We have just finished an adventure that culminated in a grueling and terrifying battle with a dragon. Our party was short on resources and already injured, but as the tower was collapsing around us, we were unable to catch our breath before we engaged our foe.
Here is the party as it stood just before this harrowing engagement:
Verik, a kindly and sagacious human wizard who's mighty spells and legendary dragon-topped cane are renown for delivering his comrades from the jaws of death.
Yolanda, a courageous yet cunning human bard who's clever maneuvers have been the bane of the parties enemies.
Urbaz, a wise and savage elven druid whose powerful bear form often keeps harm from descending upon his dear friends.
Simon, a conniving and shifty eyed gnome rogue who boasts of stabbing his friends while they are unwary and is known to carry deadly poisons—which he smatters upon needles and takes great relish in attacking the heedless with these craven tools.
Also accompanying us was a drow rogue who was once our enemy but who realized the futility in battling us and tossed his lot in with us in the preceding battle.
As these five ascended the tower — the lower entryway had been blocked by a cave-in — the wyrm set upon us. Four of the five readied blades, tooth and implements and prepared to battle this foe, though the chances of us prevailing against the beast in our present condition were slim.
Not the fifth though. Simon, in a stunning show of cowardice, took the prize we had fought so long to acquire, and leapt out a window in an attempt jump to the roof of a nearby building. Apparently, his body is as feeble as his heart, for he could not cover the distance and fell to his death, leaving his companions behind to fight the dragon on their own.
The remaining four acquitted themselves admirably. The druid leapt upon the dragon with tooth and claw, though moments later he fell to the ground, so wounded that even a Potion of Healing could not rouse him. His brave actions allowed his allies the time they needed to set upon the foul creature in a clever manner, and the combined efforts of the remaining three heroes served sufficient to kill the demonic reptile.
After the beast was slain, the brave three gathered their unconscious friend and lowered him gently down the tower with the aid of stout rope, though they knew that such a time consuming action could leave them in death's way when the tower finally fell, before they themselves descended to the ground. There they recovered the bounty and the corpse of their treacherous acquaintance, and made haste back to their patron to let him know of their success.
Our patron, perhaps not knowing of the actions that led to the cravenly Simon's death, has generously offered to resurrect him in payment of the debt for our services.
What do you say? Should we offer up the reward we toiled so long and hard for to bring back Simon, or should we leave him to his fate?
As to the actual question ... hmm. Backstabbing coward, boasted about betraying his friends, tried to swipe the party's goal and run away with it, cruel poisoner ...
Return the patron's money and let Simon rot in whatever festering pit he wound up in.
Aside: Was this Simon a PC or an NPC
Aside: Was this Simon a PC or an NPC
He was a PC.
Then ask the player to make a character who can cooperate with the party next time.
If he was "roleplaying," then your characters can as well -- by not accepting that kind of behavior in companions you need to trust with your lives.
Verik, a kindly and sagacious human wizard who's mighty spells and legendary dragon-topped cane are renown for delivering his comrades from the jaws of death.
You forgot to mention trying to deliver his comrades to jaws of death by greedilly activating the obvious trap, angering an ancient god and forcing the group to use most of the remaining resources to save him from death.
Simon, a conniving and shifty eyed gnome rogue who boasts of stabbing his friends while they are unwary and is known to carry deadly poisons—which he smatters upon needles and takes great relish in attacking the heedless with these craven tools.
Nice exageration on his wanting to stab all of his friends, but only those that would threaten the mission and the group by activating the same trap again.
Not the fifth though. Simon, in a stunning show of cowardice, took the prize we had fought so long to acquire, and leapt out a window in an attempt jump to the roof of a nearby building. Apparently, his body is as feeble as his heart, for he could not cover the distance and fell to his death, leaving his companions behind to fight the dragon on their own.
Just like it was his cowardice that made him run up to the BBG, which the goal of the mission was to return with his decapitated head. That was done with no surges, daily, or encounter combat powers remaining and only 6 hitpoints, with no expectation of being able to deliver the killing blow and expecting to then die in the very next attack, but hoping that his sacrifice would provide the CA to the drow that may bring the fight closer to an end for the rest of the group.
This same rogue who prior to making the leap of faith, spent an action and his last 10+ roll to provide the fallen druid a heal check to use his second wind. If he was a such a coward who had no regard for the party, why would he spend the action instead of using it to further an escape.
If you've got the prize, would a smart rogue stand toe to toe vs. an obviously superior enemy(with flight and levels) on unstable ground that may collaspe at any moment when there is a chance to get to more secure ground with a chance to escape and succeed. It would be like a bank robber waiting for the swat team to arrive on scene and then starting a gun fight with them.
Getting caught has caused complications for him in the past, and he would rather escape with a success then end up dead.
Of course that fight could have ended completely differently if the drake could roll better then the 4's and 5's, or if the jump check succeeded. Who really knows what could have happened. Maybe the rogue would have fought from the stable roof top while waiting for the rest of the group to join.
So now that you've got the whole picture, what does everyone think.
I'll guess that Frater was the kind wizard?
Remember though, history is written by the victorious
Funny that he did not escape w/ success and yet he still ended up dead...
ok guys..I am out of this one...if you guys are going to start a chitstorm about your game do it elsewhere...
To Fratter...talk to your group and see what they want to do. We are not in that group and there is more to the story than meets the eye (or the ears) as we have seen/heard the two sides to the story.
As for your claims to my exaggeration, I believe your threats came prior to our encounter with the rat statue. There were no traps before that, so it can only be believed that you would wish to disguise your treacherous insinuations by claiming some sort of justification that obviously can not pass an honest man's assessment. Not being an honest man (or gnome), however, you wouldn't understand that.
For your final cowardly act — have you no shame! You knew full well that no other character could make such a leap, as you were by far the most athletic among us and fell to your own demise! That you would attempt to substitute your plainly selfish motives with the suggestion that you would defend us from the roof top — I can only shake my head at the audacity. How were you to defend us from outside the tower while we were trapped inside with the beast?
Nay, it can be seen plainly that your intentions was for us to delay the fearsome dragon while you fled. Otherwise, how can you believe that your wee legs could bear you safely from the drake and his broad wings? You saw a chance to escape with the bounty and took it, regardless of the sacrifice your friends would then be required to make.
You say that you were brave in the fight preceding, against the Beggar King. So brave that you ran up to a beggar and killed him. That is what you call bravery? Even if all us here were generous and granted you your assertion, it can not be denied that before you killed the knave you were unable to make off with his head and take the bounty for yourself.
Perhaps — and a tiny perhaps it is — you have a dim and feeble spark of courage within you. The evidence suggests that the very same spark of courage is powerless before the strength of your greed, which knows no bonds of friendship or honor.
P.S. A statue of a rat guarding a brace of gems and small pile of coins is hardly an "ancient god."
So now that you've got the whole picture, what does everyone think.
Enjoy the dirtnap.
Don't take it personally. If the druid snuffed it, he'd be right next to you. You died a natural* death, who is to say it wasn't destined to be that way? I wouldn't want to annoy the powers-that-be asking them to return companions to life when it was obviously their time.
*Well, it was as natural as any other death that comes from jumping out of a window. Seriously, what were you thinking?
Looks like we found the shifty gnome...back from the dead...looks like the resurrection worked.
I'll guess that Frater was the kind wizard?
Remember though, history is written by the victorious
Funny that he did not escape w/ success and yet he still ended up dead...
ok guys..I am out of this one...if you guys are going to start a chitstorm about your game do it elsewhere...
To Fratter...talk to your group and see what they want to do. We are not in that group and there is more to the story than meets the eye (or the ears) as we have seen/heard the two sides to the story.
Funny story there. As we were discussing it, I was adamant that such a knave not be brought back from the netherworld. The other two were more on the fence.
We then took a secret ballot however, which was unanimous in favor of leaving the Gnome to the Raven Queen.
Enjoy the dirtnap.
Don't take it personally. If the druid snuffed it, he'd be right next to you. You died a natural* death, who is to say it wasn't destined to be that way? I wouldn't want to annoy the powers-that-be asking them to return companions to life when it was obviously their time.
*Well, it was as natural as any other death that comes from jumping out of a window. Seriously, what were you thinking?
Not to mention he failed three death saving throws in a row.
For your final cowardly act — have you no shame! You knew full well that no other character could make such a leap, as you were by far the most athletic among us and fell to your own demise! That you would attempt to substitute your plainly selfish motives with the suggestion that you would defend us from the roof top — I can only shake my head at the audacity. How were you to defend us from outside the tower while we were trapped inside with the beast?
P.S. A statue of a rat guarding a brace of gems and small pile of coins is hardly an "ancient god."
a 20 foot fall, if failed, does not mean TPK. There was a chance to succeed the jump, there was a chance that the damage was not deadly pending the roll. No one else was willing to try their luck.
If I remember how the walls were described, they were crumbling in some places and was 3' in the others. I never had the impression that it was an enclosed tower. So attacking a flying target could be possible.
and fine, maybe it wasn't a god, might have been an ancient rat demon who you had to steal from.
a 20 foot fall, if failed, does not mean TPK. There was a chance to succeed the jump, there was a chance that the damage was not deadly pending the roll. No one else was willing to try their luck.
If I remember how the walls were described, they were crumbling in some places and was 3' in the others. I never had the impression that it was an enclosed tower. So attacking a flying target could be possible.
and fine, maybe it wasn't a god, might have been an ancient rat demon who you had to steal from.
It was 30 ft, and we were wounded, and it was likely that the dragon would follow us and devour our bodies as they lay broken upon the cobblestones. Not to mention your leap was accompanied by the words — "Of course I'm running, I have the head."
You were right that the battle would have gone differently if the Dragon's attacks were more accurate — but it was obvious the gods favor was shining down upon us, strengthening our hearts and arms while enfeebling the dragon's attacks.
It was equally as obvious the gods found your actions less praiseworthy, as you splattered across the ground in front of a large crowd of surprised beggars, and proceeded to spill your life blood until your soul departed.
Funny story there. As we were discussing it, I was adamant that such a knave not be brought back from the netherworld. The other two were more on the fence.
We then took a secret ballot however, which was unanimous in favor of leaving the Gnome to the Raven Queen.
Then what is this thread for? You have the answer from your group....leave the Gnome to R.Q. and let her deal with it...What do you want from us here on the boards?
It was 30 ft, and we were wounded, and it was likely that the dragon would follow us and devour our bodies as they lay broken upon the cobblestones. Not to mention your leap was accompanied by the words — "Of course I'm running, I have the head."
You were right that the battle would have gone differently if the Dragon's attacks were more accurate — but it was obvious the gods favor was shining down upon us, strengthening our hearts and arms while enfeebling the dragon's attacks.
It was equally as obvious the gods found your actions less praiseworthy, as you splattered across the ground in front of a large crowd of surprised beggars, and proceeded to spill your life blood until your soul departed.
Dude I do have to say this though...your effin funny
Then what is this thread for? You have the answer from your group....leave the Gnome to R.Q. and let her deal with it...What do you want from us here on the boards?
Eh, I figured it would be a fun discussion and I was a bit concerned that while the rest of the group wanted to leave the gnome dead I was the only one who actually came out and said it.
You're right, we will decide as a group, but I am interested and curious as to what everyone else thinks. Isn't that enough reason for a thread on these boards?
Also, the original post was just fun to write.
Enjoy the dirtnap.
Don't take it personally. If the druid snuffed it, he'd be right next to you. You died a natural* death, who is to say it wasn't destined to be that way? I wouldn't want to annoy the powers-that-be asking them to return companions to life when it was obviously their time.
*Well, it was as natural as any other death that comes from jumping out of a window. Seriously, what were you thinking?
If it was the druid, and given the chance to resurrect, I might support it.
To meta game it, with my jump skill, an average roll would probably succeed. If failed, an average acrobatics roll would have canceled out what would be an average damage roll from fall.
Of course my two rolls were well below average, and the damage was high. To then have 3 more rolls below average for the natural death. With 5 bad rolls in a row, which I believe is about a 3% chance of occurring, luck was not on my side.
If it was the druid, and given the chance to resurrect, I might support it.
To meta game it, with my jump skill, an average roll would probably succeed. If failed, an average acrobatics roll would have canceled out what would be an average damage roll from fall.
Of course my two rolls were well below average, and the damage was high. To then have 3 more rolls below average for the natural death. With 5 bad rolls in a row, which I believe is about a 3% chance of occurring, luck was not on my side.
See — the gods were obviously displeased.
If it was the druid, and given the chance to resurrect, I might support it.
The druid probably wouldn't. A dead druid is called compost.
In all the games I've ever played in, I can only think of one time that anyone was ever resurrected. That one was pretty much so that we didn't have to help the player make a new character.
There's nothing wrong with posting a question about how to react in a certain circumstance to the actions of another character, but if you haven't worked out the out of character problems in real life, nothing good is going to be done by this.
Any way this works out, one of you is going to win the debate and one is going to lose, but neither of you are winning any dignity.
Cool your heads, meet in person, and argue this out together in a rational form if you have something to argue.
As for your claims to my exaggeration, I believe your threats came prior to our encounter with the rat statue. There were no traps before that, so it can only be believed that you would wish to disguise your treacherous insinuations by claiming some sort of justification that obviously can not pass an honest man's assessment. Not being an honest man (or gnome), however, you wouldn't understand that.
I'm surprised you've forgotten why you deserve the threats. Let's see if this rings a bell. The rogue wants to hide in a strategic position as the rest of the group is making a lot of noise and alerting their presence to any nearby enemies. But a hiding rogue is not acceptable to wizard. Because of the noise, the group is aware that they are now surrounded by two unknown groups behind closed doors(one was barred from the other side, i.e. not pickable, and the other was unlocked) and the wizard want the rogue to go alone into one of the rooms where he would have no surprise, no cover, and no support. Since the rogue did not want to do what the wizard wanted, the wizard was also willing to point out the rogue to the enemies.
I'd say that's deserving of the ire of the rogue.
Please, please. I'm begging you guys. Don't do this here.
There's nothing wrong with posting a question about how to react in a certain circumstance to the actions of another character, but if you haven't worked out the out of character problems in real life, nothing good is going to be done by this.
Any way this works out, one of you is going to win the debate and one is going to lose, but neither of you are winning any dignity.
Cool your heads, meet in person, and argue this out together in a rational form if you have something to argue.
Dude, it's all in good fun. No one is getting hot-headed, or trying to win dignity. We're just trying to share a fun RPing moment. I'm not actually angry at the person for jumping out of a window and ditching us, as it led to a good hour of us laughing at his fate.
I'm really just interested in what everyone else here would do. If I took a little bit of artistic license in the description of the events, it's just for the lulz, not to hurt anyones feelings or anything.
I'm surprised you've forgotten why you deserve the threats. Let's see if this rings a bell. The rogue wants to hide in a strategic position as the rest of the group is making a lot of noise and alerting their presence to any nearby enemies. But a hiding rogue is not acceptible to wizard. Because of the noise, the group is aware that they are now surrounded by two unknown groups behind closed doors and the wizard want the rogue to go alone into one of the rooms where he would have no surprise, no cover, and no support. Since the rogue did not want to do what the wizard wanted, the wizard was also willing to point out the rogue to the enemies.
I'd say that's deserving of the ire of the rogue.
Well, sure, if it wasn't for the fact that the rest of your party was stuck in a courtyard with two locked exits, and instead of say, trying to unlock the door, the Rogue is hiding behind a barrel.
Why must you keep trying to justify your acts of betrayal? Are we not your comrades, and do we not leap to your defense? Why is it that whenever we have need of you, you are hiding in some corner? Your ability to stab unsuspecting creatures in the back is no use to us because you have abandoned us to an exposed position and we are already dead.
Please, please. I'm begging you guys. Don't do this here.
There's nothing wrong with posting a question about how to react in a certain circumstance to the actions of another character, but if you haven't worked out the out of character problems in real life, nothing good is going to be done by this.
Any way this works out, one of you is going to win the debate and one is going to lose, but neither of you are winning any dignity.
Cool your heads, meet in person, and argue this out together in a rational form if you have something to argue.
Since I know he'll have to have the last word, you don't have to worry about me posting further to argue the points since it will never end and probably end up with the thread locked.
With the biased situation that was first presented, it was obvious what responses were going to be given. Now that my viewpoint is being represented as best as can be done, I'm curious to see what comes from this.
Alright, given the information and viewpoints of both sides, I'll play your game.
The question was, "Does the gnome deserve resurrection?"
My answer is: maybe, but...
Before I get into what that means, I should get out of the way the question:
"Did the gnome deserve to die?"
No, probably not. It seems fairly clear to me that the gnome did not have malignant purposes with his actions which the wizard criticizes him for. The difference of opinion seems to be mainly in tactics. Certainly, it seems to be a foul on the part of the wizard for their strained relationships in this area. While I can not say whether or not the rouge hiding behind a barrel was a bad tactic, there does not appear to be any malignancy in the action. Call it cowardly, if you like, but not malignant. The wizard's choice to point out his ally's hiding spot, however, exhibits a clear vindictive behavior.
I'll get back to this in a moment.
Edit:
Okay. I see the reason behind all the conflict with tactics now. The rogue can't do his thing as a rogue because your party is filled with squishies and you can't spare him for it. That seems an issue with the entire group, so I won't address it.
The main hinging point or why the party would not want to reraise the rogue, given the chance, seems to be his final battle and the events leading up to it. The problem is, before dying the rogue was already on bad terms with the wizard. While it is true that the wizard inconvenienced the rogue, the rogue's rash and direct threat against the wizard is bound to leave a worse impression on the other party members, psychologically. Having no chance to redeem himself because if his unfortunate death, using tactics that seemed untrustworthy to the rest of the party at the time, the overall impression of the gnome at the time of his death is a bad one. I would not argue that the gnome's tactics at this time were necessarily bad. There is little a rogue can do to protect his allies against a dragon, so wanting to scatter the party to minimize damage is a valid tactic. However, whether what he had planned was a heroic and strategic plan or mere cowardice was never ascertained because he died.
Simply put, the other party members had a bad impression of the rogue due to in-party conflict coupled with a failed tactic. It's unfortunate, but most in their position would choose the same decision to leave the rogue to his fate.
So, maybe the gnome deserves resurrection, but he had not earned it, whether it was his own fault or just dumb luck.
Ones who don't hate eachother.
In game, the rogue is probably done. Even though they could ressurrect him, tie him up, and question him and just tell him he is out of the party if they think he was cowardly or unhelpful, the group seems dead-set on getting rid of the character, and making sure he stays dead.
Out of game, my opinion stands that the original poster has some issues, and is being malicious to the rogue. He obviously has it out for him. Seriously now? Do you need internet backup this badly? You already hinted that the group made the verdict, why drag him through the mud now? If this is light-hearted, I don't see it, and I hope that the rogue isn't taking this too badly.
In any case, I don't see any good coming from this. You guys need to sort this out on your own. The past is past, and you should work towards making the game fun in the future.
The wizard's choice to point out his ally's hiding spot, however, exhibits a clear vindictive behavior.
Just to be fair, it's hard to say how much the wizard would actually point out the rogue. It was an heated discussion on what to do at that point. Was it in character, was it out, who can say. One thing is that while this was going on, the other characters reacted to this and changed their positions. So even if it was out of character, it had in game consequences.
Plus the wizard never did point out the rogue, it was just a threat.
Same is true for the rogue though, it was just a threat.
Even though they could ressurrect him, tie him up, and question him and just tell him he is out of the party if they think he was cowardly or unhelpful
Uh, why would we do that? Resurrect a character and then not take him back in the party, I mean.
Dude, it's all in good fun. No one is getting hot-headed, or trying to win dignity. We're just trying to share a fun RPing moment. I'm not actually angry at the person for jumping out of a window and ditching us, as it led to a good hour of us laughing at his fate.
Don't think Berms thinks this is "all in good fun." Don't think he was laughing, either. I could be misreading his posts, though.
I am not involved in your game, but you have asked for our advice and opinions, so here is mine.
I appreciated your presentation of the in-game situation. It was fun to read, and well written. On the surface, you appear to be asking "are our characters justified in punishing this other character," but what you are really asking is "are we justified in punishing this other player."
The players had several disagreements about how the party should respond to different in-game situations. The players forced those disagreements into the game itself, by having their characters disagree as well. The players then used their characters to try to force the other players into complying with their idea of what was best.
Now, the players are trying to use the game mechanics to punish one player for disagreeing with the rest of the group. Don't.
This is about the people playing the game resolving their disagreement about the game. Nothing you do within the game can change that. You need to settle this between the people involved. Don't drag the game into the real world - it won't help, and will probably make things worse.
Since you asked, though: to the player, resurrecting another character and then kicking him out of the group has the same in-game effect as not resurrecting him at all. That character leaves the group either way, and one way even costs me loot!
From the character's perspective, the choice is very, very different: I must choose between a small material gain for myself and the life of another person.
If I choose life for the other person, I must then decide whether or not to continue my association with that person.
Even if I know that I would choose not to associate with that other person, am I justified in choosing personal, material gain over that person's life?
I'm not asking about wether we should let the Player back in the group — I like the player and enjoy playing with him. I'm asking if we should spend our resources to bring a character back. We wouldn't be spending any money — the cost would be a favor we were promised in exchange for our services.
Seriously, what's with people making it personal — all this stuff is taking place in game. I'm not even trying to make him change his playing style, as it makes for tons of inter-character tension thats good roleplaying.
All I'm wondering, is if your guys parties would have brought Simon back. The player already has a contingency plan, as Simon has two brothers named Alvyn (already deceased in an earlier session) and Theodore.
I promise, our next session won't involve knife-fights between us as Players over the fate of Simon. I do imagine, however, that if we leave Simon dead, Theodore will be quite upset.
People keep bringing the real world in because it's easy to interpret it as you ragging on another player based on the posts the two of you have done. Humorous tones don't translate well over the internet, you see.
Whether or not we would have raised the gnome in my group depends on the personalities of our party. If we have at least one character who has lofty ideals about goodness and noble actions, he would insist on reraising the rogue. The rogue has been supporting your party, and I can't see that he has done anything particularly harmful to your party. At least, not on purpose, but mistakes happen.
If our party is full of pragmatists, it's unlikely that we would have raised the gnome. In the short time that he was with you, it wouldn't seem as if he fills a role in your party that couldn't be replaced, especially at the cost of a reward you fought for. Also, we would probably rather recruit a tank character than reraise a rogue, based on the classes of your other party members.
However, if you are planning on relying on the help of his brother as a replacement, after two of his brothers died as a result of your adventures...do you seriously want to do that? How would that conversation go? I imagine it like this:
*Knock at door. Theodore the gnome answers*
Theodore: Yes?
Verik: Hey...how's it going, Theo?
Theodore: Oh, not bad...how's Simon holding up?
Verik: Yeaaaah, see...about that...he's kinda dead.
Theodore: What?!
Verik: Well, you know...dragons and twenty foot drops and all that. We all feel really bad about that, and you know, your other brother before him...and with the economy we couldn't really pitch in for a raise dead...anyway, let's get down to business. We need another meat sh*ahem* member for out party. You up for it?
Theodore: You have five seconds to convince me not to knife you in the face.
If we have at least one character who has lofty ideals about goodness and noble actions,
Ah, well... we seem to be lacking such qualities in our group. The party's name is "the Ungrateful Bastards" after all.
And if you haven't gathered from the preceding posts, our mission was to hunt down a beggar and bring his head to the leader of the local thieves guild. Not exactly a lofty purpose, is it?
Ah, well... we seem to be lacking such qualities in our group. The party's name is "the Ungrateful Bastards" after all.
And if you haven't gathered from the preceding posts, our mission was to hunt down a beggar and bring his head to the leader of the local thieves guild. Not exactly a lofty purpose, is it?
Wait, if this is a party of jerks, why aren't you ressing him and giving him a pat on the back for a job well done? :P
After dispatching Beggar King's skeleton minion, the incredible Urbaz began to lead the his party into battle against the nefarious underworld lord. Meanwhile, his trusty minstrel sang a song to the foe's master rogue about the epic powers of the natural way they kick arse and the rest of the party killed some bats. After fully hearing our tale, the Beggar King's drow rogue sided with us and snuck back to his former lord in preparation for our strike.
Then Urbaz stood head-to-head against the Beggar King's magic, and as an insult to him threw his seed directly into the eyes of the lord of the poor people, causing him to writhe in pain and spread the warm fury all about. Just as he was about to finish the Beggar King off with a swipe of his paw, Simon jumped into the way and thrust his dagger into the Beggar Kings armor. The Rag Lord laughed at the futility of this attack, but as he was doing so he was undone by his own minion's sword stabbing him from behind.
In the moments that followed, the dark magic of the shadow king began to tear the dungeon apart. The whole party rushed away from the now collapsing foyer and up the stairs. As they moved, the ever greedy and mysophobic Verik stopped to grab up every copper he could get his mage hand on, piling it all onto the tenser’s floating disk, and then prestidigitated everything clean the whole way to the top.
Upon arriving at the crest of the stairs, the shadows which once possessed the puny Beggar King had coalesced into a single form. Before the party stood a ferocious shadow serpent. It roared and charged straight for the group.
Verik jumped straight into action, casting his absurdly broken Storm Pillar down in the area between him and us, causing the dragon to take shocks with each step. Urbaz lept between the dragon and the rest of the group, throwing his sharp paw at the foe.
However, seeing his opportunity, the dragon lashed our mighty hero from behind with his tail, knocking him to the ground. The rest of the group cried out in horror, knowing that without Urbaz they had little hope left. At our new drow compatriot distracted the beast, Simon helped Urbaz back to his feet. Standing again, Urbaz flexed so heroically hard that most of his wounds fell out onto the ground. Urbaz then charged into the fray and with one swipe knocked back the dragon into the lightning field.
It was at this time that Simon's cowardice began to show. He wasn't sure if Urbaz would be able to save the day again. With the most valuable of their loot in hand, Simon prepared to make a jump for the nearby building. Seeing this, the rest of the party pleaded with him not to make such a rash mistake. Simon ignored their cries and jumped, only to land face first at the bottom of the building. With commoners looking on, Simon bled out.
Without the help of all of his team, Urbaz soon began to falter. Shortly after taking a few more swipes from the dragon, Urbaz collapsed. Then the rest of the party got lucky and killed the dragon or something. Yolanda probably sang it to death.
As it stands, I am indifferent as to whether we should resurrect Simon. He was useful, when he felt like being useful. We're Ungrateful Bastards to the end.
First, nice presentation, nice style for the post. I like it.
As to the actual question ... hmm. Backstabbing coward, boasted about betraying his friends, tried to swipe the party's goal and run away with it, cruel poisoner ...
Return the patron's money and let Simon rot in whatever festering pit he wound up in.
I 2nd this motion
Why not start with the fact that the entire group was only lvl 1 characters, so very squishy and not very renown for anything significant other then their ability to set off traps.
You forgot to mention trying to deliver his comrades to jaws of death by greedilly activating the obvious trap, angering an ancient god and forcing the group to use most of the remaining resources to save him from death.
Nice exageration on his wanting to stab all of his friends, but only those that would threaten the mission and the group by activating the same trap again.
Just like it was his cowardice that made him run up to the BBG, which the goal of the mission was to return with his decapitated head. That was done with no surges, daily, or encounter combat powers remaining and only 6 hitpoints, with no expectation of being able to deliver the killing blow and expecting to then die in the very next attack, but hoping that his sacrifice would provide the CA to the drow that may bring the fight closer to an end for the rest of the group.
This same rogue who prior to making the leap of faith, spent an action and his last 10+ roll to provide the fallen druid a heal check to use his second wind. If he was a such a coward who had no regard for the party, why would he spend the action instead of using it to further an escape.
If you've got the prize, would a smart rogue stand toe to toe vs. an obviously superior enemy(with flight and levels) on unstable ground that may collaspe at any moment when there is a chance to get to more secure ground with a chance to escape and succeed. It would be like a bank robber waiting for the swat team to arrive on scene and then starting a gun fight with them.
Getting caught has caused complications for him in the past, and he would rather escape with a success then end up dead.
Of course that fight could have ended completely differently if the drake could roll better then the 4's and 5's, or if the jump check succeeded. Who really knows what could have happened. Maybe the rogue would have fought from the stable roof top while waiting for the rest of the group to join.
So now that you've got the whole picture, what does everyone think.
I may have to recant the motion. I will read the rest of the thread and repost:embarrass
FraterChoronzon you need to post more. If we had an annual award for most entertaining poster you might get my vote. I might submit that idea. :lightbulb
It has to be at least two people.....right?
Since the rogue did not want to do what the wizard wanted, the wizard was also willing to point out the rogue to the enemies.
There is he over there, get him, lol. You guys should make a campaign journal.
It has to be at least two people.....right?
I guess he needs an opponent. I just like the fact that he post in character.
Off-topic: I hope there are no OoC issues with what happened in the game.
Everyone is really chill in our group.
TBH the funniest part of this whole affair was when we had the blind vote for the fate of Simon.
I said "Ok, one of us should vote for him to live so we all have plausible denability", of course all the votes were tallied for let him rot.
Me: "Ok...somebody didn't follow the plan!, now we all look like jerks".
Was pretty hilarious.
I think its time to find some slightly more noble pursuits for our n'er do wells.
I don't know why people keep trying to bring the real world into it.
Because if EVERY post by your DnD group members were 'in character', Berms wouldn't be posting at all... cause he's dead. Dead men can't talk. Additionally he wouldn't have said:
Since I know he'll have to have the last word, you don't have to worry about me posting further to argue the points since it will never end and probably end up with the thread locked.
Now, unless in game, there is some sort of means to communicate to the REAL WORLD'S DnD forum... for both the living and the dead; it looks like Berms is having an issue with you talking about him behind his back, infront of his face.
...the incredible Urbaz began to lead the his party...
Party Member #3
As the bard and leader of this group...
TBH the
Party Member #4 ("TBH"? Not very 'roleplay-ish', you're not backing up Frater)
As the DM...
Right; so the gang's all here. And why?
it's just for the lulz
Uh-huh. Just to string us along. Thanks. I can see Berms' source of apparent OOC frustration.
The only opinion I can offer is that I hope this is all in as good humour as some are saying as if so this games sounds brilliant. This thread has been rather entertaining.
As for Simon... stuff his body full of garlic clovers, hang a silver cross around his neck, drive a steak through his heart... drop him in an unmarked grave... and pull a slab of stone over it.
He wasn't a vampire... but why take a chance of *ever* seeing him again?
Uh-huh. Just to string us along. Thanks. I can see Berms' source of apparent OOC frustration.
I never meant that the whole thread had to be in character, I just meant that people needed to stop worrying about Simon's player and myself getting into a real fight over the issue.
What's really boggling my mind is the whole "string us along" crap. What did you think, that we had some real life issues we needed help with here and you were going to help us out?
I'm sorry if my thread "strung you along." I guess posts that are meant to be funny and start a little debate about an in-game topic just aren't relevant enough for this board. I truly apologize for wasting five minutes of your obviously busy life, but maybe you should avoid any threads that I start from now own, because others seem to enjoy them, and I'm not going to stop because someone takes themselves too seriously.
I face palmed 2 or 3 times while reading this....
Because if EVERY post by your DnD group members were 'in character', Berms wouldn't be posting at all... cause he's dead. Dead men can't talk. Additionally he wouldn't have said:
Now, unless in game, there is some sort of means to communicate to the REAL WORLD'S DnD forum... for both the living and the dead; it looks like Berms is having an issue with you talking about him behind his back, infront of his face.
Party Member #3
Party Member #4 ("TBH"? Not very 'roleplay-ish', you're not backing up Frater)
Right; so the gang's all here. And why?
Uh-huh. Just to string us along. Thanks. I can see Berms' source of apparent OOC frustration.
Dude. chill...
UMCorian, none of that stops him from coming back as a zombie or skeleton. They'll have to grind his bones to make your bread, even if none of the players' are giants.
He can come back as a mindless undead - that's an acceptable risk.
Besides, gnome zombies are just full of good, clean family laughs.
He can come back as a mindless undead - that's an acceptable risk.
Besides, gnome zombies are just full of good, clean family laughs.
Hmmm, a death knight may be fun.
It's fun to think about all of the heckling and jeering that would take when they would be defeated or ran away in terror.
Although it is nice to see you starting to like the idea of death. Speak in private with your DM on that; if only for the purpose to surprise your former party members and extract revenge.
Failing that... Your Bones, Ma Smammich, NOW!
Right; so the gang's all here. And why?
I just run the games, not their lives.