From: fierkelab@bchm.biochem.duke.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Ethical Dilemna (GURPS Fantasy - LONG)
Date: 25 Jan 93 23:48:07 GMT
Organization: Biochemistry

In article <C1Bz9n.EF7@csugrad.cs.vt.edu> kerr@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (Shane Kerr)
writes:

>I'm running a GURPS Fantasy campaign, where the characters are 140 point 
>characters.  I made everybody take Status +1 and Comfortable, and at least
>30 points of skills, so they're not all sooper-dooper.  Let's look at the 
>party:
>
>An Artarrean fencer (ick - hi Dave)
>A Templar
>A Jesuit
>A sheriff (typical trees and bark type)
>A reptile man craftsman
>
>Okay, the campaign is set in Cardiel, which is basically religiously tolerant,
>even though the ruling nobles are mostly Christian.  While walking back from
>a typical make-work task Baron Leo gave them (they all did it for their own
>reasons), they encountered a group of pagans in the middle of drunken 
>ectasy.  The Templar, in typical D&D fashion (no flames please) charged 
>into the middle of the scene with broadsword hacking and hewing.  
>
>Of course, they slaughtered the naked and untrained worshippers in record 
>time.  They DIDN'T bother to stop the ones who ran away.  So of course the
>local lord showed up and is a bit upset because somebody just slaughtered
>all of his peasants.  Yikes.
>
>So now they're on the way to see the Baron.  Now, as I see it the law is
>clear - they're gonna fry.  But should I allow them to get off with paying
>a werguild.  Or maybe trial by combat?  Or perhaps just deportation?  I 
>COULD enslave the party.  Hm.  The worst part is that everybody but
>the fencer took honesty.  The Jesuit tried to stop the rest, but how
>do you stop a Templar on his warhorse with stern words?

Well, it would seem that the question here is "Is this a land of law, or a land
of might?"  Certainly your characters would be in trouble in 16th century
England, but may have had nothing to fear in 11th century England.  Another
question may be "What is the relationship between the Baron and the local
lord?"
If the local lord is a sworn liege of the Baron, then the adventurers are going
to owe, at the very least.  (Although weregild may not be the right term here,
after all these peasants were probably not blood kin to the local lord.  Or is
the "droit de seigneu"r practiced in this land?).  On the other hand, if these
lords are feuding, then your adventurers will be commended, although not too
loudly.  After all, it's not like they were fighting men of their own rank, or
even men-at-arms!  Certainly no one will be singing eddas about this battle!

I don't understand the problem with honesty, though, unless these characters
have been denying their role in this slaughter.  In which case, they should
have to buy off the trait.  Or, maybe, they should acquire a STRONG "sense of
guilt", and force them to role-play it?  Give away their worldly possessions
and go on a pilgrimage to a holy place, clad in sackcloth and ashes?  (An
excellent opportunity for a vision to occur, giving 1 or more characters a
quest to undertake in future adventures?)

>Anyway, another option I thought about is a time shift.  We talked about
>the massacre afterwords and apparently the Templar thought his was 
>supposed to be playing a fanatic pagan-hater, because that's what good
>Christian knights DID for a living, right?  I think he's changed his
>mind.  And the rest of the party probably wouldn't have just mindlessly
>charged into battle if blood wasn't already drawn (hm...visions of tiger
>sharks dance through my head).  So perhaps we could go back to the 
>"scene of the crime" and replay it.  Anyway, I'm definitely going to see
>what the party wants to do with it.  
>
ICK!!!  They did it!  Don't undo it!  Killing the characters would be better
that "OOPS!  Do-Over!", IMO.  From what I recall of Templars (mostly the
Classic Comics edition of Ivanhoe), your Templar wasn't necessarily out of
line.  Certainly his behavior would have come naturally to a Teutonic Knight,
from what I've read.  It all depends on your conception of the Order in your
campaign.  Who knows, if you hadn't really defined the Order beforehand, then
perhaps the player had the right idea!  (but maybe at the wrong time or
place...)

>Then the issue of character points arises.  Nobody but the Jesuit knew
>that they were breaking the law by killing them (they didn't even suspect,
>but they probably thought they were summoning a demon or something).  But
>afterwords when the Jesuit told them, they all tried their Will rolls
>to not turn themselves in.  That's fine with me, but they should at least
>be acting GUILTY.  Should I just not give any out for that session?  Make
>them spend the next 10 points buying off their Honesty?
>
Well, is it clear from the nature of the land that they should be acting
guilty?  How strong is the Honesty trait?  Is it "Tell the truth when asked?",
or is it "Always do the right thing, even before you are asked?".

Anyhow, if this was my campaign, I would be tempted to, depending on the
setting,

A)	In a strong law setting, suggest to the Jesuit that he turn in his
companions.  Does he or doesn't he?  Are the bonds of companionship stronger
than the rule of law and the word of God?  What happens to the party if he
does?  What happens to him if he doesn't?

B)	In a moderate law setting, I would require the Templar to undergo a penance
given to him by his superiors in the order.  This penance would be STRICT! 
(see above).  I think the Swordsman should develop a "sense of guilt" handicap
that could only be redeemed by a similar penance, or many acts of kindness, or
something along those lines.  Until then, how does he suffer?  Perhaps he hides
his guilt behind a fog of alcohol?  (Isn't there a drunkenness flaw in GURPS?)
I don't know enough about the reptileman to suggest what he might feel.

C)  In a low law setting, I would be tempted to start a feud between the local
lord and these characters.  Require them to go back into that area on some
quest.  "Slip a message" to the local lord (yes, I know he's a NPC), and let
him sic his men-at-arms upon them!  Hound them, hound them, hound them! 
Perhaps this lord is a servant of great EVIL, and hires henchmen to waylay them
in cities far away from his lands, sends demons after them, or whatever. (After
all, why is he so concerned about some pagan peasants anyhow?)

Anyhow, these are my suggestions, do with them what you will. 


Eric Roush				Sir Quintus Varus Lavoris
fierkelab@				sworn liege to Earl Robert of Sarum
bchm.biochem.duke.edu	and faithful member of the
						Fellowship of the Talon  (Band of the Hand?)
						(We're still working on the name...)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc