Topic: Would you award XP for murder of an NPC

[intothatdarkness]

no hard evidence really. The pcs claim an NPC enemy that was captured and interrogated named the guy a traitor. They killed this first NPC to cover the fact he did not actually say what they claim he did. Its far from ironclad. Next they claim the 'traitor' proved his guilt by refusing to comply to being interrogated with a truth potion and when he wasnt unshackled he went for a weapon/failed/was killed. That part is actually interesting but could be explained by the accused losing patience with them or being provoked (there was a history here of these guys not getting along).
The questions the crimelord/their boss will ask them is...
why did they kill him and not merely subdue him?
why did they not bring the accused traitor to him immediately?
why didnt they send word of his suspected guilt before taking action themselves?
what if the captive that named the accused traitor was lying?
who was present during the interrogation of the captive that named him traitor? (just the two NPCs)
the accused 'traitor' would surely have valuable information about who he was working for/their plans etc etc, killing him before a full interrogation was a mistake.

They can only hope they aren't interrogated by a competent Mentalism user or a Sleuth. Magic can have an interesting impact on that stuff. It can also come up later, if the crime lord doesn't trust one (or both) of the PCs and has them stealthily followed and 'monitored' by a caster of some kind. In my game every watch organization in larger towns had a Sleuth on staff (the detective division if you will), which made players extra-cautious.

[vector]

What about guilt? Is there a chance either of the PC's could feel guilt for what they did?

This notion raises an interesting question. Is it appropriate for the GM to tell a player how his or her character feels? Barring any relevant Flaws, of course.

Apologies if that is not what your are suggesting.

I would never tell a player how their character "feels" about any particular action. And as a player, that would be very annoying. Either the player decides he and/or his character feels guilty or not.

It would be a very cool role-playing choice for the player to decide he felt guilty over what he had done. Could start a quest for some sort of redemption.

It could also be just as interesting if he decides that his character is a ruthless bastard who doesn't give two !#%$.

[vector]

They can only hope they aren't interrogated by a competent Mentalism user or a Sleuth...

I have questions about the Sleuth class. Do you use them? How do you handle them? Are they common or a rarity? Are their visions or magic based conclusions taken as proof, or must they gather actual evidence too.

If they were too common I don't see how there could be a crimelord or a thieves guild. Unless they only targeted people that can't hire Sleuths I suppose.

[intothatdarkness]

They can only hope they aren't interrogated by a competent Mentalism user or a Sleuth...

I have questions about the Sleuth class. Do you use them? How do you handle them? Are they common or a rarity? Are their visions or magic based conclusions taken as proof, or must they gather actual evidence too.

If they were too common I don't see how there could be a crimelord or a thieves guild. Unless they only targeted people that can't hire Sleuths I suppose.

I use them, but they're fairly rare (only certain cultures produce them, and they guard the training closely). Since they're Channeling, they answer to a god in my world and have their spell access and use controlled by that deity. My world system tends to cap spell access for Channelers until they complete certain actions and obey strictures placed on them by their patron god.

In terms of field work, Sleuths can present their magical findings as evidence (since they're in effect minor clerics of a god), but how seriously they're taken varies from place to place. In some realms they're vigorously backed by the system (and you're right...there are few crime lords or the like in this realms), but in others they're just another source of information and often use their magical findings to support physical evidence gathering.

I've found them workable and interesting with those strictures, and have had one or two players play them over the years.

[vector]

They can only hope they aren't interrogated by a competent Mentalism user or a Sleuth...

I have questions about the Sleuth class. Do you use them? How do you handle them? Are they common or a rarity? Are their visions or magic based conclusions taken as proof, or must they gather actual evidence too.

If they were too common I don't see how there could be a crimelord or a thieves guild. Unless they only targeted people that can't hire Sleuths I suppose.

I use them, but they're fairly rare (only certain cultures produce them, and they guard the training closely). Since they're Channeling, they answer to a god in my world and have their spell access and use controlled by that deity. My world system tends to cap spell access for Channelers until they complete certain actions and obey strictures placed on them by their patron god.

In terms of field work, Sleuths can present their magical findings as evidence (since they're in effect minor clerics of a god), but how seriously they're taken varies from place to place. In some realms they're vigorously backed by the system (and you're right...there are few crime lords or the like in this realms), but in others they're just another source of information and often use their magical findings to support physical evidence gathering.

I've found them workable and interesting with those strictures, and have had one or two players play them over the years.

Thank you for the reply. I like how you've handled the Sleuth.

I guess if you make high level Sleuths as rare as a Holmes, Poirot, or Spade then they can't be everywhere at once.

[intothatdarkness]

Yeah, high level Sleuths are rare and often closer to priests or monks than actual detectives.

One thing I do with many Channeling professions is require them to under rituals of ascension (trials, basically) at both fifth and tenth level to gain access to more powerful spells (especially the semis). It started with the Paladin (because we redid the profession) and expanded to the Sleuth and some other classes.

[kwickham]

What about guilt? Is there a chance either of the PC's could feel guilt for what they did?

This notion raises an interesting question. Is it appropriate for the GM to tell a player how his or her character feels? Barring any relevant Flaws, of course.

Apologies if that is not what your are suggesting.

I would never tell a player how their character "feels" about any particular action. And as a player, that would be very annoying. Either the player decides he and/or his character feels guilty or not.

It would be a very cool role-playing choice for the player to decide he felt guilty over what he had done. Could start a quest for some sort of redemption.

It could also be just as interesting if he decides that his character is a ruthless bastard who doesn't give two !#%$.

I think A GM could award experience for great roleplaying if the player feels guilt. Or maybe some other bonus that the guilty reaction leads to some sort of forgiveness especially if they followed up with some unselfish response.

The ruthless played character, I myself wouldn't feel any connection with nor any need to further their story. They can play themself out of my game and go find someone who will tell the story that they want.

[vector]

The ruthless played character, I myself wouldn't feel any connection with nor any need to further their story. They can play themself out of my game and go find someone who will tell the story that they want.

I'm reminded of a recent post where I said I was an advocate for total player freedom, but the GM has to enjoy the game too!

I ran an epic "GOOD" campaign for many, many years so I and my players were ready for a change. They've been having a lot of fun playing EVIL and anti-hero sorts in our latest game.

[GamemasterAlf]

I agree with most that the murder was worth little or no experience
Creating the plot to frame the NPC and working to advance themselves would be worth XP

The consequences for their actions can be a different thing. I am somewhat confused as you keep referring to the "Crimelord" boss holding a court session.

The word crimelord does not envision to me an honorable person who would care overly how someone died unless a personal favorite or a family member or perhaps caused by a rival group if any exists

Not so sure on a "court" case either with the crimelord connotation. You explain yourself to him and if he is not happy with it you are dead

Its your world but I would play evil NPC leaders as evil and not a hardened good guy. (unless that is how you have his character) They will exploit their people as much as they can and the characters could either be seen as the new hit men or a threat to be eliminated

I play an evil campaign (at theplayers choice) and characters die. Frequently

[Druss_the_Legend]

I agree with most that the murder was worth little or no experience
Creating the plot to frame the NPC and working to advance themselves would be worth XP

The consequences for their actions can be a different thing. I am somewhat confused as you keep referring to the "Crimelord" boss holding a court session.

The word crimelord does not envision to me an honorable person who would care overly how someone died unless a personal favorite or a family member or perhaps caused by a rival group if any exists

Not so sure on a "court" case either with the crimelord connotation. You explain yourself to him and if he is not happy with it you are dead

Its your world but I would play evil NPC leaders as evil and not a hardened good guy. (unless that is how you have his character) They will exploit their people as much as they can and the characters could either be seen as the new hit men or a threat to be eliminated

I play an evil campaign (at theplayers choice) and characters die. Frequently

the cimelord isnt evil but neither is he honourable. he is motivated by money and infamy/reputation
he has a traitor in his organisation. it wasnt known who that person was. one of the pcs was 2nd in command but cleverly framed the first in command using fabricated statements from a captive who was interrogated and then set the guy up by provoking a reduction to get him to attack them... flimsy evidence at best.
crimelord will question the pcs and seek clarification on specifics if he feels its needed.
then he will question them one by one.
it really depends how they role-play this but ive given them an out that doesnt involve killing them.
there story will most likely not hold up. he will see their true motive for murdering his captain.
sure he could kill them as well and make an example of them but hitting them with a huge depts does three things
1) keeps the pcs in his service and in the campaign (one is a valuable sleper agent/spy the other is a good leader)
2) makes him money
3) gives the pcs pause for though as to whether it was worth it
The only issue i can see here is that there still must be a traitor in his organisation... the threat must be dealt with but without knowing he cant kill everyone can he? id say he will pick someone to make an example of... even if they r innocent and kill him in front of everyone... it send s a message to everyone else and puts the real traitor at ease (his plan so he can wait for them to slip up). The other possible issue here is pcs this ambitious could be a threat to the crimelord himself.

[vector]

I play an evil campaign (at theplayers choice) and characters die. Frequently

Is there some sort of Brotherhood us evil GMs can join? Uh, I mean GMs that run evil campaigns!

[Mordrig]

Basically zero XP for the kill, it is how they handle the rest of the collateral effects that could earn XP.  If the plot was good enough I might award Xp for that planning.  On the other hand, the news of what they did will get out, and then How will other Mercenary Captains react to them?  What about their subordinate commanders in the unit?  Will they decide that the Klingon promotion method is the way to go?  Will they respect this new commander that murdered their commander, a man they all respected and perhaps even loved?  Will they follow orders or perhaps allow the enemy to slip past them to their new commander?

[Druss_the_Legend]

Basically zero XP for the kill, it is how they handle the rest of the collateral effects that could earn XP.  If the plot was good enough I might award Xp for that planning.  On the other hand, the news of what they did will get out, and then How will other Mercenary Captains react to them?  What about their subordinate commanders in the unit?  Will they decide that the Klingon promotion method is the way to go?  Will they respect this new commander that murdered their commander, a man they all respected and perhaps even loved?  Will they follow orders or perhaps allow the enemy to slip past them to their new commander?

yes, i like the possible flow on effects for the rest of the unit. My plan is the crimelord will not reveal this 'error in judgement' to the rest of the unit but keep this as leverage against them should the pcs step out of line again and effectively turn the rest of the unit against him. Even if the previous commander was not that popular (he wasnt) dealing with him like this actually makes the new commander worse because the pc has set the precedent that if he doesnt like u or you get in his way or you tick him off and ur dead. Thats not going to inspire loyalty from them but may actually get them thinking of a mutiny themselves... the old i miss the last boss, he wasnt as bad as we thought... scenario... and the... lets get rid of this new guy and replace him with someone we like... the pcs started this... now they have to deal with it happening to them...