Killing in Glorantha and Pavis

[Mixster]

Thinking as the character I'm playing right now:
I still don't really understand how you can differentiate between murder where somebody can defend themselves against 4 people, and where they can't defend themselves at all.

With the RQ combat system, subduing a man fighting against 4 people is pretty trivial. You can easily make him run out of combat actions with pulled blows, then trip and disarm him, and then just grapple him till he gives up. The guy would have no chance on the world of defending himself against 4 people. Unless he had an obscene amount of combat actions.

So the only difference between the two is that character A is aggressive and character B is passive. IMO neither of them deserves to die directly as a result of their actions, A might suffer quite badly, but he can be put out of the fight without killing him. Character B can probably be talked to his senses if you don't kill character A.

Outside of that, I can see why you would kill character A, and that is rightly justified. Killing Character B can be justified for some of the more extreme characters.

But nevertheless I think it was a terrible decision by the players, as they are bound to be in a world of trouble for killing two guests, of which they have no evidence attacked them first.

 

[Dan True]

But the other guy's death was a clear violation of hospitality laws on the player character's part. The non-resisting guest was not aggressive, not putting up a fight, and apparently did not cause, or was in any way connected to, the first guest's sudden burst of aggression. So until he drew sword that person was still a guest.

And that makes it murder, even in the most primitive barbarian cultures.

I must disagree here. There are plenty of examples in sagas or other old stories, of people being killed for no other reason than being family or befriended to people that have done something. Bonds of family, clan, tribe or whatever are usually so strong in these societies that you can easily find a lot of people who will judge people on this, instead of their individual actions.

Again, I would have done differently - he is simply much more worth alive than dead - but in a primitive society - and I must stress that I do not know if Glorantha qualifies as this - their actions could to some degree be justified.

If you have a game where you use modern-world morality and press it unto the more primitive culture, then yes it was cold-blooded murder. But if your game attempts to capture pre-medieval morality and society, then their actions can be justified ... it all depends on the power of the killed party's family/clan/tribe whatever.

- Dan

 

[Vile]

[...] they are bound to be in a world of trouble for killing two guests, of which they have no evidence attacked them first.

This sounds too much like a modern concept of investigative police work and legal system. How much trouble they're in really depends on who would take the characters to task, and how much power they wield in their society. Evidence won't even come into it, not in the modern sense of the word.

If someone knows the PCs killed the two NPCs, and if they care, and if they are more influential than the characters, they'll probably be able to see the PCs made to pay - even if they were acting in self-defence.

If, on the other hand, the dead have no champions and no-one who knows about the killings has anything to gain by accusing the PCs, then nothing is likely to happen.

In fact, to a certain extent this is true even in the modern legal system. Your ability so seek justice is directly proportional to how much you are able to pay for it, and at the end "justice" is still dependent on the judgement of other human beings, not whether you are right or wrong.

Due to the little background we have on the case, there has been a lot of speculation and hence a fine exploration of the possibilities. This thread has been very inspirational for me, and I would view this event as a great opportunity for campaign development.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

I can't stand the yahoogroups interface, and I hate digests. I find forums like this much easier to use.

E-mail is sent from a mailing list when there is something to read.
There are 3 forums at the Design Mechanism, so that's six mouse clicks (in and out of each one) just to see if there are any new messages.
If I start to read an e-mail and get called away, when I get back it is still in the same state. Open one of the Mongoose forums, then go and do something else for a while, come back and click on the <new messages> icon, and chances are you will get a "no new messages since your last visit" message, meaning you have to go and search for the last message you read to see what is new. Or when this forum is busy, read all the messages, refresh the screen and click on the <new message> icon - only to be presented with all the messages you've just read before you get to the genuine new ones.
I'd much rather subscribe to a mailing list and have messages delivered to my in box than have to keep on going to hunt for them elsewhere...

 

[Vortigern]

[...] they are bound to be in a world of trouble for killing two guests, of which they have no evidence attacked them first.

This sounds too much like a modern concept of investigative police work and legal system. How much trouble they're in really depends on who would take the characters to task, and how much power they wield in their society. Evidence won't even come into it, not in the modern sense of the word.

If someone knows the PCs killed the two NPCs, and if they care, and if they are more influential than the characters, they'll probably be able to see the PCs made to pay - even if they were acting in self-defence.

If, on the other hand, the dead have no champions and no-one who knows about the killings has anything to gain by accusing the PCs, then nothing is likely to happen.

In fact, to a certain extent this is true even in the modern legal system. Your ability so seek justice is directly proportional to how much you are able to pay for it, and at the end "justice" is still dependent on the judgement of other human beings, not whether you are right or wrong.

Due to the little background we have on the case, there has been a lot of speculation and hence a fine exploration of the possibilities. This thread has been very inspirational for me, and I would view this event as a great opportunity for campaign development.

Precisely.

Take Rome for example. The idea of such a large 'civilized' city not having a police force is alien to many people. Yet their society simply functioned differently. And to a large degree was simply more accepting of a given level of conflict and violence.

The same is true of many/most medieval-eque fantasy settings.

There isn't a 'Detective' to investigate every crime that comes along. Justice as we know it today ( even such as 'that' is... ) doesn't exist. Justice is such a context really is much more political and practical from the perspective of the Nobility that is giving judgement and their relationships with all the various parties/factors involved.

There also seems to be some kind of inherent assumption that people are paying attention to minute details and going to go into some kind of 'police-mode' of thinking just because they know that an event has happened OOCly.

Think about it from another perspective.

Your neighbor 'may' ( or may not notice... ) that you have a guest on a given day. If you are friendly with your neighbor, perhaps they ask you who they were, if there was a special occasion, etc. But to jump to the conclusion that they would think something is 'wrong' by not seeing said guest again? It seems a very large stretch of logic, as if people are -wanting- to look for a reason to catch and 'punish' what they view as 'wrong' in game.

Would you have this reaction in real life?

If your neighbor told you instead that the guest had departed and gone back to their home in another city, would you question it?

The assumption of automatic and easily proven/investigated guilt, combined with an assumption of something even remotely like a modern investigation is ... not accurate for most settings of this type to begin with. But also, as I said, most people are not paying attention to such details and/or looking for a reason to accuse their neighbors of a crime.

There are really only a few important questions as to the fallout of this event IMO.

The status/importance of the killed NPCs, and thus whether they have any powerful friends/relatives/clan that will take an interest in what happened to them.

How the PCs dispose of the corpses, and whether they do so well/intelligently.

Who knew, if anyone, that these NPCs were staying with the PCs, and how long until they will be missed?

What were the NPCs travelling intentions at this point? Were they going anywhere after visiting the PCs? Or were they supposed to go home?

These sorts of things are important because they create the backdrop of expectations that the other NPCs will have had regarding the missing pair. But really that is it. No police inspector is going to come by and start grilling people searching for 'missing persons'. Only the more developed of cities is even going to have a Town Watch, and most such individuals as those are volunteers rather than full time soldiery. And even full time soldiery are more interested and directed towards keeping the peace and maintaining day to day law and order then solving some deep mystery.

The only factors of this situation I could really ever see coming back to haunt the PCs in this instance is if these NPCs were actually some people of importance and/or members of some sort of clan that both knew of there whereabouts, including enough to come looking specifically at the PCs door to find them, and were good relation/standing so that they care enough to risk their own necks to come and do something about it.

 

[alex_greene]

Laws of hospitality are among the oldest cultural laws, next to the establishment of standards of measurement of length and area for determination of the locations of the borders of a farmer's agricultural holdings.

Out of character, this whole episode sounds like a player behaving like a munchkin twink and killing an available target just to harvest XP. But in character, it looked like a horrifying violation of the basic hospitality laws prevalent in even the most primitive cultures.

 

[Vortigern]

The laws of hospitality were already discussed at length, and it already seems there are multiple views on their application in this situation.... some of which include that the 'non-aggressor' NPC was in violation thereof.

And I don't really understand the XP-twink argument in this context when ... you don't get XP for kills?

 

[alex_greene]

And I don't really understand the XP-twink argument in this context when ... you don't get XP for kills?

Did nobody tell the murderer's player that?

 

[Mixster]

The laws of hospitality were already discussed at length, and it already seems there are multiple views on their application in this situation.... some of which include that the 'non-aggressor' NPC was in violation thereof.

And I don't really understand the XP-twink argument in this context when ... you don't get XP for kills?

No, but you get to take his skull and put it on your armour!

Think about it from another perspective.

Your neighbor 'may' ( or may not notice... ) that you have a guest on a given day. If you are friendly with your neighbor, perhaps they ask you who they were, if there was a special occasion, etc. But to jump to the conclusion that they would think something is 'wrong' by not seeing said guest again? It seems a very large stretch of logic, as if people are -wanting- to look for a reason to catch and 'punish' what they view as 'wrong' in game.

Would you have this reaction in real life?

Ok, let's look at it from this perspective. Say you are in a mediocre sized medieval town.
There's like 10 people living in the street. You are the PC, I'm the old baker living right next door. Further down the street is John the Blacksmith who is usually up late working, since he can't stand the heat from working during the day. Then there's 7 other people around who have differing sorts of jobs, including old Jim who lives with his two daughters.

So I notice as I'm standing outside talking to someone that two guests arrive at your house, I nod a greeting in your direction. Later that night I hear quarrel from your house (we are living in a city, we are living close). The next day, I wonder why no-one except you leaves your house, when Jim and John come by to pick up their bread I ask them whether they've heard anything. And what they thought of your guests. You see, the noise piqued my interests, and I'm a pretty nosy neighbor.

So a few days go by and I see no signs of your guests. Not at all. You aren't getting extra bread for me for them, although you usually get your bread from me, but off course I'm too scared to ask what's going on. So after a week or so, somebody comes asking for two guys fitting the description of those who entered your house.

Now what am I going to tell them? If I don't know you that well, I'd say: "Well sure, they entered there a week ago, then I heard quarrel. Haven't heard from or seen them since. Vortigern seems to be doing fine though."

I actually believe this would be MUCH more common in a medieval society. Because in small societies, people are looking out for eachother. If I had been a little handier with a sword, and I'd seen two guests walk into my neighbors house and then heard quarrel, I might have rushed in to attempt to help you. If I had been a little more courageous I would have knocked on your door the next day. You might tell me a straight lie and that they have gone away. But if I sense something queer about your lie, well. I guess it just wont settle my curiosity. At the very least, I wont be the next one to come into your house as a guest.

So in every society I think nosy neighbors are quite common. And these people could really get you in trouble if somebody does come looking for these two.

Off course, if they were just rabble off the street who had no friends, nobody will miss them, and nobody will come looking for them. But do you think a lot of people actually have no-one that will miss them?

Granted I don't know much about Glorantha, but I don't think any society would totally disregard you inviting somebody in, and then killing them. If this was true, and could happen a lot. I would totally stop visiting people in such a society.

 

[Vortigern]

My point was that I think you seem to over-inflate the likelyhood of someone taking notice of these details which at the time would be trivial. And of the 'nosy' factor of neighbors, or that they will conclude that someone necessarily is 'up to no good' based on such information.

Also your assumptions about city-life I'm not sure hold true. Perhaps you do hear more as a neighbor in large cities, perhaps not... or at least not much that is useful or attributable to anyone in particular. Assumption that one could or should be able to make conclusive leaps of logic and information from such things is ... as I said before, stretching things. It seems like you -want- the person to be caught. I'd say at best perception rolls might be allowed, probably at a penalty. Then the information provided would have to be carefully judged based on the situation etc.

Yet, back to city living, in my experience... people don't react all that much to city noises. Or think much of them, unless they are terribly near at hand. Unless they actually have a relationship and motivation at stake to bring them into involvement, most people would genuinely rather not be for a variety of reasons.

Mmm. And perhaps you are more accustomed to nosy neighbors than I am. I tend to be a more private sort. I'm not sure if perhaps this is a cultural thing? Which would be an interesting thing to note when describing a setting. The degree of familiarity/privacy and ease of access etc. in society.

Anyway... the way you describe the reactions of people around this incident you make it seem almost as if everyone around suddenly transforms into something of detective all accompliced together to make sure the PCs don't get away with the course of action you didn't like.

People can and do get away with crimes. That doesn't mean that the society they live in condones them. It means they avoid getting caught and punished. We all know this happens... happens more than we would like, yes? Game-play is no different. In fact I feel it was, as long as you acted intelligently, largely easier to get away with crimes prior to forensics etc. That I feel was one reason punishments were so dramatically harsher. They knew they weren't catching everyone. Harshness of punishments for those they did catch was an intentional act of deterrence.

 

[Mongoose Pete]

My point was that I think you seem to over-inflate the likelyhood of someone taking notice of these details which at the time would be trivial. And of the 'nosy' factor of neighbors, or that they will conclude that someone necessarily is 'up to no good' based on such information.

I think some degree of understanding population densities and culture is required. Ancient Rome for example had a very high population density, but people tended to stick in their own local areas and look out for each other. This environment formed some of the first guilds and gangs recorded in history - associations based around a street or quarter, where the locals formed mutual protection groups - which later became political or overtly criminal as time went on.

Guys would sit around in drinking establishments, keeping an eye on the street - as would all the other merchants and store owners whose shops were built under the apartment blocks. You even had janitors guarding the entrances of these Insulae keeping track of visitors or at least keep petty thieves at bay. In fact in most ancient cultures life happens on the street since living quarters are too small and have such bad lighting you spent as little time inside as possible.

So the amount of neighbourly oversight could be significant.

In a smaller settlement the economic interdependence plus communal drinking habits will mean everyone will know every little thing that happens. Its not the age of newspapers, TV or internet, near enough the only source of media entertainment is gossip.

So there are other sociological factors involved than just the walls of a house. That said...

Also your assumptions about city-life I'm not sure hold true. Perhaps you do hear more as a neighbour in large cities, perhaps not... or at least not much that is useful or attributable to anyone in particular.

Again this could vary greatly. Rome was famous for its night-time noise which was satirised by authors of the period. On the other hand most insulae were poorly built with upper stories made of flimsy wood and plaster covered lathes - so there was little noise insulation. Combined with the sound reflecting/trapping nature of high rise buildings you'd be painfully aware of what was happening next door.

Indeed most pre-renaissance housing is built of wood & plaster or mud brick (depending where you are in the world) with little or no space between homes in urban areas. Even solid wood houses are rare outside of northern climes.

 

[ajs]

Accepting there is no police force in Pavis (though I thought one of the Prax tribes did this role) the act will be known about
Remembering the world of Glorantha
The dead (Happa Darrans) were likely to worship a god. The friends of the dead might be able to contact the spirits of the departed and find out what happened
What about the chances of either of the slain coming back as a ghost, wraith etc.
I'm assuming that no funeral rights were performed e.g. the bodies were disposed of in the nearest pig pen
So the souls of the deceased might be a bit upset, considerably more likely for the man with his throat cut
They may haunt the area or their slayers. They could even get their living family or co-worshippers to seek vengeance
I think I'd rather deal with a physical police force than a ghost bent on vengeance

 

[HalfOrc HalfBiscuit]

First of all, let me say I'm not at all familiar with Glorantha, so I can't comment on the mores that might operate in Pavis. But I thought the following might be of interest regarding law in ancient cultures - and particularly the likelihood that associates of the dead men might bring an accusation against the PCs:

Article 3 of the Code of Hammurabai:

"If any one bring an accusation of any crime before the elders, and does not prove what he has charged, he shall, if it be a capital offense charged, be put to death"

(Full Code here: http://public.wsu.edu/~dee/MESO/CODE.HTM).

 

[duncan_disorderly]

I think some degree of understanding population densities and culture is required. Ancient Rome for example had a very high population density, but people tended to stick in their own local areas and look out for each other.

And I think this would also apply in Glorantha - Pavis is a fairly multi-cultural city (in both 2nd and 3rd ages) - If the Darra HapPan PC's are in a Darra Happan neigbourhood then the chances are that when the (non-DH) victims friends come making enquiries, no one even remembers seeing them. If, on the other hand, their neighbours are all Orlanthi then Mixster's "nosy neighbours" may well be gossiping about mysterious noises and dissappearing guests before any sort of investigation is launched.

So the amount of neighbourly oversight could be significant.

In a smaller settlement the economic interdependence plus communal drinking habits will mean everyone will know every little thing that happens. Its not the age of newspapers, TV or internet, near enough the only source of media entertainment is gossip.

Yes. I don't think anyone in a city is going to be initially suspicious when two strangers dissapear. Seeing people you don't know is a common enough phenomenon that you wouldn't automatically remark on it.

In a smaller settlement, strangers are automatically interesting, and there movements are far more likely to be remarked on...

Also your assumptions about city-life I'm not sure hold true. Perhaps you do hear more as a neighbour in large cities, perhaps not... or at least not much that is useful or attributable to anyone in particular.

Again this could vary greatly. Rome was famous for its night-time noise which was satirised by authors of the period. On the other hand most insulae were poorly built with upper stories made of flimsy wood and plaster covered lathes - so there was little noise insulation. Combined with the sound reflecting/trapping nature of high rise buildings you'd be painfully aware of what was happening next door.

...Although how much attention you pay to it might vary. In a quiet, peaceful neighbourhood, the sound of a fight may attract more attention than in a rough, noisy neigbourhood. Swords (and Befuddle spells) do not necessarily command the same attention grabbing volume as large calibre firearms in an enclosed space! The noise from next door may carry in to your house, but unless you are specifically trying to listen to what's going on there, it's still competing with the noises from your own house, the street outside and the noises of your other neighbours.

I think this one could go which ever way the GM wants to take it. Depending on who the victims friends are, they might take "direct" action themselves, or go to "the authorities" (I'm pretty sure Lord Pavis will take a dim view of people killing each other inside his city). The characters neighbours might have noticed the fight and/or dissapearance, and might or might not be motivated to get involved in the situation (Blackmail is always a possibility too). However it would not be inconceivable that nothing more is heard about it either. (Or maybe in 6 months time, the victim's brother turns up looking for revenge)

 

[soltakss]

Yes, so there is nothing to stop a PC from doing anything he/seh wants.

However, every action has conequences.

That's how I would handle it as a GM.

Send friends/alies of the killed NPCs looking for them.
Have the body discovered in some way, unless it was completely destroyed.
Have the ghost of the killed innocent NPC come back and haunt the PC killer.
Maybe get Zero (the Pavis Detective) on the case as an interested NPC
You could even get the NPC's allies to pay off the local healers and stop them from being healed.

All of which could spawn a number of scenarios from a single act.

 

[Mixster]

Anyway... the way you describe the reactions of people around this incident you make it seem almost as if everyone around suddenly transforms into something of detective all accompliced together to make sure the PCs don't get away with the course of action you didn't like.

Now this is a strawman argument, and it is wrong.
I completely condone of this action as part of the game. Both IC and OOC

However, I don't find it realistic that in something that could be a crowded city, with tons of people in the street at almost all times, and thin clay walls in your houses, that you can actually fight someone with a sword and not be heard. He might be even more noisy and yell at you while fighting with his sword.

If I were awoken in my home by my neighbor fighting with swords (which I am, even through concrete walls 95% sure I would hear), in medieval times I would be scared shitless. It would only seem natural to me to investigate this matter. And if I knew the elders of the community would care, I would perhaps even mention it to them. At the very least. I wouldn't visit you the next time you invited me but find some excuse. (Sorry I can't go, I have to visit my cousin in this other part of town).

I don't believe getting away with murder in small local societies is as easy as you think.

However, this is assuming the PCs were in a city. If they were living on their own farm, and two annoying NPCs came by and attacked them. Killing them and burying the bodies would be no problem. When their relatives come looking for them, answering: "well, I can't tell exactly what they looked like, but some guys did come by a few weeks ago, I think they went that way. Might be the ones you are looking for" Is as easy as cake, and they could just as well have been killed by a band of robbers.

However if somebody heard it, at all. Rumor will spread. And the rumor that you like to fight visitors with swords in the night is probably not a good reputation to have in a small community. Especially if the PCs are new in the community, this could be seen as an excuse for saying: "Those new ones are always causing trouble." Which is pretty much human nature.
Even in a place that lacks the law to protect these individuals, the community will.

 

[Darran]

Ok, let's look at it from this perspective. Say you are in a mediocre sized medieval town.

Pavis isn't a middle age town but considered a late bronze age one for the most part.

 

[Mixster]

Ok, let's look at it from this perspective. Say you are in a mediocre sized medieval town.

Pavis isn't a middle age town but considered a late bronze age one for the most part.

Image

That's even better. Assuming a relatively un-noisy night in such a town (which there likely would be, there's not many noisy things to do during the night). The whole neighborhood or half the town would have heard fighting. Not everybody would be able to pinpoint it as fighting or were exactly the noise would be coming from. But the more curious villagers would be asking questions. And trying to find out what is happening around them.

 

[Simulacrum]

So what did the PCs do with the bodies? do they need to clean up the scene of the killing? I don't see that anywhere, or did I miss it? Whatever the immediate choice made at the gaming table, its the next step that says whether the character(s) gains a murky reputation of being a killer without conscience, or simply that of someone not to be messed with.

Perhaps they go outdoors to shout about how they were assaulted, defended themselves and took action they are willing to admit to in public. Or perhaps they are dumping bodies in a well or sewer in the dead of night. Either way there's a roleplay outcome, and depending on the case there may be a clandestine or public effort to seek retribution.

 

[taxboy]

So what did the PCs do with the bodies? do they need to clean up the scene of the killing? I don't see that anywhere, or did I miss it? Whatever the immediate choice made at the gaming table, its the next step that says whether the character(s) gains a murky reputation of being a killer without conscience, or simply that of someone not to be messed with.

Perhaps they go outdoors to shout about how they were assaulted, defended themselves and took action they are willing to admit to in public. Or perhaps they are dumping bodies in a well or sewer in the dead of night. Either way there's a roleplay outcome, and depending on the case there may be a clandestine or public effort to seek retribution.

We finished the session just at this point, so no idea what is going to happen next!

I can report back here as this thread seems to have taken on a life of its own!