Mihalis00's page

Hi there,

Even after playing for a while, I am still boggled by Magic Weapons and Armor. So, I ask you how it works with a scenario:

A +1 dagger costs 2000 + Masterwork costs etc, right?

So, does a +1 dagger with Flaming (cost= +1 Bonus) cost 4000 + Masterwork costs etc?

I originally thought that's how it works but another player in my group has informed me otherwise. He thinks that the "+1 Bonus" cost for flaming means it is the cost of a +2 weapon. So, does that mean a +1 dagger with flaming would cost 8000 + Masterwork costs etc?

Sorry if this is confusing, but I'm really confused by the whole lot of it.

Thanks.

Hi all,

My group and I are fairly new to Dungeons and Dragons, having played about 15 sessions in total. We started a new campaign after the party was killed in the previous campaign. Now, in the previous campaign I didn't bother tracking the players alignment; however, since I'm becoming more experienced as a DM and my players are becoming more experienced as players, we decided to track alignment this time round.

Now, after having read about the alignments and what they are supposed to represent, I've noticed a lot of grey and not so much black and white. In our last session, this happened:

>World is anti-magic, inquisitors roam the land burning magic users at the stake.
> 3/5 Players walk in to a tavern, inquisitors are sitting in the corner.
> 2/5 Players stay outside talking to the stable boy in front of the tavern.
> One of the Players inside the tavern inadvertently reveals that they are magic users to the inquisitors.
> Players inside manage to escape out the back, invisible or otherwise. The inquisitors follow them.
> One of the Players (sorcerer - Chaotic Neutral) talking to the stable boy was listening in and was able to figure out what was going on.
> The Player (sorcerer - Chaotic Neutral) panics and rips the child to pieces with Diamond Spray spell, fearing that the boy would reveal his identity to the inquisitors at a later point.
> Him and the other player who witnessed the act (ranger - True Neutral) did not tell the party what they did.

Personally, I think the act was evil. He murdered in order to protect himself. However, he thinks he acted the way a Chaotic Neutral character would act. He argued that being Chaotic Neutral meant that he should be able to do anything which best interests HIMSELF. In this case, a lesser chance of being hunted down by the inquisitors, therefore a less likely chance of being killed.

I know a lot of you will say it's my choice as a DM and I agree. But I endeavor to be a fair DM who listens to the opinions of his players. My question is:

If you were DM, would you shift his alignment? How harshly would you shift his alignment if you did? and;

Would you shift the alignment of the other player who witnessed the act and did nothing to stop it?

If you've gotten this far, thanks for reading. Any advice would be great.

Thanks.