Playing soccer with the heads of the surrendered - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Playing soccer with the heads of the surrendered

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
perfect
Jul 13, 2008 12:21:48 Wow.
Party has a bit of an alignment problem lol. The party is:
Dragonborn cleric in service to bahamut LG
his Pc brother Dragonborn Paladin in service to Bahamut LG
Me, a tiefling Warlock a disciple to aforementioned cleric/paladin at Unaligned
an unaligned dwarf fighter
an unaligned human wizard
unaligned halfling rogue
unaligned elven ranger

the last two characters recently decided to decapitate and play soccer with the head of a surrendered bandit leader. Oops. The dm was a bit shocked as were I and the dragonborn brothers.
The reason they were allowed to get away with it was, the dragonborns took a stroll in the woods...wow. I mean I would leave a party if I came back to that. I guess I'm just not that into the absurdity of the bizzaro actions of the characters. Wish they would stay more in line with the general theme and attitude of the majority of the party.

The campaign is truthfully built around the story of the two dragonborn characters and my warlock , how they are trying to raise me to serve bahamut. (they found the character on the streets of the city , a little urchin type and are trying to reform the pc)
The other players kind of just gradually joined in the idea of playing a 4th ed campaign. They're not really ruining it, they just do things that don't really fit the mood of the game. How do I help facilitate a better rp experience without taking away from the fun of the game? I certainly don't want to ruin the game because I think their characters would'nt do certain things. Especially since two or three of the pc's are playing their first DnD game ever.
Btw. This is my first post on the forums . So be gentle lol.
-P
#2
tyrandor
Jul 13, 2008 12:37:50 Well, first off, killing a surrended foe is pretty evil in itself, should **** the Dragonborn off real good.

It's the soccer that to me, shows there's more to it then just 'roleplaying'... while that isn't evil per say they're... it is sick and deranged. Are they character sociopath? Normally constitued people do not play soccer with severed heads...

With that out of the way, this is probably the players simply acting out because they don't feel involved in the central story which revolve around you and the DB. So they're acting out. Trying to create party strife and act in way that will **** off the LG characters.
#3
pigknight
Jul 13, 2008 16:39:37 Playing soccer with someone's head is:
1) CE
2) Gonna tick off the Raven Queen.
#4
nani
Jul 13, 2008 17:16:22 Killing a surrendered foe is evil.

Playing soccer of with head of said foe is in bad taste, but is a good way to intimidate your enemies or make new ones. The Raven Queen may frown upon it but with all the undead in the world this is low on the list of her priorities (though not, perhaps, the local cleric). It is on the border of evil and unaligned. Done once, no big deal other then offending PC and NPC sensiblities (which could be a problem). Done routinely, a problem.

All the Best,

Nani?
#5
salla
Jul 13, 2008 17:19:42
Killing a surrendered foe is evil.

QFT, +1'd, and You Win The Thread.
#6
doomsought
Jul 13, 2008 17:40:30
It's the soccer that to me, shows there's more to it then just 'roleplaying'... while that isn't evil per say they're... it is sick and deranged.

Actual sick and deranged falls pretty far into evil.
I say in character fight and a few smacks on the hand with a ruler OOC

I bet they will cry more about the about their characters getting killed than the ruler.
#7
voran
Jul 13, 2008 21:49:26 I'd recommend treating it as a 'non-canon' event, unless it becomes habit. When playing, I think its fair to say we all have had the impulsive 'do something stupid' moment that we wouldn't otherwise do. Stuff brought on by too much carbonate beverage, or alcohol, or pizza or this being hour 8 of a 12 hour school break weekend or something, where our chars end up doing something silly cause the player is frazzed out of its mind.

If the group can come to an agreement that this was "out of character" moment instead of something they want seen as "in character" then you can just sorta ignore it.

Like I said tho, if it becomes habit, its another story. Then in that case, you're trucking in degeneration and vastly inappropriate behavior, and aren't really suitable to be a PC anymore.
#8
etarnon
Jul 13, 2008 22:05:48
...if it becomes habit, its another story. Then in that case, you're trucking in degeneration and vastly inappropriate behavior, and aren't really suitable to be a PC anymore.

I agree.

As a DM, This would mean that they were CE.

I'd have some NPC witness the event, and then their equal power family comes looking.

The resulting confrontation would prove interesting, as they account for their actions...and likely get killed by a posse, or similar.

Such actions are not heroic, and in my mind, not in the spirit of the game.

Such characters in my mind "Have gone over to the dark side" and are pretty much denied by DM fiat to continue, or perhaps killed off, after or during a confrontation.

They could of course, win aforesaid confrontation, and then become outlaws, with all that entails.

Especially tricky with a paladin around.

Definitely doesn't sound like the actions of a seasoned, mature player, trying to fit into a team of heroes.

Doesn't mean that's how everyone sees it, but that's how I view such actions.
#9
nephlite
Jul 14, 2008 12:20:09
Killing a surrendered foe is evil.

Playing soccer of with head of said foe is in bad taste, but is a good way to intimidate your enemies or make new ones. The Raven Queen may frown upon it but with all the undead in the world this is low on the list of her priorities (though not, perhaps, the local cleric).

Wait, what does the Raven Queen care about your body being desecrated? Don't her people the Sharardi wear piercing and other things?

So I don't think she cares. As long as they died.

Plus, Soccer was originally done with heads of slayed foes. Aztecs I believe or was it Mayans...
#10
nani
Jul 14, 2008 14:45:13
Wait, what does the Raven Queen care about your body being desecrated? Don't her people the Sharardi wear piercing and other things?

Piercings are a "cultural expression" not a descecration per say.

So I don't think she cares. As long as they died.

That was my read mostly. However, if you get in the habit of desecration in small ways it could lead to bigger things.

Plus, Soccer was originally done with heads of slayed foes. Aztecs I believe or was it Mayans...

The Mongols played polo with the heads of foes. The Mayans played a game with rubber balls and sacrificed the loosing team.
#11
dm_shonuff
Jul 14, 2008 15:12:15 Um, how come no one has yet come across the main point and the reason OOC, the players decided IC, to play 'Dead Head Soccer"?

You say your tiefling and these two brother dragonborn are what the story revolves around? Your three characters are the "main plot?"

This is your problem, not your people.

D&D (esp. 4th) is a group game. Not a movie. You shouldn't be Frodo, and the others Merri and Pip. In 4th edition, no one should be a "supporting character". Your DM should see the soccer gag as a sign " oh snap! My players are bored. Maybe i'm showing the dragonborn and the tiefling a bit too much attention. Lets bring the party together."

Think back to the play session. When the dragonborn went for a 'walkie'...how long did the DM give them attention, compared to the rest of the party? I know when i'm bored at a table, and the DM is inexperienced, and showing his girlfriend/ wife/friend more attention IC than the rest of the party.....I write him a note letting him know the rest of the party needs equal attention....if it happens again....it's time to mess around!

Dwarf gets drunk, starts burning random equipment of others in the campfire.
Halfling starts rummaging through other people's stuff.. etc.

Your DM may be inadvertantly treating the others like "Supporting roles" for you three (dragonborn and tiefling) main characters...

if this continues....so will the "soccer hooligan games".

If (as you said in the OP) the campaign was truthfully built around you three...
then this should have been let known to the others. If they joined...and they are doing the decapitation games..then it may be time to let the DM know to take a break from the Drafgonborn/warlock storyline and shine some spotlight on the others....

Just advice from a 15 yr vet DM.
#12
eluxis
Jul 14, 2008 15:22:44
...D&D (esp. 4th) is a group game. Not a movie. You shouldn't be Frodo, and the others Merri and Pip...

In D&D, I'd much rather play Merri or Pippin than Frodo. Merri and Pippin got to be in the battles at Isengard and Helms Deep. Frodo just walked around with a ring and felt sick.

I know what you're saying, though.
#13
pigknight
Jul 14, 2008 15:30:49
The Mongols played polo with the heads of foes. The Mayans played a game with rubber balls and sacrificed the loosing team.

Actully they sacrificed the winning team, now back to your regulary scedualed (mispelt I know) program.
#14
darksavior
Jul 16, 2008 9:10:52 Roleplay it out. The two cold blooded sadistic killers I would think should be given an alignment shift by the DM, at least to Evil. Then make it an in game roleplay device. If your character witnessed this, and is being raised by the Dragonborn to follow Bahamut's teachings, then it wouldn't be out of line for you to mention this behavior to them... Consequences not only make players consider their actions more, it adds to believability and immersion in the game world, and could really present an opportunity for some interesting roleplay. My 2 cents.
#15
lincoln_hills
Jul 17, 2008 16:48:03 You want the new joins to "stay in line with the theme and attitude of the majority"? Well, check your stats again: the Unaligned characters are the majority of the party!

If your character wouldn't approve of such things, speak up. Stay in character: make it clear that you are repulsed by such actions. If they want your partnership to continue, they aren't allowed to behead prisoners and mock the dead. But make sure that the scene is a dispute, not a lecture: don't assume as a player that your character "deserves" to win the debate. They're Unaligned, not Evil, so you should be able to get them to make some concessions: but that works both ways. Allow them to be first to rifle the dead or something: that's usually worth some points with that kind of player.

DM_Shonuff makes a very good point: you think that the campaign is "built around" the first three characters. It's true that the campaign was all about you three, but what it is now is a story about seven characters, only three of whom have that early mutual experience.

So get the unaligned characters involved. I understand that your character regards the two dragonborn as teachers and good examples, but try to move beyond that to build some other kind of relationship with the others. Ask their advice about their fields of expertise. Ask to be taught a skill. Make them more interested in the story, and they won't amuse themselves with absurd atrocities.

(And not even terribly original atrocities. Making the severed head into a hand puppet would have been more comedically effective.)
#16
sinfire_titan
Jul 17, 2008 19:50:27 Tell me something: Have they seen Hostile 2 recently?
#17
need_a_life
Jul 18, 2008 10:46:43 Killing a surrendered foe?
Evil.

Defiling a corpse?
Immoral.

Using the decapitated head of an enemy in a sporting event?
Hilarious. Yet for some reason socially inacceptable.
#18
Kaganfindel
Jul 18, 2008 11:05:07 I'm with Shonuff. It sounds like you guys are playing a three player campaign with too many people at the table. The best way to deal with that problem will probably depend on what the players want out of the game. If the reason the game group exists is to play out this specific campaign, the bored players might be encouraged to find a campaign that includes their characters more equally. If the game group convened so that everyone at the table could play and have fun together, then the DM needs to make the other players at the table figure more prominently and more frequently in the story.

As little as I like them, this might call for a "GM rewind," replaying the session once he's modified the story to include the players who felt (rightfully, apparently) that they had to resort to making and defiling corpses to get their characters on the stage. If he can redirect the focus of the campaign to include the other characters more fully, it might be better for the story to edit out the wakeup call.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 perfect Jul 13, 2008 12:21:48	Wow. Party has a bit of an alignment problem lol. The party is: Dragonborn cleric in service to bahamut LG his Pc brother Dragonborn Paladin in service to Bahamut LG Me, a tiefling Warlock a disciple to aforementioned cleric/paladin at Unaligned an unaligned dwarf fighter an unaligned human wizard unaligned halfling rogue unaligned elven ranger the last two characters recently decided to decapitate and play soccer with the head of a surrendered bandit leader. Oops. The dm was a bit shocked as were I and the dragonborn brothers. The reason they were allowed to get away with it was, the dragonborns took a stroll in the woods...wow. I mean I would leave a party if I came back to that. I guess I'm just not that into the absurdity of the bizzaro actions of the characters. Wish they would stay more in line with the general theme and attitude of the majority of the party. The campaign is truthfully built around the story of the two dragonborn characters and my warlock , how they are trying to raise me to serve bahamut. (they found the character on the streets of the city , a little urchin type and are trying to reform the pc) The other players kind of just gradually joined in the idea of playing a 4th ed campaign. They're not really ruining it, they just do things that don't really fit the mood of the game. How do I help facilitate a better rp experience without taking away from the fun of the game? I certainly don't want to ruin the game because I think their characters would'nt do certain things. Especially since two or three of the pc's are playing their first DnD game ever. Btw. This is my first post on the forums . So be gentle lol. -P
#2 tyrandor Jul 13, 2008 12:37:50	Well, first off, killing a surrended foe is pretty evil in itself, should ** the Dragonborn off real good. It's the soccer that to me, shows there's more to it then just 'roleplaying'... while that isn't evil per say they're... it is sick and deranged. Are they character sociopath? Normally constitued people do not play soccer with severed heads... With that out of the way, this is probably the players simply acting out because they don't feel involved in the central story which revolve around you and the DB. So they're acting out. Trying to create party strife and act in way that will ** off the LG characters.
#3 pigknight Jul 13, 2008 16:39:37	Playing soccer with someone's head is: 1) CE 2) Gonna tick off the Raven Queen.
#4 nani Jul 13, 2008 17:16:22	Killing a surrendered foe is evil. Playing soccer of with head of said foe is in bad taste, but is a good way to intimidate your enemies or make new ones. The Raven Queen may frown upon it but with all the undead in the world this is low on the list of her priorities (though not, perhaps, the local cleric). It is on the border of evil and unaligned. Done once, no big deal other then offending PC and NPC sensiblities (which could be a problem). Done routinely, a problem. All the Best, Nani?
#5 salla Jul 13, 2008 17:19:42	Killing a surrendered foe is evil. QFT, +1'd, and You Win The Thread.
#6 doomsought Jul 13, 2008 17:40:30	It's the soccer that to me, shows there's more to it then just 'roleplaying'... while that isn't evil per say they're... it is sick and deranged. Actual sick and deranged falls pretty far into evil. I say in character fight and a few smacks on the hand with a ruler OOC I bet they will cry more about the about their characters getting killed than the ruler.
#7 voran Jul 13, 2008 21:49:26	I'd recommend treating it as a 'non-canon' event, unless it becomes habit. When playing, I think its fair to say we all have had the impulsive 'do something stupid' moment that we wouldn't otherwise do. Stuff brought on by too much carbonate beverage, or alcohol, or pizza or this being hour 8 of a 12 hour school break weekend or something, where our chars end up doing something silly cause the player is frazzed out of its mind. If the group can come to an agreement that this was "out of character" moment instead of something they want seen as "in character" then you can just sorta ignore it. Like I said tho, if it becomes habit, its another story. Then in that case, you're trucking in degeneration and vastly inappropriate behavior, and aren't really suitable to be a PC anymore.
#8 etarnon Jul 13, 2008 22:05:48	...if it becomes habit, its another story. Then in that case, you're trucking in degeneration and vastly inappropriate behavior, and aren't really suitable to be a PC anymore. I agree. As a DM, This would mean that they were CE. I'd have some NPC witness the event, and then their equal power family comes looking. The resulting confrontation would prove interesting, as they account for their actions...and likely get killed by a posse, or similar. Such actions are not heroic, and in my mind, not in the spirit of the game. Such characters in my mind "Have gone over to the dark side" and are pretty much denied by DM fiat to continue, or perhaps killed off, after or during a confrontation. They could of course, win aforesaid confrontation, and then become outlaws, with all that entails. Especially tricky with a paladin around. Definitely doesn't sound like the actions of a seasoned, mature player, trying to fit into a team of heroes. Doesn't mean that's how everyone sees it, but that's how I view such actions.
#9 nephlite Jul 14, 2008 12:20:09	Killing a surrendered foe is evil. Playing soccer of with head of said foe is in bad taste, but is a good way to intimidate your enemies or make new ones. The Raven Queen may frown upon it but with all the undead in the world this is low on the list of her priorities (though not, perhaps, the local cleric). Wait, what does the Raven Queen care about your body being desecrated? Don't her people the Sharardi wear piercing and other things? So I don't think she cares. As long as they died. Plus, Soccer was originally done with heads of slayed foes. Aztecs I believe or was it Mayans...
#10 nani Jul 14, 2008 14:45:13	Wait, what does the Raven Queen care about your body being desecrated? Don't her people the Sharardi wear piercing and other things? Piercings are a "cultural expression" not a descecration per say. So I don't think she cares. As long as they died. That was my read mostly. However, if you get in the habit of desecration in small ways it could lead to bigger things. Plus, Soccer was originally done with heads of slayed foes. Aztecs I believe or was it Mayans... The Mongols played polo with the heads of foes. The Mayans played a game with rubber balls and sacrificed the loosing team.
#11 dm_shonuff Jul 14, 2008 15:12:15	Um, how come no one has yet come across the main point and the reason OOC, the players decided IC, to play 'Dead Head Soccer"? You say your tiefling and these two brother dragonborn are what the story revolves around? Your three characters are the "main plot?" This is your problem, not your people. D&D (esp. 4th) is a group game. Not a movie. You shouldn't be Frodo, and the others Merri and Pip. In 4th edition, no one should be a "supporting character". Your DM should see the soccer gag as a sign " oh snap! My players are bored. Maybe i'm showing the dragonborn and the tiefling a bit too much attention. Lets bring the party together." Think back to the play session. When the dragonborn went for a 'walkie'...how long did the DM give them attention, compared to the rest of the party? I know when i'm bored at a table, and the DM is inexperienced, and showing his girlfriend/ wife/friend more attention IC than the rest of the party.....I write him a note letting him know the rest of the party needs equal attention....if it happens again....it's time to mess around! Dwarf gets drunk, starts burning random equipment of others in the campfire. Halfling starts rummaging through other people's stuff.. etc. Your DM may be inadvertantly treating the others like "Supporting roles" for you three (dragonborn and tiefling) main characters... if this continues....so will the "soccer hooligan games". If (as you said in the OP) the campaign was truthfully built around you three... then this should have been let known to the others. If they joined...and they are doing the decapitation games..then it may be time to let the DM know to take a break from the Drafgonborn/warlock storyline and shine some spotlight on the others.... Just advice from a 15 yr vet DM.
#12 eluxis Jul 14, 2008 15:22:44	...D&D (esp. 4th) is a group game. Not a movie. You shouldn't be Frodo, and the others Merri and Pip... In D&D, I'd much rather play Merri or Pippin than Frodo. Merri and Pippin got to be in the battles at Isengard and Helms Deep. Frodo just walked around with a ring and felt sick. I know what you're saying, though.
#13 pigknight Jul 14, 2008 15:30:49	The Mongols played polo with the heads of foes. The Mayans played a game with rubber balls and sacrificed the loosing team. Actully they sacrificed the winning team, now back to your regulary scedualed (mispelt I know) program.
#14 darksavior Jul 16, 2008 9:10:52	Roleplay it out. The two cold blooded sadistic killers I would think should be given an alignment shift by the DM, at least to Evil. Then make it an in game roleplay device. If your character witnessed this, and is being raised by the Dragonborn to follow Bahamut's teachings, then it wouldn't be out of line for you to mention this behavior to them... Consequences not only make players consider their actions more, it adds to believability and immersion in the game world, and could really present an opportunity for some interesting roleplay. My 2 cents.
#15 lincoln_hills Jul 17, 2008 16:48:03	You want the new joins to "stay in line with the theme and attitude of the majority"? Well, check your stats again: the Unaligned characters are the majority of the party! If your character wouldn't approve of such things, speak up. Stay in character: make it clear that you are repulsed by such actions. If they want your partnership to continue, they aren't allowed to behead prisoners and mock the dead. But make sure that the scene is a dispute, not a lecture: don't assume as a player that your character "deserves" to win the debate. They're Unaligned, not Evil, so you should be able to get them to make some concessions: but that works both ways. Allow them to be first to rifle the dead or something: that's usually worth some points with that kind of player. DM_Shonuff makes a very good point: you think that the campaign is "built around" the first three characters. It's true that the campaign was all about you three, but what it is now is a story about seven characters, only three of whom have that early mutual experience. So get the unaligned characters involved. I understand that your character regards the two dragonborn as teachers and good examples, but try to move beyond that to build some other kind of relationship with the others. Ask their advice about their fields of expertise. Ask to be taught a skill. Make them more interested in the story, and they won't amuse themselves with absurd atrocities. (And not even terribly original atrocities. Making the severed head into a hand puppet would have been more comedically effective.)
#16 sinfire_titan Jul 17, 2008 19:50:27	Tell me something: Have they seen Hostile 2 recently?
#17 need_a_life Jul 18, 2008 10:46:43	Killing a surrendered foe? Evil. Defiling a corpse? Immoral. Using the decapitated head of an enemy in a sporting event? Hilarious. Yet for some reason socially inacceptable.
#18 Kaganfindel Jul 18, 2008 11:05:07	I'm with Shonuff. It sounds like you guys are playing a three player campaign with too many people at the table. The best way to deal with that problem will probably depend on what the players want out of the game. If the reason the game group exists is to play out this specific campaign, the bored players might be encouraged to find a campaign that includes their characters more equally. If the game group convened so that everyone at the table could play and have fun together, then the DM needs to make the other players at the table figure more prominently and more frequently in the story. As little as I like them, this might call for a "GM rewind," replaying the session once he's modified the story to include the players who felt (rightfully, apparently) that they had to resort to making and defiling corpses to get their characters on the stage. If he can redirect the focus of the campaign to include the other characters more fully, it might be better for the story to edit out the wakeup call.