A question on morality and killing in the AP


Hell's Rebels


This is my first time GMing anything other than a one shot. Of course I chose something easy like a revolution to GM. I'm running into something with some of my players as we are just starting part 2 of In Hell's Bright Shadow. When the group rescued Rexus from Chellish Citizen group thugs, one of the party bbq'd one of them while he was bleeding out, because he didn't want him waking up and going to his boss' and reporting on him. Now I recognize that was a bit extreme (more than a bit), but it sparked an argument between the pcs and a bit between the players. Not just about that specific killing, but two of the players were arguing that killing any humanoid that is bleeding out is an evil act. One of those players said in character that if the other character did that again she would kill him... It is obvious that this player has a huge issue with killing (it doesn't help that her char is something akin to a bouncer from time to time in the bars in town and she's sees herself in the thugs), but that isn't the case of all of them.
Now I guess my actual question is is it even possible to do this AP without killing anyone (unless they happen to get the enemy to their neg con from standing)? I mean there really isn't even any place to take enemies to instead of killing them. I'm not going, "Yay, murder is fun, you guys should running around killing", I just don't know where to go with this. It is written that every time there is evidence of a combat between the PCs and the guard or Chellish citizen's their notoriety goes up 1d6. That would include if the thug wakes up and reports the PC's.

Shadow Lodge

bigalmetfan wrote:
but it sparked an argument between the pcs and a bit between the players. Not just about that specific killing, but two of the players were arguing that killing any humanoid that is bleeding out is an evil act. One of those players said in character that if the other character did that again she would kill him... It is obvious that this player has a huge issue with killing (it doesn't help that her char is something akin to a bouncer from time to time in the bars in town and she's sees herself in the thugs), but that isn't the case of all of them.

Sit your players down, and get them on the same page expectations-wise. As for what those expectations might be. . .

Quote:
Now I guess my actual question is is it even possible to do this AP without killing anyone?

Yes, it's possible. For the specific scenario you've outlined, there's not much OPSEC advantage to killing CCG members as opposed to leaving them alive but roughed up. As far as paramilitaries go, CCG aren't brownshirts, they're black hundredists - less-than-well-connected to the regime than they might otherwise be. Any complaints they make to the authorities won't be taken much more seriously than a normal subject's ("CCG" is a misnomer - Cheliax doesn't have citizens per se), as long as the street fighting doesn't get too out of hand.


My players went through the first two books with barely killing anyone. There was a lot of nonlethal damage being dealt out by the PCs.

In Hell's Bright Shadow, p 23 sidebar wrote:
Each time the PCs get in a fight against dottari or Chelish Citizens’ Group patrols in a public place, the rebellion’s Notoriety score increases by 1d6. Every dottari or militia member slain in a public place increases Notoriety by an additional 1d6 points. A combat or conflict that happens in a private or other hidden area (such as in an alley or sewer) does not increase the rebellion’s Notoriety score unless evidence of the crime (such as a dottari’s body) surfaces, in which case the Notoriety score increases by 1 per body discovered.

Also, killing people increases the groups Notoriety by an additional D6. If they plan on running around killing all of their enemies Thrune is going to come down with an iron fist incredibly fast. If the group tries to use the argument that the fight and killing happened in an alley, unless they take pains to keep the fighting quiet, I'd have people coming to see what the sound is/people seeing things through their windows and therefore giving them the Notoriety increase anyways.

Also, I'd have a lot of the PCs potential allies turn away if there's too much blood-shed. (Rexus wants a bloodless revolution, Laria and The Rose of Kintargo don't really seem like they want much violence in the streets, I don't think most of Kintargo would like a band of murderers killing people just because the victim is a thug or a government employee.) I'd hope that your players can use the discussion as an in-character thing to make the one (?) PC see why killing everyone they don't like is a bad thing.

Shadow Lodge

Addendum: have a talk about expectations-management before you run the Fushi Sisters encounter. You know, the one where they flat-out ask the PCs to execute someone.


See The Flash and Green Arrow for examples of jails for super-villains... and then the possibilities for narrative complications down the line.

My table has Zella Zdilli sitting in prison in the Lucky Bones basement. As a result, the raid on the Lucky Bones will have a very different goal than the one in the book. The written assault is just the distraction for the jail break.


I also had Morgar from book one as a recurring NPC as the first person to join the Silver Ravens. As a result, he's the one who's motto is that you kill the leaders, not the mooks: “A dude what sticks with his mates, deserves a second chance.” Not the most politically astute guy, but he's meant to be a Bro. The LG monk took that concept up as well.

They're now trying to give the servants of Castle Kintargo a chance to run while storming the castle...

That said, there's been a lot of killing. That does tend to happen in the civil wars and rebellions.


They might want to set up general rules for the major food groups: patriotic ordinaries, Queensmen thugs, thieves and assassins, dottari, soldiers, evil nobles, Barzillai's leaders, and other revolutionaries.

They should also figure out if it matters if they attack first.

Finally, they should decide if they're defending themselves lethally, defending themselves but stabilizing enemies at the end, or if they're taking the -4 and trying to use nonlethal. (There's a metamagic feat that allows evocation to do nonlethal too, btw.)


This is an excellent place for the revolution to figure out decision-making processes.


Wow, thanks for all the input. I will talk with my group and figure out a way forward from here. And thank you especially Warped Savant. That can help me in the immediate future, with options to move forward with my group from there.


My group has batmanned their way through the entire first book. Outside of nonhuman monsters (the lemures, mites, and the like), the only actual deaths were of Scarplume (if I remember correctly, she did kind of force their hands though), The Lout (as he's an ogrekin and was only unconscious because he rolled a natural 1 and confirmed his critical failure to knock himself out) and Nox.

This was not intentional at first. And they actively considered killing Kossrani after he press-ganged a bunch of tieflings from the Devil's Nursery to replace the Salt Works prisoners that were freed initially (they raided at night initially and he slept through the first incident, though they did deliberately leave everyone alive during the first raid).

In fact, two of the rogues they recruited for the team of Sneaks came from tieflings working for Scarplume. They decided after the adventurers allowed the rogues to live that working for the Ravens might be beneficial (especially as the Ravens had also dealt with the tooth fairies by that point). A lot of their team of Peddlers came from people at Clenchjaw's when the party defused the nightly fights that Vendelfek was instigating.

Also, the decision to coup de grace both The Lout and Nox came with complaints from the group's swashbuckler who has been a huge proponent to the whole "don't kill if at all possible" viewpoint - she's a worshiper of Milani and seems to want to give people a second chance if at all possible. :)

Shadow Lodge

See also this thread.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is going to be a fun thing for the group I'm running through this AP. The players' general instinct is to murderhobo their way through, especially since they know that the alignment of Cheliax is lawful evil. In character, though, the cleric of the group is an Angelfire Apostle and I had to remind him already that his archetype means he has to avoid killing when possible. It's going to be an interesting balance between not spoiling the AP, letting them be IC, and trying to keep IC shenanigans from making the AP close to unplayable.

We're very early, only run one session so far. They've killed 3 CCG and 2 dottari so far. To be fair, the character that started with the nonlethal fighting (and managed to take one CCG out in his first turn) just heard the authorization to kill everyone there. I have a feeling that this is going to be as much of a challenge for me as it is for the players.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just ordered the whole AP (yay, on sale!) and have been wondering what to expect. Looks like things will be very interesting.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

On killing downed foes: At various times and places in history, it was common practice in war to go around after the fight and kill all the wounded people. Medical practices what they were, most of these injured would just suffer and die anyway, so killing them was considered the merciful thing to do.

In game setting, here's some tenets taken from the Sarenite paladin code. "I will redeem the ignorant with my words and my actions. If they will not turn toward the light, I will redeem them by the sword." another one " I will fight fairly when the fight is fair, and I will strike quickly and without mercy when it is not." These people are considered good, could murder you, and point to their code of moral guidelines to justify it.

Also threatening to kill someone because you think they are morally wrong in killing someone else is hilariously hypocritical.

This is a pathfinder AP. It assumes you will rack up the murder count by the dozens, and not feel guilty about it. Just like Star Wars.


Except this is a fantasy setting where magical healing is available. If you're wounded you can survive it and probably recover fully. The "mercy killing" aspect no longer has merit in a world where magical healing is something easily available.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tangent101 wrote:
Except this is a fantasy setting where magical healing is available. If you're wounded you can survive it and probably recover fully. The "mercy killing" aspect no longer has merit in a world where magical healing is something easily available.

Easy is relative. Most people can't afford magical healing, and don't know anyone who will give it to them for free.

The point is peripheral, though. Everybody agrees that it is possible to mostly or entirely avoid killing in HR, with deal-withable consequences. Likewise, a group could murderhobo through the entire path and probably still manage the consequences.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Killing outsiders could be made easier if it is made clear that they just get sent home when you kill their material forms.

Silver Crusade

Phillip Gastone wrote:
Killing outsiders could be made easier if it is made clear that they just get sent home when you kill their material forms.

In P1 that entirely depends on what Designer you're asking, I don't think it was ever codified but it was intended they permanently die if they're killed while Called or Planeshifted.


That is actually an interesting question. At which point is it allowable to kill? For instance, my group didn't kill any of the militia or guards in the initial riot. They didn't kill anyone going after Rexus. They left the dogs alive (but tied up) in the old slaughterhouse. But they killed the mites, rats, and lemures.

Similarly, they avoided killing anyone (including dogs) from the unsanctioned doghousing, both incidents at the Salt Works (they struck when the dwarf in charge was asleep so he impressed a score of tieflings from the slums and put them to work in the Salt Works - fortunately the group retrieved them and ambushed the planned ambush of the Ravens before anything bad happened to the enslaved tieflings), and even let Scarplume live. But they still killed Nox and the Lout.

So I have a feeling that the "do not kill" rule won't cross over to evil outsiders (we'll see how the group does with the "Chain Devil" Kyton and its mortal lackey they just encountered as a side-story event). Given some of the evil Outsiders have fast healing or regeneration, just knocking a foe unconscious likely can end up detrimental to the group.

But ultimately, how the party treats monsters (and I consider devils, even highly intelligent ones, to be monsters in the eyes of the public) won't impact how the public perceives them... and for that matter the dottari and even some members of the Church of Asmodeus, who may very well be willing to surrender as they know the Silver Ravens do take prisoners and then release them with specific conditions (contract to leave the city and not return) - which would allow them to still serve Cheliax itself against the rebellion to the south.

Acquisitives

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

We are playing through it now.

Long story short: our group of 7 players a few weeks ago turned into a group of 4 players after arguing about this precise point.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Yakman wrote:

We are playing through it now.

Long story short: our group of 7 players a few weeks ago turned into a group of 4 players after arguing about this precise point.

Splitters!

Acquisitives

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
zimmerwald1915 wrote:
Yakman wrote:

We are playing through it now.

Long story short: our group of 7 players a few weeks ago turned into a group of 4 players after arguing about this precise point.

Splitters!

It's the People's Front of Kintargo!


Yakman wrote:

We are playing through it now.

Long story short: our group of 7 players a few weeks ago turned into a group of 4 players after arguing about this precise point.

Run totally separate games for the two different groups and see how differently things play out!

(Hopefully everyone is still friends and the 3 that dropped out simply decided it wasn't the style of game they wanted to play.)

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / Hell's Rebels / A question on morality and killing in the AP All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Hell's Rebels