Jarl pretty much hit the nail on the head.
If the loot from the guys is better than whatever reward you are trying to hand them out, forget about it. It'll be whackamole for the real reward instead of the carp you are trying to toss off on 'em. (not You, the King or whoever).
Unless the PC's were tasked with retrieving some specific item its perfectly legit for them to assume that Dude's gear (and everything in his lair/compound) is now theirs for the taking. You can of course go against this, but it needs to be made clear to the PC's. You are going against the grain of what most folks will think.
And when you toss them 100 gp after making them turn over 500 gp worth of gear? You can guess what'll happen next.
Expecting PC's not to loot their victories is just an unreasonable expectation within the confines of the game. If you do it, make it *absolutely cleaR* and make sure that whatever loot you are giving them for it is quite abit more than the much easier road of just whacking their "mark" and walking off.
Not trying to dig at you personally, this is just a schtick that the PC's won't be expecting. It'd be like killing the dragon and having someone come along and tell them they can't have the loot. You can do it, but expect alot of fight about it.
-S
The legal system of Galos (the country they're in and where 3 of the PCs are from) gives its citizens accused of crimes the right to a trial, and the fugitive the PCs retrieved is a citizen. It's pretty much certain he will be found guilty, and he will be required to make restitution to the man he robbed as well as pay a fine to the local baron for his crimes.
I think a lot of players would accept that as reasonable, requiring the return of valuable items to make restitution. They can be given the chance to make the first offer on the items as a perk for bringing the thief in.
Jarl pretty much hit the nail on the head.
If the loot from the guys is better than whatever reward you are trying to hand them out, forget about it. It'll be whackamole for the real reward instead of the carp you are trying to toss off on 'em. (not You, the King or whoever).
Unless the PC's were tasked with retrieving some specific item its perfectly legit for them to assume that Dude's gear (and everything in his lair/compound) is now theirs for the taking. You can of course go against this, but it needs to be made clear to the PC's. You are going against the grain of what most folks will think.
And when you toss them 100 gp after making them turn over 500 gp worth of gear? You can guess what'll happen next.
Expecting PC's not to loot their victories is just an unreasonable expectation within the confines of the game. If you do it, make it *absolutely cleaR* and make sure that whatever loot you are giving them for it is quite abit more than the much easier road of just whacking their "mark" and walking off.
Not trying to dig at you personally, this is just a schtick that the PC's won't be expecting. It'd be like killing the dragon and having someone come along and tell them they can't have the loot. You can do it, but expect alot of fight about it.
-S
Well, they're going to have to change their expectations unless they want to be branded criminals themselves. I'm running a a tabletop RPG, not a videogame.
I have faith my players will pick up on things. Next session I'm going to have the authorities tell the PCs they need to turn in the fugitive's gear. If they cooperate, great, no harm no foul they're establishing a good reputation in the barony and it'll just be chocked up to them having never pursued a bounty before and not knowing all the laws around bounties. If they refuse, well, then they refuse and deal with the consequences of that decision.
Again let me emphasize that I'm not trying to screw the PCs out of gear or anything; there will be ample opportunties for them to get phat lewtz. I just need to intercede in this particular instance in order to keep things consistent in game with how the country's laws work.
|
Que scene from the newer True Grit where Rooster is accused of killing criminals in cold blood. All it got was some laughs.
His game is probably better than trial of the beast. If going by that AP the legal system would be a sham. Then again in England it took forever before the accused were allowed lawyers. So it may be fitting that the law is Just the book they beat you with.
Xexyz;
Just make sure you aren't changing it from a game they enjoy, into one they don't.
Also: Nothing I said indicates video games.
Don't be so quick to assume that someone thinking the game works differently than how you want it to work- that it means they have some video game mentality.
The PC's didn't steal anything. They looted what they snagged. Thats how the game is setup. If you want to change it (and it appears you do) then there's nothing wrong with that- just step back and talk to the *players* OOC about it. Make sure its a change they want, and are willing to go with. Because it is a change.
It has nothing to do with good/bad/wrong/fun/video game or anything else.
-S
Hmm, let me phrase it another way.
Punishments suck. They suck in real life and they suck in game play. So knowing that, what are you doing to entice your players to play the game you want and expect?
It certainly is your game to run but it sounds like you have a far more sophisticated and modern legal system than I would imagine exists in most fantasy worlds. If they are actual guards or office holders they might have a duty to turn in such things. But otherwise I would imagine that items belonging to a fugitive are little importance unless they stole those items to make themselves fugitive. We with modern sensibilities have a notion of rights that are completely foreign in ancient, mideval or renaisance society.
|
Well, they're going to have to change their expectations unless they want to be branded criminals themselves. I'm running a a tabletop RPG, not a videogame.
You are applying a legal standard almost unknown in D&D, tabletop or otherwise. It's certainly not true the vast majority of places in Golarion (just for example), nor was it true in most medieval cultures.
That's cool, but it needs to be made crystal clear to the PCs, who are likely expecting a much more lawless area to adventure in. Think Wild West or feudal systems for a more typical set of laws.
I have faith my players will pick up on things. Next session I'm going to have the authorities tell the PCs they need to turn in the fugitive's gear. If they cooperate, great, no harm no foul they're establishing a good reputation in the barony and it'll just be chocked up to them having never pursued a bounty before and not knowing all the laws around bounties. If they refuse, well, then they refuse and deal with the consequences of that decision.
Do not just expect them to catch on. Talk with them out-of-character first. Their characters would be very aware of the degree of lawfulness common in this society (having lived there their whole lives), and thus you should also make that lawfulness very clear OOC so they do not feel unfairly trapped.
Make it clear that this society regards what they're doing as just as illegal as modern society would, and that if they still take the stuff, they'll be wanted men.
Again let me emphasize that I'm not trying to screw the PCs out of gear or anything; there will be ample opportunties for them to get phat lewtz. I just need to intercede in this particular instance in order to keep things consistent in game with how the country's laws work.
How the laws of the country they are in work is not something the PCs should need to intuit based on IC interactions, they should be explicitly stated OOC. Unless their characters don't know the laws for some reason, in which case someone should sit them down IC and explain things.
Xexyz;
Just make sure you aren't changing it from a game they enjoy, into one they don't.
Also: Nothing I said indicates video games.
Don't be so quick to assume that someone thinking the game works differently than how you want it to work- that it means they have some video game mentality.
The PC's didn't steal anything. They looted what they snagged. Thats how the game is setup. If you want to change it (and it appears you do) then there's nothing wrong with that- just step back and talk to the *players* OOC about it. Make sure its a change they want, and are willing to go with. Because it is a change.
It has nothing to do with good/bad/wrong/fun/video game or anything else.
-S
I said videogame mentality because the presumption that you always get to "loot" your enemies is a videogame mechanic to me.
Also, whether or not PCs taking gear from the people they fight constitutes theft is dependent on the circumstances of the situation - it's an assumption that it's how that game is set up, not an implicit game design. And I really don't see it as a "change" that needs to be discussed OOC because I don't see it as a "change" - a change is something that affects the whole game, and this doesn't. If the players don't like the fact that they can't loot everyone they fight then I won't play with them since it's obvious we have incompatible gaming styles (I seriously doubt it'll come to that though, since I've been gaming with these guys for more than a decade).
First off, anyone can attempt to make a DC 10 Knowledge check, even if they do not have points in the skill.
Two, the DC to know local laws, rulers, and popular locations is 10.
This seems like a situation where you can and should give the PCs a check to know the law. Also, having a friendly law enforcement officer tell them would be acceptable. I would not have him do so at sword point because this is likely a situation that has come up before if there is freedom of travel and different laws in neighboring lands. An officer of the law in a Lawful Good nation would not escalate a situation without cause.
That said, there should be repercussions for breaking the law that are appropriate for the region. Giving the PCs special treatment breaks the verisimilitude of the game.
As for those who mentioned the whole "video games" idea, please remember games with "phat loots" came after D&D started. Spoils of war and battle did not get invented by World of Warcraft.
Also, I would talk to the players out of game to let them know how your game differs from Pathfinder Society organized play and other games they might have played. A GM should be a master of communication. A subtle hint is meant to provide "aha!" moments later on, not convey basic rules of the social contact of a game that requires mutual understanding to work.
In this case, I'd let them know the local authorizes won't let them act with impunity ( which can be the case in many games and settings) and also explain that "loot" will come from places other than corpses. The current RL game I am playing in, not a single piece of loot we have came from someone we defeated. Magic items are too expensive for bandits to have; many come from local lords and governments. We receive treasure from the nobles, usually. Some ancient items were found in a cache.
Letting the players know how you run games is a needed part of the game. My current GM often holds short debriefings afterward for those who are not used to his different style.
You've played with these guys for a decade? Have you (or previous GMs) always/usually run games with these assumptions?
If so, then why has it suddenly become an issue? If not, then it's a change. Maybe not a change to the whole game, but a change to this part of it. Maybe the players will have no problem with not being able to loot everyone they fight, once you make it clear to them that they can't. But if you haven't made it clear to them, then you have an assumption clash problem, not an incompatible gaming styles problem.
Even if it just hasn't come up before because you've been fighting monsters or in less civilized parts, it's still a change.
This is the first time I've GM'd D&D/Pathfinder with them; I've played in D&D games with them and I've GM'd other roleplaying games with them as well.
Yes, I erred in not making it more explicit IC that they were not to take the fugitive's gear for themselves. I intend to correct that IC during the next session as I outlined above.
PC's taking the loot off the things they defeat is pretty much implicit in any contract with PC's, including putting up a wanted poster. If you hire adventurers to kill an X because it took your Y, you had better specify the return of the Y in your contract if you ever want to see it again.
Theft is also a non issue for a non lawful PC.
It certainly is your game to run but it sounds like you have a far more sophisticated and modern legal system than I would imagine exists in most fantasy worlds. If they are actual guards or office holders they might have a duty to turn in such things. But otherwise I would imagine that items belonging to a fugitive are little importance unless they stole those items to make themselves fugitive. We with modern sensibilities have a notion of rights that are completely foreign in ancient, mideval or renaisance society.
Yeah I did some research and have tried to be consistant as possible with the legal systems I have in place in certain parts of my game world not being what I would consider anachronistic. But things like juries and legal codes were certainly around in medieval times so they didn't seem unreasonable to have in certain places in my game world. The continent my campaign takes place on is pretty civilized - especially the country they're in now - so it didn't seem unrealistic to have a strong legal system in place in the lawful good country they're currently in. In fact part of the reason I'm emphasizing it is so when the campaign takes them to other parts of the world that aren't as civilized it will be another contrast that will further make the players really feel like they're in a totally different place, and not just the same place with a different name.
It certainly is your game to run but it sounds like you have a far more sophisticated and modern legal system than I would imagine exists in most fantasy worlds. If they are actual guards or office holders they might have a duty to turn in such things. But otherwise I would imagine that items belonging to a fugitive are little importance unless they stole those items to make themselves fugitive. We with modern sensibilities have a notion of rights that are completely foreign in ancient, mideval or renaisance society.Yeah I did some research and have tried to be consistant as possible with the legal systems I have in place in certain parts of my game world not being what I would consider anachronistic. But things like juries and legal codes were certainly around in medieval times so they didn't seem unreasonable to have in certain places in my game world. The continent my campaign takes place on is pretty civilized - especially the country they're in now - so it didn't seem unrealistic to have a strong legal system in place in the lawful good country they're currently in. In fact part of the reason I'm emphasizing it is so when the campaign takes them to other parts of the world that aren't as civilized it will be another contrast that will further make the players really feel like they're in a totally different place, and not just the same place with a different name.
If the place is as civilized as you describe, should not the criminal element be delt with by a profesional police force instead of adventureers?
Do you ban thieves?| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have played (different versions) the Greatest Roleplaying Game the World has Ever Known since 1986. And quite frankly, my fellow players (back when I played), and my current players (that I DM for) would burst out in laughter in we ever defeated a fugitive and some NPC told us we were expected to turn in his gear and instead get this 'reward'.
After the laughter ends, it would probably go down like this:
ROGUE (wipes tears from his eyes): Seriously? That is the law here? That when someone risks and life and limb--doing YOUR job--they don't get to keep the fruits of their labors? Wow, this country sucks, dude.
LOCAL AUTHORITIES: The law is the law. You will be amply rewarded, so just hand over the items you stole from the fugitive and that will be the end of it.
ROGUE: Whoa! Hold on there, partner. Point in fact, we took no items off the mark; er, I mean the fugitive. (Rolls Bluff) Poor unlucky sucker must have stashed the items because he knew we were close on his trail.
LOCAL AUTHORITIES: Look, the fugitive has made a full confession--and he claims that you stole these listed items.
WIZARD: And you are taking the word of an admitted thief, who fenced the object you were wanting recovered, who steals for a living, and is an accomplished and professional liar?
LOCAL AUTHORITIES: He has been questioned by the church! He is not lying!
CLERIC: Naive of you. I too can cast Zone of Truth and Detect Lies; neither spell is foolproof and people of stern enough will can defeat them. Which is why the Gods gave us our own sense and intuition.
LOCAL AUTHORITIES: Look, we just want the gear. Keep obstructing this and YOU will wind up in jail!
FIGHTER: Really? You are going to arrest us because some confessed criminal has accused the people who captured him of a crime? Have you considered that he is attempting to frame us as payback?
WIZARD: And besides, I just so happen--in accordance with your own laws--to have receipts for the purchase of every magical item this adventuring party owns. (Forgery being part of Linguistics) Would you care to examine them?
LOCAL AUTHORITIES: ....
LOCAL AUTHORITIES: I don't suppose that any of you would care to give your statements in the presence of our clerics?
ROGUE: Unless you are officially charging us with a crime, then it is a criminal act for you to question us under magical duress. Quite frankly, I am shocked--SHOCKED!--that the men and women charged with upholding the laws of this realm disregard them so quickly! On the uncorroborated word of a criminal!
WIZARD: Indeed, should we have to hire the services of local barrister to combat this slander and libel, then we shall also sue each of you individually in civil court for compensation of our legal fees, plus the pain and suffering associated with this false accusation that damages our sterling reputation and character!
And so on and so forth. I have yet to meet anyone, playing any type of charcter (except a Lawful Stupid Paladin), that would just roll over in this situation.
Master Arminas
If the place is as civilized as you describe, should not the criminal element be delt with by a profesional police force instead of adventureers?
Do you ban thieves?
I'm still finding my way for balancing this aspect. On one hand I want the current locale they're in to live up to its theme of a lawful good society/country, but on the other hand I need for there to be things for the PCs to do. In this case there's no explicit police force but normally yes, the town guard might handle this sort of thing. However the thief fled town hence the need/chance for the adventurers to go and nab him.
Not quite sure what you mean about banning thieves.
I have played (different versions) the Greatest Roleplaying Game the World has Ever Known since 1986. And quite frankly, my fellow players (back when I played), and my current players (that I DM for) would burst out in laughter in we ever defeated a fugitive and some NPC told us we were expected to turn in his gear and instead get this 'reward'.
After the laughter ends, it would probably go down like this:
ROGUE (wipes tears from his eyes): Seriously? That is the law here? That when someone risks and life and limb--doing YOUR job--they don't get to keep the fruits of their labors? Wow, this country sucks, dude.
LOCAL AUTHORITIES: The law is the law. You will be amply rewarded, so just hand over the items you stole from the fugitive and that will be the end of it.
ROGUE: Whoa! Hold on there, partner. Point in fact, we took no items off the mark; er, I mean the fugitive. (Rolls Bluff) Poor unlucky sucker must have stashed the items because he knew we were close on his trail.
LOCAL AUTHORITIES: Look, the fugitive has made a full confession--and he claims that you stole these listed items.
WIZARD: And you are taking the word of an admitted thief, who fenced the object you were wanting recovered, who steals for a living, and is an accomplished and professional liar?
LOCAL AUTHORITIES: He has been questioned by the church! He is not lying!
CLERIC: Naive of you. I too can cast Zone of Truth and Detect Lies; neither spell is foolproof and people of stern enough will can defeat them. Which is why the Gods gave us our own sense and intuition.
LOCAL AUTHORITIES: Look, we just want the gear. Keep obstructing this and YOU will wind up in jail!
FIGHTER: Really? You are going to arrest us because some confessed criminal has accused the people who captured him of a crime? Have you considered that he is attempting to frame us as payback?
WIZARD: And besides, I just so happen--in accordance with your own laws--to have receipts for the purchase of...
So... By that logic, your players would be fine if some NPC framed them for a crime, then used the opportunity to send a powerful group of bounty hunters after them to beat them up and take their stuff, and not complain that they're not getting their stuff back after they clear their names because, hey, they were fugitives at the time and their gear was the bounty hunters' reward?
Seriously though, if the PCs had that interaction with the authorities that's fine - it says something about their character's character but I wouldn't exact GM vengeance on them or anything. But again all actions have consequences, and if PCs (in my game) think they get some sort of implicit contractually immunity from the logical ramifications of their actions because they're PCs then they're going to be in for a rude awakening.
Is there an in-game reason why anyone would know about the magic items the player characters took?
Yes - Have NPC's do whatever they would logically do. Follow that logic without malice, limiting NPC actions to what is actually known and what the NPC's would really do...including choosing to ignore the matter.
No - Is there any sort of religious penalty or alignment violation penalty that might apply? For instance, could a paladin lose his powers until he atones for his misdeed and returns the items? Could one of the PC's (like a monk) lose her ability to advance in a class because she is no longer Lawful?
Best Advice: The absolute worst thing a gamemaster can do is retaliate against the PC's (and thus, their players) for not playing the way the gamemaster thinks they should. There is no way this will come off as reasonable to the players. This embitters players and sets them up against the gamemaster. They will stop trusting you...and for good reason, since you will have proven untrustworthy.
This, this, a hundred times this. If you expect a truly lawful society you don't hire mercenaries to do things for you because the expectation will be that half the time they'll just drag in a corpse and that they'll take what they need unless they have a reason not to.
Also the whole "courts of law" thing in medieval times was not what you might assume it is. It was not irregular for people to be killed on the road and stripped down for their valuables that's why people traveled with guards if they were killed nobody went to all that much trouble to figure it out unless it was someone important or something important was stolen.
Look I don't give a crap about what did or didn't happen back in medieval Europe. I'm not running a historical reenactment. Like I said before I'm trying to find a balance between having things for the PCs to do while at the same time presenting an example of a lawful good society. And don't say it can't be done because that's just being unimaginative and narrow minded.
This has come up quite a bit in my games. In part because I bring it up when I'm playing any character with the word "good" in their alignment.
We had a PC go down and the player decided to roll up a new character. As the party was divvying up the dead PCs loot, I reminded them that his family would very much like to have his belongings, and made sure to return them.
After clearing out a goblin lair one of my characters went piece by piece with jewelry and magic items attempting to return them to their rightful owners. He posted flyers in the nearby town asking for descriptions of items that had belonged to family members known or suspected to have been attacked by the goblins. He ended up giving back some pretty good stuff.
Probably the worst case of this sort of crazy do-gooder-ness was the time we took down the boss and found an entire warehouse of loot. Knowing that virtually all of the loot had come from the town that we had visited before seeking out the dungeon, my druid summoned a local ranger, had him guard the entrance to the dungeon while the town brought a bunch of wagons to reclaim their stuff. We got a reward for that. But not the loot.
And my druid isn't even good.
But she's honest.
|
if in a fantasy game, i had been hired to bring back a mark to the local authorities. i would first kill the mark, strip everything off the body to the point of nudity, remove the head, and burn the rest of the corpse. i would place the severed head in the cheapest sack i can aquire and deliver it as proof. and keep the loot. no matter how advanced the given fantasy societies legal system. if i could trap the soul in the cheapest possible low quality gem and destroy the soul by crushing the gem, i would.
Think of your role as a gamemaster as a bank account.
When you provide a fun adventure and make good rulings, you deposit good will and credibility into that account.
When you let the PC's win even though it frustrates your plans or kills your favorite villain, you deposit good will and credibility into that account.
When you make a ruling the player's don't like, you make a withdrawl from that account. Sometimes, this is necessary.
When you do really unworthy things...like having your favorite villain get away using an obviously contrived device...like cheating on dice rolls so your monster lives longer or hits harder...like having NPC's do things that are either illogical or based on information they could not possibly know...you make a serious withdrawl on both your good will and credibility.
Probably the worst thing you can do is retaliate against the PC's because they did something that merely annoyed you or struck you as out of character.
Gamemasters who draw their accounts dangerously low lose players.
Last session the PCs apprehended a fugitive and returned him to the seeking authorities.
Sounds Good so far...
However they also took the fugitive's magic items. I implied to them that's theft (which they more or less acknowledged) but didn't do anything more than that.
Well hold on a second. Are you sure it's not custom to despoil the prisoner? Was there an understanding that he/she was to be turned over unspoiled? Traditionally, unless specifically forbade, a prisoner's valuables were stripped from them out of hand.
Honestly I think the people on here are going a little over board in arguing for the looting of enemies. Keep in mind Xexyz has said he's created a Lawful Good society.
What I think he is trying to do is stay consistent with the rules of the country they are in. The country, lets call it Jeff, has laws about the recovery of a fugitives possession, and the PCs have violated Jeff's laws. They'll get off with a warning for returning the items, but if they refuse, they themselves become criminals.
He's also said that elsewhere, this will be different. There are other countries that allow bounty hunters to claim the fugitive's gear, well, as long as it's not stolen or something.
Xexyz is creating a setting, and in the process, has to explain the rules of the different countries. It's just like playing in Golarion. In Cheliax, part of the loot is selling the fugitive. In Andoran, you can't sell the fugitive. Granted this is a very hypothetical situation, but it applies none-the-less.
It seems the PCs will have plenty of opportunity to murder and loot people in other places, so they shouldn't have anything to worry about. Besides, this is a roleplaying game. The game isn't all about killing and looting, it's about escaping into your imagination, being something you can't be in real life; becoming someone else from another world, from another time. In that world, at that time, in that country, fugitives can report people for stealing their stuff. In another country, fugitives can die, and whoever brought them in gets their stuff.
I think you've made your decision, Xexyz, so you should stick to it, and remain consistent in your rulings so the PCs don't have any wiggle room later on in the game.
This has come up quite a bit in my games. In part because I bring it up when I'm playing any character with the word "good" in their alignment.
We had a PC go down and the player decided to roll up a new character. As the party was divvying up the dead PCs loot, I reminded them that his family would very much like to have his belongings, and made sure to return them.
After clearing out a goblin lair one of my characters went piece by piece with jewelry and magic items attempting to return them to their rightful owners. He posted flyers in the nearby town asking for descriptions of items that had belonged to family members known or suspected to have been attacked by the goblins. He ended up giving back some pretty good stuff.
Probably the worst case of this sort of crazy do-gooder-ness was the time we took down the boss and found an entire warehouse of loot. Knowing that virtually all of the loot had come from the town that we had visited before seeking out the dungeon, my druid summoned a local ranger, had him guard the entrance to the dungeon while the town brought a bunch of wagons to reclaim their stuff. We got a reward for that. But not the loot.
And my druid isn't even good.
But she's honest.
That is pretty cool role-playing.
You should be happy to have players like that...unless what the players did was actually sarcasm intended to drive home a point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... By that logic, your players would be fine if some NPC framed them for a crime, then used the opportunity to send a powerful group of bounty hunters after them to beat them up and take their stuff, and not complain that they're not getting their stuff back after they clear their names because, hey, they were fugitives at the time and their gear was the bounty hunters' reward?
Seriously though, if the PCs had that interaction with the authorities that's fine - it says something about their character's character but I wouldn't exact GM vengeance on them or anything. But again all actions have consequences, and if PCs (in my game) think they get some sort of implicit contractually immunity from the logical ramifications of their actions because they're PCs then they're going to be in for a rude awakening.
Of course not! If an NPC frames the party for a crime, said NPC is liable to end up DEAD. Just how powerful a group of bounty hunters are you sending to take down the party? They can't be THAT powerful or it goes off the scale for Epic encounters; and if the realm had those master, trusted bounty hunters in the first place, then why did the party have to track down this fugitive?
Look, I played and DMed for 26 years now: ramifications and consequences are fine with most players. Maybe you best step back and step, Xexyz and take a hard looking at what you are saying here. Are your players having fun? Are they playing their characters well? If so, WHO CARES if they don't fit into your world view? Maybe you want them to become heroic and noble and filled with charity; maybe you want them to tow the line because this is your world, and you put time and effort into detailing this lawful kingdom that doesn't tolerate their actions.
I don't know.
But, if all the authorities have to go on is the word of a confessed criminal, it isn't exactly lawful to come out and arrest or accuse the party with no other evidence, is there? If there is other evidence, then let the chips fall where they may; but don't be surprised when the party cuts their way out of this town and slaughters (in self-defense) any city guard that gets in their way. Player's will fight you tooth and nail before being stripped of their items and sent to jail.
That wouldn't make them evil by the way; neutral can kill to stay free just fine. And so can Chaotic Good characters. Especially if they warn the guards to back off before they are forced to use lethal force; so sorry, man, but it sucks to be the watch against a well-coordinated party fighting for its life. Never mind the consequence of even carefully aimed fireballs and lightning bolts and cloudkill spells on the town's infrastructure and general population.
Your average 5th-7th level party can decimate any realistic town out there in short order. Unless you have a 11th level wizard or cleric for each 500-person hamlet.
In the end, it's your game. Do what is best for you and your players; but I have seen DMs storm out after they tried to imprison parties and wound up getting their carefully designed towns devasted and decimated in the process. I have also seen parties fight to the death, and refuse to be raised when it was clear that they were going to be stripped of the items they had earned.
Master Arminas
Is there an in-game reason why anyone would know about the magic items the player characters took?
Yes - Have NPC's do whatever they would logically do. Follow that logic without malice, limiting NPC actions to what is actually known and what the NPC's would really do...including choosing to ignore the matter.
No - Is there any sort of religious penalty or alignment violation penalty that might apply? For instance, could a paladin lose his powers until he atones for his misdeed and returns the items? Could one of the PC's (like a monk) lose her ability to advance in a class because she is no longer Lawful?
Best Advice: The absolute worst thing a gamemaster can do is retaliate against the PC's (and thus, their players) for not playing the way the gamemaster thinks they should. There is no way this will come off as reasonable to the players. This embitters players and sets them up against the gamemaster. They will stop trusting you...and for good reason, since you will have proven untrustworthy.
The authorities know about it because the fugitive told them that the PCs took his magic items. So the authorities are going to question them about it and ask them if they took the fugitive's halberd and cloak (the two items he told them they took). If the PCs deny the items are the fugitive's it will be the fugitive's word against theirs, and they have a better reputation than him so the authorities will take their word over his and the matter will be settled. If on the other hand they PCs claim that the items are rightfully theirs as spoils then there's going to be an issue because the authorities will inform them that's not how things work and will request the items returned. From there it will play out depending on how much the players will try to assert their point of view. Needless to say I hope it doesn't come to that because at that point I would have to OOC ask the players why their characters feel so strongly about it.
Like I said before, I'm not going to retaliate against the PCs, I'm just going to play it logically from an in game perspective.
Honestly I think the people on here are going a little over board in arguing for the looting of enemies. Keep in mind Xexyz has said he's created a Lawful Good society.
What I think he is trying to do is stay consistent with the rules of the country they are in. The country, lets call it Jeff, has laws about the recovery of a fugitives possession, and the PCs have violated Jeff's laws.
And that's cool - it would be good to establish these kinds of things early on in the game. And if the PCs are from the area, then they would probably know the rules in regards to looting prisoners.
/ bare in mind, it is typically usual and customary for captors to despoil prisoners. Obviously there will be exceptions like social status, rank, etc.
Always remember...when you're being "fair,"...you do not go out for pizza after the game with any of the monsters. Nor are any of the monsters going to be best man at your wedding.
This has come up quite a bit in my games. In part because I bring it up when I'm playing any character with the word "good" in their alignment.
We had a PC go down and the player decided to roll up a new character. As the party was divvying up the dead PCs loot, I reminded them that his family would very much like to have his belongings, and made sure to return them.
After clearing out a goblin lair one of my characters went piece by piece with jewelry and magic items attempting to return them to their rightful owners. He posted flyers in the nearby town asking for descriptions of items that had belonged to family members known or suspected to have been attacked by the goblins. He ended up giving back some pretty good stuff.
Probably the worst case of this sort of crazy do-gooder-ness was the time we took down the boss and found an entire warehouse of loot. Knowing that virtually all of the loot had come from the town that we had visited before seeking out the dungeon, my druid summoned a local ranger, had him guard the entrance to the dungeon while the town brought a bunch of wagons to reclaim their stuff. We got a reward for that. But not the loot.
And my druid isn't even good.
But she's honest.
Most of the groups that I have had the honor of playing with (or running games for) have made certain that their characters have wills, specifying what happens to their possessions if they are killed and cannot (or do not want to) be raised. Oh, there are some bad apples that we had that would try to loot even a party member's corpse, but they tended not to last too long.
As for the no looting stuff; well that is a character decision. Yes, I have had good characters who gave a portion of their loot to charity--heck, I DM'ed for a Half-Orc Paladin in 3.5 that set up his own orphanage, for Pete's sake! Funding it and taking care of the kiddies with his share of the party's treasure.
Other players are based more on Conan and his companions than the Arthurian Knights. And I could just someone asking Conan to hand over the loot from that dead criminal he killed in battle!
Master Arminas
Of course not! If an NPC frames the party for a crime, said NPC is liable to end up DEAD. Just how powerful a group of bounty hunters are you sending to take down the party? They can't be THAT powerful or it goes off the scale for Epic encounters; and if the realm had those master, trusted bounty hunters in the first place, then why did the party have to track down this fugitive?
Well, the strength of any NPC parties coming after them depends entirely on which enemies the PCs have made through their actions...
Look, I played and DMed for 26 years now: ramifications and consequences are fine with most players. Maybe you best step back and step, Xexyz and take a hard looking at what you are saying here. Are your players having fun? Are they playing their characters well? If so, WHO CARES if they don't fit into your world view? Maybe you want them to become heroic and noble and filled with charity; maybe you want them to tow the line because this is your world, and you put time and effort into detailing this lawful kingdom that doesn't tolerate their actions.
I don't know.
Again, I'm not sitting here with righteous GM fury aghast that the PCs took some sort of action contrary to my perceived notion of how PCs ought to act. I just have to resolve this matter to keep things consistent. If the PCs end up keeping the items by hook or crook then that's what happens. The only point I need to make to the PCs is that there are different laws in different parts of the world with various degrees of enforcement regarding bounties and spoils.
But, if all the authorities have to go on is the word of a confessed criminal, it isn't exactly lawful to come out and arrest or accuse the party with no other evidence, is there? If there is other evidence,...
There's potential witnesses that could be called in to back the fugitive's word up, and things haven't progressed to the point where the authorities are out to arrest the PCs.
let the PCs keep thier darn spoils already. they went through the trouble of capturing a fugitive to get them.
in my prior post, i posted the thing i would do to a fugitive i was told to capture as a means to prevent them from suing me for thier stuff.
Ain't happening. And by "Ain't Happening" I mean they may have to live with the ramifications of their actions if they decide to go against the law. They don't just get a free pass to keep whatever they get their hands on no matter how they got their hands on it.
Oh, let me also say that the PCs are 2nd level and these were the first magic items the PCs got a hold of. This was also the first bounty they ever performed on behalf of this particular authority so it's not like I'm pulling some bait-and-switch here.
My goal here is to impress upon the PCs that not everything is cut and dried regarding these matters and if they plow blindly ahead making assumptions they may come to regret doing so.
Xexyz, I think you made a big mistake by giving those magic items to the fugitive in the first place. They are 2nd level characters. So assuming a +1 halbred and +1 cloak of resistance, that is 1,500 gp you are asking them to give up (half of full price when they sell it). If their reward isn't at least 1,500 gp, they ain't gonna be handing those items over.
Wealth-by-level guidelines, mean that if your fugitive followed the guide, he needed to be CR 6 for your APL 2 party: an epic encounter. The criminal couldn't have afforded that stuff any sooner.
They fought the fugitive; they risked their necks to do so; and these are the spoils of battle. If you don't want them to keep the items, then those items shouldn't have been there for them to take in the first place!
They might not be quite as cocky as 2nd level characters, and you don't have to worry about the whole town going up in flames, but the players feel like you are taking their items that they earned at the risk of life and limb, they ain't gonna be happy. In or out of game.
Master Arminas
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My goal here is to impress upon the PCs that not everything is cut and dried regarding these matters and if they plow blindly ahead making assumptions they may come to regret doing so.
And by extension, in the future the PC's should either not accept bounties (since the spoils are stolen by the authorities) or should kill the fugitive thereby not leaving him the option of crying foul about losing his weapons/etc.
I would be very upset if I played a game and was not notified of this expectation upfront.
But let's just ignore that and move on. If the PCs don't want to play your game of look at my ability to make a lawful society, you know what will happen? They will either a) just leave the lawful society, b) get fed up with it and resort to murdering their way out until the lawful society collapses, or c) they will just stop playing with you.
If the PCs chafe under the authority of where they are and want to leave that's fine. If they decide to try to destroy the society they'll die - not because of GM vengeance, but because they're 2nd level characters and if they started going on a killing spree NPCs would put a stop to it. But if it only happens because the players in question are so petulent and spoiled that they'd rather throw a tantrum than bear the thought of having to part with any of their ill-gotten gains then it will be better for them and myself if we didn't game together. But like I said, I've been gaming with these guys for over a decade and it won't come to that.
If you seriously want a lawful good society where the players have a reason to be lawful and where the idea of your lawful society isn't asinine then make the PCs members of the law enforcement hell make them minor nobles with reasons to follow the law give them benefits for doing their job according to the laws of the land make it give them extra for doing it with proof and for bringing in the enemies alive.
If you eventually want them to be sent somewhere lawless make it part of an ambassadorial group who are attacked by raiders and they're all knocked unconscious or separated from the group somehow.
Players are expected (by the authorities) to act lawful because they're in a lawful good jurisdiction - what their individual alignments or social stations are is irrelevent.
Xexyz, I think you made a big mistake by giving those magic items to the fugitive in the first place. They are 2nd level characters. So assuming a +1 halbred and +1 cloak of resistance, that is 1,500 gp you are asking them to give up (half of full price when they sell it). If their reward isn't at least 1,500 gp, they ain't gonna be handing those items over.
Wealth-by-level guidelines, mean that if your fugitive followed the guide, he needed to be CR 6 for your APL 2 party: an epic encounter. The criminal couldn't have afforded that stuff any sooner.
They fought the fugitive; they risked their necks to do so; and these are the spoils of battle. If you don't want them to keep the items, then those items shouldn't have been there for them to take in the first place!
They might not be quite as cocky as 2nd level characters, and you don't have to worry about the whole town going up in flames, but the players feel like you are taking their items that they earned at the risk of life and limb, they ain't gonna be happy. In or out of game.
Master Arminas
There are 6 PCs in the party with a 25 point buy so their APL is about 4, not 2. The fugitive in question was a level 5 fighter who I equipped according to the NPC WBL chart in the core rulebook.
Gotta agree with Jarl although they might just go with accepting the bounty then murdering the target and disposing of the corpse via burning and casting the ashes in a ditch. Sure they're Chaotic but since killing evil people is nominally good in RPGs they're still good or neutral. After disposal they just return to town and tell the guards they're sorry but they just couldn't find the guy he seems to have escaped.
I've already addressed this in a previous post:
If the PCs would've killed the fugitive they would not have been paid for the bounty. Furthermore, they still would've been expected to hand over the fugitive possessions to the authorities. (Which is the mistake I made; I didn't make this clear to them.) Now, the PCs of course can kill fugitives in cases like these, take their stuff, and lie to the authorities, but if it becomes a recurring thing they won't be allowed to hunt fugitives any longer. And if the authorities catch wind that the PCs were taking the fugitives/victims' possessions, then the PCs will be considered criminals in the eyes of the law.
Just a quick edit: Something you should note is that the players don't give a crap what the authorities think they should do, they care what they want to do. Now as DM if you want the players to act the same way the authorities would expect them to act you have to give them a reason to feel like doing it otherwise they'll leave or they'll just hold onto the grudge until 2 weeks later when they're all level 12 and murder the town then. (XP gain speed is absurd in campaigns I've played ymmv)
Depending where they are, the PCs can not give a crap about what the authorities think at their own peril. And if they want to hold a ridiculous gruge they're free to do so - but again consequences have actions.
You seem to think I'm trying to force the PCs to walk the straight and narrow, but I'm not - I simply have to address this matter here and now. Otherwise if they decide to pursue other bounties and are told they can't keep the bounty's possessions then they're going to wonder why the bounty they just completed was different.
And by extension, in the future the PC's should either not accept bounties (since the spoils are stolen by the authorities) or should kill the fugitive thereby not leaving him the option of crying foul about losing his weapons/etc.
I would be very upset if I played a game and was not notified of this expectation upfront.
That's perfectly fine if they don't want to pursue bounties with the restrictions the local authorities place on them. This bounty and likely others in the future are simply extra activities the PCs can choose pursue or ignore and have no implicit bearing on the primary campaign focus.
|
|
the lawful good society is a dick move. it's merely an excuse to deprive the PCs of wealth they risked an arm and a leg to aquire.
2nd level PCs don't have much for bonuses compared to this 5th level guy.
even if there were 6 of them and they all had a 25 point buy. thier mundane trash just can't keep up with the level 5 fighter whose bonuses are likely much higher. i imagine he can reliably drop most 2nd level PCs in a single blow. they were 2nd level.
the risk of falling to a single blow is plenty of reason for the PCs to deserve to keep the gear without legal repurcussions.
How it was during the middle ages have as little relevance as how it is now. Just saying you DONT want a game with medieval laws, where a mere accusation of whitchery might get you tied up and thrown into a lake. Fantasy is fantasy for a reason, and laws can be anything the dm sets them to be. The players can always choose not to play but breaking the laws of the land because "laws werent like that in the middle ages" makes no sense.
the lawful good society is a dick move. it's merely an excuse to deprive the PCs of wealth they risked an arm and a leg to aquire.
2nd level PCs don't have much for bonuses compared to this 5th level guy.
even if there were 6 of them and they all had a 25 point buy. thier mundane trash just can't keep up with the level 5 fighter whose bonuses are likely much higher. i imagine he can reliably drop most 2nd level PCs in a single blow. they were 2nd level.
the risk of falling to a single blow is plenty of reason for the PCs to deserve to keep the gear without legal repurcussions.
Actually the PCs weren't in very much danger at all. However it's clear that you play very different games than I so there's really no point in going into the reasons why.