During battle, one of the PC's attacked their own NPC commanding officer in their mercenary company, while said CO was down and had failed two death saves.
The PC didn't know the Captain had been poisoned and the poison was preventing magical healing; they thought he was possessed and that somehow Toll the Dead's necrotic damage (a la Final Fantasy) would heal him.
Unfortunately, the Captain had failed two death saves already (for important NPC's, I do death saves)... and the damage from the cantrip killed him.
Luckily, the chronurgist used Chronal Shift, and the Captain made his saving throw. So he was later stabilized with the Medicine skill.
Said PC has been militarily arrested for assaulting a superior officer and our next session will be a drumhead court-martial. He faces potential character death by execution.
So here's how I'm going to organize this beast. I've given each of the players (except the defendant) an NPC and role to play. One is the acting CO as "Judge." Others are playing NPC comrades with specific roles: Cop, Prosecutor, Bailiff, Expert Witness (arcane magic), Expert Witness (healing). The two experts have other minor things to do as well to keep them interested.
We're basically going to play Law & Order: DnD. I'll split the session into two phases: Investigation and Trial. During the Investigation phase the Cop, Prosecutor and Defendant can interview other players (and me, fielding any NPC I haven't assigned out). The Trial phase will have opening arguments, evidence and witness testimony, and closing arguments. The Judge will ultimately decide the verdict and sentence.
I will warn the players about accepting the result and no malice toward any of the others, that if any mistakes are made, it's probably on me for not prepping the other players enough. Also, the defendant has a backup character in case the worst happens, so it's not too bad if it does come to that.
I feel like this will be fun, but I also feel like I have a lot of rough edges and I can use some help in smoothing them out. Any ideas?
We've got a mix - some strong roleplayers, some that might struggle. I think I'd offer to play the NPC if the player wished. Some of them could totally pull off a conversation with themselves.
Also, I forgot to mention this is a homebrew world, and we're early on in the campaign; the players are still discovering some of the lore of the world. I've had to let some facts out to different people earlier than I would have otherwise, but it's gotten them excited.
My only advice would be to, while acting as judge, ensure the 'trial' is structured like a trial. One party speaks, another rebutts, opening and closing remarks, objections, all that. What you don't want is this to devolve into a lot of cross-talk arguing well after both sides have both made their points. Allow them to make their point once, allow the opposition to respond, then continue on. Otherwise you'll get stuck and it'll take forever.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Ok, so there was a previous discussion here: https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/dungeon-masters-only/1920-dm-looking-for-advice-running-a-trial
But my situation is somewhat different:
Said PC has been militarily arrested for assaulting a superior officer and our next session will be a drumhead court-martial. He faces potential character death by execution.
So here's how I'm going to organize this beast. I've given each of the players (except the defendant) an NPC and role to play. One is the acting CO as "Judge." Others are playing NPC comrades with specific roles: Cop, Prosecutor, Bailiff, Expert Witness (arcane magic), Expert Witness (healing). The two experts have other minor things to do as well to keep them interested.
We're basically going to play Law & Order: DnD. I'll split the session into two phases: Investigation and Trial. During the Investigation phase the Cop, Prosecutor and Defendant can interview other players (and me, fielding any NPC I haven't assigned out). The Trial phase will have opening arguments, evidence and witness testimony, and closing arguments. The Judge will ultimately decide the verdict and sentence.
I will warn the players about accepting the result and no malice toward any of the others, that if any mistakes are made, it's probably on me for not prepping the other players enough. Also, the defendant has a backup character in case the worst happens, so it's not too bad if it does come to that.
I feel like this will be fun, but I also feel like I have a lot of rough edges and I can use some help in smoothing them out. Any ideas?
We've got a mix - some strong roleplayers, some that might struggle. I think I'd offer to play the NPC if the player wished. Some of them could totally pull off a conversation with themselves.
Also, I forgot to mention this is a homebrew world, and we're early on in the campaign; the players are still discovering some of the lore of the world. I've had to let some facts out to different people earlier than I would have otherwise, but it's gotten them excited.
My only advice would be to, while acting as judge, ensure the 'trial' is structured like a trial. One party speaks, another rebutts, opening and closing remarks, objections, all that. What you don't want is this to devolve into a lot of cross-talk arguing well after both sides have both made their points. Allow them to make their point once, allow the opposition to respond, then continue on. Otherwise you'll get stuck and it'll take forever.