New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 50 of 50
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2009

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by King of Nowhere View Post
    knowing that there are villages of werewolves that live peacefully, then this mostly invalidate the "kill them all" rationale.

    but if that hadn't been an option, i could definitely understand the rationale, and i can support it if the circumstances are extreme enough.

    was the "those villages live in peace" argument brought up during the discussion? if so, how was it countered?



    I disagree with this approach. the moment you start discussing the morality of the option, it becomes a philosophical issue. and this is just a threat to weave a DM hammer to make the players agree with you on a philosophical dilemma. It's basically argomentum ad baculum. And if you can't come up with better reasons for why it is wrong than "because i'll change your alignment", perhaps they have a point.

    Also, I don't like selctive responsibility. if one is responsible for killing innocent people cursed as werewolves, then one is equally responsible if he spares them and they go on a killing spree.

    Finally, I also believe that basing a decision of that kind on "what would let me keep my good alignment" is authomatically an evil action, regardless of choice or outcome. A good alignment is about caring for others, an evil alignment is willing to hurt others for self gain. If one say "I don't care about the consequences in the long run [no concern for others], this action will let me keep my good alignment [personal gain]", that's evil.
    In fact, if I had a paladin in a difficult dilemma, I would never make the paladin fall for taking what he genuinely believes the best choice. but i would always demote a paladin who started to wonder how the keep his class privileges active and his cape shiny.
    Answers that are not egoistic instead (for example "we don't know a cure, but we don't know everything. and there's good and smart people to care for them. I'm sure they can find some solutions") are perfectly accepted. Let me reinstate for clarity: I'm not arguing against the specific choice or the specific scenario. I'm arguing against making moral choices based on the fact that your alignment may change.
    The issue with this train of thought is that a good alignment isnt just a possession thats nice to have. Its the right way to behave. Its like asking "what gets me into heaven?" The basic answer to that is "good deeds". Regardless of your concern about your afterlife you're asking "Which deed here is the good one". Both questions mean the same thing, but one puts it into a specific context.
    Paladins have codes and alignments for a reason, its their structured systemic approach to being good. Asking "How do I stay a paladin" isnt evil or selfish. Its appealing to an external code you signed up to because its supposed to make the world a better place when you follow it.
    I Am A:Neutral Good Human Bard/Sorcerer (2nd/1st Level)
    Ability Scores:
    Strength-14
    Dexterity-11
    Constitution-16
    Intelligence-16
    Wisdom-12
    Charisma-16

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    My only problem with "cursed innocents" is that usually it's not really used in that way. Lycanthropes aren't cursed innocents. Yes, they were "innocent" before, and maybe when they were first "cursed they might have been "innocent". I don't know how long it's been since they have been cursed, but I doubt they have been squeaky clean in the interim. So they are no longer innocent. If there was a cure and it saved them from being "cursed" they are still no longer innocent.

    The idea of a cursed innocent is something like, sleeping beauty... or Fiona... A curse that effect only the cursed person. I mean try to argue the morality of putting sleeping beauty to the sword while she was sleeping. Once the curse acts on the person, and it effects other people, then the person isn't innocent anymore.

    This whole line of questioning seems like a "gotcha" kind of thing, were no matter what you say someone is going to introduce something that will make your answer just seem wrong. I mean from the whole idea that there is a "good" werewolf village somewhere seems kind of convenient. Where were they when the evil ones were running amok? Why didn't they come down to intervene? Whose to say that they want to watch over these new werewolves?

    The idea that damaging them, and they might change into werewolves so don't do it... isn't an argument either, or rather its a poor one. Who is to say that they don't get thirsty one night, come downstairs...step on a lego and wolf out... killing bunch of randos one night?

    The idea of killing everyone because a Necromancer might come by and wraith everyone is laughable too. I mean first off, this isn't the same. These werewolves are already known to be controllable by something else without much effort. The whole Necromancer thing still requires someone to come in and establish control and do a bunch of other things.

    the whole idea that they are "sick and vulnerable to mind control" is laughable. It would be one thing if they aren't harmful... it's entirely another thing if their "sickness" and vulnerability to mind control didn't come with claws ripping out their fingertips and large pointy teeetth gnashing out their baby molars that comes with a side order of irresistible bloodlust.

    I mean I am all for housing and lodging the 40 man women and children who go into a deep sleep everyone month. Trying to find a cure for them... .but

    The idea of of just casually trying to come up with a way to house 40 BESTIAL SAVAGES that can rip apart walls and tear through flesh with the ease of a burrito? I mean you imagine that conversation. " Oh jeeze... one got out and mauled someone." "Who did it get?.... Karen? ...aw well no one liked her anyway."

    Also the idea that a Medieval village or town has the capacity to deal with that many monsters is ... ludicrous.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2009

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kyberwulf View Post
    My only problem with "cursed innocents" is that usually it's not really used in that way. Lycanthropes aren't cursed innocents. Yes, they were "innocent" before, and maybe when they were first "cursed they might have been "innocent". I don't know how long it's been since they have been cursed, but I doubt they have been squeaky clean in the interim. So they are no longer innocent. If there was a cure and it saved them from being "cursed" they are still no longer innocent.

    The idea of a cursed innocent is something like, sleeping beauty... or Fiona... A curse that effect only the cursed person. I mean try to argue the morality of putting sleeping beauty to the sword while she was sleeping. Once the curse acts on the person, and it effects other people, then the person isn't innocent anymore.

    This whole line of questioning seems like a "gotcha" kind of thing, were no matter what you say someone is going to introduce something that will make your answer just seem wrong. I mean from the whole idea that there is a "good" werewolf village somewhere seems kind of convenient. Where were they when the evil ones were running amok? Why didn't they come down to intervene? Whose to say that they want to watch over these new werewolves?

    The idea that damaging them, and they might change into werewolves so don't do it... isn't an argument either, or rather its a poor one. Who is to say that they don't get thirsty one night, come downstairs...step on a lego and wolf out... killing bunch of randos one night?

    The idea of killing everyone because a Necromancer might come by and wraith everyone is laughable too. I mean first off, this isn't the same. These werewolves are already known to be controllable by something else without much effort. The whole Necromancer thing still requires someone to come in and establish control and do a bunch of other things.

    the whole idea that they are "sick and vulnerable to mind control" is laughable. It would be one thing if they aren't harmful... it's entirely another thing if their "sickness" and vulnerability to mind control didn't come with claws ripping out their fingertips and large pointy teeetth gnashing out their baby molars that comes with a side order of irresistible bloodlust.

    I mean I am all for housing and lodging the 40 man women and children who go into a deep sleep everyone month. Trying to find a cure for them... .but

    The idea of of just casually trying to come up with a way to house 40 BESTIAL SAVAGES that can rip apart walls and tear through flesh with the ease of a burrito? I mean you imagine that conversation. " Oh jeeze... one got out and mauled someone." "Who did it get?.... Karen? ...aw well no one liked her anyway."

    Also the idea that a Medieval village or town has the capacity to deal with that many monsters is ... ludicrous.
    I think youre going more off horror movie werewolves than what was actually described in the scenario.
    I Am A:Neutral Good Human Bard/Sorcerer (2nd/1st Level)
    Ability Scores:
    Strength-14
    Dexterity-11
    Constitution-16
    Intelligence-16
    Wisdom-12
    Charisma-16

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2011

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Raziere View Post
    There is scarce more carefulness or correctness you can acquire than sending them to that innocent werewolf village. unless you propose for these people to live out in the wild hunting and potentially encountering random dangers in a DnD fantasy wilderness- which if they don't have hunting and survival skills is a slow death sentence anyways, as well as the risk of them just scattering to go wherever they want anyways- there is little else you can do than accept the risk.

    the alternative is sending them to city where there are no werewolves which is different problem: if people find out, there is no one there that understands their plight and will not hesitate to kill them anyways. furthermore the city will remember the PC bringing them there and might assume that the PCs are apart of the evil werewolf village or something and hunt them for bringing in werewolves to their city. the evil werewolves could also infiltrate the city, mind control the refugees then use the strife this causes to pin the blame on the innocent werewolves, thus killing both the refugees and the good werewolf village while potentially causing sabotage to the city, which is even worse than the good werewolf village being given a chance. all the alternatives seem worse than just bringing them to that good werewolf village.
    If you really don't get the concept of not taking things at face value, and actually investigating, then I'm certainly not qualified to explain it to you. However, in case you just don't understand what I meant when I suggested looking into the problem, allow me to list a few alternatives that would qualify, that aren't covered by your "unless" / "the alternative":

    Sense Motive on the "good" village, especially when (overtly and/or subtly) probing questions are asked.

    Scouting the "good" village, to look for evidence that this was their plan, all along.

    Sense Motive on the evil village, especially when (overtly and/or subtly) probing questions are asked. (Note: this is not exactly conducive to the health of level 3 PCs - I suggest doing so only with captives after taking up with the "good" villages.)

    Scouting the evil village, to look for evidence that this was their plan, all along.

    And this is just using the actors given, and 2 muggle skills. There are many more options for ways to more carefully evaluate the scenario for evidence that the "good" werewolf villagers are in cahoots with the evil masterminds (most of them simultaneously more subtle and (subsequently) safer).

    Evaluating whether sending the werewolves into the good village was a "Trojan horse" part of an evil master plan is much more difficult to investigate or explain, so, if you don't get the idea of more basic investigation, there's really no point in me even trying to explain.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kyberwulf View Post
    I mean from the whole idea that there is a "good" werewolf village somewhere seems kind of convenient. Where were they when the evil ones were running amok? Why didn't they come down to intervene? Whose to say that they want to watch over these new werewolves?
    Yes, a little too convenient. These "good" werewolves seem the perfect cover to convince adventurers to leave the werewolf breeding grounds peacefully.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lord Raziere's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
    If you really don't get the concept of not taking things at face value, and actually investigating, then I'm certainly not qualified to explain it to you. However, in case you just don't understand what I meant when I suggested looking into the problem, allow me to list a few alternatives that would qualify, that aren't covered by your "unless" / "the alternative":

    Sense Motive on the "good" village, especially when (overtly and/or subtly) probing questions are asked.

    Scouting the "good" village, to look for evidence that this was their plan, all along.

    Sense Motive on the evil village, especially when (overtly and/or subtly) probing questions are asked. (Note: this is not exactly conducive to the health of level 3 PCs - I suggest doing so only with captives after taking up with the "good" villages.)

    Scouting the evil village, to look for evidence that this was their plan, all along.

    And this is just using the actors given, and 2 muggle skills. There are many more options for ways to more carefully evaluate the scenario for evidence that the "good" werewolf villagers are in cahoots with the evil masterminds (most of them simultaneously more subtle and (subsequently) safer).

    Evaluating whether sending the werewolves into the good village was a "Trojan horse" part of an evil master plan is much more difficult to investigate or explain, so, if you don't get the idea of more basic investigation, there's really no point in me even trying to explain.



    Yes, a little too convenient. These "good" werewolves seem the perfect cover to convince adventurers to leave the werewolf breeding grounds peacefully.
    Investigation takes time, days at least maybe weeks, what would you do with the villagers in the mean time? they still need somewhere to go, food to eat, shelter, your delaying a solution over some baseless metagaming paranoia and even if you were right about being suspicious of the good werewolves, what would you do THEN? you'd just be confirming that they have nowhere to go, so what would you actual solution be? while if your investigation turns up negative you've wasted time distrusting the GM over nothing because you suspected a gotcha that wasn't there.

    sometimes an obvious good/bad dichotomy is just that: the GM being lazy with their worldbuilding and making the solutions simple so that the PC's don't get confused from having to remember more complex lore. if the PC's suspect a trap behind every town or smiling face they might as well just burn the entire campaign to the ground, its the stupidest kind of PC paranoia, when the Player-DM relationship is all about trust. what do you expect the barkeep to try and kill you in your sleep to?
    Last edited by Lord Raziere; 2020-03-13 at 07:14 PM.
    I'm also on discord as "raziere".


  6. - Top - End - #36
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    To clarify things a little bit more...

    The lycanthropes in the region are divided into three main school of thoughts:

    So... Every werewolf around was turned (or is the offspring of those who were turned) and had to leave the human city (of their own volition or forcibly). Many of them killed someone when they first turned, since during their first transformation, they can't yet control themselves and become mindless beasts. Over the years, the human city hired an elite military force specialized in fighting lycanthropes. We don't know what causes the lycanthroly here, but it seems to happen to someone every few months... It was implied a few times that there's a curse on the ground where the city was built. There is no indication of other lycanthropes sneaking in to turn the inhabitants.

    - The "good" ones. Who still care about their friends and family in the city. We have much reason to believe them, as we witnessed these werewolves actively defend the city from invaders. We also spent 2 days in their village. They seem to be legitimately peaceful people trying to get on with their lives.

    - The "neutral" ones. Who we didn't encounter at all. But multiple sources told us they don't really care one way or another about human society. They live in remote locations and keep to themselves. Matches what we heard and saw so far.

    - The "evil" ones. Who resent being expelled from the city (and/or believe themselves to be superior to normal humans). We have strong evidence they attacked the city multiple times and.joined forces with an evil cult that worships a lich. Apparently, it was said cult who taught them the ritual to mind-control infected werewolves (only those on whom the ritual is performed).

    While we don't have indisputable proof of the motives and general alignment of each werewolf community, the evidence we uncovered and events we witnessed all seem to corroborate the descriptions given above.

    I don't think the GM is going for a dark-n-edgy "they were all evil all along!" kind of twist, BTW. But as always, I might be wrong.
    Last edited by Lemmy; 2020-03-13 at 09:56 AM.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2014

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    I am trying to picture in my head how this played out. I don't mean morally or philosophically. I mean the actual physical methods employed considering there are 40 people involved.

    "Hey villagers huddle over here, we need to talk to you guys about what just happened. Oh don't worry about the flasks of oil and torches, they are just for our next job."

    One PC to another PC: "Hey can you distract those parents over there so I can cut this 3-year old's throat?"

    "We lead everyone back home and then ride ahead and set up an ambush to pick them off with arrows as they arrive."

    I suppose the DM handwaved the party killing everyone but if he is not running 'that kind of edgy game' then it sounds like he either didn't think very carefully about what his players might do or really doesn't care. If so, you should probably discuss this sort of thing with him.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lord Raziere's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    See? good werewolf village is best choice. unless you want to go find the neutral ones for fear of the good ones bringing them along to fight evil, assuming they're stupid/incompetent enough to bring them like that knowing whats wrong with them. but generally I'd like to not assume that about other people, or to assume the GM wants me to roleplay as a tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist who is afraid of their own shadow being a mimic.
    I'm also on discord as "raziere".


  9. - Top - End - #39
    Troll in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by Keltest View Post
    That sounds like youre conflating out of game player rationale with in-character roleplaying rationale. Having a player ask "what would a good aligned character do" is a reasonable direction for their thoughts to go in. Punishing a player for not caring about the NPCs as if they were real people is... wrong.
    well, when put like that, it seems more like metagaming than anything else. "what a good character will do" is not a good question, because there are a ton of different ways a good character may behave. you should instead wonder "what this specific character would do".

    actually, there are a tons of threads on the specifics of why alignments are not straightjackets and you should not let them dictate your behavior. no need to derail this one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lvl45DM! View Post
    The issue with this train of thought is that a good alignment isnt just a possession thats nice to have. Its the right way to behave. Its like asking "what gets me into heaven?" The basic answer to that is "good deeds". Regardless of your concern about your afterlife you're asking "Which deed here is the good one". Both questions mean the same thing, but one puts it into a specific context.
    Actually, that reminds me of the "bet" argument one phylosopher used to argue that it's better to believe in god: "yes, we can't know for certain either way, but if there is god and you did believe in him you go to heaven, while if there was no god you didn't lose much. so it's better to believe".
    to which the refutation was "perhaps god prefers an honest atheist to an hypocritical believer who only believes because he expects a reward."
    which applies here too. If you wonder "how should i behave there to get into heaven", perhaps the powers that be decide that you should be punished for your selfish attitude.

    Again, "good" means self-sacrificing to help others. If you care not for helping others but only for maximizing your chances to go to heaven, you are neutral at best.


    Paladins have codes and alignments for a reason, its their structured systemic approach to being good. Asking "How do I stay a paladin" isnt evil or selfish. Its appealing to an external code you signed up to because its supposed to make the world a better place when you follow it.
    this is a bit table-depending, because what the exact code of a paladin is depends on the specific DM and player. Though even I, who have a more flexible attitude than most, would never condone a paldin killing innocents to stop a curse unless all other options have been exhausted first. (if i was dm-ing, i'd also never put a paladin into a situation of having exhausted all the other options, because it would make for a very sad story. i'd let them find a solution of some sort).

    but I think most people here will agree that the paladin code is not something to rules-lawyer, and that the core of it is "you step up and help people". So, a paladin saying "ok, we rescued your loved ones as you asked. oh, by the way, they are affected by a horrible curse that will turn them into bloodthirsty monsters on the next full moon. Well, goodbye. I have new and exciting quests to attend" would definitely NOT be doing his job.
    Now, a paladin staying with the village to try and find a solution for the cursed is perfectly fine, and a paladin leaving to undergo on a quest to find a cure/find someone who can help is also perfectly fine.
    I only disagree with the notion that a paladin can just leave the villagers to deal with those cursed werevolwes because doing so does not violate his code. that if you seem to have no good and pure options, you can just walk away to avoid staining yourself with difficult decisions. Leaving some innocents to deal with a threat that's well over their capacity to solve and that will probably kill them all in a few weeks just because you can't find a way to help them while keeping your hands clean is probably against the paladin code. Pretending that you actually kept your hands clean is hypocrisy of the worst kind.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lemmy View Post
    To clarify things a little bit more...

    The lycanthropes in the region are divided into three main school of thoughts:

    So... Every werewolf around was turned (or is the offspring of those who were turned) and had to leave the human city (of their own volition or forcibly). Many of them killed someone when they first turned, since during their first transformation, they can't yet control themselves and become mindless beasts. Over the years, the human city hired an elite military force specialized in fighting lycanthropes. We don't know what causes the lycanthroly here, but it seems to happen to someone every few months... It was implied a few times that there's a curse on the ground where the city was built. There is no indication of other lycanthropes sneaking in to turn the inhabitants.

    - The "good" ones. Who still care about their friends and family in the city. We have much reason to believe them, as we witnessed these werewolves actively defend the city from invaders. We also spent 2 days in their village. They seem to be legitimately peaceful people trying to get on with their lives.

    - The "neutral" ones. Who we didn't encounter at all. But multiple sources told us they don't really care one way or another about human society. They live in remote locations and keep to themselves. Matches what we heard and saw so far.

    - The "evil" ones. Who resent being expelled from the city (and/or believe themselves to be superior to normal humans). We have strong evidence they attacked the city multiple times and.joined forces with an evil cult that worships a lich. Apparently, it was said cult who taught them the ritual to mind-control infected werewolves (only those on whom the ritual is performed).

    While we don't have indisputable proof of the motives and general alignment of each werewolf community, the evidence we uncovered and events we witnessed all seem to corroborate the descriptions given above.

    I don't think the GM is going for a dark-n-edgy "they were all evil all along!" kind of twist, BTW. But as always, I might be wrong.
    Ok, then let me reinstate my question, since it wasn't answered the first time:
    why did nobody suggest to bring those cursed people to the good werewolves?
    Last edited by King of Nowhere; 2020-03-14 at 12:28 PM.
    In memory of Evisceratus: he dreamed of a better world, but he lacked the class levels to make the dream come true.

    Ridiculous monsters you won't take seriously even as they disembowel you

    my take on the highly skilled professional: the specialized expert

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2011

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Raziere View Post
    Investigation takes time, days at least maybe weeks, what would you do with the villagers in the mean time? they still need somewhere to go, food to eat, shelter, your delaying a solution over some baseless metagaming paranoia and even if you were right about being suspicious of the good werewolves, what would you do THEN? you'd just be confirming that they have nowhere to go, so what would you actual solution be? while if your investigation turns up negative you've wasted time distrusting the GM over nothing because you suspected a gotcha that wasn't there.

    sometimes an obvious good/bad dichotomy is just that: the GM being lazy with their worldbuilding and making the solutions simple so that the PC's don't get confused from having to remember more complex lore. if the PC's suspect a trap behind every town or smiling face they might as well just burn the entire campaign to the ground, its the stupidest kind of PC paranoia, when the Player-DM relationship is all about trust. what do you expect the barkeep to try and kill you in your sleep to?
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Raziere View Post
    See? good werewolf village is best choice. unless you want to go find the neutral ones for fear of the good ones bringing them along to fight evil, assuming they're stupid/incompetent enough to bring them like that knowing whats wrong with them. but generally I'd like to not assume that about other people, or to assume the GM wants me to roleplay as a tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist who is afraid of their own shadow being a mimic.
    You're likely too far away from understanding my point / my PoV for my words to reach you, but I'll make one last attempt, for everyone else reading the thread, at least, to describe what it is that I like in a game.

    Firefly

    Patience: We can deal. I’ll upload coordinates for a rendezvous point outside of town.

    Mal: See you in the world. (Mal ends the transmission, followed by a long pause.) I believe that woman’s planning to shoot me again.

    Jayne: She meant to pay you, she’d’a haggled you down some.

    Wash: Just a little effort to hide it would’ve been…



    Serenity

    Zoë : So... trap?
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : Trap.
    Zoë : We goin' in?
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : Ain't but a few hours out.
    Hoban 'Wash' Washburn : Yeah, but... remember the part where it's a trap?
    Kaylee Frye : But how can you be sure Inara don't just want to see you? Sometimes people have feelings. I'm referring here to people.
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : Y'all were watching I take it?
    Kaylee Frye : Yes?
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : Did you see us fight?
    Kaylee Frye : No.
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : Trap.



    West Wing(?)

    (Lots): …they're sleeping in each other's houses…

    -----

    I want a world worth Exploring. I want NPCs with character, and human motivations that can be read - not by skill checks, but through simple player skills and attention to detail. I want a GM that I can trust to portray those people, not mustache-twirling caricatures and/or incomprehensible garbage.

    I don't want weeks of investigation.

    I don't want to have to be a paranoid conspiracy theorist to enjoy the game.

    I want the GM to present realistic NPCs, and I want my characters to experience the gamut of human experience.

    -----

    LR, I doubt you - or any who stand near your PoV - will ever travel far enough to actually see my PoV. But if you ever do, kudos - those who walk away from Omelas have a wide world to look forward to.

    EDIT: note that I agree and have agreed that the "good" village is the "correct" choice if things are as… simple as they seem. I just believe that the "more correct" answer is to… hmmm… "trust, but verify", to go in with eyes open rather than blindly following the "best" plan. Because I don't know if the GM is awesome enough to be able to play a true Mastermind villain, and (over)confident enough in the party to actually do so.
    Last edited by Quertus; 2020-03-13 at 09:32 PM.

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by King of Nowhere View Post
    Ok, then let me reinstate my question, since it wasn't answered the first time:
    why did nobody suggest to bring those cursed people to the good werewolves?
    I did. Repeatedly. Group A wouldn't cave in, though. They said "it was still to risky. the evil werewolves could attack and regain control of the cursed".

    EDIT: Removed the green color because that bright neon-kryptonite appearance hurts my eyes.
    Last edited by Lemmy; 2020-03-13 at 09:37 PM.
    Homebrew Stuff:

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lord Raziere's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
    You're likely too far away from understanding my point / my PoV for my words to reach you, but I'll make one last attempt, for everyone else reading the thread, at least, to describe what it is that I like in a game.

    Firefly

    Patience: We can deal. I’ll upload coordinates for a rendezvous point outside of town.

    Mal: See you in the world. (Mal ends the transmission, followed by a long pause.) I believe that woman’s planning to shoot me again.

    Jayne: She meant to pay you, she’d’a haggled you down some.

    Wash: Just a little effort to hide it would’ve been…



    Serenity

    Zoë : So... trap?
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : Trap.
    Zoë : We goin' in?
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : Ain't but a few hours out.
    Hoban 'Wash' Washburn : Yeah, but... remember the part where it's a trap?
    Kaylee Frye : But how can you be sure Inara don't just want to see you? Sometimes people have feelings. I'm referring here to people.
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : Y'all were watching I take it?
    Kaylee Frye : Yes?
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : Did you see us fight?
    Kaylee Frye : No.
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds : Trap.



    West Wing(?)

    (Lots): …they're sleeping in each other's houses…

    -----

    I want a world worth Exploring. I want NPCs with character, and human motivations that can be read - not by skill checks, but through simple player skills and attention to detail. I want a GM that I can trust to portray those people, not mustache-twirling caricatures and/or incomprehensible garbage.

    I don't want weeks of investigation.

    I don't want to have to be a paranoid conspiracy theorist to enjoy the game.

    I want the GM to present realistic NPCs, and I want my characters to experience the gamut of human experience.

    -----

    LR, I doubt you - or any who stand near your PoV - will ever travel far enough to actually see my PoV. But if you ever do, kudos - those who walk away from Omelas have a wide world to look forward to.

    EDIT: note that I agree and have agreed that the "good" village is the "correct" choice if things are… simple / as simple as they seem. I just believe that the "more correct" answer is to… hmmm… "trust, but verify", to go in with eyes open rather than blindly following the "best" plan. Because I don't know if the GM is awesome enough to be able to play a true Mastermind villain, and (over)confident enough in the party to actually do so.
    Firefly is a bad example then, its tropey han solo smuggler stuff just used as the focus rather than the sideshow. not saying its bad, I love firefly but its a romanticized space smuggler western, and tropey underworlds are always full of traps.

    assuming that two villages who are morally opposed to each other and outright do different things to the city are actually some two-village wide long-con is not realistic, it is baseless paranoia, no one does that on that scale. that requires an entire village to keep a secret, and secrets grow harder to keep the more it spreads. what your suspecting IS mustache-twirling caricatures by thinking that they are so cruel as to go so far just to con people about one village is pretty stupid: why not just have both villages pretend to be good? if your going that far, whats the benefit to one of them being open about it? the openly evil ones just hurt their cause then.

    assuming everything is a trap as you do is the exact opposite of human experience, because humans generally don't assume that unless they were specifically conditioned to. its the same as the PC's assuming every vizier is actually evil and wanting to overthrow the king, its tired hackneyed trope thinking filtered through a murderhobo's desire to do the most efficient solution regardless of how realistic it actually is for a person to actually propose or do it.
    I'm also on discord as "raziere".


  13. - Top - End - #43
    Troll in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Raziere View Post
    assuming that two villages who are morally opposed to each other and outright do different things to the city are actually some two-village wide long-con is not realistic, it is baseless paranoia, no one does that on that scale. that requires an entire village to keep a secret, and secrets grow harder to keep the more it spreads. what your suspecting IS mustache-twirling caricatures by thinking that they are so cruel as to go so far just to con people about one village is pretty stupid
    on the other hand, there could be a small group in charge of it that's minupulating stuff, and using the rest of the (genuinely good) village as a cover for their plan. perhaps they are gathering the good werewolves as an excuse to secretly practice the mind-control ritual on all of them when the time is right.
    I did something similar in my campaign with at least three different groups of villains; it's a good way to hide in plain sight a villain with good public relations whose plan does not involve doing evil stuff immediately, as well as to establish said villain as a skillful manipulator once the cover is blown. It's also a good way to establish a powerful villain in a world that's not full of evilness: this guy just hijacked a non-evil organization. yes, when he reveals himself a lot of his lackeys will leave, but he's gained control of all the money, information, and magical resources that way. and perhaps he's manipulated that organization into serving his goals in the meantime.

    but yes, one should not assume a trap everywhere. even in my campaign, where i may have overdone it, trusting people gained more than it lost in the end. what can you do, attack any organization on the off-chance that some villain may be manipulating it?
    In memory of Evisceratus: he dreamed of a better world, but he lacked the class levels to make the dream come true.

    Ridiculous monsters you won't take seriously even as they disembowel you

    my take on the highly skilled professional: the specialized expert

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Mid-Rohan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by King of Nowhere View Post
    Actually, that reminds me of the "bet" argument
    Pascal's wager, as I recall. We need to be careful to keep real world religion out of this, though, so let's stick to game relevant logic.

    Quote Originally Posted by King of Nowhere View Post
    If you wonder "how should i behave there to get into heaven", perhaps the powers that be decide that you should be punished for your selfish attitude.
    Except D&D mechanics explicitly don't work that way. Good is a cosmic force and performing truly good acts is always good. At worst, having selfish motives for Moral Desserts makes the Good action ping neutral. Never evil. You have to go as far as Inquisitor stuff before extreme good starts to blur the line with evil.

    Quote Originally Posted by King of Nowhere View Post
    Again, "good" means self-sacrificing to help others. If you care not for helping others but only for maximizing your chances to go to heaven, you are neutral at best.
    Neutral at worst, not at best. Because RPG morality actually functions differently than real world stuff. Having a literal plane of Good openly and actively pursuing explicit, well defined agendas changes the dynamic. Any true cooperation with these agendas is neutral at worst.

    A player trying to select the "good" option in a game likely isn't concerned with their character's afterlife in ths moment they are deciding. They are likely more concerned with what kind of person they are being in that moment.

    It's good for a DM to give them information about their choices, because morality in real life is hard enough to parse. In an RPG, we have to imagine the details of the scenario before we can begin evaluating the ethics. DMs should consistently provide information about the relevant details to help players see the big picture and make an informed decision.

    Quote Originally Posted by King of Nowhere View Post
    well, when put like that, it seems more like metagaming than anything else. "what a good character will do" is not a good question, because there are a ton of different ways a good character may behave. you should instead wonder "what this specific character would do".

    actually, there are a tons of threads on the specifics of why alignments are not straightjackets and you should not let them dictate your behavior. no need to derail this one.
    And players are open to devising their own plans, but in scenarios like this, the choices are intrinsically limited and bear enormous moral weight. What must be done with the cursed villagers? As you pointed out, even choosing nothing isn't a great option in any regard.

    It's not alignment putting players in a straightjacket. It's a scenario with few truly good options available.

    But again, the characters probably aren't thinking about their own afterlife here. They're weighing the lives of these cursed villagers against the lives of everyone else they might harm or kill later. That's where the real moral conundrum is.

    Do you spare the cursed villagers, risking they become a danger to others, or do you kill them to protect everyone else?
    Quote Originally Posted by 2D8HP View Post
    Some play RPG's like chess, some like charades.

    Everyone has their own jam.

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2011

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by King of Nowhere View Post
    but yes, one should not assume a trap everywhere.
    Yup. But you need to be able to differentiate "assume a trap" and "realize that one is possible". It's that lack of middle ground that makes one-sided stances suboptimal. Thus, "do X" is suboptimal next to "look to do X, being mindful of the potential fail states".
    Last edited by Quertus; 2020-03-14 at 05:51 AM.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2009

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by King of Nowhere View Post
    Again, "good" means self-sacrificing to help others. If you care not for helping others but only for maximizing your chances to go to heaven, you are neutral at best.
    Who says thats what good is?
    What is good when the options avaliable do not really contain self-sacrifice as an option?
    When I go to heaven do I not enhance the cause of Good? If I went to Hell does evil not have another minion?
    If I sacrifice myself for these villagers, what of the countless innocents I could have saved in the future?

    Moral issues are complex and thorny. And not everyone has your clear vision of what to do.

    Paladin codes and getting into heaven are ways that you know what you did was right. Its appealing to an external authority for wisdom. And its not how I live my personal life but it IS how 99% of paladins live theirs.

    Youre assuming that the Paladin wants to stay a paladin or get into heaven for the perks, rather than the knowledge that if they went to hell or lost the paladin status it means THEY DID SOMETHING BAD. Viewing it in a cosmic justice lens is not better or worse than viewing it from a personal lens.

    I mean lets look at Miko. Clearly not a good person what with the murder of a helpless old man. Perhaps if she had cared more about losing her paladin status she mightve re-evaluated what she did better. If she appealed to an external source of morality rather than her own incredibly flawed one, the world mightve been a better place.

    Or suppose theres a police officer. If they started planting evidence and using police brutality they would (hopefully) lose their badge. Thus acting in a way to preserve that badge is a way to actually keep being good.
    Last edited by Lvl45DM!; 2020-03-14 at 07:36 AM.
    I Am A:Neutral Good Human Bard/Sorcerer (2nd/1st Level)
    Ability Scores:
    Strength-14
    Dexterity-11
    Constitution-16
    Intelligence-16
    Wisdom-12
    Charisma-16

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Vinyadan's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    To be honest, "they turn into mindless beasts every month" sounds like a more urgent problem than the eventuality of possession, especially if there are human villages or roads nearby. The "innocents" could handle that, however, if there were for example an uninhabited island they could reach by boat, or some underground structure with a phenomenally sturdy door that needs a key or code to open.

    The players could have allied themselves with the good werewolves and some more (people from the city, given that they are a problem for them) to destroy the bad ones.
    Quote Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien, 1955
    I thought Tom Bombadil dreadful — but worse still was the announcer's preliminary remarks that Goldberry was his daughter (!), and that Willowman was an ally of Mordor (!!).

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    GrayDeath's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    In the Heart of Europe
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    While I may be too alte to the paty, let me simply state how my last 2 D&D Chgaracters would have handled this (both under the assumption that if the DM does not announce the nonexistance of high elvel Cleric magic, it means it exists).


    1.: Karnrak, Lawful Evil Warforged Warblade/Rogue Gestalt:

    Escort them to the Village. Make inquiries how to help them, establish a local powerbase, and if assumptions about the danger of mind control show to be correct, let the Theurge make a few doezen protection from X amulets.
    Gave me a seemingly good, but due to owing me and their curse aimed towards evil, Village of potentially powerful Lycanthropes.


    And even if they betray me, as a Warforged I am immune to their abilities AND high level enough to slaughter them all anyway.

    Win Win.



    Ancoron: True Neutral Elven WIzard.

    Make VERY sure I have all the facts.

    Ask the cursed and the Good Village to make a collection, to purchase cures for them for example (even if that might not be enough for all, it will show if they are truthful).
    Use Divination for the rest.

    Under no circumstances "simply kill them all".



    Now, if your campaign is more a Horror Fantasy than normal D&D, that will obviously change, but I for one would have taken the DM aside and simply asked out of Game if he knows that he is not actually presenting a deilemma, as there are a few ways to cure Lycanthropes.


    Still, Kudos to your CE Player for successfully starting the corruption of the group! ^^
    A neutron walks into a bar and says, “How much for a beer?” The bartender says, “For you? No charge.”

    01010100011011110010000001100010011001010010000001 10111101110010001000000110111001101111011101000010 00000111010001101111001000000110001001100101001011 100010111000101110

    Later: An atom walks into a bar an asks the bartender “Have you seen an electron? I left it in here last night.” The bartender says, “Are you sure?” The atom says, “I’m positive.”

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Troll in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by GrayDeath View Post

    Now, if your campaign is more a Horror Fantasy than normal D&D, that will obviously change, but I for one would have taken the DM aside and simply asked out of Game if he knows that he is not actually presenting a deilemma, as there are a few ways to cure Lycanthropes.
    yeah, good solution, if a bit meta-gamey.
    because the right solution would depend on the setting. on your regular setting you are guaranteed that you can do something about it, and killing the villagers is always bad. in a grimdark setting, there will never be any cure, killing the villagers will always be the only solution, and waiting will only make things worse.
    knowing if you play an heroic fantasy or a cosmic horror is important for acting accordingly.
    In memory of Evisceratus: he dreamed of a better world, but he lacked the class levels to make the dream come true.

    Ridiculous monsters you won't take seriously even as they disembowel you

    my take on the highly skilled professional: the specialized expert

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: The Cursed Innocents' Dilemma - Was this the "Right" thing to do?

    Group A was afraid that an evil werewolf would could take control of the villagers. The other infected still become beasts, but can't be mind-controlled.

    I have no idea how to actually use the quote function so I'm gonna do it this way, if that's alright. Honestly, this sort of reasoning is a bit flawed. I've seen other people point out why and ultimately agree with that thought process. Anyone can be mind controlled with a wizard that has the right spells. In a lot of games I play, Enchanters (of the mind control variety, not the magic item creation variety) are as looked down upon as Necromancers, Anti-Paladins and other evil beings. That these guys can be mind controlled by some extra force isn't the best, but it's not like werewolves themselves are inherently immune to mind control. (Heck, in a lot of stories, they are very easy to at the very least lead by the nose thanks to their beastial nature.)

    The only argument that can be made in defense of this reasoning is that sure, anyone can be mind controlled, but not everyone can become giant killer chainsaw monsters that turn other people into giant killer chainsaw monsters. But there we run into a bit more of that logic hole. If anyone can be mind controlled, then so can the other werewolves of the good village, which means they are just as dangerous as these folk. If these characters really care about the greater good and have this firm belief, all werewolf villages should be put down.

    They are ultimately arguing the slaughter of victims of a terrible crime because they are slightly more vulnerable to being used as weapons then the average werewolf. Oh, but only to a very specific sub group (evil) of another very specific sub group (werewolves). Even if Evil werewolves take up 10% of the population of werewolves, it's still a very small subgroup of people to begin with. Assuming anyone was left alive who even knew these people could still be mind controlled. You said it took a special ritual to do, if I remember correctly, so what they are ultimately advocating for is the death of victims who could easily be contained and protected in a community of super powered, good chainsaw monsters, but ultimately must die because a werewolf who is also evil who also knows this dark magic ritual that is probably very rare and can also defeat the alpha of the other village (and probably the rest of the village with it, cause only an idiot wolf fights alone) and also knows that the Alpha is protecting a specific kind of werewolf that can be mind controlled with this ritual...

    And by this point it's not that hard to see the problem with this line of reasoning, I don't think. Their reasoning for why it's dangerous is based in panic and fear, or indifference for some. They saw how terrible it was and ignore the likely hood (however unlikely it is) that history would actually repeat itself. It is a very human reaction and I don't advocate for any character to be punished for it, beyond their characters own punishments toward themselves. But I also wouldn't advocate for it myself.

    Even if you remove every barrier and say, guaranteed, that all evil wolves know the ritual, can beat the village (without killing the ones he wants) and now know the existence of said werewolves... These people are still only one step closer to being dangerous then any other werewolf when it comes to a sufficiently powerful wizard. Unless they advocate for the death of all werewolves for the same reason, then I'd argue their reasoning is not based in sound logic but simply in fear. And in the end, that sort of reasoning can and will bring ruin to a world. After all, a werewolf can be dangerous... but so can a mob of regular people bewitched by sorcery.

    Might as well start burning down every village you walk through. Just in case.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •