catch and release XP [Archive] - Wizards Community

catch and release XP [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Algorithm_X
08-02-05, 02:08 PM GOOD=MERCIFUL

I like this because it is a simple formula reduced to its base parts. But to round out the equation

good method = merciful = (catch villians) + (release villians) = reoccuring villians = XP > evil method = slaughter all

reduced this comes out to be

good method > evil method

or

merciful > slaughter all

Releasing villians for further torment means more bountiful XP harvests, just look at superheros, they reap xp from the same villians over and over again, this is the conservationist's way of gathering xp.

:P
LCD2YOU
08-02-05, 02:23 PM If all you do is catch the bad guys and take them to the authorities, that's fine.

But if these guys escape, killing guards in the process and costing 100s if not 1000s of GP to fix the fortifications that were wrecked, I hope that you will expect a much different greeting the next time you bring them back to those same authorities. The new reward could just say simply "Reward: Wanted DEAD" and no haggling. Example if the authorities see you again and the bad guys are still alive, the best is that they kill them there on the spot.

If you take them to another set of authorities and the whole thing happens again, I will not consider you "good" at all. My reasoning is that you are just having fun capturing these guys, taking them somewhere to do more harm and trying to collect reward money.

After a very short while, the "goodness" of your actions wears thin.
tarkin
08-02-05, 03:10 PM I strongly disagree.

Catching and returning them to the government for disposal has the following GOOD things about it:

1) The government can fix errors (I.E. Whoops, we sent you out after the wrong man. This guy is innocent. Thanks for catching him though. The real bad guy is his brother George. Go get him now.)

2) It allows the government to decide to go with a lesser punishment then merely death. (Yes he stole 50,000 gp from the king, but no we don't want to kill him. We just want to punish him. Oh and by the way, thanks for returning the king's treasure.)

3) It allows the government to question the bad guys before they kill them. (Where are your allies? Why did you do X? Who sold you the Poison?)

4) It let syou deal with creatures that are by nature good, but doing evil. (Dominated for example).
mvincent
08-02-05, 03:22 PM Yup. Metagame-wise, not killing your BBEG's is to your advantage, because:
1) You likely already know his tricks and stats.
2) If he's dead, your DM will just put you up against something you're unfamiliar with that has the same CR.
3) Your DM may appreciate being able to reuse all of his hard work
4) The villain may respect that you didn't kill him, and may one day return the favor (or at least put you in a death trap* as opposed to killing you outright).
5) Reoccurring villains are more satisfying RP-wise (as well as being more cinematic)

* After telling you all about his villianous plan
DragonDeadite
08-02-05, 04:04 PM Good/Evil is subjective. I see turning in a person to the authorities where he'll be kept in a cage and eventualy hung as an evil thing, it would be the good thing to give him an honorable death right then and there and have played it as such on more than one occasion... of course, the character I'm playing right now has 4, maybe 5 Taint points because of evil things he's done.... :cool:

:Dragon:
Vaelan
08-03-05, 12:35 AM Releasing villians for further torment means more bountiful XP harvests
But they already know your tricks if you release them, and if they know your tricks, they pose a much larger threat next time you encounter them,
Cymraegmorgan
08-03-05, 01:10 AM Releasing villians for further torment means more bountiful XP harvests,

And when the villain kills dozens or hundreds of innocents for the second or third time you failed to do the right thing, you are no longer one of the Good Guys, you are a selfish evil prig who cares more about his or her own pathetic career than you do about the lives of the innocent.
There reaches a point where your "mercy" becomes negligence. Negligence in the face of evil is evil in and of itself.

BBEG + your sword in his gut = the greater good
mvincent
08-03-05, 01:20 AM But they already know your tricks if you release them, and if they know your tricks, they pose a much larger threat next time you encounter them,Meta-game wise, your DM will still know your tactics. If your DM actually doesn't prep his encounters to deal with your tactics, you're probably not challenging him enough ;)
mvincent
08-03-05, 01:37 AM And when the villain kills dozens or hundreds of innocents for the second or third time you failed to do the right thing, you are no longer one of the Good Guys, you are a selfish evil prig who cares more about his or her own pathetic career than you do about the lives of the innocent.
There reaches a point where your "mercy" becomes negligence. Negligence in the face of evil is evil in and of itself.

BBEG + your sword in his gut = the greater goodWe're still talking about a make believe fantasy game-world here, right?

While I'm sure many players get a vicarious, visceral thrill from playing a pragmatic killer, it does very little to advance the genre. In literature, the heros don't kill the bad guys (I know this because I watch a lot of TV and such). Same thing in real life (I know this because I am a former soldier and cop). Killing is easy and commonplace in D&D, but I'm impressed by players that do something different.
Cymraegmorgan
08-03-05, 01:58 AM We're still talking about a make believe fantasy game-world here, right?

While I'm sure many players get a vicarious, visceral thrill from playing a pragmatic killer, it does very little to advance the genre. In literature, the heros don't kill the bad guys (I know this because I watch a lot of TV and such). Same thing in real life (I know this because I am a former soldier and cop). Killing is easy and commonplace in D&D, but I'm impressed by players that do something different.

Yes, but this idea is not about reforming evil, it is a metagaming munchkinism to gain xp. To borrow your phrase, this does little to advance the genre.

In literature, the heros don't kill the bad guys :confused: :confused:
Every hero from Hamlet to Hawkmoon kills the bad guy. Maybe not in politically correct modern tv cop dramas, but in all the great classics, the bad guy goes down.
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable
08-03-05, 02:12 AM By all means, let him go. After he's secretly conditionned/booby traped/neuteured/taking ritual samples/attuned to a bad thing/cursed/maimed/crippled/forcefully converted/brainwashed/mind-controled/charmed/addicted/conjectured/geased/homing-beaconned/rendered limbless/publicly humiliated, of course.

The role-playing possibilities are astounding.

Warning: The author disavow any responsability if a ****** off DM snap and either random damage your PC to Kingdom Come or bodily explain his objections to your treament of his beloved NPC.
Vaelan
08-03-05, 09:17 AM Meta-game wise, your DM will still know your tactics.
And he won't use that knowledge if the villain wouldn't have access to it.
mvincent
08-03-05, 11:31 AM Yes, but this idea is not about reforming evil, it is a metagaming munchkinism to gain xp. To borrow your phrase, this does little to advance the genre. I was thinking it was a good excuse to do both. Pointing out a meta-game reason for PC's to encourage recurring villians seemed like a good idea (especially if it also encouraged villians to not kill PC's outright as well). But I wasn't really thinking about "reforming" the bad guys (which would eliminate them as a recurring villian), just keeping them around as viable options for future sagas.

Every hero from Hamlet to Hawkmoon kills the bad guy. Maybe not in politically correct modern tv cop dramas, but in all the great classics, the bad guy goes down. Certainly, every villian eventually needs to go down (and even then, they sometimes come back), but the recurring villian is a cliche for a reason. It tends to be difficult in RPG's though since PC's generally just kill anything they find... which can also be fine/enjoyable, but it tends to become video-game like after awhile.
The Half-Orc Wizard
08-03-05, 07:22 PM Anyone else see Mystery Men? Despite being a great movie, it deals with this topic. For those who havn't seen it, I'll give a brief description. Captain Amazing is a superhero, and he keeps on killing off or permanently disposing of his villains. Eventually, he has nothing left to fight against. So, he does what you suggest, releasing a bad guy, his arch-nemesis Casanova Frankenstein, back into the world to simply beat him again. Well (with the help of some faulty level-flipping by the Blue Raja) Amazing gets fried to a crisp by some laser thing created by Casanova.

The moral? Sure, you can release your BBEG back into the world. But who's to say that he won't defeat you next time you meet? Adventurers arn't the only ones who get stronger.
mvincent
08-03-05, 09:12 PM Sure, you can release your BBEG back into the world. But who's to say that he won't defeat you next time you meet? Adventurers arn't the only ones who get stronger.Sure, but the idea is that the DM could do this just as easily (or more easily) with a brand new villian instead.

Note: To make this work, you generally want to release the ones that are underpowered for their CR, or are otherwise easily defeatable, or at least have a high treasure percentage for their CR (Dragons and Krakens are best). And don't let on to the DM that the encounter was anything but tough and deadly ;)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Algorithm_X 08-02-05, 02:08 PM	GOOD=MERCIFUL I like this because it is a simple formula reduced to its base parts. But to round out the equation good method = merciful = (catch villians) + (release villians) = reoccuring villians = XP > evil method = slaughter all reduced this comes out to be good method > evil method or merciful > slaughter all Releasing villians for further torment means more bountiful XP harvests, just look at superheros, they reap xp from the same villians over and over again, this is the conservationist's way of gathering xp. :P
LCD2YOU 08-02-05, 02:23 PM	If all you do is catch the bad guys and take them to the authorities, that's fine. But if these guys escape, killing guards in the process and costing 100s if not 1000s of GP to fix the fortifications that were wrecked, I hope that you will expect a much different greeting the next time you bring them back to those same authorities. The new reward could just say simply "Reward: Wanted DEAD" and no haggling. Example if the authorities see you again and the bad guys are still alive, the best is that they kill them there on the spot. If you take them to another set of authorities and the whole thing happens again, I will not consider you "good" at all. My reasoning is that you are just having fun capturing these guys, taking them somewhere to do more harm and trying to collect reward money. After a very short while, the "goodness" of your actions wears thin.
tarkin 08-02-05, 03:10 PM	I strongly disagree. Catching and returning them to the government for disposal has the following GOOD things about it: 1) The government can fix errors (I.E. Whoops, we sent you out after the wrong man. This guy is innocent. Thanks for catching him though. The real bad guy is his brother George. Go get him now.) 2) It allows the government to decide to go with a lesser punishment then merely death. (Yes he stole 50,000 gp from the king, but no we don't want to kill him. We just want to punish him. Oh and by the way, thanks for returning the king's treasure.) 3) It allows the government to question the bad guys before they kill them. (Where are your allies? Why did you do X? Who sold you the Poison?) 4) It let syou deal with creatures that are by nature good, but doing evil. (Dominated for example).
mvincent 08-02-05, 03:22 PM	Yup. Metagame-wise, not killing your BBEG's is to your advantage, because: 1) You likely already know his tricks and stats. 2) If he's dead, your DM will just put you up against something you're unfamiliar with that has the same CR. 3) Your DM may appreciate being able to reuse all of his hard work 4) The villain may respect that you didn't kill him, and may one day return the favor (or at least put you in a death trap* as opposed to killing you outright). 5) Reoccurring villains are more satisfying RP-wise (as well as being more cinematic) * After telling you all about his villianous plan
DragonDeadite 08-02-05, 04:04 PM	Good/Evil is subjective. I see turning in a person to the authorities where he'll be kept in a cage and eventualy hung as an evil thing, it would be the good thing to give him an honorable death right then and there and have played it as such on more than one occasion... of course, the character I'm playing right now has 4, maybe 5 Taint points because of evil things he's done.... :cool: :Dragon:
Vaelan 08-03-05, 12:35 AM	Releasing villians for further torment means more bountiful XP harvests But they already know your tricks if you release them, and if they know your tricks, they pose a much larger threat next time you encounter them,
Cymraegmorgan 08-03-05, 01:10 AM	Releasing villians for further torment means more bountiful XP harvests, And when the villain kills dozens or hundreds of innocents for the second or third time you failed to do the right thing, you are no longer one of the Good Guys, you are a selfish evil prig who cares more about his or her own pathetic career than you do about the lives of the innocent. There reaches a point where your "mercy" becomes negligence. Negligence in the face of evil is evil in and of itself. BBEG + your sword in his gut = the greater good
mvincent 08-03-05, 01:20 AM	But they already know your tricks if you release them, and if they know your tricks, they pose a much larger threat next time you encounter them,Meta-game wise, your DM will still know your tactics. If your DM actually doesn't prep his encounters to deal with your tactics, you're probably not challenging him enough ;)
mvincent 08-03-05, 01:37 AM	And when the villain kills dozens or hundreds of innocents for the second or third time you failed to do the right thing, you are no longer one of the Good Guys, you are a selfish evil prig who cares more about his or her own pathetic career than you do about the lives of the innocent. There reaches a point where your "mercy" becomes negligence. Negligence in the face of evil is evil in and of itself. BBEG + your sword in his gut = the greater goodWe're still talking about a make believe fantasy game-world here, right? While I'm sure many players get a vicarious, visceral thrill from playing a pragmatic killer, it does very little to advance the genre. In literature, the heros don't kill the bad guys (I know this because I watch a lot of TV and such). Same thing in real life (I know this because I am a former soldier and cop). Killing is easy and commonplace in D&D, but I'm impressed by players that do something different.
Cymraegmorgan 08-03-05, 01:58 AM	We're still talking about a make believe fantasy game-world here, right? While I'm sure many players get a vicarious, visceral thrill from playing a pragmatic killer, it does very little to advance the genre. In literature, the heros don't kill the bad guys (I know this because I watch a lot of TV and such). Same thing in real life (I know this because I am a former soldier and cop). Killing is easy and commonplace in D&D, but I'm impressed by players that do something different. Yes, but this idea is not about reforming evil, it is a metagaming munchkinism to gain xp. To borrow your phrase, this does little to advance the genre. In literature, the heros don't kill the bad guys :confused: :confused: Every hero from Hamlet to Hawkmoon kills the bad guy. Maybe not in politically correct modern tv cop dramas, but in all the great classics, the bad guy goes down.
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable 08-03-05, 02:12 AM	By all means, let him go. After he's secretly conditionned/booby traped/neuteured/taking ritual samples/attuned to a bad thing/cursed/maimed/crippled/forcefully converted/brainwashed/mind-controled/charmed/addicted/conjectured/geased/homing-beaconned/rendered limbless/publicly humiliated, of course. The role-playing possibilities are astounding. Warning: The author disavow any responsability if a ****** off DM snap and either random damage your PC to Kingdom Come or bodily explain his objections to your treament of his beloved NPC.
Vaelan 08-03-05, 09:17 AM	Meta-game wise, your DM will still know your tactics. And he won't use that knowledge if the villain wouldn't have access to it.
mvincent 08-03-05, 11:31 AM	Yes, but this idea is not about reforming evil, it is a metagaming munchkinism to gain xp. To borrow your phrase, this does little to advance the genre. I was thinking it was a good excuse to do both. Pointing out a meta-game reason for PC's to encourage recurring villians seemed like a good idea (especially if it also encouraged villians to not kill PC's outright as well). But I wasn't really thinking about "reforming" the bad guys (which would eliminate them as a recurring villian), just keeping them around as viable options for future sagas. Every hero from Hamlet to Hawkmoon kills the bad guy. Maybe not in politically correct modern tv cop dramas, but in all the great classics, the bad guy goes down. Certainly, every villian eventually needs to go down (and even then, they sometimes come back), but the recurring villian is a cliche for a reason. It tends to be difficult in RPG's though since PC's generally just kill anything they find... which can also be fine/enjoyable, but it tends to become video-game like after awhile.
The Half-Orc Wizard 08-03-05, 07:22 PM	Anyone else see Mystery Men? Despite being a great movie, it deals with this topic. For those who havn't seen it, I'll give a brief description. Captain Amazing is a superhero, and he keeps on killing off or permanently disposing of his villains. Eventually, he has nothing left to fight against. So, he does what you suggest, releasing a bad guy, his arch-nemesis Casanova Frankenstein, back into the world to simply beat him again. Well (with the help of some faulty level-flipping by the Blue Raja) Amazing gets fried to a crisp by some laser thing created by Casanova. The moral? Sure, you can release your BBEG back into the world. But who's to say that he won't defeat you next time you meet? Adventurers arn't the only ones who get stronger.
mvincent 08-03-05, 09:12 PM	Sure, you can release your BBEG back into the world. But who's to say that he won't defeat you next time you meet? Adventurers arn't the only ones who get stronger.Sure, but the idea is that the DM could do this just as easily (or more easily) with a brand new villian instead. Note: To make this work, you generally want to release the ones that are underpowered for their CR, or are otherwise easily defeatable, or at least have a high treasure percentage for their CR (Dragons and Krakens are best). And don't let on to the DM that the encounter was anything but tough and deadly ;)