have to make the same kind of skill checks a PC in the same scenario would: sleight of hand, stealth, perception/investigate for traps, thieves' tools, whatever.

if you have a less mature group with hot tempers present, I wouldn't suggest it at all. If you do, then be prepared for some blow back from your players.

Just do NOT under any circumstances simply DECIDE their stuff gets stolen. One- it is poor story-building; and TWO-it seems less like your playing the game and more like you are just trying to screw with the players.

and let's be honest, as DMs, if we want to screw with the players, there are more clever ways to do so :smallsmile:

[kardar233]

I think there are a few key distinctions between death and theft that make the latter much more frustrating for players.

1. Interactivity. In almost every occasion a PC dies in, particularly in combat, there’s some kind of point of improvement that you can look to. You cast Absorb Elements instead of Shield, or you positioned a little too far forward, or maybe you just got unlucky. Whichever it is, it feels like it’s something you could have done something about. On the other hand, an item theft is often not something that you have a chance of knowing about before or as it happens; you just wake up one morning and your Holy Avenger has disappeared. Because of this, there’s a feeling of frustration and helplessness that is counter to the reasons a lot of people play D&D.

2. Items are expensive, death is cheap. At any level where you have items worth taking, you probably have access to one of the game’s many resurrection options. In a “magic items are rare” game like 5e, you can usually buy resurrection components with regular money, while all the money in the world won’t buy you a magic item. Thus, the effective cost of death is much lower than losing an item. If you die, a shopping trip, a spell and a week’s rest will have you hale, hearty and ready for more, while the loss of an item is going to stick until you can find (i.e. the DM assigns) a replacement.

3. The personal angle. Often an attack on items feels like it’s outside the regular ways the DM challenges the players. The fact that a theft often hits a single character makes it feel like the DM has it out for that player in particular. If your players don’t say they post sentries during the night, it’s probably because they’ve assumed that their rests are inviolate, or haven’t even thought of the possibility. Getting blindsided by that sort of thing is really frustrating, and broken expectations tend to focus anger at the DM, not the villain.

I think this strategy is much more likely to irritate players than motivate them. If you manage to avoid the issues I mentioned, you may be able to stay on the good side of that, but it’s a tricky thing.

[FreddyNoNose]

Taking away a players stuff? That’s awful. No respectable DM would actually do something cruel like that, and I defiantly wouldn’t play with them.



Hahahahahahahahaha, just kidding, do whatever you want.

Ok, I am going to do this and blame you for it!

[Davrix]

This is why in my games there is no such thing as the resurrection spells. Death is death, the only spell that works is revivify but other than the last minute shock to the soul treatment. You dead son.

But as to the topic I've done this once or twice. Players HATE IT but they have never been angry at me sens both times, they got themselves arrested or capture and their gear was taken from them. There just mad at themselves for getting caught both times.

[DarkKnightJin]

This is why in my games there is no such thing as the resurrection spells. Death is death, the only spell that works is revivify but other than the last minute shock to the soul treatment. You dead son.

But as to the topic I've done this once or twice. Players HATE IT but they have never been angry at me sens both times, they got themselves arrested or capture and their gear was taken from them. There just mad at themselves for getting caught both times.

Being arrested is one thing. You can get your gear back after that. If you're not executed for whatever reason, anyway.

But throwing monsters at your party -specifically- to **** with their gear?
Yeah, I might get a bit cross with the DM that pulls a stunt like that.

[Davrix]

Being arrested is one thing. You can get your gear back after that. If you're not executed for whatever reason, anyway.

But throwing monsters at your party -specifically- to **** with their gear?
Yeah, I might get a bit cross with the DM that pulls a stunt like that.

Once again i would say depends on the situation. Its only a bad move when the Dm is just doing it to spite the party.

Lets say for an example the party gets on the wrong side of a noble, who then hires a crew to send a warning to the party to leave him be by stealing their stuff in the night. Lots of fun things that might come out of it. I would say in one case when they got arrested by the way, the party never got their stuff back because he guards pawned it for beer and hooker money.

[Darth Ultron]

I do this all the time.

It is a great motivator, but then too, so is getting stuff in general. I like to give out lots of interesting, custom stuff too...stuff that lost of players like and want back.

It's true that many players don't ''like'' it, but that really should not matter. The game is not made to be a happy player like fest. Once the DM starts to make a list of dozens of things the players ''won't like'', you won't have much left.

Good players understand that the loss of stuff is not the end of the game or the end of the world. It's just stuff. They can always get it back.

[Quoz]

I've done this in almost a one-up, where the enemies got to use the party's weapons against them. I set up a gladiatorial trial by combat to defend the honor of a noble in the party, who was away that session. Each character was allowed two items, which were taken from them and placed randomly in the maze/arena. Along with an equal number from the opposing side. Aside from what was placed, they were allowed only a loincloth and a small jar of bicep oil. Some traditions must be observed, after all.

Of course, they put in more healing potions than weapons. The ranged characters found the enchanted swords and the melee characters made improvised weapons. The casters had a blast until an enemy made the save and got in close. It was a good time all around. But it only really worked under the premise that it was under honorable, if somewhat forced, circumstances.

[Asmotherion]

Get a Rez? Are you playing a Tron Campain? :smallconfused:

Jokes aside, I believe handling Death in a D&D game so casually is the affter effects of computer games. A good solution to your problem I believe is to include some of the Gritty Realism Rules, as well as some "Wounds" rules. Make them feel that death is something meaningful, permanent. There is no such thing as "hey, I was killed yesterday, but guess what, today I'm back!".

Make people who can actually resurect people a rarity AND a secret to society. If a person in the party happens to be one of them, explain to him how expensive the component to resurect someone actually is, perhaps make it more expensive.

When someone is resurected, include resurection penalties, and have them stay for a few sessions.

[Telwar]

In our 4e Al-Qadim game, the invoker and my sorcerer were building a casino in the setting's version of Port Royal. (We were using it as our cover for being on the island, and we got surprisingly into it)

We left to do something, and came back, to find out it'd been closed for health violations.


The DM later said that he was never actually scared of us until he saw our reactions. Though the fact that the invoker was played by his wife might have been part of it.

[Kane0]

Where was that old quote... ah there we are.



Kill a PC's father? Well that's just the cost of doing business.
Steal a PC's boots? Now it's personal.


About sums it up.

[Pex]

About sums it up.

Funny, but it isn't as cynical as it sounds. The father is an NPC. DMs fiat what happens to NPCs all the time. This wouldn't be anything new. The character has motivation to do something, but the player doesn't have a direct emotional impact. When the boots are stolen, it depends how it was. If it was also DM fiat that's the DM taking control over the PC. The PC could do nothing to stop something affecting his character, so the player is miffed. If it was an encounter the PC failed to stop his boots being taken, the player is disappointed but he was nevertheless involved. It means something to him because he participated. There's a direct emotional impact.

[Tanarii]

That's why I was a fan of potential item destruction via saves on failed character saves. It emphasized your stuff could be destroyed (realistic), added a nice touch of fear for your stuff, but also put the outcome in the hands of the players rolling dice.

Of course, rolling dice to determine your outcome isn't really agency, since there are no decisions involved. But players (including myself as a player) tend to feel a lot more in control of an outcome when they're the ones rolling the dice.

[Pex]

That's why I was a fan of potential item destruction via saves on failed character saves. It emphasized your stuff could be destroyed (realistic), added a nice touch of fear for your stuff, but also put the outcome in the hands of the players rolling dice.

Of course, rolling dice to determine your outcome isn't really agency, since there are no decisions involved. But players (including myself as a player) tend to feel a lot more in control of an outcome when they're the ones rolling the dice.

Which isn't fair to the players for the same reason critical fumbles aren't and even worse, accepting no tyrannical DMing (Pex trademark pending) was intended. The players are on camera all the time so losing something hurts more than the bad guy losing something presuming you're trying to be fair and have the bag guys also risk losing stuff on failed saves. However, the bad guys were theoretically going to lose anyway so losing stuff only means they're killed off perhaps a round or one attack sooner than otherwise. They only exist for that one combat. What makes it worse is the bad guys losing stuff means the PC are losing loot trying to defeat them. It's why no one Sundered in 3E.

[Nifft]

Want to motivate players?

Take away their phones.

[Kane0]

That seems more like a demotivator in this current age unfortunately.

[Tanarii]

Which isn't fair to the players for the same reason critical fumbles aren't and even worse, accepting no tyrannical DMing (Pex trademark pending) was intended.
It's not about being "fair" to the players. It's about them potentially having to deal with the consequences of losing their stuff. A way of adding challenge. And probably the intent was "realism", given the source.

The major advantage is the players know it can happen in advance under the game system, and by what rules, as opposed to the DM fiat of thieves stole your stuff while you were asleep.

Another way to remove stuff in an above board fashion is to give it durability, like many CRPGs do.


Want to motivate players?

Take away their phones.
Let's not get evil. :smallamused:

[Chugger]

Want to motivate DMs? Stop sitting at their table!

[Regitnui]

Want to motivate players?

Take away their phones.

My players have character sheet apps. That won't work.

[oxybe]

My players have character sheet apps. That won't work.

As someone who largely plays using digital aids, taking away my laptop & phone is very literally telling me not to play: phone does the rolling without threat of losing dice or having a stray floor dice, PC holds character sheets, notes, handouts (and even if it's not a digital handout, guess what modern phones are equipped with? cameras), etc...

While I do have physical books, I prefer to keep them at home as the laptop is simply more convenient to carry around. I've long since given up my days of lugging around a kitbag of minis, dice & books to a game as I did in my late 2nd ed & early-mid 3rd ed days.

Once I got my first lappy, I never went back.

[Tanarii]

While I do have physical books, I prefer to keep them at home as the laptop is simply more convenient to carry around. I've long since given up my days of lugging around a kitbag of minis, dice & books to a game as I did in my late 2nd ed & early-mid 3rd ed days. I know I'm old and outmoded because that makes me sad.

Otoh I allow players to keep their phones, because apps.

On the gripping hand, it's still annoying, because it looks like they're not paying attention, because players that use phone character apps constantly fiddle with the damn things.

On the ... okay now I'm out of hands ... constantly looking at your physical character sheet is also a form of not paying attention.

[KorvinStarmast]

Taking stuff from PC's: we have discovered that in Tomb of Annihilation that Flaming Fist patrols will demand that any adventurers turn over their stuff unless they are exploring with a charter from the Flaming Fist.
We are at char level 2. The issue is they want to confiscate "all adventuring gear" (basically our starting equipment) until we get "approval" to be in their area. This isn't a "just piss PC's off" thing; it's written into the module. (It has already upset one of the players a little bit).

I am pretty sure that we are going to fight; as my ranger put it "You can have my longbow when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers. I've been hunting with this bow and feeding my family with it since my uncle gave it to me on my 15th birthday." {back story point: uncle is a semi-retired ranger who runs the local militia back home}

When we next get together, they either kill us and get our stuff, or we kill them.
Fight or flight?

[Pex]

Want to motivate DMs? Stop sitting at their table!

:smallbiggrin:

[Snowbluff]

I don’t like to take items from my players. As said above, it’s a reward. They earned it.

What I will do is have NPCs gank their kills every once in a while. “Hey, this is the NPC that killed the giant queen you wanted to kill. I can’t give you XP for something you didn’t do.” It’s a pretty sure fire way to get them to kill something that needs to die for plot reasons, but they wouldn’t bother with anyway.

[lperkins2]

3. The personal angle. Often an attack on items feels like it’s outside the regular ways the DM challenges the players. The fact that a theft often hits a single character makes it feel like the DM has it out for that player in particular. If your players don’t say they post sentries during the night, it’s probably because they’ve assumed that their rests are inviolate, or haven’t even thought of the possibility. Getting blindsided by that sort of thing is really frustrating, and broken expectations tend to focus anger at the DM, not the villain.


So, I tend to be a rather meticulous player. If we're travelling through extremely dangerous areas, I'll sometimes make the DM go through safety precautions in excruciating detail, but honestly, it's not interesting, it doesn't advance the plot, and it generally is entirely pointless... Except when it saves the party from having their crap taken, or getting shanked in the night. And once in a while, I encounter a bad DM who assumes that the lack of excruciating detail on how the camp is situated that time means we didn't post a guard, are all fast asleep at the same time, without any of the standard protections active, or worse, takes the details given (due to the party being concerned about nighttime ambush) as an excuse to screw with the players.

If you're a truly masterful bad DM, you ambush the party the first time they go out of their way to avoid being bushwhacked, and make it clear it happened specifically *because* they tried to avoid ambush. Then, later, have 'random' obnoxious encounters at their camp on the road, which take them by Surprise specifically because the players never said they were trying to avoid trouble while travelling.

If you're a good DM, you set the stage for all action that takes place. You wouldn't normally start an encounter with 'the dragon hits you for X', you'd at least tell the players something about the area, or have a map, or something so that they know what's even at stake (it could be that you're rolling initiative for an unseen attacker, but the terrain should be visible, and generally initiative gets rolled first, so they know combat is happening). Likewise, you don't start the Encounter with a midnight Thief by having the party wake up to their stuff missing. Instead, you take the time to inquire about their camp, who's on watch, is it a cold camp, is it a dry camp, are they in tents, are they sharing tents, et cetera. If you've got decent players, they'll realise it might be important, and figure out how they run their camp. Then you can try to have your NPC sneak in, following the standard unseen actions rules, to see if they can steal the party's stuff.

And don't be surprised when the answer is 'no', since old adventurers are a paranoid lot, so you may well find that they do silly things like using their pack as a pillow (it's actually pretty comfortable, been there, done that). And the wizard's pack, which is probably the one with stuff actually worth stealing, it's tied shut from the inside, he uses mage hand to untie it in the morning.

[furby076]

As someone who largely plays using digital aids, taking away my laptop & phone is very literally telling me not to play: phone does the rolling without threat of losing dice or having a stray floor dice, PC holds character sheets, notes, handouts (and even if it's not a digital handout, guess what modern phones are equipped with? cameras), etc...

While I do have physical books, I prefer to keep them at home as the laptop is simply more convenient to carry around. I've long since given up my days of lugging around a kitbag of minis, dice & books to a game as I did in my late 2nd ed & early-mid 3rd ed days.

Once I got my first lappy, I never went back.

i love having my laptop with character sheet, and clicking button to know instantly wht happens to my pc (e.g., blind effect). However, if my DM felt the laptop was takin away, id print character sheet. I prefer dice to digital rollers, but again, this is not a game breaker. So, taking away your phone or laptop is not "literally telling" you not to play. Get some dice, or borrow some, and print your character. Bring the 1-2 books you need...probably someone else is bringing the PHBwhich is easily 80% of what you need.

so, lets not get over dramatic

[mgshamster]

If you want this, instead of having thieves take away their stuff just implement some house-rules for object damage. Losing your stuff used to be a staple in AD&D & BECMI. IIRC it could happen on a failed saving throw.

I miss those days.

I still fondly remember when my cleric struck a demon with his (dm customized) holy sword and got a crit, and the demon crit failed his save causing a catastrophic explosion.

I had to roll for every item on me, and if it was a magic item that failed, it too caused an explosion prompting a whole new set of rolls.

I really don't remember how I managed to survive, but I did. Lots of lucky saves for me. But my equipment all had to make saves, too. Each item individually. Lost my holy sword. Lost the majority of my equipment. The only thing that survived was a necklace with a small pendant that I wrote into his backstory back when I first made the PC. No magical powers, it just got the lucky die roll for every single save. Come to think of it, that pendant survived one hell of a lot of stuff.

But man, was that fight epic. I saved the day. I killed the big bad with a single blow, and the resulting explosions killed all the other demons, too. And it was right when we thought all was lost.

And the aftermath of me, getting up through all that, all my stuff gone, my clothes ragged and torn, my hair burned, and a grin on my face that said, "Yeah, I just killed a mother ****ing Demon Lord. Don't **** with me."

Good ol' AD&D

(Also, potion mixing charts. Those were lots of fun.)

[guachi]

Gaming session from yesterday. Module X4 Master of the Desert Nomads. Encounter with the nagpa. Nagpa has Corruption ability. Destroys a magic item on a failed save.

6th level Paladin with a Holy Avenger (very lucky roll. That's D&D and its random tables, for you) wins initiative and attacks first. Nagpa goes second. Only magic item it's seen used is Holy Avenger. Bad luck for Paladin.

I explain ability before asking for die roll. Player starts crying, screaming and having a fit. She's 13 but really freaking out.

So, yeah, take their stuff.

[oxybe]

i love having my laptop with character sheet, and clicking button to know instantly wht happens to my pc (e.g., blind effect). However, if my DM felt the laptop was takin away, id print character sheet. I prefer dice to digital rollers, but again, this is not a game breaker. So, taking away your phone or laptop is not "literally telling" you not to play. Get some dice, or borrow some, and print your character. Bring the 1-2 books you need...probably someone else is bringing the PHBwhich is easily 80% of what you need.

so, lets not get over dramatic

No dramatics on my part.

If a GM doesn't like how I game, I have no obligation to join their games. I have other things I could also be doing that night.

On the flipside, why must the GM be so dramatic about how I play the game? :P

[Tanarii]

On the flipside, why must the GM be so dramatic about how I play the game? :P
Ultimately, that's why I decided not to object to players using phone apps for their character. As long as they've given me a hard copy for my records, they can use whatever makes them most happy during game play. And in a casual / home game, I wouldn't even require that.

I do object to laptops though. Because they're bulky and get in the way and create a physical barrier between the player and the rest of the table. Not because it's non-traditional.

Otoh players aren't allowed books at the table for the same reason when I DM.

[Kane0]

I do object to laptops though. Because they're bulky and get in the way and create a physical barrier between the player and the rest of the table. Not because it's non-traditional.

Otoh players aren't allowed books at the table for the same reason when I DM.

Tablets and those full foldaround touchscreen laptops are much better, although obviously not everyone has one of those. I'm lucky enough that I have one provided by work.

[Pex]

Gaming session from yesterday. Module X4 Master of the Desert Nomads. Encounter with the nagpa. Nagpa has Corruption ability. Destroys a magic item on a failed save.

6th level Paladin with a Holy Avenger (very lucky roll. That's D&D and its random tables, for you) wins initiative and attacks first. Nagpa goes second. Only magic item it's seen used is Holy Avenger. Bad luck for Paladin.

I explain ability before asking for die roll. Player starts crying, screaming and having a fit. She's 13 but really freaking out.

So, yeah, take their stuff.

Curious, how old are You? I'd be upset too, though not crying. First, 6th level is no place for a holy avenger, random or not. No magic item exists without DM permission. Any random table does not rule the roost.

I Don't know the module but that Corruption ability is bad design. I include the rust monster, but I bias digress. If magic items are a dime a dozen then I suppose it can fit in, but 5e emphasizes specialness. That ability doesn't belong.

If I was a 17th level paladin who just got a holy avenger after a holy quest only to lose it the next session over a die roll, I'd likely yell about it too. It is not logical, but it is not about logic. It is about time and energy spent achieving a great accomplishment being destroyed by the DM because no monster with its abilities exists without the DM's permission either.

[Corsair14]

Different game system but this kind of thing used to happen all the time in my old group. We would regularly start the adventure tied up in a cell with loincloths, in a wagon, what have you, plus the all time best for us, naked, tied to a pole in the jungle smeared with blood with an animal carcass in front of us. Equipment came and went, wasn't that important.

[Unoriginal]

Taking stuff from PC's: we have discovered that in Tomb of Annihilation that Flaming Fist patrols will demand that any adventurers turn over their stuff unless they are exploring with a charter from the Flaming Fist.
We are at char level 2. The issue is they want to confiscate "all adventuring gear" (basically our starting equipment) until we get "approval" to be in their area. This isn't a "just piss PC's off" thing; it's written into the module. (It has already upset one of the players a little bit).

I am pretty sure that we are going to fight; as my ranger put it "You can have my longbow when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers. I've been hunting with this bow and feeding my family with it since my uncle gave it to me on my 15th birthday." {back story point: uncle is a semi-retired ranger who runs the local militia back home}

When we next get together, they either kill us and get our stuff, or we kill them.
Fight or flight?

Well, the thing is that the


Flaming Fist mooks

are basically nothing but state-backed thugs and robbers. Their backers are too important to have their pillage right over a part of Chult contested, even by the Merchant Princes of Port Nyanzaru.

The guides my campaign's PCs hired made clear that those jerks wouldn't be pleased if they caught the group on their territory.

Keep in mind the exploration charter costs 50gp, they want you to pay it after robbing you blind, and they're not giving your stuff back even if you pay (IIRC). That being said, and I say that without spoilers, they DO respect the contracts and deals you do with them, and playing it cool with them at their fort has some nice advantage.

In any case, yeah, giving that they're about to shake you down and leave you in the deadly jungle without any equipment (including spellbook and the like), killing those you encountered isn't different from defending yourself from any other bandits.

Aside from the fact most bandits can't put a bounty on your head and alert patrols to look out for you if you run away or if they run away.

[KorvinStarmast]

In any case, yeah, giving that they're about to shake you down and leave you in the deadly jungle without any equipment (including spellbook and the like), killing those you encountered isn't different from defending yourself from any other bandits. Aside from the fact most bandits can't put a bounty on your head and alert patrols to look out for you if you run away or if they run away. My suggestion to the party is that we fight or flee, and if we fight we have to kill them all, and / or hunt down any of them who run off if the fight goes against them.
I don't want a price on my head for the whole module. Since I am playing a ranger, forest being favored terrain, I think we can manage the latter if they run off. If the patrol simply doesn't return to the fort, then anything could have happened to them in the jungle.

[Unoriginal]

My suggestion to the party is that we fight or flee, and if we fight we have to kill them all, and / or hunt down any of them who run off if the fight goes against them.
I don't want a price on my head for the whole module. Since I am playing a ranger, forest being favored terrain, I think we can manage the latter if they run off. If the patrol simply doesn't return to the fort, then anything could have happened to them in the jungle.

Yep, my point.

Though, to be 100% fair the bounty-on-your-head thing is purely DM-dependent, or at leadt not literal. I mean, their goons will probably give a description to their leaders, but the DM could say that the leaders decide to keep that in-house and won't bother to involve outsiders.

You'd still have to worry about their agents and allies for the rest of the module, though.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Purposefully killing off a squad of goons to escape the consequences of even talking to them seems a bit non-good, and depending on circumstances likely non-lawful.

[Kurt Kurageous]

Purposefully killing off a squad of goons to escape the consequences of even talking to them seems a bit non-good, and depending on circumstances likely non-lawful.

Losing things is incredibly motivating/irritating to players.

An early level (3 or 4) player lost some 300gp to a band of brigands they misjudged. She's still upset about it.

The party acquired a bag of holding (through their NPC agent) by pooling almost all party funds. The bag disappeared as a result of a temporary wondrous effect. They wanted to kill me, partialy because they had yet to use it.

If you take their stuff, expect they will grouse about it.

[Tanarii]

Purposefully killing off a squad of goons to escape the consequences of even talking to them seems a bit non-good, and depending on circumstances likely non-lawful.
Sounds like they're effectively bandits, trying to pass themselves off as authority. So clearly it's lawful good to take them out.

[Unoriginal]

Purposefully killing off a squad of goons to escape the consequences of even talking to them seems a bit non-good, and depending on circumstances likely non-lawful.

They're literally stealing all your belongings and leaving you to die in the jungle.


Sounds like they're effectively bandits, trying to pass themselves off as authority. So clearly it's lawful good to take them out.

Well, they are the authority. In the sense that their employers said "now we're in charge of this part of the land, we take everything from it" and no one had the guts to contest it (since they very much liked to have said guts stay in their body).

[KorvinStarmast]

Purposefully killing off a squad of goons to escape the consequences of even talking to them seems a bit non-good, and depending on circumstances likely non-lawful. You really don't understand the situation. They are armed, and are demanding our gear. That is armed robbery. IN D&D land, that leads to battles. We are level 2. low level combat is swingy.

I don't know what this party is made up of, but if I do a little math in the back of the MM, on guards or scouts, and the lowest level cleric NPC, and then make up for the numbers multiplier, we find a hard to deadly encounter depending on if they have a higher CR leader or not.

What game have you been playing? Certainly not D&D. When evil ruffians approach your party, armed, and demand all that you own, what do you do? Give them all your stuff? No, you don't, not if you are in the jungles of Chult in ToA. (Maybe reread the title of the thread).

Also, Tomb of Annihilation is a bit of a lethal scenario as far as I can understand its themes. Our last encounter, which we avoided, was CR 6 cyclops. We discussed, and avoided so that we could get to where we are going. That cyclops might have killed us all, or might have been defeated. Not sure. They hit like freight trains, and can one shot a second level char easily.

We fought a Giant Scorpion at level 1 and just got by thanks to a single save made versus poison. 4d10 damage of poison plus 1d10 regular damage tail spike ... on a first level paladin. Had our paladin failed that save, he's dead, as in Completely Dead. More than twice his max HP dead. In ToA, that means dead forever. And with him down, and as quickly as giant scorps can move, (he already had our barbarian in his pincers, grappled) the chances that multiple other chars die goes up. We've each put some effort into our back stories, and already have a few connections in CHult thanks to RP and some dinosaur races that we participated in at the port.

The encounters in the module apparently don't seem to care what level you are. (Which is kinda cool, since we have to make decisions on fight or flight with some frequency. It has a bit of an old school, sandbox feel).

[Coffee_Dragon]

My suggestion to the party is that we fight or flee, and if we fight we have to kill them all, and / or hunt down any of them who run off if the fight goes against them.


You really don't understand the situation.

What do you think I don't understand about the situation? Did you not mean to propose to purposefully kill any survivors of a battle? Assuming you did, do you contend this is a good act?

(Incidentally, what if instead of attacking, they just declare their intention to report you and turn their backs? The utility of killing them appears to be the same.)

[Tanarii]

What do you think I don't understand about the situation? Did you not mean to propose to purposefully kill any survivors of a battle? Assuming you did, do you contend this is a good act?Sounds like a "good act" to me, or at least a smart one without alignment implications. It's pretty normal to also do that with orcs, gnolls, hobgoblins, or any other human bandits when you're worried about them alerting their allies for reinforcements or escaping to hurt others.

Heck, summary execution of bad-guy prisoners for their crimes is often a "good act" in D&D-landia.

[Unoriginal]

The encounters in the module apparently don't seem to care what level you are. (Which is kinda cool, since we have to make decisions on fight or flight with some frequency. It has a bit of an old school, sandbox feel).

Indeed, the module encounters don't care about what level you are.

The lvl 1 PCs of my campaign are about to face a troll.

Though, tbf, not all of the encounters are hostile from the get-go.