forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

No one of Mogdreds men escaped alive. They even killed one of the dogs, those nasty buggers.

Seriously though, the Folk-moot will be very interesting, but that won't be the next adventure. The characters are planning to travel to Tyrant's Hill to spy on the people there, before the Folk-moot. I haven't written this adventure yet, but they did talk about trying to kidnap one of the warriors living there.
Any ideas and thoughts about how this story could play out? What would they find Tyrant's Hill? What dangers?

Of course, the danger is that Mogdred could see the characters as attackers from Rhosgobel, and this would make the Folk-moot play out a bit differently...

E.

This forum definitely needs sub-forums. One of them should be "LM Council (Spoilers)"

Agreed. With all the terrific story content coming out for The One Ring, it would be nice to have a section where you don't have to write "--SPOILERS--" over everything.

E.

The book says the Loremaster should warn players who are about to carry out a Misdeed (revised rules, p. 224). Did you do that?

The question boils down to whether attacking a fleeing opponent is a Misdeed. This is hard to say. I picture in my mind the Bakshi film where Theoden rides out of Helm's Deep hacking down fleeing orcs who had previously been besieging the Rohirrim. This is the climax of the film, and doesn't strike me as a Misdeed.

Now, if the men had fallen to their knees and begged for mercy, continuing to attack would certainly be a Misdeed. This would be true even of orcs. Somewhere between attacking and begging for mercy is a fuzzy line where attacking an enemy goes from fighting to murder, from justified action to a Misdeed. On which side of fleeing does this line fall?

The answer may depend on the organization of those who flee. If routed orcs could regroup and attack again, attacking them would simply be a tactic of battle. If routed orcs are completely scattered in defeat, attacking them as they fled would be a Misdeed. Likewise with your two fleeing men. In their case there seems little chance that their flight is a regrouping tactic, so shooting them from behind or cutting them down as they run is probably a Misdeed. Based on the table on p. 224 this may be akin to abusing your authority to dominate (4 Shadow points) in that you're violating the rules of war (your victory earned you the authority) to slaughter an enemy (dominate). It's aggression that was not unprovoked, but it's more than just threats, and it probably wasn't cowardice that caused the players to act that way.

If it really should be 4 Shadow points, you really must warn the players before they do it. I'd be tempted to knock it down to 3 points if the men really were asking for it.

Aeglosdir wrote:The villains probably wouldn't have shown any mercy, but the PCs don't have to act like villains.

Once they're running away from you it's no longer self-defense though. It's hard to shoot people in the back without looking to hurt them. Maybe you're simply venting your anger: I'm gonna get the sucker who sprung this ambush on me... he has forfeited his claims to mercy.

Agreed. It's not self-defense. At that point it becomes justice and/or punishment. I understand in our civilized modern world we have professional cops and so forth who handle that, but in a quasi-dark-age world, I would not bind the heroes with the shackles of our modern day criminal justice sensibilities. Do you want players reading bandits their Miranda rights?

And Tolkien did believe in both justice and merited punishment for crime-doers. Mercy requires submission to proper authority and a penitent heart (ostensibly brought about by the threat of a beat-down, but sometimes that's what it takes). Running away from justice/punishment is not submission.

I didn't warn the players that it was a Misdeed, but then again, I only gave them one Shadow point.

E.

One mitigating circumstance could be what happens if they get away. I.e., there's a large camp of bandits just out of earshot.

We had problems because 2 survivors ended up surrendering, but we were in the middle of nowhere and their camp was nearby. Would have been easier if they had just given us a good reason to kill them.

And you tried to sell the survivors into slavery and would have made a profit but for the dwarf's objections.

Hermes Serpent wrote:And you tried to sell the survivors into slavery and would have made a profit but for the dwarf's objections.

Ok ok ok....but we were going to do it ONLY to teach them a lesson, and we promised to donate the money to an orphanage. Plus we knew that Viglund would have probably freed them within a few weeks.

It's pretty sad when the Dwarf is the moral compass of the party