We currently have a debate at our table about the option of joining the cloak or not. Yes it's legal and we are not trying to change it, we are just wondering as player if we want all our arcane caster to join, just those who are willing to join or no one joining. And I am currious on what other people are thinking about that option.
We are playing AL legal, so no houserule or weird ruling will be allowed.
The fact:
Joining the Cloak cost 3downtime and 12gp (Edit from 36gp sorry for the miscalculation) per mission (a mission give back on average 10 downtime and 200gp+).
The cloak work for the high blade, the leader organization of an evil city
The cloak created an exception in the Arcane Banishment Edict, allowing arcane caster to exist and use their abilities for the well being of the High blade
The cloak offer benefit to the members: free scrolls, discount on lifestyle price, protection against bribes, fine, mutilation and death penalty (temporary death and perma death)
The cloak offer 1 flaw: if caught doing something against their oath: (Edit from the High blade) you DIRECTLY go to perma death (no dice roll, no Harper intervention, you automatically go to 22+, fry and cursed to the 9 hells)
In homegame, a cloak member could even receive bribes, but since we are playing AL we cannot increase the amount of treasure, so we cannot receive bribes
As a table we declare that a cloak PC reporting a non cloak PC is considered PvP and will be considered as disruptive, but to avoid the non cloak PC putting the cloak PC to death, We intepreted the Edict to allow PC that during a DDEX mission (a mission usually geared toward the protection of Mulmaster against the Evil Elemental cultist) the non cloak PC will work under the supervision of the cloak PC.
While most witness will believe that the non cloak PC is a member of the cloak since he work with an identified cloak PC they will simply not report it.
If a witness decide to still report it, then the cloak PC will explain that he needed help to protect the rule of the High Blade since the Evil Elemental Cultist are a theat to Mulmaster, the Noble and the high blades, and the non cloak member was under the supervision of the cloak member and used his spell only to protect Mulmaster. Once the adventure is over, if the non cloak member use a spell like (a bard making a show for exemple) he will still go throught the witness/sentencing process.
If the non cloak PC uses his spell in a way taht would put the cloak PC in trouble (attacking an "innocent" noble or using arcane spell in a manner that will not protect Mulmaster (like using minor illusion to enhance a bard performance) then the non cloak PC is considered disruptive since he's willingly making an action that will cause grief to the cloak PC.
as player we don't have access to the module so we don't know if the module themself offer benefits or penalties to the cloak member;
Small stuff like, you have disavantage to talk with the people in the zhent ghetto or you have advantage when talking with nobility etc...
Bigger stuff like, the zhent ghetto thug attack you when they learn you are a cloak member, or the city watch help you defeat the thug when they see you are a cloak member
Or even extra/less quest: the cloak offer you this side quest or when the zhent thug see you are a Cloak he attack you instead of giving you a side quest.
We assume that the 3 downtime day are used on Cloak business, like hunting down some innofensif arcane caster (a merchant using sky write to promote his store, or a bard using minor illusion to enhance it's show) or doing paperwork, appearing in trial as an expert witness etc... We assume those task since we are not gaining experience in doing so, so hunting down a powerfull wizard trying to destroy Mulmaster would be more something that should be done within a special mission within a DDEX (or even a DDEX itself) rather then a behind the curtain downtime activity.
Please avoid spoiler or at least put them in [.spoiler][/spoiler] box and if you are quoting someone please remove the spoiler box, since in the quote it display the spoiler box.
If you know there is special mission (or complete DDEX that require to have a cloak member) please post it without any spoiler (like simply say: yes their is some cloak only mission, just like there is Harper only mission)
QwertyAzerty wrote:
Sounds like a perfectly fine way to houseru...err..use the rules to create a situation that is fun for you. Since that is the most important aspect I would say; go for it.
The desperate need to frame things within the disruption mechanic in as black and white a way as possible is alien to me, but again, if it works for you...
Your questions are difficult to answer, because in one breath you say:
QwertyAzerty wrote:
I should also point out that the Edict only applies in the city to those who are 4th+ level. Roughly half the adventures (especially the higher level ones) are outside, or mostly outside, the city, so the edict does not apply. There's actually not that many oppurtunities to be caught, even if you flaunt the system.
Greg Marks
DnDAL Associate Resource Manager
Hey now Skerrit. Don't go putting up logic and reasonableness to catch the falling sky.
TheBreen wrote:
^ This
With the exception that Lifestyle expenses allow players to handwaive minor currency exchanges within their lifestyle. Your Wealthy cloak would normally pay his bills, it is simply handwaived into the Lifestyle expense itself. Upon reaching Rank 5, a Cloak has enough ranks within the organization it is assumed that some of their costs are covered by the organization themselves (think of it as a tax break). Upon reaching rank 8, you gain enough of a tax break - that your lifestyle expenses become 0 (if wealthy, or 6gp if aristocratic). What money your character personally puts out, is reimburst (that or covered by state funds).
You are free to give other reasons why your lifestyle costs are 0 (such as the aforementioned example of not paying your bills) - but the reasons I gave above are the "default" assumption (based on logic).
This is our discussion for our tier 2 character (since like mentioned by Skerrit the ABE do not apply on the arcane spell caster level under 4)
Quick question, how does (in game) someone can determine a metagame notion of level? I mean yes if you can cast a spell level 2 you are at least "level 3) if you can cast spell level 3 you are at least "level 5". But unless the Cloak witness see you cast 3 spell level 2 (something that only a level 4+ character can do) or 4 spell level 2 (for a sorcerer using SP) I know the city watch could beat you to death even if you are under level 4 since they are not train to differanciate between apprentice and full pledge caster, but how does teh Cloak determine the "level" of someone since "level" is a metagame term to track what kind of power that person develop, based on a metagame table in a physical boook (PHB)
Specially when you realize that most NPC do NOT follow the learning curve of PC. While a wizard level 3 can cast 4 spell level 1 and 2 spell level 2, a Mage NPC with 3HD might be able to cast only spell level 1. Or is this a suspension of believe moment to simply apply a setting special effect that everyone can understand and use easily?
Then we are not seeing our ruling has an houserule, we see it has an interpretation that allowed those 3 fact to co-existe:
Liberty of choice of players: player are not force to join the Cloak and are free to join or not too join.
No disruptive action can be taken in AL: A Cloak member reporting a non cloak member to the authorities would be consider disruptive. And Vice Versa, a Non cloak member making a Cloak member break it's oath provoking that cloak member to be automatically perma death would be considered disruptive as well.
A cloak member has to report all illegal use of magic to the authority for the sake of upholding the ABE: So if a non cloak member cast a spell, the cloak cannot report him otherwise he's disruptive, but the non cloak casting a spell causing the cloak member a chance for perma death, is also disruptive.
So the only logical result that avoid this situation where everyone become disruptive just for casting a spell. is:
-No one enter the Cloak so no one need to report anyone, but we need to be carefull, adding an extra layer of difficulty on the missions.
-Everyone is a cloak member so no one need to report anyone since everyone is legal to cast spells.
-If we instaure this ruling where during a mission that would upheld the oath (protect the high blade, protect Mulmaster and prevent the Evil cultist caster to invade Mulmaster) (AKE the DDEX) a cloak member can oversee a non cloak member; choosing a lesser evil (a non cloak member casting arcane spell for the protection of Mulmaster from the Evil Cultist) to defeat a bigger evil, and as rewards offer him temporary immunity (the duration of the DDEX) as long that his spell are for the "greater good" of Mulmaster
Kalani wrote:
I think being given funding concessions to live a wealthy lifestyle free of charge is definitely within the realms of abuse of power. Who do you think is actually funding your extravagant lifestyle - the citizenry (through heavy taxation, unlawful seizure of goods, etc).
The Cloaks need more funding? Time to round up some illegal spellcasters. Can't find any? Let's accuse someone!
Kalani wrote:
While I am glad Pauper is willing to spend the time to explain some of the many ways in which this stuff could be handled, the fact that that is needed makes me worry.
I've been singing the we need more DM guidance song for a couple of organized play incarnations and its still a valid tune. I guess maybe the Heralds Guild needs to devote some resources to a "DMing Adventurers League" seminar. Or articles on the AL site that focus in a more detailed and descriptive way (i.e. fleshed out examples) on the room DMs DO have rather than the room they don't.
I'd be glad to contribute to a 'DMing Adventurers League' seminar at GenCon, if one were organized.
--
Pauper
For those which are interested:
- The campaign staff is currently working on a supplementary article to the "State of Mulmaster", which will provide DM (and possibly player) guidelines for adjudicating Cloak vs. Non-Cloak PCs, as well as related situations (getting caught, sentencing guidelines, etc).
My working strategy is to play a character that has lied, evaded and and hidden from the Cloaks her whole life, flippantly evades the law, and plans to stretch her six-month warning time for as long as possible. Eventually she'll probably be forced to join the cloaks, but that oath will just be complete lip service, and if she ever does get caught and cornered plans to go down in a blaze of glory. My "win condition" for season 2 is to play all of the adventures thusly and live through it. Because everyone needs goals.
Oh, is there a typo in this sentence? It seems, grammatically, like something is inverted:
Although the Zhent Ghettos are officially part of the City, they are generally treated as such and the Edict of Arcane Banishment applies and is enforced there as well.
Ive yet to run any of the Expeditions Scenarios bar Mayhem which is mostly set outside the city. These rules were obviously not out when I ran that one but I think I might of run it slightl different had I of known.
What Ive done is make a print out of the Mulmaster PDF for my next Expeditions game (The drowned Tower). Ill give it to each player at that game. My biggest issue locally is that Ive got a lot of 'casual' players who really dont know much about the setting behind the game. Ie they know what I tell them. Im not sure they have the desire to look up the background outside of the game. But I definetly want to encforce the magic edict thing so they will learn.
RCanine wrote:
QwertyAzerty wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
QwertyAzerty wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
The PC you use as an example can only play in 6 of the 16 Expeditions this semester (based on tier) and of those nearly all of them occur all or mostly all outside the city. The complaint that high level PCs are unplayable because you MUST cast spells in public whenever you are in the city is not all that relevant since you are not really in the city all that much.
As I said upthread (but which appears to have been overlooked):
- The Campaign Staff is working on a supplementary article which addresses these concerns, and offers guidance for the DMs (and players) as to how to adjudicate the Arcane Edict.
Coredump00 wrote:
abanathie wrote:
Pauper wrote:
I should also point out the following passage from the ALPG, as I believe it's relevent to the discussion.
During Each Play Session (ALPG p5)
Provide information to the DM whenever he or she requests it. Though it’s fine to keep some information hidden from the other players if you like, the DM needs to get a handle on your character, and often might need to understand details about your character that the rest of the group might not know. You can pass notes if you’d rather not talk about a specific detail in front of the rest of the group.
I sit corrected -- Kalani's note points out that keeping info hidden from other players is allowed in AL.
Still, her other point is also valid -- the DM needs to know whether or not your character is a Cloak, and depending on the adventure, the information may not necessarily stay hidden. The DM is not obligated to keep your secrets if the events in-game demand otherwise.
This is one of the reasons why I'm not personally a fan of keeping intra-party secrets, though -- it's way too easy for someone to do something you don't like, not because they're trolling you, but because they didn't know enough to avoid it.
--
Pauper
I never insinuated that the player shouldn't inform the DM; just that it isn't required to inform the other players. Not informing other players could cause problems; it really doesn't matter if it's from trolling or inexperience.
Mulmaster is a city built around cloak-and-dagger conspiracy. In many ways, it emulates the environment of the Paranoia game - Trust the computer. The computer is your friend. Players should not be casting spells under the assumption that their allies are loyal to them. You never know who is an informant (or an officer) for the Cloaks and/or Hawks.
If you have Tier 2 harpers and/or Lords Alliance in the party - chances are, at least one of them is a member of the Cloaks or Hawks (respectively). In fact, it appears that all R3 Lords Alliance are members of the Hawks. While it isn't their job to oversee arcane magic, it is their job to enforce the High Blades laws - including the Arcane Edict. As such, I could see Hawks reporting crimes to the Cloaks if not detaining them until they arrive.
QwertyAzerty wrote:
abanathie wrote:
Pauper wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Kalani wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
As I said above - page 21 of the ALPG addresses player actions while answering a question pertaining to evil characters. That answer does not cover an exhaustive list of disruptive character actions, although it does clearly indicate that they fall under the conduct umbrella (as all PC actions are in fact player actions).
Coredump00 wrote:
abanathie wrote:
If it comes to PvP combat, yes it is disruptive. If it comes to metaphoric "blows", or if someone just wants to punch another PC in the face (without causing damage), I personally have no problem with it providing it doesnt lead to genuine bad blood (I would monitor the situation and if I felt it was getting out of hand or if it was dragging out, I would introduce a complication that advances the plot, one that demands immediate attention - such as a random encounter).
Kalani wrote:
Yeah, I imagine some awkward circumstances; a PC deciding to use magic in public or point a finger to a cloak about another PC's magic use under the guise of self-preservation, then claiming that the other PCs can't stop him because PVP is illegal.
This, however, is not something new in Mulmaster. It's happened at several games I've played/DMed, where some of the PCs are trying to roleplay / negotiate with an NPC, and a different PC interjects to the effect of, "I shoot it." It's a challenging situation--especially since most players are strangers and you can't rely on the social contract between friends to arbitrate it. It's a factor any time PCs will tend to disagree on something important, and the DM just needs to be prepared for it.
Coredump00 wrote:
As stated previously - the campaign staff is currently working on a supplementary article for the "State of Mulmaster". I suspect said article will be released some time in the next week (or two).
One thing that people fail to realize
- There are only 6 Tier 2 Expeditions this season.
- Of those 6 adventures, the majority take place (primarily) in the surrounding wilderness - outside of Mulmaster juristiction.
- Tier 1 characters are exempt from the laws (receiving a warning and an offer to join the Cloaks).
- All characters receieve a "free pass" on their first Mulmaster Adventure.
Ergo - the situations in which characters will face true peril are few and far between, and can easily be avoided by either:
- Not casting spells in those situations OR
- Casting deceptively and hoping you don't screw up your Deception/Sleight of Hand checks.
Also,I think that peacebound stuff is very very likely to happen. Most cities are really not that keen on having heavily armed adventurers, with a well deserved reputation for unprovoked violence and disregard for collateral damage, run around their town without some rules and restrictions. While I don't generally advocate too much reality in my fantasy, I am very happy with a little more realism in how the reams treats murder hobos.
edit: and yes, anyone that insists they cannot spend any time in a town without having to cast a spell...likely a murder hobo too 
I know, I know, I am biased and cynical. Sue me.
QwertyAzerty wrote:
Actually, I'm more interested in when the campaign eventually transitions to Hillsfar, and runs into the Two Great Laws of Maalthiir:
1) Do not interfere with legitmate trade.
2) Only humans are allowed in the city.
That'll be fun!
--
Pauper
Pauper wrote:
TheBreen wrote:
3rd level. You aren't an arcane spellcasters until that time.
abanathie wrote:
BRJN wrote:
abanathie wrote:
QwertyAzerty wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
It should be noted that DDEX 3-1 has a title -- "Harried in Hillsfar".
All you non-humans, take note -- this is probably your catch-phrase.
--
Pauper
Pauper wrote:
Play report!
Harmless the Witchalock: 1
The Stinky Cloaks: 0
Although there was a pretty awesome moment when some NPCs attempted to surrender to us, and I was about to accept but then thought, "they have seen me use arcane magic and must therefore die." To the trail of blood and deception I will sow.
However, this also happened, as I feared it would:
RCanine wrote:
RCanine wrote:
BRJN wrote: