hi all, new Dm here-long story short. my group were investigating the disappearance of an acquaintance they know in a village. while searching for clues they found his stash of gems and gold and the rouge and warlock decided to help themselves (premise being he is dead so doesn't need it !!), now the paladin was justly very upset that they knew the guy and they were stealing his stuff, the rogue said "if he is alive we will give it back" this angered the player and also the character, he gave them an ultimatum of putting it all back or he would do it by force.
my question is, he already has inspiration, I do use hero points, I am aiming to also rarely award a feat for big sacrifices etc, I feel I want to reward him for standing his ground and making them do the right thing.
cant give inspiration, so an extra hero point? or a free feat related to the situation? i know its playing his character but he really was not happy about it, not in a way that would ruin the game, also i want to show the others you get rewarded for doing the right thing.
He should have already have used his inspiration - a missed opportunity to grant another one.
Perhaps a hero point, but certainly not a feat - a hero point is a one-use thing, a feat is a permanent thing.
But there's also XP rewards for good roleplay (if you aren't using milestone levelling); otherwise just accept that not all RP needs to be rewarded by the DM.
Ethical concepts, like Right and Wrong, are perspective based and highly subjective. Your Paladin might see what they are doing as Right, likewise for your Rogue and Warlock. What is socially acceptable for the "grittier" PCs, that maybe had to scrape and claw for a means to eat, might not be deemed appropriate to someone who's never had to resort to these tactics in order to survive. Same goes for someone who might see this as a normal part of a life-death cycle, like a Druid, that doesn't have a problem with re-purposing items and resources to suit the natural flow of life and death. Societal norms can be extremely complex and sometimes they won't match up to what we might understand in our respective cultures IRL. Just food for thought.
As for how to reward your players, if they aren't using the inspiration mechanic or hero point resource that you have provided, I really wouldn't suggest going bigger with Feats and possibly other abilities. You might give them appropriate gifts or favors from Patrons, or NPCs that witnessed the act like consumable magic items, or free room and board for a period of time. I'm with Farling that anything permanent might be a bit heavy handed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
You shouldn't give a feat. It is far too much and there is no in game character justification for it (unless you decide to give him the Inspiring Leader feat since it seems to fit the situation :) ). Though, I would strongly recommend against it at this point. You might be able to justify that particular feat if there are several incidents where the paladin displays Inspiring leadership. However, you don't want to set up a situation where the players expect powerful rewards like that.
If you use hero points then that is probably your best choice. As an alternative, you could give the character a single consumable "Luck" point - functions the same as a single use of the Lucky feat. Better than inspiration but since there is only one and it gets used up it won't unbalance anything.
In addition, depending on the alignment, the rogue taking the stuff in the first place could well have been equally good role playing as the paladin. Rogues are often portrayed as being highly motivated by treasure and if the original owner is dead (even if it is the rogues friend) the character could easily decide that the treasure is better off in his pocket for "safekeeping". The role playing of the rogue in this situation might have been just as good as the paladin. The same may be true for the warlock depending on the character alignment and morals. So, you will need to decide if they all deserve rewards.
Inter party conflict is always possible when characters have opposing moral systems. The party then needs to fall back on the reason WHY they are adventuring together in the first place. Perhaps they were childhood friends that chose divergent paths but they are still devoted to each other (e.g. Raistlin and his brother in the Dragonlance novels)? As a result, they will object and argue but rarely fight unless one of the characters does something so unacceptable that ending the friendship (for the characters) feels like the only option. If these guys just met in a bar and decided to work together then there isn't that much holding them together and moral conflicts and easily end up with incompatible characters that will eventually end with the party breaking up (i.e. one or more players rolls up a new character ..).
Finally, my main concern here is that the paladin character wasn't role playing. The player was upset and objecting to such behavior, not necessarily the character. The fact that the rogue's explanation "angered the player" is a red flag. It is a role playing game, the characters may do things the players may not like but it is the characters that matter. It's fine if the player and their character align in moral outlook but it is a game, the character might get angry but the player shouldn't. If the player was pretending to be angry to make the role playing even better then they definitely deserve a reward for good role playing but if the player actually WAS angry due to the comments of the other player then you probably need to have an out of game and out of character chat with the players and remind them that this is a game. Players are role playing characters and it doesn't necessarily indicate anything about the player in the real world. It is fine for a character to angry with a character but you should emphasize that it is a game and if the player was angry with the player for role playing their character then they need to take a deep breath and relax for a few minutes considering that it is a group of friends, sitting around a table, having fun with a role playing game.
Honestly, I don't necessarily consider threatening PvP to be a stellar example of roleplaying. In fact, I'm more prone to consider it to be lazy. "If I don't get my way I'll try to murder you," isn't exactly a strong moral position. (Neither is the distinction that it's someone they know. Taking stuff from dead people is only okay if you killed them yourself, and you didn't know them?)
He could have walked away. He could have said that he would stand with the group if that was their decision, but would be compelled to turn them into the local authorities and take his share of the punishment. Lots of things would have been much more compelling, IMO.
I would reward the player "in story". Like if the guy finds out that they didn't steal from him then they get a reputation boost. People start treating them better. That sort of thing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
hi all, new Dm here-long story short. my group were investigating the disappearance of an acquaintance they know in a village. while searching for clues they found his stash of gems and gold and the rouge and warlock decided to help themselves (premise being he is dead so doesn't need it !!), now the paladin was justly very upset that they knew the guy and they were stealing his stuff, the rogue said "if he is alive we will give it back" this angered the player and also the character, he gave them an ultimatum of putting it all back or he would do it by force.
my question is, he already has inspiration, I do use hero points, I am aiming to also rarely award a feat for big sacrifices etc, I feel I want to reward him for standing his ground and making them do the right thing.
cant give inspiration, so an extra hero point? or a free feat related to the situation? i know its playing his character but he really was not happy about it, not in a way that would ruin the game, also i want to show the others you get rewarded for doing the right thing.
thanks for any advice.
Adam
He should have already have used his inspiration - a missed opportunity to grant another one.
Perhaps a hero point, but certainly not a feat - a hero point is a one-use thing, a feat is a permanent thing.
But there's also XP rewards for good roleplay (if you aren't using milestone levelling); otherwise just accept that not all RP needs to be rewarded by the DM.
Ethical concepts, like Right and Wrong, are perspective based and highly subjective. Your Paladin might see what they are doing as Right, likewise for your Rogue and Warlock. What is socially acceptable for the "grittier" PCs, that maybe had to scrape and claw for a means to eat, might not be deemed appropriate to someone who's never had to resort to these tactics in order to survive. Same goes for someone who might see this as a normal part of a life-death cycle, like a Druid, that doesn't have a problem with re-purposing items and resources to suit the natural flow of life and death. Societal norms can be extremely complex and sometimes they won't match up to what we might understand in our respective cultures IRL. Just food for thought.
As for how to reward your players, if they aren't using the inspiration mechanic or hero point resource that you have provided, I really wouldn't suggest going bigger with Feats and possibly other abilities. You might give them appropriate gifts or favors from Patrons, or NPCs that witnessed the act like consumable magic items, or free room and board for a period of time. I'm with Farling that anything permanent might be a bit heavy handed.
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
You shouldn't give a feat. It is far too much and there is no in game character justification for it (unless you decide to give him the Inspiring Leader feat since it seems to fit the situation :) ). Though, I would strongly recommend against it at this point. You might be able to justify that particular feat if there are several incidents where the paladin displays Inspiring leadership. However, you don't want to set up a situation where the players expect powerful rewards like that.
If you use hero points then that is probably your best choice. As an alternative, you could give the character a single consumable "Luck" point - functions the same as a single use of the Lucky feat. Better than inspiration but since there is only one and it gets used up it won't unbalance anything.
In addition, depending on the alignment, the rogue taking the stuff in the first place could well have been equally good role playing as the paladin. Rogues are often portrayed as being highly motivated by treasure and if the original owner is dead (even if it is the rogues friend) the character could easily decide that the treasure is better off in his pocket for "safekeeping". The role playing of the rogue in this situation might have been just as good as the paladin. The same may be true for the warlock depending on the character alignment and morals. So, you will need to decide if they all deserve rewards.
Inter party conflict is always possible when characters have opposing moral systems. The party then needs to fall back on the reason WHY they are adventuring together in the first place. Perhaps they were childhood friends that chose divergent paths but they are still devoted to each other (e.g. Raistlin and his brother in the Dragonlance novels)? As a result, they will object and argue but rarely fight unless one of the characters does something so unacceptable that ending the friendship (for the characters) feels like the only option. If these guys just met in a bar and decided to work together then there isn't that much holding them together and moral conflicts and easily end up with incompatible characters that will eventually end with the party breaking up (i.e. one or more players rolls up a new character ..).
Finally, my main concern here is that the paladin character wasn't role playing. The player was upset and objecting to such behavior, not necessarily the character. The fact that the rogue's explanation "angered the player" is a red flag. It is a role playing game, the characters may do things the players may not like but it is the characters that matter. It's fine if the player and their character align in moral outlook but it is a game, the character might get angry but the player shouldn't. If the player was pretending to be angry to make the role playing even better then they definitely deserve a reward for good role playing but if the player actually WAS angry due to the comments of the other player then you probably need to have an out of game and out of character chat with the players and remind them that this is a game. Players are role playing characters and it doesn't necessarily indicate anything about the player in the real world. It is fine for a character to angry with a character but you should emphasize that it is a game and if the player was angry with the player for role playing their character then they need to take a deep breath and relax for a few minutes considering that it is a group of friends, sitting around a table, having fun with a role playing game.
I think the paladin did the right thing. Maybe give him an extra inspiration and just hold it for him until he needs it?
I really like D&D, especially Ravenloft, Exandria and the Upside Down from Stranger Things. My pronouns are she/they (genderfae).
Honestly, I don't necessarily consider threatening PvP to be a stellar example of roleplaying. In fact, I'm more prone to consider it to be lazy. "If I don't get my way I'll try to murder you," isn't exactly a strong moral position. (Neither is the distinction that it's someone they know. Taking stuff from dead people is only okay if you killed them yourself, and you didn't know them?)
He could have walked away. He could have said that he would stand with the group if that was their decision, but would be compelled to turn them into the local authorities and take his share of the punishment. Lots of things would have been much more compelling, IMO.
I wouldn't give him anything.
I would reward the player "in story". Like if the guy finds out that they didn't steal from him then they get a reputation boost. People start treating them better. That sort of thing.