Did I railroad?

Style

Mongoose
We finally finished up Slaver’s Caravan last night, and are starting a new adventure. During the session, one player was complaining loudly about being "railroaded" and that “This would never happen.” Let me give you the details, and then you decide.

As detailed in Slaver’s Caravan, the party was informed by a caravan guard they saved that they were about to be double crossed. As I expected, they ignored his advice to escape, and instead ambushed their would be slavers before they could be double crossed. Their plan was excellent, and went really well. They easily defeated the caravan guards and the men sent from the salt mines to collect them. The merchant, Hadramas, escaped, and everyone else was killed but Hadramas’s slaves, the caravan drivers (non-combatants), the guard who informed them of the double cross (I named him Jonas),and one of the men from salt mines who they let live. They decided to take the caravan to Athos where they would sell the goods, including the slaves, and then return to Messantia (where the adventure started) to search for Hadramas.

Meanwhile, Hadramas, who I had made a sorcerer, used divination to learn that a battalion of 100 armed knights have been given orders by King Milo to hunt down bandits that have been harassing caravans in the area. (The PCs encountered these bandits earlier in the adventure.) He found the battalion quickly (pretty easy to do since he can shape change into an eagle, had knowledge of their location via divinations, and they were in the area already). Hadramas tells the knights that some new caravan guards he hired turned on him, slaughtering his regulars, and stealing his caravan. He barely escaped with his life. They immediately turn in the direction he points, and follow the PCs.

A week after the PCs took the caravan, as they are nearing Athos, they are overtaken by the Knights. The knights approach the caravan, and ask for their names. They give them. The commanding officer makes a signal for Hadramas, hiding behind all the men, to identify them as the thieves. He does. The knights surround the caravan and pull out bows. While this happens, one of the PCs spots Hadramas and charges out after him. He’s made into a pin cushion, and falls dead. The commanding officer calls out that they are under arrest, that they are to put down all weapons and climb off the caravan. Another PC refuses. The knights move in to force him to comply. He pulls a sword and attacks. He’s chopped down, falls unconscious, but lives. The rest submit to being bound.

The knights do a little investigation on the spot, questioning everyone. The PCs tell them their side, with no lies. The slaves and caravan drivers all give their side, with no lies, which confirms Hadramas's story. They saw the PCs plan an ambush, slit as many caravan guard throats as they could while they slept, and when they awoke and raised the alarm, they cut them all down. When asked about the sorcery the PCs spoke of from Hadramas, they say “No, we saw no sorcery from Hadramas. But we did see that Pict Shaman (a PC) casting spells.” Keep in mind sorcery is illegal in Argos. Keep in mind every word they are saying is true. Even if put to the rack, forced to tell the truth, this is what would come out. They asked the guard from the salt mine his story. He said he was there to buy slaves from Hadramas. Again, this is true. Hadramas says “Yes, I was to sell him these slaves” And points to his collection of legitimate slaves. This is not true, he was going to sell him the PCs, but this is the only lie spoke as the NPCs gave their testimony, and it was buy a major villain sorcerer NPC.

The PCs are taken back to Messantia, in manacles, to be tried. Jonas dies on the road there from a mysterious illness. :twisted: There, all of this testimony is drawn out again, and the PCs are convicted of murder, theft, and sorcery. They are sentenced to death. (They are to be fed to lions in the Arena. This of course leads into the next adventure.)

So there are the details. Here are the complaints:

* We were railroaded. From the time Hadramas escaped, no matter what we did we would be hunted down. We had no options.

Umm, no, you had options. Were the good options limited? Yes. Go out and kill 10 people right now, and leave witnesses. From the point, you have many, many options. True, many of them are not good options. Many of them will lead to you being arrested. Once you’re wanted in a land, you’ve given up the option of continuing about your daily life with out getting arrested. Your options are pretty much 1) go somewhere that you’re not wanted, 2) go into hiding, 3) go incognito. (Come to think of it, options 1 and 3 are just variants of option 2.) Anyway, those are your options. Yes, pretty much any other option means you get harassed by the law. Is that railroading?

* But we were defending ourselves! We didn’t murder them!

Were you? One guy told you that they were going to betray you, and then you start slitting throats while they slept. “But then they pulled swords and attacked us!” Come on now, you were trying to kill them! They were defending themselves, not the other way around!

Besides, even if it were true that you were defending yourself, all the witness didn’t see it that way, and their testimony reflected that. If you testify that you didn't kill someone and several witness testify that you did, you're not going to like the results.

* But we’re not Bandits! The Knights were looking for bandits, which we clearly were not!

What’s your definition of bandit? It says here that it’s a robber: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=bandit They robbed Hadramas, so how does this not apply? Were they traditional caravan bandits? No. Were they the bandits the knights set out to find, the ones that caused the order to be made by the king? No. Does any of that matter? Not that I can see.

* How could they find us so quickly? They never could have caught up.

First of all, Hadramas is a sorcerer. He can do things not possible with out magic, namely fly and use divinations. He knew where they were going. And even without magic, how hard is it to track a caravan moving down major roads? At any cross roads you ask which way the caravan went, and major cross roads would be very rare. Most roads encountered would be country trails that would be extremely unlikely choices.

* But we had a head start! There is no way they could have caught us. 100 armed men on horseback can not move faster than a caravan moving down a road.

This one I honestly don’t know. Is that a legitimate complaint? My defense was the knights were pushing it, because they were hot on the trail. The players replied back that they too were pushing it, which I called bull shit on. Never once did they say they were moving any faster than normal, and if you don’t say it, the assumption is you follow normal operating procedure, i.e. you move at normal speeds. It did take the knights a week to catch up. It wasn’t like they caught them the next day. It seemed reasonable to me, but perhaps this was not realistic. In my opinion, if I was wrong here it was a pretty minor offense.

* The knights would not have arrested us. At that point, it was Hadramas word verses ours. They would have questioned us and had a mini trial on the side of the road before deciding whether or not to take us into custody.

Hadramas is a well known merchant in Messantia, and was known by at least some of the knights (most of which were nobles). They’re out looking for bandits, and would rather be home drinking wine and chasing tail in their villas. They do not like this assignment, which is taking too long. Hadramas shows up in dirty torn clothes pleading his case. They jump at the chance to finally do something. If this isn’t good enough for you, then write it off as a case of Hadramas, being a sorcerer, charming the pants off the commanding officer. I mean come on, sorcerers in Conan make people jump when they say “boo”, and that’s if they haven’t made them an outright puppet with their arcane skills. Point is it didn’t seem like a stretch that the knights would take Hadramas' word.

Anyway, I don’t see how it’s not beside the point. The knights did in fact have a mini trial on the side of the road, questioning everyone, and then they determined the PCs were to be taken back to Messantia to be tried. The fact that they stated “You’re under arrest” before this is splitting hairs. They had a mini trial. Significantly more people backed Hadramas' story. And they were arrested. Whether they said “You’re under arrest” before or after the questioning, the end result is the same, so does it matter? In my opinion, if this is an offense on my part as a GM, it’s a minor one.

So that’s the long and the short of it. Am I off base?
 
I think how things turned out was great. Sure, they couldn't avoid getting caught, but that sets up the pivotal scene as to what the characters do when the knights find them. They acted incredibly unsavvy and paid the price.

The reality is that the party are not the good guys, protagonists sure, but not the good guys. If they don't want to be treated like criminals, then they shouldn't act like them or they should plan better.
 
That's not rail roading, thats just the pc's having something bad happen to them then having a cry about it. the only thing i would cry foul on is the knights having bows :? but the argossians are known for hiring shemite asshuri so could have been a group with the knights.
 
Oh boo hoo, we can't do our usual "kill and loot indiscriminately without consequences" routine!

Hah! They got what they deserved, and that didn't sound like railroading at all. Besides, a little railroading now and again isn't bad. People only complain when they aren't railroaded to fabulous treasure. :p

And yes, a band of horsemen would travel faster than a caravan. Wagons, mules, oxen or the sort are NOT speedy, generally no faster than foot speed. It's the cargo capacity, not speed, that's important.

I've said for years that (in universally recognized D&D alignment terms) Player Characters are more often than not Chaotic Neutral at best, with Evil tendencies.

"But we're killing monsters!", they protest. Uh huh, and if those "monsters" were Picts, Stygians, Frenchmen or pretty much anyone else with some gold on them, you'd hack them up and loot their corpses without a second thought. :?
 
railroaded... eh, perhaps. Taught a tough lesson with a big stick? DEFINITELY.

Seems like there needs to be more out of character hints about the possible negatives of their actions before they do them. It sounds like a number of the players are used to free reign immortality as PCs with few consequences for their greed/brutality and have now entered a whole new world where you expect solid logic and thinking with less fantasy/player fiat. I'd recommend giving the players a bit more grace and give them hints on the negatives and kill off NPCs if they continue along a dangerous road. Then punish them with in game consequences and use death only as a last resort.
 
I dont know about the RR thing, can see it either way. Did they deserve what they had coming? Absolutely. Even bad/stupid choices and decisions in RPGs have consequences.
 
I haven't played the Slaver's Caravan myself but read it once, so I halfway remember what's supposed to go on there.

In my opinion, there are two elements of your game mastering that I don't like:

* making the merchant an Uber-NPC who is much more powerful than the PCs. I'm assuming the PCs are all low-level because Slaver's Caravan is intended for levels 1-2.
In this context: is it really plausible that a sorcerer who can scry and shapeshift (minimum level 12!!!) earns a living by double-crossing wandering adventurers?

* inventing an overwhelming force, in this case 100 armoured knights, which IIRC is not part of the original module, that exists solely to fuck the players. I find this uncalled for.

I must add that I do react a bit allergic to those two tricks, because we used to have a GM (back in school days) who would do that all the time. Especially the Uber NPC thing. No matter what we did or how good we were at it, there'd always be some smart ass who'd one up us, and if it was an eight year old girl.
 
I do not know the background that Clovenhoof implies, so I can't comment on the NPC and whether he was plausible or not. True enough, it seems strange if a powerful sorcerer would bother with simple slave ruses for meager coin. However, I don't see this as railroading. (*) This is especially true as having your ass whipped, losing everything, being crucified middle of a desert and still crawling back with a vengeance is part of the Hyborian atmosphere. I think too many players tend to assume - perhaps a mindset coming from D&D - that they should never be put in a situation where they can lose their gains and that every fight should be winnable. As a player, I'd be very annoyed if the GM just announces that the next scene begins with my character in chains, having lost all his property, noble titles and half of his stats. However, if I got in to this situation as a result of a course of action I myself selected and had a fair chance to avoid the end result even when things started going bad, it is fine and even fun. I can only speak myself, but a feeling of powerlessness can really break the game. It can be okay on a cosmic sense, like in CoC game, but not when it comes to the fate of your own character. This is the kind of path I try to follow when I GM a game.

Oh and I agree with one of the above posts - knights shouldn't have bows, but asshuri could have those, heh.

* Railroading in this case meaning "GM forcing players to go to one specific direction or take one spesific action without true input from the players, often with one specific end result in mind". In Conan d20, High Living rules actually fall under this mandate - which is why they are disabled in my games.
 
Yeah, "Railroading" (or "hedging") can mean two things,
* disallowing all courses of action except one; like "you can't go west because the road is flooded, not east because the bridge collapsed, and not north because the mountain roads are unpassable at this time of year. Where do you want to go?"
* imposing one particular result on the players regardless what action they take. Like, they can go whichever direction they want but will always be attacked by mind flayers.

In this sense, well, the adventure as described was not really railroading, if they stayed with the caravan after their coup by their own decision. If they had chosen to take to leave the caravan and would have been rounded up anyway, _that_ would have been railroading.

Also, the consequences are okay from an ingame perspective. It's not like Style did a TPK or didn't leave them a way out (escapes from Arenas are always fun, that's how I started off our campaign). Apart from the unlucky fellow who got killed, the players aren't getting shafted too badly.

Still, I don't like the use of an Über NPC and a "bigger hammer" force to nail down the PCs.
 
I understand Clovenhoof's points. They are sound.

However, it reads like it was a fun adventure. The PC's should've had a scout watching for trouble while they traveled with the caravan. Then, when they were forewarned of the obviously large force coming right at them, they could've hit the trail and abandoned the caravan OR they might of decided to see what the large force wanted and parleyed. Then the adventure could've advanced as it did only with the PC's cursing each other that they should've high tailed it for mountains. It's their fault for just wandering down the road in a stolen caravan. Thats just one of the ways they could've avoided their current fate.

What was the one PC thinking charging the sorcerer with 100 knights surrounding the caravan?
 
Clovenhoof said:
* making the merchant an Uber-NPC who is much more powerful than the PCs. I'm assuming the PCs are all low-level because Slaver's Caravan is intended for levels 1-2.
In this context: is it really plausible that a sorcerer who can scry and shapeshift (minimum level 12!!!) earns a living by double-crossing wandering adventurers?

Agreed. Only problem is he's not uber powerful. I play savage worlds, not Conan, and he has these abilities easily at lower levels.

Clovenhoof said:
* inventing an overwhelming force, in this case 100 armoured knights, which IIRC is not part of the original module, that exists solely to **** the players. I find this uncalled for.

A lot of things are not part of the original module, including the PCs actually beating Hadramas. (Seriously, look it up. It lists two options: they run away, or they are sent to the salt mines.) I wouldn't want a module to try to detail every possible moving part in the world. Many things that happened in my game were not specifically detailed in the module. So it not being in the module means nothing to me.

Ant the sole purpose was not to fuck the PCs. Keep in mind I ran it in Argos, not Zamora, as written. From the Messantia box: "The lands under Messantia’s control are, like much of Argos, completely pacified." Before I even played the module and had any clue how it would turn out, I read the part about bandits haunting the hills, attacking the caravan, and it didn't sit right with me, knowing the lands were pacified. I said to myself "These bands must be new to the area, and they will not be tolerated long." To me it made perfect sense that the king would send out a force to deal with the bandits quickly, and set an example. Trade is Messantia's life blood, and must be protected, even at high cost.


Majestic7 said:
knights shouldn't have bows, but asshuri could have those, heh.

Knights having bows is (I presume) a violation of Howard canan, but has nothing to do with me railroading or the scenario being implausible, i.e. it doesn't help the player's argument. If it makes you feel better it's pretty easy for me to say it was 100 armed mercs, led by an Argossean knight who was given legal authority by King Milo to bring in the bandits. Bows or no bows, that's probably a more likely scenario anyway.

Clovenhoof said:
escapes from Arenas are always fun, that's how I started off our campaign

I'd love to hear how that went.
 
I emailed this post to some of my rpg fanatic friends who are not in my current game. Below is their email replies:


Ryan said:
the PCs are just making excuses for fucking up.

100 horsemen would easily catch up to a caravan, also. a caravan is slowwwwwww moving, not even normal speeds...not only that, they would have had to run at normal speeds to not arouse suspicions

the excuses sound like 8 year olds. "well, art told me he was going to hit me, so I punched him in the face first, as self-defense." that doesn't really work, now does it


Scot said:
I'm going with the "No RailRoading" verdict. Lots of things are outside the control of the PCs. And most of those are present to move the story in the direction the DM needs to take the adventure forward.

Suck-it and Deal, M-fers.

As for the arrest BS. "You're under arrest" does not mean that you are convicted. Arrest, means that you are prevented from movement. That's all. Don't leave the scene of the crime while I piece together your BS story vs this other guy's BS story. Ain't nobody ever watchin' Cops anymore? Plenty of people are arrested during questioning and released. Plenty of other people are arrested and have a means of escape at their disposal. Probably should think that through next time Mr PC.

Style said:
Right, the commanding officer even told them that. He said "You are under arrest, but you're innocent until proven guilty. We'll take you to the magistrate and he can decide."

The "innocent until proven guilty" things is actually being pretty nice. In many societies it was the other way around, especially if we're talking foreigners (the PCs) being accused by a noble. While the merchant was not technically a noble as in having royal blood, merchants pull the strings of the king and run the kingdom, and are nobility in all but name. At a minimum, merchants are aristocrats.

Oh, and to address the "most of those are present to move the story in the direction the DM needs to take the adventure forward", I actually didn't need this to happen for the story. I had three new modules ready to go last night, and was prepared to wing it if none of them fit, b/c I had no idea which path the PCs would take. I had the arrest planned if they decided to go the path they went, i.e. not behave like fugitives, but by no means was it necessary for the story to advance that they get arrested.

Damon said:
I think the general concensus so far is that your PCs are fucking morons....as PCs tend to be (myself and present company...despite ego saying otherwise...not excluded). PCs do stupid shit that they don't think through all the time. Sure it's fun to slaughter people....god know's I enjoy sensless violence more then most people, I'm sure....but if there's no reality injected into D&D, then they may as well play a video game.

Ryan said:
I think we're all in agreement that the PCs are being idiots. They made a stupid choice, and got caught. It's all a matter of perception. Just like everything else in real life.

The dumbass who immediately went after the leader of the caravan didn't help the PCs' case, either. What idiot attacks an accuser directly in front of the cops? Then, Who attacks after the first guy dies? It's 100 to 5...even in fantasy circles, the odds are long on surviving attacking a band of law enforcers.

Damon said:
Seriously....I can only take out about 95 guys at once with my ninja-gangsta skillz....but 100....please....

Style said:
The guy who attacked after the first one was killed was the loud complainer. He actually said more than once that they should just roll up new characters and abandoned their horribly railroaded ones.

Most of it boils down to "We got our asses kicked and lost our stuff. We don't like it, so lets throw a tantrum."
 
Obviously your other friends have gamed with you more and are familiar with your gaming style. May I ask how long the new group has played with you? Maybe I'm too merciful, but players, esp. new ones sometimes need some nudging to consider the broader spectrum of things. Esp if they are/were used to a very different style of play.


p.s. I hope your PCs don't visit the forums, because if I were them, I doubt I'd be back for a game with you as a GM after getting your friends to join in a public flailing of me. Not exactly the soul of discretion.
I'd recommend an after action discussion to allow both sides to diplomatically explain their positions and define some standards & expectations for the next game.
 
You did not railroad. You provided a framework and a challenge for your players. That is the heart of being a DM.

That being said, your players made several really bad decisions, and in one case, a suicidal deicsion. It seems they don't quite understand the concept of the Conan game, or roleplaying in general. It is not all just "kill them and take their stuff" while the DM covers their a$$es.

Good luck in schooling them on how to make intelligent choices and deal with consequences.
 
* We were railroaded. From the time Hadramas escaped, no matter what we did we would be hunted down. We had no options.

Umm, no, you had options. Were the good options limited? Yes. Go out and kill 10 people right now, and leave witnesses. From the point, you have many, many options. True, many of them are not good options. Many of them will lead to you being arrested. Once you’re wanted in a land, you’ve given up the option of continuing about your daily life with out getting arrested. Your options are pretty much 1) go somewhere that you’re not wanted, 2) go into hiding, 3) go incognito. (Come to think of it, options 1 and 3 are just variants of option 2.) Anyway, those are your options. Yes, pretty much any other option means you get harassed by the law. Is that railroading?

I have some small reservations about this, based on:

pretty easy to do since he can shape change into an eagle, had knowledge of their location via divinations,

If he has this level of "locate PC" skills, it seems likely that escape will be difficult... but I suppose he has to be wary about displaying these skills to the knights!

* But we were defending ourselves! We didn’t murder them!

Were you? One guy told you that they were going to betray you, and then you start slitting throats while they slept. “But then they pulled swords and attacked us!” Come on now, you were trying to kill them! They were defending themselves, not the other way around!

Besides, even if it were true that you were defending yourself, all the witness didn’t see it that way, and their testimony reflected that. If you testify that you didn't kill someone and several witness testify that you did, you're not going to like the results.

The second paragraph is the important one. It doesn't matter one bit whether they were defending themselves or not. Its not what is true, its what can be proved.

* But we’re not Bandits! The Knights were looking for bandits, which we clearly were not!

What’s your definition of bandit? It says here that it’s a robber: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=bandit They robbed Hadramas, so how does this not apply? Were they traditional caravan bandits? No. Were they the bandits the knights set out to find, the ones that caused the order to be made by the king? No. Does any of that matter? Not that I can see.

You are wrong in one sense here, though it doesn't do your position any harm at all. Actually, they were behaving very much like traditional Caravan bandits. Joining the caravan and striking from within was a favourite tactic.

*
How could they find us so quickly? They never could have caught up.

First of all, Hadramas is a sorcerer. He can do things not possible with out magic, namely fly and use divinations. He knew where they were going. And even without magic, how hard is it to track a caravan moving down major roads? At any cross roads you ask which way the caravan went, and major cross roads would be very rare. Most roads encountered would be country trails that would be extremely unlikely choices.

Exactly right. This is not the 21st century west, criss crossed by easily usable roads wherever you look. The caravan will have been going down The Road. I doubt they passed a crossroads... it would have had a major settlement at it.

* But we had a head start! There is no way they could have caught us. 100 armed men on horseback can not move faster than a caravan moving down a road.

This one I honestly don’t know. Is that a legitimate complaint? My defense was the knights were pushing it, because they were hot on the trail. The players replied back that they too were pushing it, which I called bull **** on. Never once did they say they were moving any faster than normal, and if you don’t say it, the assumption is you follow normal operating procedure, i.e. you move at normal speeds. It did take the knights a week to catch up. It wasn’t like they caught them the next day. It seemed reasonable to me, but perhaps this was not realistic. In my opinion, if I was wrong here it was a pretty minor offense.

An ox cart travels at about 2 mph, and can go for 8-10 hours. A man on horseback can travel between 6-9 mph for 10 to 12 hours per day. A cavalry detachment of 100 men will be going a bit slower than that, but even so they must have stopped for more than a couple of cold beers on the way to take a full week to catch up.

* The knights would not have arrested us. At that point, it was Hadramas word verses ours. They would have questioned us and had a mini trial on the side of the road before deciding whether or not to take us into custody.

Hadramas is a well known merchant in Messantia, and was known by at least some of the knights (most of which were nobles). They’re out looking for bandits, and would rather be home drinking wine and chasing tail in their villas. They do not like this assignment, which is taking too long. Hadramas shows up in dirty torn clothes pleading his case. They jump at the chance to finally do something. If this isn’t good enough for you, then write it off as a case of Hadramas, being a sorcerer, charming the pants off the commanding officer. I mean come on, sorcerers in Conan make people jump when they say “boo”, and that’s if they haven’t made them an outright puppet with their arcane skills. Point is it didn’t seem like a stretch that the knights would take Hadramas' word.

Anyway, I don’t see how it’s not beside the point. The knights did in fact have a mini trial on the side of the road, questioning everyone, and then they determined the PCs were to be taken back to Messantia to be tried. The fact that they stated “You’re under arrest” before this is splitting hairs. They had a mini trial. Significantly more people backed Hadramas' story. And they were arrested. Whether they said “You’re under arrest” before or after the questioning, the end result is the same, so does it matter? In my opinion, if this is an offense on my part as a GM, it’s a minor one.

The caravan, when it left Athos was owned by Hadramas. When it left Messantia, it was owned by Hadramas. Now, it is not owned by Hadramas, most of its personnel are missing, and Hadramas is claiming it was stolen. Things Do Not Look Good. Even if the PCs had made it to Athos, they would have needed a damn good explanation for why they were selling someone else's caravan. With the ex owner standing there saying they stole it, it looks bad.

And, they resisted arrest. Two of them attacked a noble. The Commander of 100 knights (more likely 10 knights and 90 mounted sergeants) isn't going to be a nobody. He called on them, a bunch of commoners, to do something and two of them attacked a force of nobles exercising a royal commission. Right at that point, they were headed for the arena. Whether they were found guilty of ripping off a merchant and killing a feww commen caravan guards or not, they attacked a noble who was operating under royal authority

They should have been condemned for armed insurrection against the crown, armed assault on officers of the crown, refusing a royal officer's command to surrender and insolence to a noble of the realm. With additional charges that they probably robbed some merchant as well. If anyone still cares about that.

So that’s the long and the short of it. Am I off base?

No.
 
I'd love to hear how that went.

I looked up my old report and copy-paste it:

A Thief, a (female) Pirate and a Pit Fighter found themselves locked up in the dungeon of an arena (guarded by two gaolers a lot like those seen in The Life of Brian... "He is dumb as a p-p-p-p-"). The city's laws combine the necessary with the pleasant, and so criminal convicts (like Pirates and Thieves) have to fight to the death in the arena, as a matinee before the real gladiator duels take place. No parole for the winners: they simply go back to their cells to fight another day, until one day they are out of luck. (I copied this system from the old Romans)

I used this setup for two reasons, one was of course to get the player characters together, and the other to introduce them to D20 combat. Each character had to fight one low-powered NPC on day one.

Pirate and Thief each had to fight a commoner, equipped with no armour and only a short sword which lay on the ground in the arena. After the fight, the winner had to put down his weapon and was escorted back to the cell by two armoured guards (Soldier 1 with scale corslet and battleaxe). The Fighter was equipped with a large shield and a short sword, and pitted against another gladiator with net and trident. They all survived their fights without a scratch.

I didn't have my D&D PHB with me so I had to ad-lib the mechanism, now I checked in the SRD and found that I wasn't too far off. It worked quite well. :)

The Pirate and Thief realized that this place was a deathtrap, since their initial hope for pardon after their first respective victories proved false. So at night in their cells, they agreed that they would work together to escape, if they ever had to duel each other.

They also tried to find another way of escaping, but although it was not impossible (I was prepared to allow several ways out), they gave up rather soon and waited for their duel.

Soon, the day had come, they were both led to the arena. Again, a short sword for each convict and no armour. They put up a mock fight and the Thief "killed" the girl (Bluff check). Then he laid down his weapon and the guards came to get him. As soon as they turned around (readied action), the Pirate grabbed the dropped short sword (still had hers in hand, too) and used her two surprise attacks to stab each guard in the back of their knees (I allowed her to execute two attacks in the surprise round because it was such a nice setup).
The Thief immediately attempted to disarm one of the guards (also readied action) and actually succeeded (not drawing an AoO because the guards were flat-footed, and getting lucky with the dice). The Pirate fought the other (armed) guard, while the disarmed guard tried to flee (drawing AoOs from both players, taking damage). The next round, both guards were down and out. The two gaolers followed suit. Our two heroes then quickly opened all cells to create additional confusion, and grabbed some gear from the weapon chamber. And so they all rushed out the dungeon's exit and disappeared in the crowded city streets.

End of Episode One.
--

After that they were still stuck in a walled city with guards on the lookout for them, but they managed to escape over the walls at night (that took a full session). However, the Fighter had deemed it necessary to set some houses on fire, which of course did not go down well with the Master of the City. So the next day he sent a squad of riders after the fugitives. Normally he wouldn't have found it worth the bother sending rider after escaped petty criminals, but with the arson on their scorecards, he was really mad.

Then we had some player turnover (some players left for job reasons, others joined), but eventually we managed to proceed.
And so it continued...
 
Nice, Clovenhoof. I'll definitely have to read your campaign thread.

Paladin said:
Obviously your other friends have gamed with you more and are familiar with your gaming style. May I ask how long the new group has played with you? Maybe I'm too merciful, but players, esp. new ones sometimes need some nudging to consider the broader spectrum of things. Esp if they are/were used to a very different style of play.


p.s. I hope your PCs don't visit the forums, because if I were them, I doubt I'd be back for a game with you as a GM after getting your friends to join in a public flailing of me. Not exactly the soul of discretion.
I'd recommend an after action discussion to allow both sides to diplomatically explain their positions and define some standards & expectations for the next game.

You really are a paladin, aren't you? ;)

The guy who played the cimmerian barbarian who rushed out and was killed has been with me for over 4 years and 80 sessions. Over that time he's seen more than 10 PCs killed b/c they did something stupid (including one tpk) and a handful more who were just unlucky. He should have known better. I think he did, b/c he never said 1 word of complaint and cheerfully created a new character. The complainer has been with me only 5 or 6 months, and maybe 10 or 12 sessions. He played the pict shaman who was the second guy to resist arrest, but lived. He's a munchkin who's used to power gaming and league play. The other two, who were quiet, have played with me 2 months and 8 years respectively.

There are things I could have done to give them warning. When making their plans for the preemptive strike, I considered having one of the npcs that they worked with ask how they were going to prove Hadramas intentions. I could have done this afterward as well (although at that point they had already limited their options). I considered having one or more caravan drivers openly treat them like thieves and murderers. After the battle, when the PCs killed any caravan guards who still drew breath, I decided the drivers were scared out of their wits, would not say a word unless spoken to, would obey all commands, and if a PC so much as cleared his throat they would cower. The players thought it was funny that the drivers were scared of them and so willing to serve.

I probably should have gave them at least some warning. From time to time I will let PCs bury themselves, but it's good practice to drop hints that what they are doing could turn out bad. If they balk afterward, at the very least you've gained the right to say "Hey, I gave you warnings here and here. It's not my fault you chose to ignore them."

Concerning public flailings: To my knowledge the players do not visit this forum. At the very least, their identities have been protected. No one here knows who they are, nor do my email friends.
 
Style said:
Knights having bows is (I presume) a violation of Howard canan, but has nothing to do with me railroading or the scenario being implausible, i.e. it doesn't help the player's argument. If it makes you feel better it's pretty easy for me to say it was 100 armed mercs, led by an Argossean knight who was given legal authority by King Milo to bring in the bandits. Bows or no bows, that's probably a more likely scenario anyway.

Heh, yes, that was just a nitpick.

On a general level -

1) Did you make clear to them what kind of place Argos is? If they knew that it is orderly kingdom, where stuff like this is exception to the rule, not common, they should have been able to deduct a thing or two about it.

2) One option in these cases it to ask the player to make Int rolls, Knowledge (Geography) checks or something like that. If they succeed, then tell that they known certain risks are involved in the path they are wanting to follow. If they still continue on that route, at least they knew the risks and decided to face them. This is what I do, so I don't feel so bad if shit hits the fan later on.

..but yeah, that largest complainer sounds like a D&D type I mentioned earlier. I guess my advice would be to dump him from your group if you don't think it to be worth your while to endure his complaining. He might change his outlook on the games in the future, perhaps... but to reach that end, you'll have to endure a lot more complaining every time you put him in to a bad situation.

edit - This board has inbuilt censorship, I see. Heh, hilarious.
 
Majestic7 said:
Did you make clear to them what kind of place Argos is? If they knew that it is orderly kingdom, where stuff like this is exception to the rule, not common, they should have been able to deduct a thing or two about it.

I made it clear Argos was civilized lands, with the feudal system. They were told that sorcery was illegal. They also knew theft was illegal from an earlier encounter. Was murder explicitly stated as being illegal? No, but then I never told that them that air was a requirement for their characters to live either.

I honestly think they thought it was a case of self defense, never mind that they started it by slitting throats in the night.

That's another thing, they countered being sold into slavery with murder. That's like countering a slap to the face with a hammer to the knee caps. That's more than self defense to me. Hell, they killed off survivors lying broken on the ground after the battle! In the states there is a law about that. It's called necessary force: http://law.jrank.org/pages/1470/Justification-Self-Defense-Necessary-force.html
 
Back
Top