Posting mode: Reply
Password(Password used for file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 3072 KB.
  • Images greater than 250x250 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Read the rules and FAQ before posting.
  • ????????? - ??

  • File : 1259053926.jpg-(39 KB, 600x320, 1199056071744.jpg)
    39 KB Death to Druids: Results Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:12 No.6844197  

    hey, fa/tg/uys.

    I came here to tell you how this went. Let me start by telling you that I am incredibly pissed at my (shitty) DM and my (shitty) party.

    I lost. It wasn't even a fight. It was a massacre. Stacked against me unbelievable from the beginning with salt rubbed into my wounds every round.

    My supply run was ambushed. Just like that. No crossbows for my men. No extra dynamite. No potions of bless, no reinforcements, no help from anyone.

    My traps did shit. The damage was laughable. Everything was either easily spotted or neutralized with ease. With the mob of druids that they marched on me with, they had numberless free heals.

    Not only were there 4 pcs against me, the DM saw it fit that the level X NPC druid and his assistant would join them on the hunt. Already in a battle I can barely imagine winning, I get shit stacked even more against me.

    When the fighting was about to start, I RP tried to diplomatize with them. They took this opportunity to hit me with enough ice storms to incapacitate me before I could do anything. I went down without a fight.

    My diplomacy fell on deaf ears. Everytime I told them that they were doing no good by threatening the miners, they lashed back at me for destroying the river and making it difficult. They never considered anything I said. The mob mentality had taken its hold and they could literally not comprehend their actions as possibly being wrong. They were convinced I was evil for perpetuating greed.

    The rest was a cakewalk. My miners were grouped into one turn in which they shot 3 or 4 arrows. The PCs wiped out everyone without blinking an eye.

    The more I write about this the more angry I get. I should have taken the meta-gamin advice you gave me and just quit the group.

    I failed you /tg/. I am sorry.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:23 No.6844310
    sounds like you got jewed.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:24 No.6844319
    Is that Kino on a shooting range?
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:27 No.6844338
    Dude, I was there for your first thread, and must have posted in it like 15 times, and that is some goddamned bullshit. He just handwaved you into oblivion without any chance for recompense.

    Fail and AIDS.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:28 No.6844348
    Fuck leaving the group. Murder them, burn their houses to the ground and salt the earth on which they stood. I respect the fact that you attempted to fight, but seriously, the entire group sounds like a bunch of asshats.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:29 No.6844354
    DM fiat over anything that could go right for you, and I bet the party rolled for everything that could go wrong for them.
    >> OP 11/24/09(Tue)04:33 No.6844391
    My DM remarked to me that he was surprised that the party was so proud of themselves. He brought up the Stanford Prison Experiment as describing their depravity. Regardless, he still fucked me over straight to my face.

    He admits that it was partially in the interest of keeping the campaign going. That one event took 5 hours, even with them just raping me over and over again from round one.

    They invited me to re-roll or make a drastic RP change to my character. I said yes, but the more I think about it, the more pissed off I get.

    I just wish they were just a random group I joined. Them being actual friends makes it really awkward to ragequit the campaign.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:34 No.6844395
    This is very depressing. I am truly sorry for your loss, OP.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:34 No.6844400
    You got fucked hard, fellow bro. I support taking the advice of >>6844348 and implementing a scorched earth partyquit.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:36 No.6844408

    Play an incredibly nihilistic druid. Ask your GM if you can play a blighter.

    See how far the players will go to protect mother earth.
    >> Evil !!Oo43raDvH61 11/24/09(Tue)04:36 No.6844414
    Seems the party has a bad case of the, "I play role playing games to win".
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:37 No.6844417
    So in the interest of keeping the campaign going, he fucked over you and the potential for an epic fight at every possible turn. Call him on his bullshit and tell him exactly how fucking retarded that was.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:38 No.6844431
         File1259055536.jpg-(109 KB, 512x384, 1258279380292.jpg)
    109 KB

    Once upon a time, the main characters of the group had a good NPC friend. The NPC was kidnapped, tortured, forced to do unspeakable things and then turned into a death knight by the villain. When the NPC was fighting the players and was going down, I roleplayed his quick deconstruction into his old self, hinting at a possible purification for his soul.

    The players fought over who was going to kill him; they were going to either kick him off of the platform, set him on fire, or cut his head off.

    Sometimes, the players are not worth good work.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:39 No.6844439
    A douche gets stomped like he deserves and he comes crying back to /tg/. You're -that guy.- Stop. Think. Re-evaluate.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:42 No.6844456
    FORMER friends, OP. Someone who pulls shit like that for the lulz never was a friend.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:44 No.6844471
    Cleanse the genepool of their filth, the DM might be worth sparing if he swears an oath of not being a complete pushover.
    No john, you are -that guy-.
    >> Beardfag !VdkG.buB8o 11/24/09(Tue)04:47 No.6844492
    ...still can't believe you didn't make a peasant railgun.

    Really should've, at least it would've generated more lulz than that bullshit. Condolences, Anon.
    >> OP 11/24/09(Tue)04:50 No.6844512
    tried it. Denied, as expected.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:52 No.6844527
    You're a hero for trying. Sorry your group is full of dicks.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:52 No.6844531
    You should be mad. I would be furious. Inform the DM that you will have no part in this tomfoolery, and leave.
    >> Evil !!Oo43raDvH61 11/24/09(Tue)04:53 No.6844538
    Wait, so they killed all the miners but decided to keep you alive? Why?
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:55 No.6844549
    Roll a druid, break the game twice as hard as they could ever hope to, and then be sure that they *know* you did it because of this. If they kick you out, you've lost nothing, and can give them a final "u mad." before departing.
    >> Beardfag !VdkG.buB8o 11/24/09(Tue)04:56 No.6844553
    Shit sucks when the DM himself starts to metagame. I mean, sure it's conceivable the druids found out you sent for supplies, but having it go down like that meant it was over before it started.

    I'd at least have had you have a moment of glory before eating shit. =/
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:57 No.6844556

    Screw them and the DM. He obviously had no intention of having you even provide a challenge, and the players obviously don't care for the RP.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:57 No.6844559
    Roll a rogue, sneak attack while they're resting (or in the middle of combat for added lulz).
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:58 No.6844570
    On the one hand, I can understand the GM siding with the larger number of players. Generally speaking, if you have a situation like 4 v 1, the GM has no choice but to side (subtly) with the larger group, for the sake of the campaign, but it's fair to let the players duke it out to see who ends up with more people once the dust settles.

    But holy fuck, 5 fucking hours? That's just obscene. It's like, sure, fuck you over, etc., etc., no way to win, and so on, but 5 fucking hours of you getting repeatedly fucked is pretty much bullshit. THAT is something to bring up as being pissed about. Everything else can be forgiven within the context of the game, just so long as it doesn't take gratuitously long.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)04:59 No.6844578
    So that they can gloat. Because they believe that some kind of fucked up manifest destiny that they have wrought vindicates them utterly. OP, I feel your rage flowing through me like the river.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:00 No.6844587
    it looks like they kept him alive so he could continue to adventure with them. OP, I'd say agree to the rp change, then when you're fighting the BBEG, turn on your party, kick the shit out of the casters once the meatshields have engaged, screaming 'THIS IS FOR <town name>
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:01 No.6844598
    that, or offer to stand watch, and kill them all in their sleep, and ditch their asses. Stay friends with them, sure, but never EVER play rpg's with them again.
    >> Beardfag !VdkG.buB8o 11/24/09(Tue)05:01 No.6844600

    Of course, with that DM it'd probably result in your death. But if it didn't...
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:02 No.6844605

    Did they really, TRULY keep you alive? Because if so, >>6844587 would be real-life fucking poetry. And they'd learn a valuable lesson about not murdering whole towns and partnering with the survivors.

    In fact, I can't think of a good reason, in game or out, why this wouldn't be a good idea.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:03 No.6844614
    INB4 meta thread claiming to be your DM gloating about how he crushed you.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:03 No.6844618
    This. Bonus points if you have enough names of the miners to go with every attack.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:03 No.6844619
    Much better if you gain some sort of important role in a battle with a major enemy, and then refuse to carry it out.
    Attacking them? That's hot blooded. Stepping aside and watching them die, while you complete the mission by yourself? That is the proper serving of this dish.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:05 No.6844629
    >offer to stand watch, and kill them all in their sleep

    And then burn down the fucking forest
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:05 No.6844630
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:05 No.6844633
    aqquire a scroll of anti-magic field, and drop it on the casters before doing >>6844587
    even if the dm kills you, you'll hopefully fuck up the casters long enough for the BBEG to incapacitate the meatshields. Unless your dm is enough of a dick to make the BBEG back out and wait to see how the inter-party conflict goes.
    >> OP 11/24/09(Tue)05:05 No.6844634
    I was tickled by an idea about become a drunken master who drinks to forget. if I ever sober up, i will rape them.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:06 No.6844637
    Holy shit, OP. You gotta do this and come back with a trip report.
    >> Evil !!Oo43raDvH61 11/24/09(Tue)05:06 No.6844640
    I would bring up the very notion of "campaign" with your DM. Obviously he is confused to the purpose of the game you are playing. If he had the shit kicked out of you to progress it, you should honestly tell him that you thought you were playing a game and not writing his fucking novel for him. There are things that happen in the setting that the PCs may have no control over, but how they deal with it or ignore and run away from is not for the DM to decide.
    >> Ico !!e7sVT6PQvbb 11/24/09(Tue)05:08 No.6844646
    Seconded. All that prep wasted... your GM sucks.

    Maybe combine this with >>6844587
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:09 No.6844653
    Some day, it may not be today, or tomorrow, but someday, they'll need you. Some day, they will roll poorly, and fall to the negatives or be paraylzed, somehow incapacitated, and you will be the one who is left because you have carefully engineered your position in the party to maximize the chance of this occurrence. And on that day, instead of fighting, or stabilizing, say with relish, "You should have left me to die in the mines." And leave them.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:11 No.6844668
    i... i think i'm in love with this concept.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:12 No.6844678
    Do it and then do this:
    >> Insert Pun Here 11/24/09(Tue)05:12 No.6844679
    There's not enough rage in the world right now to deal with this.

    Basically, I would bring down your options to the following (in-game):

    1. Power game the absolute fuck out of them. Find the most broken combination ever, and use it to get an exponential leap over the other players.
    2. Kill the other players (not the characters, the players. rapefist them.)
    >> Insert Pun Here 11/24/09(Tue)05:14 No.6844697
    on second thought, this. thisthisthisthisthis. THIS.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:15 No.6844700

    Roleplay with the group, say that your character has seen the light. He changes class to a druid. Everyone is extremely happy. Play the part like a normal person.

    Make an arrangement with the GM. Your new class is really a fucking assassin. Wait until you gain enough levels, and get your revenge. Start passing notes the the GM about mundane tasks. Never anything bad. The rest of your party will start passing notes all the time.

    Then, after everyone is used to note passing, steal an item from one player and hide it in the bed of another player, the party won't realize you did it. Start pitting them against each other.

    Then, when the shit hits the fan, finish all of them off.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:15 No.6844703
    That's a good idea too.

    I mean, I know how you're feeling, because I've had something similar happen to me, and these guys ARE your friends (don't believe the other anons saying they're not your friends any more, because anons don't have friends). They probably feel pretty good about themselves, and you probably want fucking revenge, but not so bad that you're willing to make a huge issue of it. Being subtle, and cockpunching all of them when they least expect it is completely justifiable with in-game and meta-game reasoning. This alone makes it the only path worth taking, and god only knows you might actually get a real kick out of doing it. More than you would if you ragequit, or were a whiny bitch. By all means, wait till the opportune moment, and let your plants of revenge blossom into a beautiful flower... OF REVENGE.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:18 No.6844722
    >>6844703 here, also, use >>6844653. It's even better if you stay patient and wait for when they're all on their knees and you're the one who can save them. Then you turn their back on them. That's what I did to get my REVENGE.

    Depends on what kind of angle you're going for, if you're patient, and you think you can make a clean break. But I'll tell you, nothing would be more beautiful than walking away from them in their moment of burning need to let them all die.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:20 No.6844735
    Reject all divine power, all mortal power, Steal it Gather your power from the dregs and cast off remains of the tormented souls your party slaughtered.

    Become an Ur-Priest. Gain immunity to their divine powers.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:20 No.6844738
    RP change to being horrified by the party. I agree with the siding with the BBEG at the end, and drinking to forget, but at the end you should mention that you side with the BBEG because he's the lesser of two evils. After what they did to that village they don't deserve to be called heroes.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:20 No.6844742
    >Make an arrangement with the GM.
    You don't seem to have been paying attention. The GM is writing a novel, he won't let anyone give notes.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:22 No.6844756
    That's pretty harsh. Side with Asmodeus himself over them, because it's the moral thing to do.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:22 No.6844758

    >> Abaddon 11/24/09(Tue)05:23 No.6844764
    whats the bbeg's plans and motives who is he.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:25 No.6844782
    join, create character made to kill them all take their shit, justify it by saying you're character is a murderous thief.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:26 No.6844787
         File1259058403.gif-(39 KB, 309x262, rorschach.gif)
    39 KB
    "And someday, all the miners blood and the scum from their debauchery and self-righteous cruelty with froth up around their necks. And as they reach their gauntleted hands out, and ask me to save them, just like they spared me... I'll look down and say, 'no.' "
    >> Ico !!e7sVT6PQvbb 11/24/09(Tue)05:26 No.6844788
         File1259058414.jpg-(65 KB, 600x750, Defiance.jpg)
    65 KB
    If the GM is writing a novel, then almost anything OP does will be fiatted out of existence.

    Looks like >>6844653 is the best way to go.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:27 No.6844791
    I support the revenge at a crucial moment plot.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:29 No.6844806
    ITT: OP is a passive-aggressive faggot throwing a bitchfit when he can't get his way. There are enough people on /tg/ that are exactly the same and supporting his plans of revenge while overlooking the most obvious solution: not playing anymore.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:30 No.6844816
    Yes, I thought it was a good plan too. Leaving them to die is certainly the most optimal course of action.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:30 No.6844817
    Pretend to join them
    Then when things arent going well for the party IE a tough fight, betray them
    >> Dungeonfag 11/24/09(Tue)05:30 No.6844821
         File1259058646.jpg-(759 KB, 1144x1600, kino7.jpg)
    759 KB
    Yes, yes that is, though I'm kind of wondering why she's wearing dog tags and firing a Browning HP. Least I think that's a HP.

    Fanart maybe? No clue, but it doesn't seem like it.

    Anyway, to the OP, if you're going to stay with the same group, you should probably discuss with the DM about keeping the dignity of your choice. According to him, YOU made the 'right' decision, and thus should be rewarded for it, even though he favored the many over the few. A good character would be some sort of judicial figure sent to arrest and bring to court (alive) the party for their actions in the village, perhaps with some sort of exposition surrounding how their actions have negatively effected many people. It would 'punish' the PCs without actually killing them and showing them the risks of mob mentality.

    In order for you to get the upper hand on them alone, you could either have some relatively high level cohorts, or some sort of ridiculous macguffin provided for this mission alone, or is really only useful here. Talk about it with the DM. If he likes it, everybody's happy and your DM isn't a total prickfuck. If he doesn't bail out. Hard.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:37 No.6844872
    It clearly has to catch everyone, including your DM, by surprise. He has demonstrated that he will fuck you over if he can to preserve his precious campaign integrity, and DM's are very rarely powerless to intervene in a situation in a meaningful manner (technically, they're never powerless, but having a meteorite fall on you just as you were about to enact your revenge is a turn of events that even the railroadiest DMs would recoil from). Do not conspire with your DM on this, you must gather your resources subtly and prepare in secret, cloaking your movements and maneuvering from all suspicion. You are, as suggested, literally going to have to spring this thing at the last moment and have it resolved before the very universe in which your character exists can rise up to thwart him.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:38 No.6844875
    On top of this see if you can find any family members that weren't in the mining town at the time. Maybe some traders or the messengers you sent out to ask for aid.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:38 No.6844876
    I got the sense that the GM might be willing to let him get his vengeance somehow. It'd only be proper, anyway.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)05:59 No.6845047

    Do this, but make sure the group knows you're doing it for RP reasons. No need to piss off your real life friends because they role-played evil characters.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)06:02 No.6845066
    Reroll a wizard or sorcerer who's looking for his wayward son, who left home to seek his fortune. Your wizard/sorcerer joins the group to do some good while he searches.

    What you don't tell the party is that you already found your son, murdered by an over-zealous group of adventurers.

    Part of your starting equipment should be a scroll of magic jar. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magicJar.htm
    (this will cost you 1,250g, but definitely worth it).

    Late one night, you cast this and jump into the jar. Then possess the warforged (the scroll will be a minimum caster level 9, so the DC will be around 20 or so, easy enough to get past his will save of +1)

    Use the Warforged to rough up your body (to allay suspicion) and make it look like he's gone crazy.

    If they take him down, use the gem to possess the person with the next lowest will save (probably the rogue). But don't attack immediately, first you use this person to voice the idea that the warforged can't be trusted anymore and should be completely disposed of.

    This will probably result in an argument breaking out, you use this as your excuse for your second victim to attack the party without arousing suspicions of foul play.

    Continue this for the 9 (minimum) hours you have with the magic jar spell active. During combat always target the ones with the highest will saves in case you aren't able to possess them with the magic jar spell.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)06:02 No.6845071
    I'd follow through the development it means to your character: Since he should be horrified of the actions of the party that slaughtered a village of miners, he'd propably seek revenge somehow. Make him bitter, vengeful - perhaps start drinking and take some powergaming to boost you for the conflict. Seek to actively to undermine them and get your revenge for the poor souls they killed, even side with some BBEG if it seems logical for the monk to do. Epic revenge will ensue when you betray them at a crucial point (just be sure to show some hints of your motives that they might get while gaming, to help agains "herp derp, you are just bitching about the village, the monk wouldn't do that")
    Also, remind the gm they commited evil acts and the druids might not agree to what they did, unless they justify killing somehow. (if they do, try to get the local lord and some merchants that had interests in the town to help you out).

    Though, to make it work you would need the gm to help you. If he doesn't, I doubt that this is a group you'll want to play with anymore, since he obviously only has one vision how the game is supposed to go. And you don't fit in it.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)06:11 No.6845132
    That kind of group would just metagame the shit out of it and somehow discover the mage is responsible in the first few seconds.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)06:17 No.6845163

    Yep. Better to just continue playing your current character, let them think you're on their side then wait for a close battle to turn on them.

    Try to get items that'll let you disable casters, take down the sorcerer first and DO NOT let the DM in on your plan - he's already shown you he's willing to railroad you in the name of the plot.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)06:17 No.6845164
    I really don't think the GM is some novel-writing faggot like everyone else. As GM, you're pretty much obligated to side with the majority of the group, which is unfortunate sometimes, but ultimately, you can't let one player determine what the rest have to do if the rest don't want to do it.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)06:20 No.6845172
    You're probably right

    He could remind them that they require a spellcraft check to identify the effect of the spell, which would be a DC 25. But assuming the gnome has been keeping his spellcraft up, he would need to roll a 13 or higher to identify it.
    >> Dungeonfag 11/24/09(Tue)06:30 No.6845236
         File1259062232.jpg-(752 KB, 1159x1608, kino3.jpg)
    752 KB
    Well, not really. Your one main responsibility is to continue to apply 'reality' to the characters. If 4/5 PCs suddenly think jumping off of a bridge is a good idea, the raging river 200 feet down doesn't suddenly become a big fluffy mattress 5 feet down. In this case, it WAS the reality of the situation, to the point where it would have been more blatant if the DM sided with the OP. However, it was the OP that passed the 'morality test' by sticking to his principles and letting himself get skullfucked by PCs over 5 hours. THAT deserves a fucking medal, which is why it would be most appropriate for the DM to punish the party without killing them, like presenting 'realistic' consequences. A small separatist band of druids committing an act that would cripple the local economy would definitely NOT be supported much by the local kingdom, and dollars to donuts the PCs involved will be wanted men.

    Which is why I suggested being one of those out to get them and then make it so they can't screw you over like that again.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)06:35 No.6845273
    Drink to forget. Spiral down into alcoholism more and more. Grow bitter, still go with the group, and whenever it seems appropriate, in situations where they're screwed and need you to bail them out, do as little as possible to help them.

    Let them suffer like the people they killed. You shouldn't do it all the time, call them sudden sober moments when the events of the village slaughter float up to the surface.

    This could be used with the ''you should have left me to die in the mines'' at the end.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)06:38 No.6845295
    Quivering Palm that sorc in the final showdown.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)06:40 No.6845303
    Seriously, Obad-hai wouldn't even tolerate that kind of wholesale slaughter
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)06:47 No.6845369
    Work this in with that drunken master class.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)07:11 No.6845549
    >>6845236 Well, not really. Your one main responsibility is to continue to apply 'reality' to the characters. If 4/5 PCs suddenly think jumping off of a bridge is a good idea, the raging river 200 feet down doesn't suddenly become a big fluffy mattress 5 feet down.

    This. As a DM, you should be willing to cut your players a break if they screw up, but if they do something incredibly stupid you shouldn't let them get away with it. I had a group of five DH initiates try to take on a pair of Chaos Space Marines. They figured rigging a few grenades to go off when they walked through a door would give them enough of an advantage that they could win easily.

    Sometimes you have to fuck your players with the Strap-On of Consequences. They'll thank you for it when they get over the inevitable butthurt.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)07:34 No.6845727
    During a binge drinking session, pick randomly one of the PC's, approach them in drunken friendly fashion, grab their shoulder and say ''you know, I really hate you''. Then laugh, pat them a few times and stagger away.

    Put in notes that your character has severe problems with the group that killed a village, then simply help him up and aren't seemingly having any problems with the situation.

    Also, I recall that in the last thread you said the group is new to the whole RP thing. So on that in mind, you should forgive them, but your character should never forget, never forgive.

    It might teach them that RP'ing is what the game is about, not about fulfilling the objectives that they see.

    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)07:37 No.6845750
    Sage for Touhoushit.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)07:45 No.6845826
    Your GM is a motherfucker.
    Is your PC still alive? If so we might be able to redeem this.
    If he is then turn LE and start a very quiet vendetta against ALL druids for what you saw, and the other PCs, manipulate them into burning down forests, destroying dams to flood massive areas of land. Eventually go CE and take levels in Blackguard and enact slaughter upon druids.
    See if you can justify it to the other PCs as well so they join in, they don't seem to bright. Eventually turn on them and become the BBEG deeming that since humanity and nature can't seem to work together you choose humanity and civilization.
    Then take a city, build a massive steampunk utopia which strip mines massive areas of land to survive and whenever you come across druids have them brought back to the city and publicly humilated for their foolish choice, then made into slaves in the worst factories in your city for being enemies of the world.
    Become unstoppable, collect the 5 magic gems and become a monsterous Anti-Captain Planet.
    Oh, and get those miners ressurected, ASAP.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)07:51 No.6845884

    >One monk and 50 commoners versus 4 PCs and some magic users.

    >I lost.

    No shit.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:05 No.6845994
    Either of these two. Starting a massive fuck off Midgar city would be awesome, but make sure to casually warn the GM about GM bullshit and letting them fuck you over again.

    You sir, are a cunt who has forgotten the one most important thing.
    The only way to win is to play.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:09 No.6846038

    >The only way to win is to be a bitch about losing a battle against massive odds. I am a huge faggot please rape my face.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:16 No.6846092
    >The only way to react to GM bullshit is to leave as oppose to taking it and using it in character like a real roleplayer would. I am a huge faggot, please rape my face.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:38 No.6846244
    >Midgar city
    This would be awesome. Bonus points if you manage to make a steam powered monk Mech and/or create a sect of steam punk warrior monks with knuckle dusters/Trench knives and boots which have a sort of Anti-foliage/Anti-nature spell on them as your main guard.
    You send a patrol out into the forest hunting druids and leaving a massive trail of brown dead plants and dying trees behind you as they walk and casually draw their blades along the tree trunks.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:41 No.6846268
    Thats total horse shit. Seriously. SOUNDS LIKE ITS HIGH TIME TO GET A NEW GROUP.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)08:43 No.6846287
    So what we have here is a whiny jerkass who tries to kill off the rest of his party, has unsurprising things happen to him, then whines some more when his little experiment fails?

    I'm surprised he's gotten any sympathy at all.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:44 No.6846296
    Cool troll, bro.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)08:45 No.6846300
    Also, give it up. If you keep this feud going, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the DM makes rocks fall on you, and truth be told, I'd support him in doing so.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:46 No.6846304
    You'd have to have been there for the first thread, I think. Unless you read his archive link, in which case, reading comprehension is important. You can't just scan over the letters and pretend.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:46 No.6846306
    sounds like your dm is a doormat.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)08:46 No.6846310
    I'm reading the first thread as we speak. As of now, it hasn't made the OP look any better.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:47 No.6846311
    A good DM would have "fed" the monk's side until they were even with the druids, then had an epic battle and judged it fairly no matter how it goes. Snuffing out emergent play to get the train back on the railroad is a sign of inexperience.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:47 No.6846312
         File1259070424.png-(35 KB, 736x736, awesome.png)
    35 KB
    Man, I knew there was something pissing me off about this thread. All the instances of the word 'miner' I see as being the word 'minor' spelled incorrectly
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:47 No.6846316
    Typical tripfag behavior, ruining things for everyone else.

    You didn't catch the irony in bitching that he was trying to ruin the group's fun did you?
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)08:49 No.6846325
    There's nothing to ruin. It's simply whining and plots for petty revenge. OP has been rewarded as a traitor deserves.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:52 No.6846348
         File1259070762.jpg-(144 KB, 605x984, captree.jpg)
    144 KB
    You did the right thing OP. Those metagaming faggots got a free pass from the railroading hippie fuck DM and a fistful of "get out of evil free" cards. You were the only actual roleplayer there.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:53 No.6846350
    Lord, I hope your name is D&D Good Alignment reference, because with your overall attitude you would be a monumentally unfun shitpile in an Exalted game.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:53 No.6846354
    This. This this this. They want to be tree-hugging fags? All right. Become the biggest goddamn tree-hugging fag with the hugest fucking boner for nature.

    And at some point down the line, pick off the weakest of the group for some epic ironic justice. Accuse him of not being nature-faggy enough.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:54 No.6846358

    Railroading? What fucking result did you expect from a monk challenging a goddamn druidic circle?
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)08:55 No.6846361
    It's the former, you're right. Also, I'm not annoyed at the OP's scheme quite so much as I'm annoyed at just how much he's whining about it.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:55 No.6846364
    >DM acknowledges that OP has taken the path he thought to be right and likely predicted that the other players would take
    >Both groups stick to their guns
    >DM admits, he fucking ADMITS that he fucked over OP for making that choice, in order to 'keep the campaign going'
    Not really 'whining' when it's justified to this extent. Whilst I wouldn't ragequit, and I don't think the DM is a MASSIVE douche, I still think getting some sweet revenge up in this campaign is just what the doctor ordered.
    It's shit like this that sometimes ends up drawing me right into a campaign I was iffy on at first.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)08:56 No.6846371
    Sorry mate.
    Do you mean the part where he did what his PC would of done despite the other PCs opinions. The good roleplaying bit.
    Or the part where the GM loads the side against him by having him have low level NPCs while the other 4 PCs have druids? Which, while fair enough, is the reason he came to us for help, to try and even things out.
    Or the part where, in this thread, the GM swept aside all the careful plotting for 'Lol, back on the tracks with ye!' and let the Druids win without even a fight?
    Or the part where he's been pissed off because the GM didn't even give him an even chance, which he should of had, while letting the other PCs just waltze over him.

    Yep...No reason to whine at all...
    Dick head.

    As for OP >>6846244 sounds good and awesome, make sure before hand though to tell the GM (If he is inexperienced, and you're more experienced than him) that the rails are there as a guide, not something he should force you onto.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:00 No.6846389
    >Railroading? What fucking result did you expect from a monk challenging a goddamn druidic circle?
    Better than the 'they just find your traps' and the 'your supply line is just fucked'. The odds are fucked and it's likely that he would have lost anyway, but reread OP's posts and you'll see the DM didn't see fit to allow him what little odds he had.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:01 No.6846393
    Good roleplaying? Fine.
    DM siding against him? Laughable. We have one guy using a bunch of NPC miners, while the rest of the party is allied with druids. The results are quite realistic.
    I find it hardly surprising that your supply train was ambushed, seeing as how you're fighting druids and all, who really are rather good at that sort of thing. The traps seem to be rolling damage badly.
    And an even chance is the last thing I'd expect when one PC and a bunch of experts fight four PCs and a bunch of druids.
    Cut down your pity party, roll a new character, and make crazy schemes if you want, but don't be surprised when the rest of your party kicks your ass. Again.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:01 No.6846394
         File1259071311.jpg-(13 KB, 301x155, SHIT GOT REAL.jpg)
    13 KB
    Do it. You know you want to.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:02 No.6846397
    Screw that.
    Is there still dynamite around? There should be since the PCs disarmed the traps instead of setting them off.
    If so Jihad the Druids and PCs, in the name of <Town name>
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:07 No.6846422
    I think it's not about "FUCK I LOST", but about the DM letting the druid side of the conflict steamroll over everything the lone player had planned.

    "Yeah you're not getting any supplies after all"
    "The other players see the traps you've carefully set up"
    "Stop being stupid and let the village get slaughtered so I can get on with the story"

    Sure the odds were against OP from the very beginning, and then the DM stacked them even higher. Shit sucks and so on.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:07 No.6846426
    >Jihad the Druids
    This would be fantastic.
    Out fanatic them, they think they're fighting for a cause is a show of their love of a cause, you're willing to die for yours.
    Bonus points if you survive the explosion, maybe wear a ring of fire resistance or something when doing it.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:07 No.6846430
    And don't forget the 5+ hour skullfucking.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:08 No.6846431
    OP should still quit whining and be thankful that the DM doesn't encourage party treachery.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:11 No.6846452
    There's a difference between actually rolling for success (Yes, the druid's familiars or whatever make the spot check to detect the supply run, yes, some of the druids were diverted to destroy the supply run and did not take part in the main assault) and lolno railroading (your supply run was ambushed, no save, it does not affect the druids at all and they expend nothing in doing so).
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:11 No.6846455
    Oh, right: the village wouldn't have been slaughtered if the PC hadn't organized them to fight in the first place. Enjoy your bloodied hands, OP.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:11 No.6846459
    I'd just wander around burning down forests, befouling streams, killing animals, etc.

    I would become the one-man druid's nightmare. You love your fucking trees so much? Good. It will hurt all the more when you see them burn.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:12 No.6846464
    Remember that we're only seeing one side of the story here, and furthermore, that side is very butthurt. It's no more likely that the destruction of the supply train was completely unfair than that it was fairly managed and the OP is just, well, being the OP.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:12 No.6846467

    No, and fuck you. You don't know shit about roleplaying.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:13 No.6846471
    Oh, yeah, try the same thing you did before, except without fifty meat shields. That'll totally work.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:13 No.6846472
    You're really dedicated to getting a reaction, huh?
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:13 No.6846473
    If this had happened in my games, I would have done everything in my power as the DM to make the two sides even and prolong the battle over several sessions of intense guerrilla- and counter-guerrilla warfare.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:14 No.6846486
    Except that realistically the town prospering from this mining operation would become forced into poverty. Lots of people would die of starvation because the druids got butthurt over people exploiting their natural resources.

    It's honestly like saying that going to a farming community and burning all their crops isn't going to hurt anyone.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:14 No.6846487
    Was it a bad thing, then, that I decided to retire my enormously moralfagette bard from a largely evil party because I was pretty sure she'd try to turn the rest of the party into the authorities if she stayed with them too long?

    Not really, this is mostly my reaction.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:16 No.6846497
    Yes, actually, because she joined up with them in the first place.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:16 No.6846505
    >retire my enormously moralfagette bard from a largely evil party because I was pretty sure she'd try to turn the rest of the party into the authorities if she stayed with them too long?
    Yes, you had a character, you should of roleplayed them, you didn't create the character thinking "I'm gonna screw the arty for shits and giggles", you should of stuck with her and damn well roleplayed it, if her leaving was roleplaying fair enough, if it was Metagaming then fuck you and everything you stand for.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:17 No.6846506
    When the defeat became apparent, he should have set the forest on fire and escaped with the remaining miners, then pledged to king or whoever to send his paladins to rape the druids up the bum.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:17 No.6846508
    As far as I can tell, the druids were not themselves evil, and saw themselves as being on the defensive side. If anything, what you should have done was try to negotiate some kind of alternate income source for the town, seeing as how it's up against an overwhelming threat and trying to fight it off would, well, lead to the result you're now complaining about. I'm sure the druids wouldn't mind all that much, and even if they didn't feel like helping, you could probably get the other PCs to help somehow.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:17 No.6846509
    Doesn't take fifty people to light a forest fire.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:17 No.6846513
         File1259072278.png-(139 KB, 424x470, 1257626369508.png)
    139 KB
    God damn it, I hate tripfags.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:18 No.6846516
    So if only things had gone in the exact opposite of the way they did then everything would work out. Makes perfect sense.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:18 No.6846518
    >DM siding against him? Laughable.

    >Regardless, he still fucked me over straight to my face. He admits that it was partially in the interest of keeping the campaign going.

    Yeah no.
    Players should at least be able to expect of their DM a fair adjudication of situations like this, and unless I'm misled that's exactly what OP claims he didn't get. That's what the rage in this thread is about. Not the OP's loss, but the circumstances surrounding the defeat (also, I've watched documentation on the Stanford Prison experiment and the shit OP describes reminds me of a lot of the shit-eaters I've gamed with over the years, so for me I'd like to hear in the future of how our OP served their comeuppance. But that is a personal thing and I'm not attributing that to other posters)
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:20 No.6846534
    You're that guy, fuck off.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:20 No.6846536
    No, it was roleplayed. She decided that she didn't really want to be around them anymore, and left before she had to turn on them. So yes, my motivation was somewhat metagamed, but I came up with an in-character way of finishing it off.

    What OP should be doing is accepting that he had a heroic last stand of sorts, and be glad that he fulfilled his roleplaying obligations. Then leave and make a new character, and not start baying for the party's blood because his treachery didn't hold up.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:22 No.6846551
    Your party is clearly too fucking stupid to handle anything to do with morality "LOL LETS MURDER THE PEASANTS BECAUSE NATURE DURR", so this time roll a character that has no morality and murder them in their fucking sleep.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:22 No.6846554
    If the monk hadn't been trying to start a fight while in the weaker position? Yes.

    He admitted that he did what he did partially to keep the campaign going. OP's claim that he fucked him over straight to his face is just that: a claim.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:22 No.6846555
    Except the druids seemed to have nothing on their minds but murder, from the way it looks. Diplomacy lead to ICE STORM ICE STORM and level X druids shot level 1 miners to death without a second thought.

    Inviting them in when they've said they intend to wipe the village off the map? Kind of even more silly.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:23 No.6846560
    >be thankful that the DM doesn't encourage party treachery.


    Not only do you ignore the completely valid reasons for the monk player to make a moral stand here (although the monk player is ignoring the valid reasons for the other players to make the opposite moral stand, it seems), you also make the same mistake the rookie DM made - you can't seem to even imagine that this new, emergent gameplay was probably _better_ than the campaign he had planned. If something this awesome happens, he should have thrown his notes in the trash bin and made _this_ his campaign, the War For Buttville. That's how an RPG works. Any good DM will fearlessly let the game run its course even if isn't anything he had prepared for.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:24 No.6846569
    Exalted you are a pretty fucking shitty tripfag. I hereby request you change your name to FATAL.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:25 No.6846573
    You're right, a person with a strong moral code would just turn around and walk away from a bunch of murderous chucklefucks without ever cluing in the authorities to the activities they engaged in that disturbed her so much. She would not regret letting people that she sees as evil go unpunished, presumably to wander around doing even more distasteful things.

    But back to the topic at hand:

    >What OP should be doing is accepting that he had a heroic last stand of sorts, and be glad that he fulfilled his roleplaying obligations. Then leave and make a new character, and not start baying for the party's blood because his treachery didn't hold up.

    You completely miss the fucking point entirely. What's bullshit is not that he lost, it's that he never had any chance at all to win. ANY. DM fiats soundly dismissed every single thing he did to try and succeed, and it was a five hour long utterance of the sentence "sorry, you lose, no arguments." What could have been a fantastic RP session was instead turned into a massive fuck you that was no fun at all for the OP.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:25 No.6846574
    >although the monk player is ignoring the valid reasons for the other players to make the opposite moral stand, it seems

    Their opposite moral stand is on the chaotic evil spectrum of morality though...
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:26 No.6846581

    The mining operation really was killing the forest. This came up in the original thread.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:26 No.6846582
    Siding with the minority here, in that I don't think the GM handled this poorly. And I posted supporting ideas in the original thread, hell, I was the one who archived it.

    Firstly, the fight was horridly skewed against the OP from the start: one PC and a bunch of level 1 miners against a bunch of, presumably, high level druids and 4 more PC's. Even without any GM fiat, it was easy to see who'd win. The GM should maybe have given a chance to the supply run, but presumably the supply run went through druid territory. Druids are the types to use every animal, bird or tree out there as spies to find and eliminate threats. Those runners were doomed from the start. Suggesting the use of a fucking stupid rules loopholes like the peasant railgun was never going to do any good.

    The GM should generally side with the majority in the group. Like I said, the odds were stacked against you to start with. If the GM had allowed you all the benefits you'd have needed, the rest of your group would be complaining about you being the GM's favourite. The rest of the group chose a side and stuck to it, just like you did. In a way, both sides were in the wrong, and in the end, like so much else, it came to bloodshed when it could easily have been avoided. You mentioned the others as being first-time roleplayers, so cut them a little slack at least.

    So yeah, congratulations OP. You took a stand against impossible odds and got crushed. Sometimes that's what happens when you try and stand against the tide. Don't whine when the side you were on gets defeated, especially if you then try and claim that the others are bad role-players. You got beaten, adapt.

    Like others have said, apparently have a change of heart, then make them regret it later. Never forget the tiny Village of What's-its-name.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:26 No.6846583
    That was after he started the fight. The negotiation stage was long past.

    It did happen. One PC and fifty mooks with no fighting ability went up against four PCs and an entire druidic circle. The obvious happened. If that was all, I wouldn't be in this thread, probably. But now the OP is complaining about it, which is somewhat understandable, and plotting revenge, which in this case is just stupid.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:26 No.6846585
         File1259072801.png-(46 KB, 569x571, 1257786365783.png)
    46 KB
    There are no good tripfags. They are vermin and should be exterminated.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:27 No.6846587
    Who gives a fuck about some dickhead forest? This isn't set in the modern age, there's plenty of forest to go around.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:27 No.6846589

    How is plotting revenge stupid? It's in character, and I damn well would want some justice myself in this sort of situation.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:28 No.6846598
    >It did happen. One PC and fifty mooks with no fighting ability went up against four PCs and an entire druidic circle. The obvious happened. If that was all, I wouldn't be in this thread, probably. But now the OP is complaining about it, which is somewhat understandable, and plotting revenge, which in this case is just stupid.

    The obvious happened in an unfun and railroading way. How many times has this been spelled out for you? Why the fuck are you still here?
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:28 No.6846600
         File1259072899.jpg-(71 KB, 683x1024, 124846832069.jpg)
    71 KB
    Dear Sir, I request you hereby to fuck off and die.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:28 No.6846601
    >The GM should generally side with the majority in the group.

    No, the GM should side with whoever is _right_.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:29 No.6846603
    They hadn't done anything sufficiently evil at that point; also, they were in a primarily evil power center.
    And your summation is only from the OP's point of view.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:29 No.6846604
         File1259072961.png-(19 KB, 300x309, 1258795074391.png)
    19 KB
    >The GM should generally side with the majority in the group.
    No, no, no, no, no, no. Sell your books, melt down your dice, and kill yourself.
    The GM should side with no-one. That is not his job.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:29 No.6846605
    >One monk and 50 mooks set up a bunch of traps, sent for help, tried defending their homes as best they could, and got slaughtered for it
    >One lone rogue librarian and and 50 Tau planets made a small fleet, sent for help, tried defending themselves as best they could, and got exterminatused
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:30 No.6846607
    Yeah, except that instead of his warriors making a valiant last stand against a group of people that they see as utterly unreasonable (fuck the goddamn trees, my children need to eat, you asshole) they were steamrolled without any invocation of the rules whatsoever. The druids just won automatically with zero losses, and instead of saying this plainly the DM dragged it out in a five hour long session.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:30 No.6846608
    If my character's alignment wasn't Chaotic Evil, I would have serious fucking trouble associating with any group who would slaughter fifty people for trying to make a honest living.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:30 No.6846611
    The lesson learned here is:

    When you're playing with your retarded friends who operate in-character on a solely instinctual level of WHERE THE LOOT AT LOL and base their morality on pop culture, do not attempt to do anything awesome.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:31 No.6846615
    It doesn't look like either person is explicitly "right" here.

    The OP seemed to want to have a completely equal chance, when he very clearly had nothing of the sort.

    I'm pretty sure that the schemes involving the creation of new characters aren't exactly IC.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:31 No.6846619

    Don't let your retarded friends get off this lightly OP. Bring it up at every point you can just to piss them off, ESPECIALLY if one of them tries to roleplay being filled righteous fury or anything like that in the future.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:32 No.6846628
    >It doesn't look like either person is explicitly "right" here.

    You're kind of a fucking psychopath if you think murdering a small village for the sake of some fucking deer is in any way "right".
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:33 No.6846630
    >It doesn't look like either person is explicitly "right" here.
    Players: Lets go and kill all the men, women and children in that mining village for trying to make a life for themselves
    Monk: No I shall try to defend them and fail
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:33 No.6846634
    You're quite behind the times, my friend.

    If there was no invocation of the rules, how could the battle possibly last five hours?

    Those are some nice assumptions.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:34 No.6846650
    It wasn't murder, it was basically a small-scale war. In the negotiating stage, the OP didn't bother to come up with any alternatives other than "the miners must stay here and keep doing what they're doing now."
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:34 No.6846651
    >Those are some nice assumptions.

    Unless this is an EVIL party, in which case the OP's situation becomes somewhat less rage-worthy, unilaterally siding with genocidal druids is not a likely outcome unless they are complete retards IRL.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:35 No.6846652
    The GM shouldn't take sides at all. He isn't the story maker, he's the conduit through which the story pours itself out into the world.
    You know good writers speak of the story writing themselves, the characters 'wouldn't do that' or 'it just happened that way in the story, I didn't think it wouldn', the aim of a GM is to get into that state of mind.
    Total, impartial story telling.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:35 No.6846656
    >PCs slaughtering an entire village of peasants
    >not murder

    So you're admitting you're a fucking psycho?
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:35 No.6846660
    it wasnt a war you retard, they just marched in and killed everyone
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:35 No.6846661

    War is just the plural of murder.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:35 No.6846662
    Hey, Exalted?
    You fucking suck at being Good.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:36 No.6846665
    No he fucking didn't. He wanted some of the elaborate planning he did to do some fucking good. He wanted the fact that he did a supply run and helped train all the miners and laid traps to make some discernible fucking difference instead of being completely and utterly ignored by the DM, who didn't even fucking roll to determine the outcome of any of it. It's not what happened that matters here, it's the fucking way it happened, and the fact that every last one of the miners was brutally murdered by druids who didn't even have to get off from their high horses to destroy the livelihood of a small town and bring grief to most of the families living there when they could have just as easily subdued all of them without shedding a drop of blood is really just rubbing salt into the wound.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:37 No.6846674
    Exalted I never used to know what people were talking about when they flipped out at you for being a fucking moron and horrible poster. Now I know.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:37 No.6846675
    The OP wanted to have [A] chance, which he did not get at all.

    I think that's the crux of the problem. By the responses of the thread, what everyone is advocating is to screw the rest of the group while giving them no chance to respond, to demonstrate how having no chance is a sucky thing to have.

    Personally, I'd just set up an elaborate explosive device afterwards (or do it yourself - buy a potion of fly and a wand of fireballs) and burn down the forest sometime after you leave.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:37 No.6846678
    So the fact that they're peasants somehow changes the fact that they've taken up arms against you? If you were a knight during a peasant revolt, would you let them kill everyone in your estate, including your family?
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:38 No.6846684
    Are you retarded? The answer is yes.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:39 No.6846694

    OK. Looking at that, I probably phrased it wrongly. The GM shouldn't allow one group of players to win just because it is larger. That''s true. However, view it from the opposite side.

    >Hay, /tg/, I hate my bullshit DM. One of our party had decided to turn against us and save a group of evil industrialists who were polluting a river in their search for profit. We decided to help out the druids and throw them out. Now this is the bullshit part. So we're thinking it's not going to be too difficult to sieze control of one village, but then it turns out that they have enough dynamite to blow up a continent, all the villagers are expert crossbowmen, they've just recieved a shipment of magical items and the King's sent an army to crush us. WTF? Fucking railroading GM.

    The GM''s role shouldn't be to ensure that everyone has a 50/50 chance of winning each fight. The GM is there to help the players tell a story. In this case, one player stood against an army and lost. Now he's got the chance to build on the story with his desire for justice and revenge for the villagers.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:40 No.6846702
    The DM railroaded the supply caravan into being ambushed for no fucking reason. Eat shit.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:40 No.6846706
    Actually, I'm not making an argument based on what's good here. I'm arguing against what I see as petty and childish revenge fantasies.

    Again, we have no idea whether or not the DM rolled to determine the outcome of any of it, except maybe the supply train. And I'd really like to have more details on the nature of those traps, how they were set up and suchlike.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:40 No.6846707
    so they were supposed to just say "oh, you're here to kill us all and nothing we say can convince you to stop?"
    "okay sir heres a good spot for your sword if you just give it a quick thrust and ouch.."
    no they fought back because death was the only other option
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:40 No.6846712
    Why are you still posting? Get the fuck out of here.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:41 No.6846714
    Slight misuse there: You cannot railroad NPCs.
    It was removed by GM Fiat.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:42 No.6846723
    I'm assuming that the player paid for said supply caravan, in which case having it ambushed is causing said player's action to fail without due dice rolling.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:42 No.6846724
    Probably something like "we'll stop destroying your forest, but we'd kind of appreciate it if you could help us find a different income source, so we won't be tempted to start destroying your forest again."
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:42 No.6846730
    There should be clear consequences for the rest of the party murdering a town of miners. If they get off completely free for it then the DM has completely and utterly failed and whatever 'campaign' he has planned isn't worth the time.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:42 No.6846737
    They werent even destroying the forest, they were mining and that was what was pissing off the druids.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:42 No.6846738
    Who the fuck said they didn't try that? And you flip out at US for making retarded assumptions. Please just stop posting.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:43 No.6846743
    If you're a knight who lives in the woods (without ownership of said woods, except you tend to them on occasion) and go off and slaughter a bunch of peasants who legally own the land they are on, who don't have anywhere to move, because you don't like the smoke coming out of their chimmneys, I don't think the fact that they've set up pit traps to stop you from simply marching in and slaughtering all of them is the same as them wanting to kill off your family.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:44 No.6846754
    The fact that the arms they've taken up against you are pitifully ineffective when you've got magic spells that can easily incapacitate them without harming them should factor in here somewhere.

    That. Is. Not. The. Issue.

    This is from their perspective, yes? If the DM did the opposite result in the same way (no dice rolls either way, they just fucking win) then they would be justifiably pissed for the same goddamn reason.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:44 No.6846755
    If the OP did in fact try that, I imagined that he would have said it in one of his many posts. If I'm wrong, please enlighten me.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:44 No.6846761
    You know what is FANTASTICALLY IRONIC about this whole thread?

    Exalted is now the monk, alone against the players that are /tg/.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:44 No.6846762
    didnt he try negotiating at one point only to get completly murdered by the Druids?
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:44 No.6846764
    This is the bare minimum I would demand if I were the OP. The party is now a band of outlaw murderers, since they wiped an entire town off the map for no clear reason.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:45 No.6846769

    Maybe if he got banned that would be an accurate analogy, retard.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:46 No.6846772
    In that case, a better analogy would be a bunch of disenfranchised peasants who go around robbing and pillaging churches because they don't see themselves as being able to get money anywhere else. What would your reaction be in that case?
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:46 No.6846775
    Except there isn't any mod coming along to permaban the tripfag and delete all of his posts in this thread simply because we all disagree with him.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:46 No.6846776
    We'd need a gm/mod for that.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:46 No.6846778
    Why isn't it the issue? You're bringing up something completely irrelevant that didn't happen while dismissing the crux of all the complaints.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:47 No.6846782
    >comparing mining to armed robbery

    What the fuck is wrong with you?
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:47 No.6846783
    After the fight had already started.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:47 No.6846785
    Clearly it would be to burn their village to the ground with all of them in it, rather than capturing and prosecuting the individuals responsible for each crime.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:47 No.6846791

    >This is from their perspective, yes? If the DM did the opposite result in the same way (no dice rolls either way, they just fucking win) then they would be justifiably pissed for the same goddamn reason.

    Except the OP clearly says there were dice rolls. The supply caravan might have been GM fiat, but then he talks about the traps' damage being laughable and the high level druids healing each other and the rogue disarming traps. If I remember correctly, the GM only had six hours or something in character to set up this trap, it was bound to fail.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:48 No.6846793
    What you should do is reroll a character who was born in <village name> and left only a few months before the PCs raised it.
    Then things will get interesting.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:48 No.6846794
    That's how the druids see it. The natural world is their church.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:48 No.6846799
    This. Make him a fucking Paladin too.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:48 No.6846801
    Let's see what the previous thread mentioned about the diplomacy stage. Starts with "other players teamed up with druids who are coming to kill us all".

    OP's char has shit for diplomacy and CHA, and the entire session on the night preparing for the attack was people trying to win other people to their side. I guess we all now know how it ended up.

    Although it also says that the druids weren't "probably" planning to kill anyone. Nonlethal force all around. And then apparently the PC's started killing the miners left and right. Or then the OP's previous assumptions were wrong and the druids were full of anger of the crimes against their way of life.

    I sort of forgot the exact details, except there was lots of killing involved. That, and the rage overwhelms my memory.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:48 No.6846805
    they sound more like bandits than peasants
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:48 No.6846806
    you guys do realise the point to a dilemma is that there is no right answer....its hard either way you go
    the dm gave the party a choice, the party split over the choice
    it sounds like he flubbed the execution of it....5 hours does seem extreme... but this is what roleplaying is
    getting into your characters head, and working out what they will and wont stand for.
    If it was simple and straightforward, it wouldnt be interesting
    yes he should have been given a chance, yes it could have been managed better, yes the larger part of the party should have won, yes there should have been more interesting negotiations than just fighting, yes it should make people emotional
    roll with it
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:49 No.6846813
    Here's a right answer for you: don't railroad the underdog into losing you stupid piece of shit.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:50 No.6846814
    go back to /v/ where RPGs only have 1 or 2 choices.
    they could have convinced the druids and peasants to compromise
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:50 No.6846816
    Not a very good one. In the original scenario the miners are mining their OWN property.

    I'd say a good analogy was that the peasant farmers in your scenario were scaring off the animals while farming their lands to food, animals that the knight wants to hunt, and so he goes and murders them all.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:51 No.6846826
    So clearly if a peasant were to kill and eat a deer then the druids would be completely justified in torturing him and his whole family to death.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:51 No.6846830
    Exactly. There was no mention whatsoever of trying to find a compromise; everyone was already ready to fight and the only question was who would be on which side.

    This would be after they might have had a chance to earn amnesty and avoid prosecution. Instead, they decided to say "No, we're going to keep doing this, and also, fuck you and your worthless religion."
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:51 No.6846831
    >I'd say a good analogy was that the peasant farmers in your scenario were scaring off the animals while farming their lands to food, animals that the knight wants to hunt, and so he goes and murders them all.

    This is accurate.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:52 No.6846840
    That would be somewhat accurate if hunting was the center of the knights' (plural) religious and spiritual lives, and the peasants flat-out refused any possible compromises.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:53 No.6846841
    ive been on the losing end of a party split before....of course I took it
    otherwise the game ends.
    if you decide to take a stand because IC thats what your character would do, then take a stand
    man vs landslide should always end in death
    the only thing the dm did wrong was not give the op his moment in the sun
    a heroic death fighting for his ideals, the price of betrayal, the seeds of evil etc etc
    this is all good roleplaying stuff
    i spent a 8 hour game once arguing IC....it ended up with my character leaving his wife and the other pc giving up all his powers
    there was no right answer....
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:53 No.6846843
    >This would be after they might have had a chance to earn amnesty and avoid prosecution. Instead, they decided to say "No, we're going to keep doing this, and also, fuck you and your worthless religion."

    Clearly they should have just stopped their only source of income. It's not like being a feudal peasant is a good way to starve to death if you don't have any money or anything.

    You are utter scum.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:53 No.6846846
    Druids healing each other an infinite number of times. He couldn't even wear them down. The supply cart being taken down by GM fiat is quite plainly railroading, since if they had those crossbows and Bless potions and reinforcements they might have had a chance and it might have been a more interesting battle. If those traps had not all been instantly seen there could have been a different outcome.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:53 No.6846848
    >the only thing the dm did wrong was not give the op his moment in the sun

    You say that like it isn't a big deal.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:53 No.6846849
    >flat-out refused any possible compromises
    stop talking out your ass there was never any talk of compromise on EITHER side.
    Mainly because the peasants didnt know they were pissing off the druids.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:54 No.6846858
    What possible compromises? "Stop mining right now god damn it" is not a compromise.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:55 No.6846861
    Unless the kingdom that the village belonged to is particularly week or inept, they will probably send a force to investigate the destruction and slaughter of a mining town. If this campaign world makes any sense that is. Temples of good-aligned gods may also send investigative forces to figure out wtf is going on. Few people are going to accept the 'Druids done tol' me them mina's needed killin' excuse.

    What happened would hardly qualify as a war before, but it could easily spiral into a full fledged one.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:55 No.6846864
    There's nothing to state that it was their only possible source of income ever. The medieval analogy breaks down because it doesn't have magic. If the druids wouldn't be willing to help the miners find some source of non-damaging income, that'd be another issue altogether and my position would change.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:56 No.6846868
    This. I doubt the DM in question has a big enough brain to understand this sort of thing though.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:56 No.6846871
    it is a big deal.....but its a hard job being dm for things like this
    we only have one side of this story
    we dont know what the others worked on in OP's absence
    we dont know what the dm did, wanted to do, why he set this up, etc
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:56 No.6846875
    yeah it would go down like this
    "Stop mining now god dammit"
    "but we need to mine so that we can feed ourselves"
    "No, stop mining you're upsetting our religion"
    "what if we mined a little less, so we could still eat"
    "no stop mining altogether, the 5 of our lives are worth more than the 50 of your lives"
    "But we'll starve"
    "right thats it, we're gonna fuck your shit up"
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:56 No.6846877
    Generally the people who are on the obviously losing side would be the ones making concessions.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:56 No.6846878
    >If the druids wouldn't be willing to help the miners find some source of non-damaging income, that'd be another issue altogether and my position would change.

    Why the FUCK are you assuming they were? Because you're taking the most contrary position possible just to piss everyone in this thread off?
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:57 No.6846881
    just read through the previous thread,

    I'm surprised no one thought of using WWI mining tactics - build a tunnel under the main entrance (because, PC's are stupid and usually will take the road), set up all the gunpowder a few feet underground. etc etc.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:57 No.6846884
    There's every indication that the druids just plain didn't give a fuck about helping their town survive the massive losses they'd have to eat as a result of the mine shutting down. Land, mining equipment, and the infrastructure of a mining camp all cost money to maintain.

    And since when the fuck do level 1 commoners have access to magic?
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:57 No.6846887
    Druids aren't generally opposed to harvesting of nature as long as it's sustainable and doesn't actually damage the environment in any major way.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:58 No.6846889
    fair enough
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)09:58 No.6846894
    The druids could help them. It seems like a fair solution to me.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:58 No.6846897
    The dynamite never arrived, so the result would have been the same.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:59 No.6846899
    Druids generally don't massacre towns of peasants because LOL THE RIVER IS DIRTY NOW.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)09:59 No.6846904
    So instead of perhaps... erecting a fence to stop the animals needing to be chased away, the knight slaughters the peasants who want to survive?

    For example The druids might have perhaps... used their magics to stop the pollution from affecting the forest instead of wholesale murder. Nope, right to the murdering! Because clearly murder was the only solution.

    Druids were aggressors. Miners were not. It's that simple.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:00 No.6846905
    The druids intended to stop the operation, not necessarily kill them all. It escalated because no one offered a compromise.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:00 No.6846915
    And it didn't happen because the Monk has low CHA and the other people in the party were fucking vegans irl. Speculating on what might have happened if the Monk were a fucking Bard is NOT what this thread is about. This thread is about the utter bullshit way in which these happenings concluded.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:01 No.6846920
    I just arrived in this thread and I dont believe theres anyway anyone could defend murdering 50ish peasants for trying to make a living and maintain a good alignment. so either you're a complete and utter retard or a fairly adept troll, but this debate is kinda interesting rather than rage inducing (for me anyway) so not sure if that makes you a failure or not.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:01 No.6846923
         File1259074883.jpg-(158 KB, 600x600, patchy okay.jpg)
    158 KB
    Lazy nigger of a GM. I'd of honestly told him to STOP RIGHT THERE CRIMINAL SCUM the second the prick decided to mash 50 men into a single attack.

    Wait. You said they shot "3 or 4 arrows" Did any of them hit?

    Because you could extrapolate that 50 men attacked 3 or 4 times is actually 3 or 4 VOLLEYS of arrows. If the "attack" "hit" then it would follow that all 50 arrows hit. If they did, you could of turned your lazy nigger of a GM's table against him and demanded the (i imagine) single target take 50d(6)? damage from a crossbow. Which will kill the victim. Outright. No need for rolls there.

    Even if they missed i'd of just demanded the players and GM actually fight 50 commoners whilst you go and get yourself a fucking rightfully deserved cup of tea.

    Either way, you did fucking well to stick to your guns till then end, good job.

    Oh and Exalted is a pretty dog-tier troll, or wind up, i don't know why so many of you bothered to even give him a bat of an eye.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:01 No.6846924
    >I'm going to assume retarded shit after flipping out at everyone who disagrees with me for allegedly assuming things

    Please stop posting.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:01 No.6846925
    Gah. Death was only on the table AFTER things had horribly escalated.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:02 No.6846930
    please stop spamming Anon Talk .com thanks
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:02 No.6846933
    >complete and utter retard

    I'm voting for this.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:03 No.6846934
    Possibly, but it's just as much of an assumption that the druids were out to kill everyone.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:03 No.6846935
    OP said that he tried playing the diplomancer and all that. Nobody's arguing about people being unreasonable. What is pissing everyone off is the use of DM fiat ruining a player's fun in what honestly sounds like a situation that had the potential to be fucking awesome: epic battle, moral ambiguity, etc. Instead it was LOL YOU LOSE and everyone dies. Now if the DM turns this into the rest of the PCs suddenly being in deep shit for killing a whole bunch of laughably under-equipped and underpowered peasants this could turn out great... but given that he resorted to fiat that much I doubt he's good enough at DMing to think of that.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:03 No.6846939
    It shouldn't have been on the table at any point unless these are neutral evil druids. Fucktard.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:03 No.6846943
    This thread had the potential to be interesting. Shame about the tripfag.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:04 No.6846946
    please stop spamming Anon Talk .com thanks
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:04 No.6846947

    Exalted needs to shut the fuck up about his retarded hypotheticals.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:04 No.6846949
    >druids didnt like miners
    >miners all died after the druids attacked

    They had a chance to talk, but chose not to.
    If you read OP he said that they hadnt started the battle when he tried to diplomacy them, he was ignored compeltly and downed.
    >When the fighting was ABOUT to start
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:05 No.6846954
    please stop spamming Anon Talk .com thanks
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:05 No.6846958
    And that's the thing I disagree with; I don't think it was as badly handled as the OP made it out to be, and I think that his revenge plots are generally childish.

    I didn't even intend to get into a moral argument; really, I think that both sides were stupidly uncompromising. But everyone here seems to be saying that the druids were pure evil, and I can't agree with that.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:06 No.6846968
    The peasants were neutral or good, druids definatly evil and uncompromising.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:06 No.6846969
    And it was still unnecessary. It's hard to sympathize with the Israeli soldiers who disengage their safeties and empty their clips into a crowd of Palestinians because some jackasses decided to throw rocks at a soldier wearing a helmet and body armor. Sure, those big heavy rocks can potentially cause serious injury to the persons being assaulted with them, but an assault rifle is much better at killing people and is not an appropriate response to mild riot behavior.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:07 No.6846975
    The druids weren't being pure evil, just garden variety evil.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:07 No.6846976
    OP states flatly that ambushed supply cart was accompanied by no dice roll at all.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:09 No.6846993
    Exalted, I generally found your Tau DH threads interesting and your quest thread ok, but this is really a bit silly. What exactly is your argument? That the druids were right? That there was a better way of solving the argument? Either way, the point is academic now.

    You feel that it'd be silly for the OP's character to harbour any ill will towards the party afterwards, that's not really very well founded. I agree that rolling a character simply to fuck with them is a tad over the top, but I think the OP is allowed to try if he really feels so aggrieved by it.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:09 No.6846995
    What exactly in his post do you disagree with? That some chucklefuck cultists living in the woods might get in trouble for murdering a WHOLE FUCKING TOWN of law-abiding citizens? That the DM fucking over the supply caravan prevented the situation from being as fun as it could have been?

    These are things that I actually had assumed that you wouldn't argue with because they're THAT fucking obvious. I thought that they would be apparent and inarguable to even a psychopath who thinks that wiping a town of men women and children off the map could possibly be not evil. Clearly I was wrong.
    >> Dungeonfag 11/24/09(Tue)10:10 No.6847001
         File1259075431.jpg-(118 KB, 250x313, kinosteamavy.jpg)
    118 KB
    >>who didn't even fucking roll to determine the outcome of any of it.

    Now that's just not true. The traps were spotted fair and square, the supply route was properly ambushed, and because of that, there were next to no decent supplies. Basically, all of the odds were stacked against him from round 1. These odds are perfectly reasonable, fair, and 'realistic.'

    That doesn't mean that the OP has no place complaining about it. Basically, the OP is in a place of frustration for failing despite doing the 'right' thing. The OP was playing like you're SUPPOSED to play: according to character, and yet he still got shafted. That sucks no matter the odds, so I'd have to say that his reaction is perfectly acceptable. Now if the DM is a good DM, he'll support him in gaining the upper hand and forcing the other players to face the consequences of their actions. Like I said earlier, this sort of act has consequences, and they have to be fleshed out.

    Rolls that HE knew about. No mention of dice being involved or not.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:10 No.6847002
    They're not setting off any of my evil alerts. They didn't kill noncombatants; if they'd stormed the town and killed everyone no matter what they were doing, it'd be evil, but the people in this example all armed themselves and were aiming to kill.

    This whole conflict wasn't a good act, but I don't think it was an evil one either.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:12 No.6847024
    They're evil
    they killed innocent men and women trying to defend their lively hood.
    All income in the town is now non-existant
    so either everyone in the village starves to death or abandons their home and becomes a homeless begger in another city.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:13 No.6847027
    Did the druids kill the whole town? I was under the impression that they only killed the miners who were trying to kill them.

    That there was a better way of solving the argument. And thank you for your endorsement.

    I apologize for starting this argument in an overly hostile fashion; I was angry and I think I went too far.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:14 No.6847041
    this is why people who think in morality plays are idiots
    how about 'everyone did what they thought was right, it went to hell, the weaker side got axed'
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:14 No.6847043
    it was a mining village.
    Anyone who wasnt a miner was a kid.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:15 No.6847053
    When you waltz into people homes and kill them you can't claim that it was ok because they were trying to defend themselves.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:15 No.6847054
    Damnit Exalted, with your interesting "Tau-version-of-the-inquisition" idea, it seemed like you actually HAD A BRAIN.

    I have been sadly proven wrong.

    OP, you deserve revenge. All you have to do is inform the local authorities, lets see them fight the kingdom's militia or whatever and win as easily.

    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:15 No.6847056
    That's why I said "miners who were trying to kill them," rather than "all the miners, period." OP said "my miners," so I believe that only the ones who fought died.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:17 No.6847068
    so leaving hundreds of orphans wandering around starving to death and crying about the bad men who killed mummy and daddy
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:17 No.6847069
    Do note that I haven't said a word disparaging trying to get the kingdom's militia involved. That would probably be a reasonable course of action.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:17 No.6847074
    >He brought up the Stanford Prison Experiment as describing their depravity.
    Maybe that avenue would be worth pursuing.
    Ask the DM to turn the game into an evil campaign and watch how long it takes for your friends to notice.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:17 No.6847077
    OP never mentioned anything about the end of the battle. I'm guessing the session ended there.
    >> Dungeonfag 11/24/09(Tue)10:17 No.6847078
         File1259075866.jpg-(33 KB, 500x363, kinoCYCLE.jpg)
    33 KB
    been archived:

    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:18 No.6847083
    no but you seem to be under the idea that the druids were in the right.
    which is the most retarded thing I've ever seen
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:18 No.6847090
    I don't believe that either side was explicitly within the right or within the wrong.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:20 No.6847100
    See >>6844197:
    >>The PCs wiped out everyone without blinking an eye.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:21 No.6847105
    Still moronic.
    lets take a look at this
    Massacre miners
    No compromise offered
    Ignore negotiations

    Trying to make a living
    Defending themselves
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:22 No.6847120
    >the supply route was properly ambushed

    where are you getting that information from? did you even read the op post, or are you just a troll..

    wait, don't answer that.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:23 No.6847127
    I think that meant everyone on the battlefield.

    You're looking at that from only the perspective of the miners. You might want to consider that the lives of the druids are equally dependent on the forest, as well as their spiritual beliefs and even class abilities (those are at least based on a desire to defend it). And neither side was willing to compromise.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:25 No.6847141
    so handful of druids = 50+ miners?
    okay that was biased though I'll do it from the druids side

    Killed all nasty polluters
    Ignored negotiations, "who wants to talk with people who pollute"

    Fought back when they should have clearly just let themselves get murdered or commited suicide
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:25 No.6847144
    Who do you think the army is going to side along, then? It might depend on how shithouse the kingdom is but I doubt they are going to just let a massacred village go without any sort of response.

    inb4 "They'll side with the druids of course"
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:26 No.6847151
    Okay, Level 6 monk, right? You still using the same character? If so, go into Drunken Master. Drink to forget, like you planned for your character. Then, when your DM has the group face down a demon and he likely will, druids taking back a mining town from nature is kinda cliché, at least as much as fighting off a demon is.

    During the build-up to the demon, be passing notes to the DM that, basically, say that your moments of soberness are becoming more and more frequent the closer you get. Have your character become distant, cold, and eventually just wander off with the stated intent of scouting around. Refuse any help as, "it's harder to spot one person, even if he is drunk." Have a meeting with the demon, ask for power.

    Become a blackguard, then pass your sheet to the DM since he's now probably the demon's right hand man. Tell them to call you when they finish with this bullshit game and then walk away since it's not fun anymore.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:27 No.6847154
    Druids were unwilling to compromise.
    Miners were UNABLE to compromise.

    Druidic spiritual beliefs condone wanton slaughter? Super cool story bro, just get the fuck off 4chan even /b/ wouldn't stand for your shit.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:27 No.6847156
    That's still quite biased.

    I have no idea, seeing as how I'm not the army. I would guess that they'd have a preference for the miners, though.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:28 No.6847159
    depends on the religious politics of the region
    50 dead miners might be nothing compared to fucking with the druids....or this might be the perfect excuse for a different church to crack down on the druids albegesian crusade style
    not enough informaiton has been given to know
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:28 No.6847160
    Not biased, thats actually how the druids saw the whole situation.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:28 No.6847162
    ... but they DID kill everyone.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:28 No.6847164
    next session:

    group sits down, OP simmering with resentment. DM starts 'So, you guys and the druids are standing in the remains of the mining town. OP's char is lying on the ground, at -1 hp. Just then, you hear the sounds of trumpets, and thousands of marching feet. The army of <realm> has come, in response to the runners sent out by OP. They may be too late to save the village, but they're not to late to avenge it.

    cue 5 hours of OP getting to kick the shit out of party, and new campaign. Because this one's gonna be a clusterfuck from now on.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:29 No.6847170
    I don't see how they were unable to compromise. If nothing else, they could have asked the druids to compromise. I just don't see why they absolutely had to stand and fight without trying anything diplomatic (the OP was only trying to use diplomancy to get people to join his side).
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:30 No.6847174
    I think they only killed everyone on that battlefield.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:31 No.6847184
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:32 No.6847186
    This had potential to be a pretty awesome party conflict.
    The only party conflict that I've had was where me and another guy were getting annoyed by the antics of a third guy.
    So we punched his lights out and sold him to an orc gay brothel as an exotic.
    he got raped due to failing all the rolls he got to avoid it.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:32 No.6847194
    Then they got a bunch of orphans to kill now.
    "Sweet exp nuggets dewd"
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:32 No.6847195
    they were unable to compromise because the druids were unwilling to compromise
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:33 No.6847200
    Did they try?
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:35 No.6847210
    so you can show proof that the druids never came to town with concerns about the mine or the river pollution?
    because you are totally extrapolating based upon what you wish to be true
    OP never gave any history to the event
    only described the finale
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:35 No.6847212
    >My diplomacy fell on deaf ears
    >I RP tried to diplomatize with them. They took this opportunity to hit me with enough ice storms to incapacitate
    >They never considered anything I said
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:35 No.6847214
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:36 No.6847219
    Let's just imagine, for a second, the economics position of a peasant in the dark ages, when this game is undoubtedly set. Your job is your life line. A boy will take an apprentice to a craftsman and learn that trade. He will do that job until he dies, or in extreme cases, earn enough money to hire others to work for him. There were no welfare cheques or benefit schemes in the dark ages. If you didn't have a job you starved, simple as that, and you were already slightly malnourished in the first place. Loosing ones job in the dark ages was like a death sentence. So no, these men did not have a choice they either die by the blade or starve to death.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:36 No.6847227
    He started diplomacy before the fight had begun.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:37 No.6847238
    Or they try to work something out with the druids and find some sort of alternate solution.

    And even if that's not the case, the druids are as dependent on the forest as the miners are on the mine. If no compromise is possible... well, that's what happened here.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:38 No.6847243
    Did he start it back when he might still have had a chance?
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:39 No.6847249
    but they werent damaging the forest.
    no matter what happend there would have still been a forest.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:39 No.6847252
    yes this is why the middle ages was a shit time to be alive....
    if you want to look at peasant deaths due to religious politics, then have a look at the 30 year war in prussia
    or the crusades
    or witch hunts
    if someone important (priest, noble or rich merchant with pull) cares, then it might be on like donkey kong....but peasants dieing isnt always a noteworthy event
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:40 No.6847257
    They were polluting the river and badly damaging the forest.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:41 No.6847259
    Where was that said?
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:41 No.6847268
    Why was it up to the peasants to compromise?
    They werent even aware of druids in the forest.
    Surely the druids should have tried that instead of going straight to KILL MAIM BURN mode
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:41 No.6847269
    He clearly tried to parley before the fighting started, they opted to shoot first instead.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:42 No.6847274
    from the op: they lashed back at me for destroying the river
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:42 No.6847282
    OP: "The druids don't like us because we're polluting the rivers and killing all the wildlife in the immediate area, spreading more and more each day."

    You seem to be thinking of this as though the druids were a bunch of Greenpeace suburbanites who had no personal stake in this and just wanted the miners dead. But they're not anything like that; as I said before, they're as dependent on the forest as the miners are on the mine.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:42 No.6847283
    did you read the original post?
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:44 No.6847302
    Both sides went immediately to KILL MAIM BURN mode, it's just that the miners couldn't do as much because they had no chance of invading the forest. And they lost because they were weaker.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:45 No.6847308
    With the overwhelming force they had, no I don't buy that at all.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:46 No.6847317
    The druids were evil for killing 50 peasants
    They may have been polluting but they didnt try diplomacy.
    So that may mean that both were evil.
    But neither were good or neutral.
    >> Exalted !OOirDpvrkA 11/24/09(Tue)10:47 No.6847330
    Well, the druids are much more powerful, obviously.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:48 No.6847347
    we dont know if diplomacy was tried prior to the pc involvement
    once the armies are lined up, diplomacy was already past
    the pcs probably pushed it more towards absolute violence....but maybe it would have happened without them
    either way....we dont know what happened in the past
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)10:59 No.6847472
    I think its safe to say that this debate is stupid.
    Neither side has enough information to change the mind of the other side.
    Best to just call it a draw here.
    >> Anonymous 11/24/09(Tue)11:24 No.6847694


    It would be nice to hear what the other players/DM's side of the story was, but I guess that'll never happen.

    Delete Post [File Only]
    Style [Yotsuba | Yotsuba B | Futaba | Burichan]