Our party's Rogue wants to be an assassin. I am playing a Bard and trying to stay very neutral WRT group conflicts. He considers it foolhearty to think he is going to end strife of that sort, but he still attempts to smooth out the bumps and rough edges he finds along the way. The rest of the party are two paladins, a ranger, a cleric and a sorcerer (orphaned child).
Our Rogue took a contract to murder two individuals sight-unseen in the next town we were traveling to and arrangements were made for him to collect 2000gp for the job in the next town when it was over.
My character offered to help him locate the two dwarves without knowing why he wanted to locate them. After the job was over he agreed to go check out a tavern/brothel where the Rogue would accept payment. He did this because he generally wants all party members to succeed in their individual pursuits and to use his charisma to help party members in general. The job was done, somewhat inelegantly, and payment was received by the Rogue. The next morning we are alerted to a number of towns guard rushing about outside to lock down the city because two dwarves were murdered and the captain of the guard wants to locate the criminal. Upon hearing two dwarves were murdered the day before I look askance at the Rogue, who just avoids my gaze.
A short time later we learn the dwarves were involved in smuggling slaves that worked in the mine out of town/city to their freedom. This is very interesting that the town's guard knows about this but officially slavery in this town is legal. This would make the dwarves that were murdered notorious criminals in this town/city. There is plenty of cognitive dissonance in this one.
Now we're stuck in town for this and another reason for a week. I as a player believe each player should be allowed to play their character in a manner that they find enjoyable. If your party has a Rogue, then a Rogue is gonna do what a Rogue is gonna do. But ... now I think I need to have an in-character discussion with the Rogue and lay my cards on the table letting him know the Bard does not think this is OK to involve the party in this sort of extra-curricular activity. Right now the Sorcerer knows more than the Bard because he was nearer to the action, and the rest of the party doesn't know anything about it.
My problem is what does the Bard do if the Rogue tells him to forget about it. The Bard wants to convince the Rogue to make amends and take responsibility within the party, but the one of the Paladins has made it clear if he finds out he will help the guards apprehend the Rogue, and I think the Cleric is near that feeling too. The other Paladin is not wanting to get involved. I don't know if the Ranger would participate in arresting him or just give him a strong lecture.
Our party's Rogue wants to be an assassin. I am playing a Bard and trying to stay very neutral WRT group conflicts. He considers it foolhearty to think he is going to end strife of that sort, but he still attempts to smooth out the bumps and rough edges he finds along the way. The rest of the party are two paladins, a ranger, a cleric and a sorcerer (orphaned child).
Our Rogue took a contract to murder two individuals sight-unseen in the next town we were traveling to and arrangements were made for him to collect 2000gp for the job in the next town when it was over.
My character offered to help him locate the two dwarves without knowing why he wanted to locate them. After the job was over he agreed to go check out a tavern/brothel where the Rogue would accept payment. He did this because he generally wants all party members to succeed in their individual pursuits and to use his charisma to help party members in general. The job was done, somewhat inelegantly, and payment was received by the Rogue. The next morning we are alerted to a number of towns guard rushing about outside to lock down the city because two dwarves were murdered and the captain of the guard wants to locate the criminal. Upon hearing two dwarves were murdered the day before I look askance at the Rogue, who just avoids my gaze.
A short time later we learn the dwarves were involved in smuggling slaves that worked in the mine out of town/city to their freedom. This is very interesting that the town's guard knows about this but officially slavery in this town is legal. This would make the dwarves that were murdered notorious criminals in this town/city. There is plenty of cognitive dissonance in this one.
Now we're stuck in town for this and another reason for a week. I as a player believe each player should be allowed to play their character in a manner that they find enjoyable. If your party has a Rogue, then a Rogue is gonna do what a Rogue is gonna do. But ... now I think I need to have an in-character discussion with the Rogue and lay my cards on the table letting him know the Bard does not think this is OK to involve the party in this sort of extra-curricular activity. Right now the Sorcerer knows more than the Bard because he was nearer to the action, and the rest of the party doesn't know anything about it.
My problem is what does the Bard do if the Rogue tells him to forget about it. The Bard wants to convince the Rogue to make amends and take responsibility within the party, but the one of the Paladins has made it clear if he finds out he will help the guards apprehend the Rogue, and I think the Cleric is near that feeling too. The other Paladin is not wanting to get involved. I don't know if the Ranger would participate in arresting him or just give him a strong lecture.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt