CK , whats your call.

Ace of Swords · Post by **Ace of Swords** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:57 am

Playing through a converted D1 with my group of players (varying from 7th to 9th)

They meet a Dark elven patrol, the Drow advance a leader to parley. the players send up a couple to parley.

The Drow tries to 'suggest' the players retreat.

One of the paladins declares "evil act, i attack"

I tried to stress , yes the Drow broke parley but the players should allow them to return to their forces before attacking.....

The paladin balked at this and argued they broke parley and he should be free to attack.

Whats your call????

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 6:04 am

I assume you mean the drow cast the spell suggestion rather than simply made a verbal opinion and gesture. If so, the spell casting is an attack, and the drow is either 1) stupid for advancing beyond its companions, 2) suffers delusions of superiority above its companions or the party, or 3) is in a situation where it has no choice. However, any of these three does nothing to diffuse the fact that the party was attacked -- clearly the drow did not wait to have the party remain, and "good" does not mean "stupid" so, return in kind is not unjustified... in fact, it may be the only lawful good action to do.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 6:06 am

If battle is to happen, and everyone knows, and weapons are at the ready, its time to fight. Parley is over when parley is over. Paladins are just not allowed to attack helpless targets and to adhere to any pledge they give. Not a second longer against evil.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

AslanC · Post by **AslanC** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 6:20 am

If the Drow cast a spell and they knew (how would they know?) then fair-play to the Paladin. IMHO.
_________________
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Earth Alpha: Yet another RPG blog!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Visit the new BASH Forums!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 6:24 am

Ace of Swords wrote:
Whats your call????

Well, if I were playing the Paladin my call would have been "No negotiation with evil!" as I hurtled my two handed sword into the chest of the nearest target.
More germane to the topic, the Paladin would certainly be justified, as part of the code of such extremists, in laying waste at the slightest provocation of evil.

To me, a Paladin only protects those who follow their precepts. Anyone acting outside of that is fair game for destruction.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Jynx · Post by **Jynx** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:25 am

gideon_thorne wrote:
To me, a Paladin only protects those who follow their precepts. Anyone acting outside of that is fair game for destruction.

DITTO!

CKDad · Post by **CKDad** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 12:28 pm

That's one flavor of paladin. Another, IMHO equally legitimate take is one that adheres to a code of honor, even when - and most especially if - it hurts. This flavor emphasizes the "lawful" aspect.

One could argue that a paladin might not agree to the parley in the first place, but once it started, he/she would abide by the rules of parley -

- up until the Drow tried to use suggestion. At that point, the Drow violated the rules of parley first, and the paladin would be fully justified in responding to hostile action with Lethal and Gleefully Excessive Force.
_________________
"I don't wanna be remembered as the guy who died because he underestimated the threat posed by a monkey."

Steerpike · Post by **Steerpike** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 12:45 pm

I agree that once the spell is cast, the Paladin is free to act without fear of breaching his ethical code. He or his comrades have effectively been 'attacked' by the drow patrol. That's how I'd adjudicate it.
_________________
"There are two kinds of people in the world: those with guns, and those who dig." - The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

CharlieRock · Post by **CharlieRock** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 1:20 pm

There is a difference between "chivalry" and "lawful good".

LG does not mean I have to allow you to properly arm yourself for a struggle.

Chivalry does.

However, chivalry also (usually) only applies to honorable opponents. A dastardly parley-breaking evil-spawn drow leader may not be seen as honorable enough to be offered a chivalrous duel. In fact, the very fact parley was offered/accepted by a chivalrous PC may be an act of charity only. When it was broken (or refused more accurately) then chivalry may actually call for the knave's head without further fuss. A samurai would certainly behead the offending drow in a blink.

A knight may have a dilema here, but a paladin certainly does not.
_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:06 pm

Parlay is the primary issue here, as soon as parlay is broken, the rules no longer apply, so paladin or not, fighting resumes.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Sir Osis of Liver · Post by **Sir Osis of Liver** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:07 pm

I'd also look at it from the standpoint that if the paladin already knows that the drow in that world are evil, he's already got the hair-trigger thing going. If the guy blinks wrong, he's going to get skewered. I'm totally on the side of the player/paladin on this one. Kudos to him for playing the class/alignment consistently.

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:16 pm

CKDad wrote:
That's one flavor of paladin. Another, IMHO equally legitimate take is one that adheres to a code of honor, even when - and most especially if - it hurts. This flavor emphasizes the "lawful" aspect.

Well sure. But I see nothing in my above premise that violates this.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

TGryph · Post by **TGryph** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:27 pm

gideon_thorne wrote:
Well sure. But I see nothing in my above premise that violates this.

Ditto. Add to that breakiing parley is a Chaotic Act as well. Double no-no on the Drow. Go get 'em Pally!

TGryph

Deogolf · Post by **Deogolf** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:45 pm

Death to the Drow! Based on all that has been said. The party is free to attack as they see fit and are capable.
_________________
Eulaliaaa!!! Give those rapscallions blood and vinegar, wot?!

Be sure to check out Jim's artwork for sale:
http://jimhollowayart.com/id5.html

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:57 pm

Course, being the bastard game master I am, this would all be a highly organised and pre planned trap by the drow.

Several of which who are waiting invisibly in ambush....
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

sieg · Post by **sieg** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 7:13 pm

I agree with CK Dad and Charlie; LG does not equate to Chivalry, nor to stupidity.

In such a circumstance I'd have to know the following:

1. Was "Suggestion" a spell, or just persuasive discussion? If the former, how did the party know it happend?

2. What god/faith did the LG paladin follow? That's going to have an effect on behavior.

If 1 is true (spell), then absolutely the paladin should attack. HOW the paladin attacks (bum rush, allowing Drow to return to fellows, etc.) will depend on the deity. A paladin of Athena might very well let the drow return to his party; or at least prepare for combat (Goddess of Defensive War). However, a Paladin of Thor? Groin shot on the drow and stomp his head in while he's down!
_________________
Always remember, as a first principle of all D&D: playing BtB is not now, never was and never will be old school.- Tim Kask, Dragonsfoot

AslanC · Post by **AslanC** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 7:16 pm

sieg wrote:
1. Was "Suggestion" a spell, or just persuasive discussion? If the former, how did the party know it happend?

This is my question as well
_________________
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Earth Alpha: Yet another RPG blog!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Visit the new BASH Forums!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Ace of Swords · Post by **Ace of Swords** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 7:31 pm

To clairify, it was a suggestion spell.

I run a very dark ages mideval style game.

Chivalry is very important.

I chided the a paladin a bit, about keeping his word.

And showing that he was lawful and good to his word for safe passage to and from parley.

I would not have given any punishment if he had attacked.

The parley was like the gathering of generals before a battle.

They were going to fight, but certain civilities were to be observed.

My favorite responce was the

(Well, if I were playing the Paladin my call would have been "No negotiation with evil!" as I hurtled my two handed sword into the chest of the nearest target.)

Rather then derail this topic i will start a new one about another point...

Post by **Fiffergrund** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 7:33 pm

I would have expected the drow to break parley. That's what they do.

On the other hand, if the players are good role-players and their characters have never dealt with drow, they showed remarkable restraint in allowing parley to happen in the first place.

Speaking from my POV only, if I'm a paladin and I detect evil to that degree, there's no way in Hades I'm going to allow any sort of negotiation.

"First, it's a trap. Second, it's a bloody trap. Third, it's ALWAYS a bloody trap. The correct course of action is to kill them outright before they kill us."

So, was the paladin justified in attacking? Not only yes, but hell yes, and what was he waiting for to begin with?

Incidentally, how did the players know the drow attempted this? Just curious.
_________________
Sir Fiffergrund, Lord Marshal of the Castle and Crusade Society.

He Who Hides Behind The Elephant's Back

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 7:36 pm

Fiffergrund wrote:
I would have expected the drow to break parley. That's what they do.

On the other hand, if the players are good role-players and their characters have never dealt with drow, they showed remarkable restraint in allowing parley to happen in the first place.

Speaking from my POV only, if I'm a paladin and I detect evil to that degree, there's no way in Hades I'm going to allow any sort of negotiation.

"First, it's a trap. Second, it's a bloody trap. Third, it's ALWAYS a bloody trap. The correct course of action is to kill them outright before they kill us."

So, was the paladin justified in attacking? Not only yes, but hell yes, and what was he waiting for to begin with?

Incidentally, how did the players know the drow attempted this? Just curious.

Holy shit! I agree with Fiff on something. Man, the worlds gonna end.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Ace of Swords · Post by **Ace of Swords** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 7:43 pm

The drow cast suggestion and the paladin's holy sword's SR stopped the spell.

(holy grammar cunnundrum double possessive can't be right can it?)

AslanC · Post by **AslanC** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 7:47 pm

Ahhhh! So that alerts the Paladin? Cool.

Yeah he was well in his rights IMHO at that point to bury his sword to the hilt in the Drow's face.
_________________
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Earth Alpha: Yet another RPG blog!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Visit the new BASH Forums!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 8:52 pm

Actually, doesn't suggestion have components, like verbal, somatic, material? Usually, when someone start mumbling in some eldritch phraseology, waving around weird and unusual things, while flicking their wrist and making odd gestures... it means either they're insane or casting something, and maybe even both. I have no qualms believing the paladin knew a spell was cast... what spell is a different question, with a different answer.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

sieg · Post by **sieg** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:15 pm

Yep, in that case its drow shishkabob.
BTw, I wouldn't have a problem saying that the drow in question didn't necessarily have to follow the PHB spell rules to cast Suggestion. After all, their magic does so mmany odd things to begin with., its only logical.

Otherwise, in drow society requiring V,S, and/or M would make it a fairly useless spell; his peers would've killed anyone even trying the spell long ago.

Darwinism in action!
_________________
Always remember, as a first principle of all D&D: playing BtB is not now, never was and never will be old school.- Tim Kask, Dragonsfoot

Go0gleplex · Post by **Go0gleplex** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:18 pm

Hmmm....I have to give the Drow credit for trying to avoid a battle. That in itself is unusual unless there was some advantage to do so (like time to bring reinforcements). But I'd not consider that use of the spell as an attack per se since there was no direct harm intended at that time nor would harm come to the PCs or place them in a position to be harmed directly. So the rules of parley would still be applicable until such time as there was an active attack as performed by the paladin. (BAD Paladin! No Holy Milk Biscuit!)

Now if the suggestion had been for an action that would have directly led to harm of the party or put them in a position where harm would come to them (such as drop your weapons...oh good, they're helpless...ATTACK!) then I would rule parley broken and the Paladin would be clear to engage with a clear conscience.

My opinion for what it's worth.
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:23 pm

Quote:
Otherwise, in drow society requiring V,S, and/or M would make it a fairly useless spell; his peers would've killed anyone even trying the spell long ago.

Which is why you don't just walk up to a group of armed assailants and cast it in front of them. There is a reason why drow are regarded as subtle and mastersof subterfuge... they learn better than that, or they die.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

CKDad · Post by **CKDad** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:43 pm

gideon_thorne wrote:
Well sure. But I see nothing in my above premise that violates this.

You're correct, Peter - I wasn't trying to rebut you, just offer an alternative slant on the character.
_________________
"I don't wanna be remembered as the guy who died because he underestimated the threat posed by a monkey."

CKDad · Post by **CKDad** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:43 pm

gideon_thorne wrote:
Course, being the bastard game master I am, this would all be a highly organised and pre planned trap by the drow.

Several of which who are waiting invisibly in ambush....

But of course!
_________________
"I don't wanna be remembered as the guy who died because he underestimated the threat posed by a monkey."

CKDad · Post by **CKDad** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:56 pm

Fiffergrund wrote:
I would have expected the drow to break parley. That's what they do.

*snip*

Speaking from my POV only, if I'm a paladin and I detect evil to that degree, there's no way in Hades I'm going to allow any sort of negotiation.

Race and alignment aren't straightjackets, though. Sure, drow usually break parley, and paladins as a rule wouldn't negotiate with drow. But as my drill sergeant used to say, "Terrain and circumstances will dictate." There might be reasons that warrant an exception to the rule - not saying they were present here, but only fanatics say "Never!" (Though I'm aware that it's arguable that paladins are fanatics.)

Of course, dealing with the consequences of "breaking the rules" could also be very interesting! "What do you mean, you negotiated with drow?!? I don't care if it meant that you were able to rescue the orphans! I'll see you in irons for that!"
_________________
"I don't wanna be remembered as the guy who died because he underestimated the threat posed by a monkey."

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:56 pm

CKDad wrote:
You're correct, Peter - I wasn't trying to rebut you, just offer an alternative slant on the character.

*chuckles* I actually enjoy playing a Paladin. I have one character who is one. He's about 15th level now, and I started the character back in 1982.

Game masters enjoy when I play paladins, other players not so much.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Troll Lord Games

CK , whats your call.

CK , whats your call.

Re: CK , whats your call.

Re: CK , whats your call.