NPC Sets the party back during the hunt for the BBEG

>11111100001
>do a 360 and walk away
>Shiggity diggity

>want to play DUNGEONS and dragons
>DM has us chasing townsfolk instead
>attack this shit townsfolk for wasting our time
>DM mad I attacked something for once
if you don't give me shit to fight of course imma take a swing at the first thing with HP I find

>Tropes are inherently good
>Implying it's not a spectrum where both good and bad exists
>Implying execution of said tropes isn't also a major factor

>Expecting me to show mercy.
Should have promised me a magic item to spare you instead.

>Tropes are inherently good
Nobody said or even implied that.
>Implying it's not a spectrum where both good and bad exists
That's what you just did not the person you're responding to.

You'll never see it coming.

>greentext contains a strawman
If he wants to set up the moral dilemma, that's fine, but don't expect me to take the "good" choice just you want me to for your shitty railroaded plot. If the NPC was supposed to be important and the GM is angry that I'm forcing him to modify his story, he should have done a better job selling the character. According to GM's logic, the defendants at Nuremberg were executed by "murderhobos".

>DM can't think of a NPC's name

docs.google.com/document/d/1dsXjOZQY9IgznaI5Gf-y0BmWSwaUCiqpnbTeCPOj7sM/edit?usp=sharing

I like how you're doubling down so hard to justify your actions. Almost like a child who knows they've done something wrong and are trying to convince their parents of the contrary.

Not an argument.

...

>He reveals he was forced to do it by the BBEG promising to kill his family, torture his heir, and pollute/curse the oasis that kept his town alive
>NPC :"I had no Choice! You must understand!"
I for one do not understand.

He's a follower of the BBEG, and is actively trying to stop them from stopping the BBEG.

Surely this NPC fellow understands that the heroes have no choice in removing the obstacle that prevents them from taking down the BBEG?

There is no choice for the heroes, so why must the heroes understand that the NPC had no choice?

It's just something the NPC would say. It's not intended to be the DM declaring a fact about the word.

"Adventurers" are characters who have left everything behind to go off and do good things.

Of course they're going to think a guy who did bad things to protect his lifestyle is bad.

So why the fuck is the GM complaining about the PCs eliminating the obstacle in the way?

If they don't, the BBEG will just use the guy again, because he is being controlled.

It doesn't matter how he's controlled, just that the NPC is a liability and be actively detrimental.

Best case scenario the guy will beg for him to save their town and waste more time while the BBEG goes and kills more.

Why does the GM get mad when the PC knocks off a reluctant accessory to evil?

Now you're just trying too hard. Maybe next time you could tone it back a bit, might be more convincing.

Those posts were less than a minute apart, meaning they couldn't be the same person. Maybe you're just a retard and multiple people are telling you you're a retard?

It's an anonymous imageboard, stop trying to save face. In fact, just stop posting entirely.

Why not take your own advice?

I can't tell if you're baiting or just THAT butthurt over being mentally challeneged and/or underaged on a forum where we don't even have usernames. Either way, stop.

Technically, I could have been both of those people if I had a Veeky Forums pass (but I don't). In any case, that guy is just trolling or a legitimate thatguy, so who cares.

>NPC is a sniper and has the PCs pinned down, with the team medic bleeding out in the street from a shot right through the neck
>he contacts the PCs via radio to explain why he's doing what he's doing
>he needed money so that his family won't be malnourished and in this economy it's really hard to find a job, so he took up a post in the tyrannical military junta
>NPC :"I had no Choice! You must understand!"
>PCs want to call an airstrike on the empty building he's in
>mfw
>What is it with people not understanding the Idea that you can quite literally be forced to do something without being enslaved by magic or some shit? And why is that adventurers mainly seem to believe this?

you're complaining that a paladin thinks it would have been better to lose everything than aid evil.
you should probably think about that.

But...Aren't the PCs right? He chose to poison or harm hundreds of people for selfish reasons. Even if I was the party's Paladin, I would kill him.

The man made a choice, and he chose wrong. There's no reason to spare him.

Because it's pretty brutal for heroes to kill defenseless civilians.

Clearly wasn't defenseless if he was fighting the PCs.

Plus, knights and samurai and other "heroic" castes killed peasant civilians all the time.

1. OP never says the guy is fighting them, maybe he is fleeing from them
2. Realworld medieval culture isn't necessarily D&D

>hat is it with people not understanding the Idea that you can quite literally be forced to do something without being enslaved by magic or some shit?
Sorry OP, Guess you're too much of a cocksucker to understand D&D's objective morality.

You eat a person to survive, even though e dead?
Gods have 3+ curses for that, all involve you becoming some fucked up variant of a Ghoul
You wanna be morally grey
Congratulations, you've become Chaotic Evil, and have become a Demon Lord/Elder Evil/Eradicated from existence and only remain as a vestige

Only magic excuses choices made under blackmail, and the gods grant mercy to those who fall in the pursuit of justice and righteousness don't like it? don't play D&D. Because, the security of the afterlife is a thing you know.

The "big bad" MIGHT have have sligt alignment change, but as long as he is willing to repent, he's in the okay zone, It's the parties matter of picking up and making up for his weakness by saving his family and people.

Actually wait, that shit is Lawful evil as fuck, your PC's are going to have a visit from a pit fiend soon.

How can you trust people who have already worked against you?

Killing a potential threat is heavyhanded pragmatic but there is logic there.

I see nothing about defenseless civilian in OP's post, user.

Are we talking about the same NPC, General Killfucker, who has ordered two genocides and raped three continents and fourteen temples personally?
I mean, sure, he just wanted to protect his village because the BBEG said he'd poison it, fifteen years ago, so why are you planning on readying an attack when he is just standing there on the flagship of his aerial fleet?

Why are players like this?

He had a choice. He could have said no. He could have fought Evil
But there are no heroes left in man

Enemy agents aren't civiliand genius. If he swore an oath to aid the party and betrayed them I see no problem with execution. That said it should be done in a proper way and with an understanding of why he did what he had to do but also the knowledge that he broke his sworn oath and endangered the lives of the men he swore loyalty to.

It was heavily frowned upon to kill peasants in Medieval Europe and it didn't even make much sense; peasants are what give land worth; no peasants and all you have is a bunch of earth.

In the good old days of AD&D, that player and all the other ones following him would have faced that hell called "change of alignment"... Unless they were already evil, obviously.

The big bad threatens civilization with his antics, but it's okay if he repents.
It doesn't matter that his unholy horde has raped and pillaged the land, it was all a misunderstanding.
Killing a traitor that is willing to sacrifice everything for his waifu, even though he knows the evil guy is gonna kill her anyway.
Executing this dumbass for high treason against all civilisations is somehow evil.

Morality all depends on context, even in the objectified DnD setting.

D&D alignments are retarded.

And if you painted him green and put a diaper on him first any change would be avoided.

>suddently the whole group is neutral
>the BBEG is marching against the remaining forces of good
>"hm- going after the villain sounds like a bitch and a half. Wanna grab something to eat at the inn instead?"
>"whatever. I was hungry anway"
>the party that was previously opposing the BBEG goes for scones and coffee
>just_as_planned.keikaku

Good job shooting yourself in the foot btw.

'You should have asked us for help, or told us sooner. Now we know we can't rely on you, and you may set us back again - might even get us all killed. So now you die, goodbye.'

>alignment controls how your character acts
>not the other way around
pls

>implying that saving the world is evil

That's retarded

You mean in the edition where killing orc babies is LG?

>Klebold Harris

No, I mean the edition where orc babies weren't even mentioned. Because, you know, there wasn't really a need for them.
But obviously you aren't old enough to know that, so feel free to contribute with your "spot-on knowledge" about that.

>"My friend, I perfectly understand and forgive you."
>"However, my plans do not allow for the disruption of betrayal. Too much is at stake. Don't worry, i'll take care of your family and home."

And then I kill him, because i'm Lawful Evil.

"Paladins are not stupid, and in general there is no rule of Lawful Good against killing enemies. The old adage about nits making lice applies. Also, as I have often noted, a paladin can freely dispatch prisoners of Evil alignment that have surrendered and renounced that alignment in favor of Lawful Good. They are then sent on to their reward before they can backslide.

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth is by no means anything but Lawful and Good. Prisoners guilty of murder or similar capital crimes can be executed without violating any precept of the alignment. Hanging is likely the usual method of such execution, although it might be beheading, strangulation, etc. A paladin is likely a figure that would be considered a fair judge of criminal conduct.

The Anglo-Saxon punishment for rape and/or murder of a woman was as follows: tearing off of the scalp, cutting off of the ears and nose, blinding, chopping off of the feet and hands, and leaving the criminal beside the road for all bypassers to see. I don't know if they cauterized the limb stumps or not before doing that. It was said that a woman and child could walk the length and breadth of England without fear of molestation then...

Chivington might have been quoted as saying "nits make lice," but he is certainly not the first one to make such an observation as it is an observable fact. If you have read the account of wooden Leg, a warrior of the Cheyenne tribe that fought against Custer et al., he dispassionately noted killing an enemy squaw for the reason in question.

1/2

All the younger versions of monsters were just a smaller version of the monster itself, and if you tried to inquire about
>no wait, they're too young to be killed actually
you'd only end up killed by a smaller but still pretty lethal version of that giant/dragon/whatever.

>What is it with people not understanding the Idea that you can quite literally be forced to do something without being enslaved by magic or some shit?

It's the old argument levelled at Germans during the war who didn't go BJ Blaskowitz on der furhrer and so are complicit

I am not going to waste my time and yours debating ethics and philosophy. I will state unequivocally that in the alignment system as presented in OAD&D, an eye for an eye is lawful and just, Lawful Good, as misconduct is to be punished under just laws.

Lawful Neutrality countenances malign laws. Lawful Good does not.

Mercy is to be displayed for the lawbreaker that does so by accident. Benevolence is for the harmless. Pacifism in the fantasy milieu is for those who would be slaves. They have no place in determining general alignment, albeit justice tempered by mercy is a NG manifestation, whilst well-considered benevolence is generally a mark of Good." -Gary Gygax 2005

Really no question.

He had a choice, though.
He could could warn PCs and they could setup fake death for him if necessary. Instead he choose to stay loyal to BBEG.

Sorry to hear about your group OP. Sounds like a chance to rescue this guy and his town from the BBEG, make some allies, get some info, etc. At least my group would handle it that way. Hell, if the BBEG really intends to follow through on threats they could even set up an ambush for him.

Veeky Forums pass retard. you need to stop posting.

>several hours later
>Still trying to save face after getting called a retard by like 5 separate people

Many keks

Why do i get the idea that you would argue every "chaotic neutral" into being a saint.

Nah, you murdered a dude who was looking out for his family and friends.

>>Implying thats how alignment works.

Read nigga

Not casting him away from the party?

At least this guy can admit he is evil. Thank you user, you are the better man.

new phone who dis? im a new guy honestly.which one are you?

youtube.com/watch?v=GnkbJ-H4r5k

Underrated post.

you murdered a dude who assisted evil and hindered good.
100% LG

why is it so hard for people to say they'd kill or incapacitate the guy without also being a fucking edgelord about it?

Christ I get that it's an imaginary character from a made up universe, but going full judge dredd just makes you sound like a petulant 13yo.

IRL if someone kidnaps your family and gives you a gun to shoot the president, you're expected to call the cops.
Not to shoot at the president and then claim you weren't responsible.
A man is free to choose his course of action.
He cannot choose the consequences of his actions.

Because, the act itself is pretty fucking edgy. Hell, Dredd himself prefers not to kill creeps in those particular circumstances.

Dredd can just lock them in an isocube and stop worrying though. not so easy in a medieval society where jail isn't a thing.

Killing someone who is stopping you from killing someone who wants to destroy the world is not evil.

so the only option is "psssh, nothin personnel kid"?

more like 'face mortal justice, then divine justice. better hope you were a good guy otherwise'

"Muh children/ I'll mother" and other "I was forced" BS is what most captured goons start telling when I GM. Sometimes that's even partially true. If your evil minions don't try to weasel out when they can't run or fight PCs then either they are mindless constructs or you are a shitty GM

The Benny Hill music is still playing, so he had to spin in circles

Just keep track of how many times the party does stuff like this. If they take the 'kill everyone who gets in our way' approach too many times, before the fight against the BBEG is even over start introducing new adventurers who exist to hunt down and kill the party.

Congrats! From an outside perspective, you are a wandering group of monsters who slaughter people without mercy. To the people left in your wake, YOU are the next BBEG.

>Nah, you murdered a dude who was looking out for his family and friends.
Yeah, murdered a dude looking out for his family and friends by assisting a presumably genocidal maniac threatening said family and friends.

PROTIP: if you wanted to do the right thing, you should have asked the heroes to help, not backed the villain.

I think you misunderstand. The way I read OP's post, if the guy didn't delay the PCs (not even kill them, just slow them down) his entire town was going to be killed.

The fact that the party is bothering to talk to him at all means his plan worked. Damage done. Whats more, the moment you leave his town behind he stops being a threat.

There really isn't any point in killing him besides spite.

>before the fight against the BBEG is even over start introducing new adventurers who exist to hunt down and kill the party.
Why, because they're doing the right thing?

>Congrats! From an outside perspective, you are a wandering group of monsters who slaughter people without mercy. To the people left in your wake, YOU are the next BBEG.
bullshit

That's a great plan, except for one thing:

Tomorrow, the heroes leave.

If a week from now the BBEG sends some dudes to fuck up your town in punishment, the fact that the heroes helped you TODAY won't save shit.

Everything depends on presentation. You pretty much failed in that regard if you wanted that NPC to survive.

>NPC realizes PCs know
>runs away benny hill style
>gets caught and goes "Muh family!"
>PC's take it as a cheap attempt to bargain for his life
>ded

Try this instead.

>PCs break down door of NPC house
>NPC sitting on a chair in a dimly lit room
>an open bottle on a nearby table
>a childs toy next to it
>head buried in hands

With this setup the inner murderhobo should take a halt in most cases.

> the BBEG uses indiscriminate murder to accomplish his goals for power

> the party uses indiscriminate murder to accomplish their goals to thwart the BBEG

After a certain point, all anyone not following the story from your perspective knows is that every time you go someplace everyone fucking dies.

>this guy has the means to slow down the PC, and the BBEG has a hold over him
>clearly we should let him go as the BBEG is an honourable man and won't do exactly the same thing tomorrow

Congratulations, the BBEG's going to keep threatening to kill your town every week. Perhaps if you'd helped the heroes instead of slowing them down they could actually remove the yoke from your neck?

Besides, what's the BBEG going to do, send his bodyguards to fuck your town up while the heroes stab him to death?

I suppose in a universe where the afterlife is fully confirmed with active gods, killing someone and sending them to their maker holds less weight than in our universe.

>> the party uses indiscriminate murder to accomplish their goals to thwart the BBEG
>After a certain point, all anyone not following the story from your perspective knows is that every time you go someplace everyone fucking dies.
Yes, because killing minions working directly for the BBEG is "indiscriminate murder".

Try again.

What kind of chickenshit BBEG doesn't have minions?

Can you imagine how pathetic Sauron would have been if it was just him and the Ringwraiths, no orcs or anything else? He'd never get anything done. He can terrorize maybe a town at a time, but he would be more of an annoyance than a threat despite being immortal.

It is, though.

When was the last time your party took prisoners or gave quarter? When was the last time your party routed an enemy force rather than just killing all of them?

If they behave anything like a typical dnd party, indiscriminate murder 100% sums up their go-to battle strategy.

>indiscriminate murder
in fact the heroes DO discriminate
against criminals and monsters
look up what 'indiscriminate' means, retard

>all anyone not following the story from your perspective knows is that every time you go someplace everyone fucking dies.
>implying it wouldn't spread that one guy want to kill everybody and the other guys kill anyone who fucks with them

I guess I can't fight any of the BBEG's minions, since they could all be forced to work for him for a variety of reasons.
I also can't fight any summoned beings since they've likely been summoned against their will.
I can't fight any animals that attack me in the forest because they're maybe forced to attack to me to protect their children.
And depending on what made the BBEG do all the bad shit, guess I can't fight him either. All it takes is for him to say he has no choice and I have to stop my attacks on him.

>the right thing
from your perspective.

I want this to happen more often.

cause hate and vengeance is a thing. I could imagine a wealthy widow hiring a high level legendary bounty hunter to go after the group, or just putting a reward out for their lives.

it would be really cool if players actually had to think about the consequences of their actions before they do stupid shit, and since basic human empathy doesn't translate well in a murderhobo simulator, having someone who is just as indiscriminate as them trying to kill them seems fair.

You are "special", aren't you?

You're just speculating.
Besides, conceptions of what is morally acceptable or not depend heavily on circumstance.

If you slaughter every last orc in a tribe, not just the men, but the women and children too, the town is probably going to raise a statue to you for getting rid of a fearful enemy.

If you kill every bandit you meet, you can probably turn in their scalps for bounties.

Outlaws, as the term came to be, meant someone completely outside the protection of the law. Bandits, murderers, rapists, these people were outlaws.
Justice exists only as it is enforced in any one place. In D&D that's typically feudal justice, as decided by the lord.
Stop using modern conceptions of morality in a game where the very forces of Good and Evil are physical energies you can measure.

>What kind of chickenshit BBEG doesn't have minions?
Nothing wrong with someone having minions.

Just be aware that being a minion may lead to sudden violent death.

Yesterday. We ambushed a bunch of paladins picking up an armour shipment to forment rebellion, and tore through then with mostly causing nonlethal damage.

Some of them may have exploded from being punched too hard nonlethally.

Good thing we went nonlethal, too, they were not actually paladins but mind controlled actor prostitutes set up as a propaganda effect to discredit the Lawful Evil regime that we worked for.

>from your perspective.
objectively
commit crimes or aid criminals, get punished.

>cause hate and vengeance is a thing. I could imagine a wealthy widow hiring a high level legendary bounty hunter to go after the group, or just putting a reward out for their lives.
cool, more criminals to execute.

>basic human empathy
lol, nice excuse for HE DINDU NUFFIN
are you a nigger or liberal by chance?

people who play these games tend to be single loners with no families and no strong emotional ties to people. They're incapable of feeling the responsibility that a parent would 8f their children were in dangerm

Are you an asshole with an absolute and relative morality?

>implying
You are aware that some people may be the oldest sibling in their family and know the feeling of having to look after someone younger than themselves right? Probably not considering your post.