Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Paul Hopebringer 08-02-05, 11:38 AM	I'm looking for situations that don't have any right answers, or where the right answer is really hard to find. Tough issues. I'm planning to use them as roleplaying warm up exercises to strengthen my players skills. I don't care if it is a "rail-roading" situation or anything like that, it's a warm up. If they are really good and not rail-roading, I might use them in my campain, but otherwise, it is fine. The point is to come up with really hard desisions that could come up. Things like "do I kill the demon child, or let him grow up to be the proficied demon lord of the nation for a thousand years?", "Do I act to save a thousand lives, while killing one, or do I remain passive and not be responsible for the death of one, but as a result of inaction, thousands die?", "Should I kill him to end his suffering, or let him suffer, but not be guilty of murder?" are all what I'm looking for, I just what more examples, and more specific examples (stories) would be nice. I'd like to make a test or something that will let me see how they think about moral situations. Maturity is the name of the game, the tougher the situation is morally, the better. If it is an artificial situation, fine. I'll either like it, or I won't, but I'm not going to mock you for it or anything like that. (From what I've seen, you have a right to worry about that sort of thing...some people just don't aprove of the use of questions with no right answer...) Anyway, if the question has a right answer, that is fine to, but my campain is a very mature exalted campain, and I need some tests for there exaltedness.
Icarus, Wolf of Hades 08-02-05, 12:02 PM	I think an interesting situation is one that's actually posed by an image in the BoED itself. A paladin levels a sword at what appear to be two fiendish lovers of some kind. "The paladin must choose between destroying evil or honoring love" is the caption, or something to that effect. Evil beings practicing some kind of pure behavior is always a tough scenario for characters to decide upon, assuming they're not the most zealous anti-evil crusader with a sword ever. Wanna make it even more interesting? What about genuine love between a human and an evil outsider? Not an easy scenario to judge.
Sir_Darien 08-12-05, 10:37 PM	The chapter in BoED that spells out how exalted characters should handle these sort of lose-lose situations has caused far more contraversy in my group than VoP and the assorted other overpowered abilities in the book. My group is, like yours, a group of experienced ROLEplayers who thought a dive into the exalted game would be fun. We came up with a group that consisted of: Exalted NG Cleric of Lathander Exalted LG Paladin of Lathander Exalted LG Monk/Cleric/Sacred Fist of Lathander LG Dwaven Fighter who worshipped Moradin (no exalted abilities) and me: NG Sorcerer who worshipped Mystra (no exalted abilities) On the surface it should seem that this party would have no trouble coexisting as a unit. As long as everyone stuck to their faith and alignment there should be no problem, right? Wrong. The first major problem began when an enemy yuan-ti sorceress surrendered in battle, rather than fighting to the death. She was neutral evil, but the party felt they would be doing wrong if they put her to death so they took her prisoner and decided they would take her to the nearest temple of Lathander and ask for assistance in keeping her from becoming a further danger. As a party we didn't know what yuan-ti were capable of, so we were unaware of her ability to polymorph into a snake. After she had traveled with us for 2 days, she turned into a snake while the Dwarf was on watch, dominated him, and left camp after instructing the Dwarf to wait 10 minutes and then attack us in our sleep. The dwarf killed the cleric, but the resulting commotion woke the rest of us, and we subdued the Dwarf before anyone else was seriously hurt. We used a scroll of raise dead on the cleric, then tracked the yuan-ti back to her lair, fought through her guard, defeated her again, but once again she surrendered rather than fighting to the death. Now the sorceress was at this point responsible for the death of one of the members of the group, and had already surrendered and escaped once, so I'm thinking, "No way am I falling for that again." (I have no idea in character how she escaped in the first place, so I am completey unconfident in our ability to hold her.) However the paladin and the monk begin arguing that we must take her captive if she offers surrender. Finally we reach a consensus that we can take her captive, but she must remain under the effect of the cleric's coma spell (sleep that lasts for hours) as we travel. (This took all of our clerics highest level (6th) spell slots, which I was not happy about, but it was a workable plan) We would wake her twice per day to let her eat and such. Two days later while we had her awake she turned into a snake to slip her bonds, and attacked us. We defeated her for a third time without suffering serious losses, but she again surrendered. This time the dwarf had had enough and he put her down for good. The paladin, monk, and cleric were angry that he had done so, and when we came to the next town, we had a decision to make regarding whether or not the party could function together. Basically it came down to the paladin, cleric, and monk insisting that the Dwarf swear an oath that he would never again kill an opponent who surrendered. The dwarf said that he would never kill someone the first time they surrendered, but he would not promise anything more. The Paladin and others decided that they would not travel with someone who did not share their moral code, and asked the dwarf to leave. The dwarf's player, being mature decided just to drop the matter and create a new character, an exalted human ranger. The second problem came up when we travelled to Baldur's Gate. We were looking for a slaver, who turned out to be a corrupt city councilman. Before we could figure out who he was, he had us framed for a murder. The guard cornered us (we could have easily defeated them, but most of them were neutral or good and just trying to do their jobs.) Magical escape was unfortunately not possible because an earlier set of combats in the day had pretty much wiped out our spells, and elite thieves hired by the councilman had stolen some of our loot the previous week. So we surrendered peacefully, and were tossed in a cell that contained an antimagic field. Guards would come in and out every day to bring us our meals, so I figured that was our time to strike. The group refused to kill the guards on the grounds that they weren't evil, and refused to subdue them on the account that they would be, get this, punished for allowing us to escape! I couldn't believe it. My character, being a sorcerer with less than ten strength was pretty much inneffective in an antimagic field, and could not overpower the guards on his own, so he was basically stuck. After the first week of incarceration, I'd had it. I waited for the guard to come in and leave our food, and as he was leaving, I made a break for the door. I barely got out into the hallway, but as I did I cast a sending spell that contacted an old friend (the dwarf) and let him know of my predicament. I was then shoved back in the cell. Two days later the dwarf and some of his friends staged a jailbreak, during which no one was killed, but the rest of the party wouldn't leave. Disgusted (in character), i left the group and came back with a new character. Eventually (several MONTHS later) the councilman tried to have the group quietly executed and they made their escape attempt at the expense of the duke's guard, who were for the most part evil. This conclude's my personal experience with the difficult choice situations. Now, here are a few I've thought up for games down the road. BBEG kidnapps all children from village, tells party he'll kill them all if they don't retrieve an evil artifact, locked away in a place that only good-aligned creatures can reach. BBEG kidnapps all children from village, tells party he'll kill them all if they don't defend him from the good-aligned elite troops that just broke down his castle door. Murderous, rapacious BBEG has magic item that if he dies at the hand of another, he will be reborn as something far more powerful. The previously noble king of a strictly lawful kingdom has become ill and insane in his old age. The priests and healers can do nothing for him. The law stipulates that the only way he can leave the throne is through death or resignation, and in his madness he refuses to resign. The prince approaches the party as the kings decrees are spreading bloodshed and chaos thoughout the land. Will they help him unseat his father? Well I kind of got a bit wordy there, but just doing my best to give you a hand. Good luck in your exalted game, and may you have a slightly more cohesive party than we did.
Melpomene 08-12-05, 10:40 PM	You could use my "crucible" scenario... aught to be in the search engine somewhere...
Loren Pechtel 08-14-05, 01:02 AM	We defeated her for a third time without suffering serious losses, but she again surrendered. This time the dwarf had had enough and he put her down for good. The paladin, monk, and cleric were angry that he had done so, and when we came to the next town, we had a decision to make regarding whether or not the party could function together. Basically it came down to the paladin, cleric, and monk insisting that the Dwarf swear an oath that he would never again kill an opponent who surrendered. I don't see the problem with killing her. She's clearly demonstrated that it's a false surrender. Thus what obligation is there to accept it?
Ogre4Hire 08-14-05, 03:51 PM	Ditto. You know the old saying "Fool me once..." From the sounds of things, a few of your party members don't seem to know the difference between Exalted and stupid.
Sapp 08-14-05, 04:43 PM	I'd say either stupid good or true stupid (http://boards.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=422550) It's difficult to set up difficult choices with the intent of forcing your players to lose their exalted status, if that's what you're going for. The BoED is pretty explicit. No explicitly evil actions, ever. The ends never justify the means. If an exalted character was given a choice to retrieve/steal an evil artifact for a BBEG or suffer the death of an innocent, he still wouldn't help the BBEG. The ends (saving the innocent) doesn't justify the means (stealing an artifact, giving it to a BBEG). It's not the exalted character's fault that the innocent will die. It's entirely the fault of the situation or the person who set the situation up (the BEEG). However, I guess we could come up with some choices that don't involve evil actions... rather evil inactions, because that isn't covered by the BoED I believe. For example, an evil blackguard is going to steal an artifact herself. She isn't asking the players to help her. She just wants to be left alone. In this case, choosing not to stop her would be evil through inaction, which isn't as explicitly evil as evil through action. However, even though she is commiting an evil act (being evil and all), her goal is actually to use the artifact to save a loved one. The ends don't justify the means, so she's still evil. However, a life is at stake, and so the evil that the players would be commiting through inaction (not trying to stop her) isn't quite as evil anymore. I think the right choice is a little more subtle in this case, because there's no explicitly evil "action" to avoid. Well. What do you think?
WarDragon 08-14-05, 04:47 PM	Indeed. Heck, the BoED even covers that exact situation! Look under Vow of Peace; if an enemy violates their surrender, your may "deal with them as you see fit," without losing Exalted status.
runestar 08-15-05, 08:00 AM	Couldn't you run the campaign such that the PCs "borrow" the artifact, wait for the children to be released, then try to reclaim it? Afterwards, they can always return it. Of course, I expect the BBEG has no intention of honouring his promise, but it still means they have to try. They cannot just sit back and see innocents die. Then again, you could argue that there are no innocents in this world, since it is each and every one of us, by our actions and inactions, that shape the world into what it is today. So everyone is guilty and deserves to be judged.
Sapp 08-15-05, 02:12 PM	I'll assume you meant that the PCs "lend" the artifact to the BBEG who "borrows" it from them. Unfortunately, when the book says that "the end never justifies the means" they are completely discrete and indiscreet about it (hehe, sorry about the play on words). Just because you plan to get the artifact back, does not justify you stealing it for the BBEG in the first place. It's similar for a rogue who steals a priceless holy relic to justify his actions by saying, "Oh... I'll give it back... someday. Well, it'll be in my will when I die. I'll be leaving it for the church." As for everyone being guilty and deserving of judgment, that doesn't matter. An "innocent" refers only to the current situation. Innocent in question here is only innocent because he/she has nothing to do with the BBEG's plot, and yet, he/she will die as a result of the plot. The problem is that the BoED clearly shuts down some of the power of the DM to create these alignment testing situations that could end up screwing with his players. The writers must have foresaw that some unusually sadistic DMs (not implying that the OP is sadistic, just some DMs in general), the same ones that constantly pick on poor paladins, will try to void the new abilities described by the BoED. Its bad because Paladins were difficult enough to play against these DMs. The fact that exalted is described as even greater than average "Good", makes life for players that want to use the BoED impossible. That would make the book useless. So they cleverly set a standard that makes role-playing "exalted" much easier. They eliminated the gray areas by defining "good" and "evil". They are not up for interpretation as defined in the BoED. They are not concepts like they are in real life. They are forces of nature, discrete and separate from each other. The ends never justify the means. Even if you were ordered to kill one innocent to save an entire world, you would NOT do it. Exalted characters supposedly know that "good" and "evil" are multiversal concepts that span throughout many cosmos. By saving one world, you have slightly doomed billions more by shifting cosmic balance. An evil act, even one with very good intentions, is a concession to the fact that "evil" is more necessary and more reliable than "good" is in the multiverse. You are taking the side of evil, which automatically makes you slightly more evil. You do not kill the 1 innocent to save a world. The fault lies squarely on the BBEG, God, or Primeval Fate that set up the situation on you just to make a point that "evil is necessary". Personally, I like it better this way. We won't have hundreds of posts asking whether an exalted character should lose his status for this no-win situation or that no-win situation. It offers a STABLE, RELIABLE means for PCs to argue and keep their exalted status if they choose to role-play that, without being tortured by whimsical DMs. EDIT: So as you can see, it would be extremely hard to find a situation that forces your players to commit evil actions if they want to stay "exalted". However, I believe that evil "inactions" aren't covered by the BoED, so that might work.
runestar 08-15-05, 10:42 PM	Or what about this senario: the PCs have a mage craft a replica of said artifact and enchant it with spells like nystul's magic aura and the like, to fool the BBEG. I don't have BOED, but I cannot stop wondering what kind of exalted would the PCs be if they routinely ignore such calls for help simply because its none of their business. Seems more neutral than good to me. I believe there will always be a solution around said dilemmas. Some just aren't as apparent.
Sapp 08-16-05, 01:32 AM	Yeah, it bugs me too. ... but I see it as a good thing. I don't like the thought of too many paladins or exalted characters being screwed over by DMs who have a vastly different view of "real life moral dilemmas" than their players. It's unfair to the players, I think, because the DM always has the final word. It would be lame to continually leave a group because of the same moral conflicts. The BoED solves these dilemmas by giving us strict, "take it or leave it" solutions to these hard problems. I have to agree though, there probably IS a solution besides "oh just ignore the innocent, because I'm exalted and can't help by commiting an evil act." Obviously, an exalted character would at least attempt to do something without breaking his exalted code of ethics. What you suggested is a good idea. Giving him a fake version of the artifact. I'm certain that's not evil. So yes, I agree that there probably are solutions besides choosing "the lesser of two evils (in my character's best judgment)". But it sounds to me like the OP wants a situation where his players are more or less forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. For that, I'd suggest a situation that forces them to choose between two evil "inactions". Should I NOT stop the blackguard from committing an evil act to save her lover (which is the only way to save him), or should I NOT save her lover. In this case, there's no explicit evil "action" for the players to avoid. It might not be severe as the consequences of an evil "action", but they certainly wouldn't be able to find an easy answer through the BoED.
Paul Hopebringer 08-16-05, 03:48 PM	There is always out of the box thinking. 1. Give Evil person Artifact to save lover 2. Allow Evil guys lover to die (3.) I think I'll let the evil guy join my party and we'll save her together. The original situation didn't mention the reason, but that is fine. If the case was that he needed it to save someone, good. If it was some other reason, You'de probably need to come up with another solution. Hmm... there are some more tough situations in there... I guess I'd help kill the king, he has clearly tradgically fallen, and must be stopped. Or, the way I run my campains... you could try to change the stupid law. If changing it doesn't work, the focus of the campain then becomes overthrowing the corrupt government. Peace first, War last, as is the way of Exalted Good. I don't want to here about a "good" nation that is so stupic (lawful) that it won't change a law that is causing so much pain and suffering. Clearly, it would be a good action to take them out of power if they can't handle the power that they are in. If the BBEG wants protection from the good people, and wants the party to handle it, the best thing to do would be to tell the good guys to back off. Arrange something with the BBEG to get the children back. If he won't give them back, find a way to kill him as quickly and efficently as possible, preferably without using the guards at all, even as a distraction (they'de make him nervous...) Simply don't kill the man with the artifact. If he is knocked out, you can remove and destroy the artifact, and send him to jail. If he is to powerful for jail to work, killing him might be the only way. As for the book removing any questions... arg. I don't like the alighnment system the way it is anyway... I don't like it cut and dry, I'm rather fond of affecting my players on a deeply personal level. My group consists of friends, and we'll sort it out on our own. I'm running and "Exalted" campain, but I don't care if the situation wouldn't ever come up because of the writen rules. Killing a foe that surrendered... three times... and tried to kill you each time it unsurrendered, is not what I would call an evil act. I would like situations that either are, or at least seem like exceptions to the rules of what is good and what is evil. How about some situations that make you wonder if it is really worth being exalted good. Some other situations that have an instictive answer, but have results that you wouldn't normally anticipate, and would make you wonder about things a bit. Some situations that really show the difference between Good and Exalted good. Some situations that really, really hurt when you make the right disision.
Sapp 08-16-05, 09:03 PM	Don't worry, I'm pretty sure the BoED mentions that if a prisoner broke the terms of surrender once before, then you may deal with him however you like (no torture, just a straight execution). So the BoED doesn't actually get in the way of that... it's practical... to a degree. And about your response... 1. Give Evil person Artifact to save lover 2. Allow Evil guys lover to die That's not what I said at all. I tried to be clear. It was "don't stop her from taking the artifact herself" or "don't help her save lover." The way you put it, there's a definite "evil action" to avoid (giving artifact to evil blackguard who will use it for selfish purposes at the expense of your church), and there's an "evil inaction" (allow evil blackguard's lover to die). The way you put it, there's an obvious action to take "allow evil blackguard's lover to die", because partaking in an evil action is a weakness, a concession that evil (stealing from your own church) is sometimes the only way to do things. ... but even then, the right action would probably be to try your best to save her lover without betraying your church, even if it costs him his life. About your request for a situation that makes one wonder if it's worth it to be exalted... I hate to point out the cliche, but a lot of movies have that theme. A guy lets the girl of his dreams slip by because "it would be for the best // she would be happier that way // I can't support her... etc." Also, another stereotypical way would be to throw powerful items at them that test their alignment. "Oh god! We found an artifact. It's so good, I really need it. Crap, only evil people can use it..." Or, the item in question is not evil. It's extremely powerful, an artifact useable for any alignment. The problem is, it belongs to someone else. And there's proof of it. Eventually, the PCs bump into the owner who wants the artifact back. Even something as simple as an attractive/powerful cohort might tempt a paladin. Perhaps the paladin really wants a chaotic good cohort. Perhaps the cohort is lawful evil, etc. I don't know if you really want this though. The players might just get sick of playing exalted and decide to switch (to get better cohorts, items, etc) if you keep doing this.