>Party knighted by king after doing work for him, King dies of natural causes
>Prince becomes new king, treats party like shit.
>Stiffs them on payments, titles, insults them, ect.
>Half-brother from a previous marriage shows up, claims kingdom is his and will find legal proof for this, fucks off to do so
>Dickbag king releases party from his service and tells them to fuck off and join his half-brother if they want. He doesn't like them and doesn't want them as his knights anymore
>Party immediately fights and kills him along with a good chunk of his king's guard.
>Kingdom now in succession crisis and turmoil, anarchy beginning to take hold
I expected that to happen.....but not the very second he released them. Does this seem a bit jumpy to you guys? I mean, Dickbag didn't actually do anything illegal or horrible to the party, just didn't treat them as well as his father did because he didn't like them. But I guess they really wanted revenge for him.....um.....calling them shit, because they went all out on him. It was a little scary. They cremated him right there in the throne room and teleported to ashes to a lake to make sure he couldn't come back.
Also; Psychopathic party stories general.
>>45935296
He stiffed them on payments and insulted them, then tells them to fuck off? Did you expect anything different from what sounds like a mid level murderhobo party?
>>45935322
No, just didn't expect them to do so that very second. Figured they go for the civil war thing. What I had planned, anyway.
>>45935344
Sounds like you gave them the 'yes man' option now all they hear is this https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L53gjP-TtGE
>>45935344
>Planned
Well there's your problem
>>45935296
Yeah my party would probably do that too.
>Stiffs them on payments, titles, insults them, ect.
Especially if that happened.
>>45935344
If you are a murderhobo, or rather, a Mercenary Knight, you ain't got no honor. The moment they back stab you, you have to react fast. This is why kings never did that. What the king should've done is send them away on the promise of payment at selected location and just, WHOOPS NOT GONNA PAY YOU WHAT YOU WANTED SORRY
>>45935459
They weren't really mercs, they were fully knighted by the previous king and helping the kingdom with a war and shit. Now that kingdom is more than a little fucked
>>45935508
Then you handled it wrong.
If I was GMing it, I've would've told the players they are bound by honor to respect the king in his house and told them not to attack him. If they decide to attack anyway, the whole Kingsguard should've been all over their dicks and kill them on the spot. If they manage to kill the Kingsguard then there's the army just outside the throne room all over the castle. If they manage to escape an army then their reward is not they are known as the Kingslayers. Now the half brother won't trust them because who would trust Kingslayers. They are free to do what they wish. The brother now has a civil war to placate, a throne to occupy and the Kingslayers won't get anything out of it. Maybe now they are true mercenaries and decide to fight for the throne since who better to rule than the strongest dick around?
>>45935508
You expect them to sit around and Take It from some overly privileged and under-appreciative little shit? They were betrayed, as they see it.
>>45935563
This
They murdered their king. Now their reputation is in the shitter and they must either live like bandits or find asylum.
>>45935605
I have to say, the Kingslayers sounds like a great name for a group of disgraced murderhobos
>>45935459
You can knight them but deep inseide they are still murderhobos
>>45935626
Yes. A rag-tag adventuring party of ex-nobles can get into all sorts of monkey business now.
>>45935605
When they were released as knights and explicitly told they can join another's bid for the throne, they are perfectly within rights to do such a murderous thing. He's no longer THEIR king. He just released their duties.
>>45935605
>>45935626
>>45935657
Oh trust me, that's the idea now. I was just a little surprised they'd throw everything away like that for revenge against a few shitty payments and insults.
Anyone else have any stories about the party ruining themselves and all they worked for just to get something minor or petty?
>>45935675
This anon has it right, the new king quite literally told them to do as they wished as they were no longer seen as knights in his kingdom. So why not kill him and secure a now empty throne?
>>45935707
They burnt down the shipyards in a port town because one of the shipwrights refused to purchase their half sunken boat for the outrageous price they asked for it.
Things escalated to the point where half the party was killed and most of their items destroyed after being trapped by a lynch mob in a burning building and the rest had to steal a boat and escape.
>>45935775
Because that makes them usurpers and brigands?
Wow, now that half-brother can take the throne and blame the party for killing his dear sibling. Just play along. The problems should just snowball further from here. And the rogue knights could be a good roleplaying setup if handled right.
>>45935707
Never, ever, EVER underestimate the power of raw spite, ESPECIALLY in a fictitious setting. Seriously, don't do it.
>>45935795
Would it matter at that point? All that time spent becoming loved by the former king and made into knights all scattered to the wind by dickbag mcgee, effectively making them start from zero anyway. I would've slain him on the spot as well, nothing much to lose at that point. They would've had terrible reputation for being stripped of their titles anyway.
So wait, they had titles but no lands? It's not like they lost much then.
>>45935936
No, they did. It wasn't even being taken away. Not so much anymore, though.
>>45936044
Well did they like the old king?
>>45935563
Exactly. They kill the king, the guards show up, and then arrows.
All the arrows.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeTBqolcrO8
>>45936060
They helped him fight a war and seemed quite pleased with him. The enemy offered them to switch sides once but they refused.
>>45935296
>not paying what you owe them
>not expecting retaliation at last
Oh no you didn't
>>45935508
>what are hedge knights
Being knighted means shit anon for honor. Knights actually were some of the most brutal people of their time, their war mongering and violence was only surpassed by the barons they pledged their TRUE fealty to.
>>45935400
>Kanye West gets shilled everywere, even tg
>>45935707
Really, what did they throw away? He stripped them of their titles and basically asked to be killed eventually by sending them to the service of his rival.
>>45936718
Their reputation mostly.
Personally I'd just say screw it and leave the country entirely at this point. They seem experienced enough that they could carve out a place for themselves someplace where nobody knows them.
>>45935296
You expected them to kill him eventually. The party also expected they would have to kill him eventually, and he was right there so may as well do it on the way out.
>>45935296
Cheating nobles out of titles and payments? Tha is a HUGE no-no historically. He's lucky they were honorable enough to wait for him to release them from their oaths.
>>45936741
Are they scoundrels and kingslayers, or are they patriots who removed an unfit pretender to the throne to clear the way for the rightful king?
>>45935605
The king disowned them.
After stiffing them on promised payments and titles. Nobility (which Knights are to a degree) have revolted for less.
>>45936799
All depends on who writes the History, and that's pretty much their next job.
>>45936809
The Praetorian's did this shit all the time for less.
>>45935296
That sounds entirely reasonable. It sounds like you are upset for your party not following the script you wanted.
How are you surprised? The prince denied them the titles, payments and respect they had earned and tells them that everything they have done for the kingdom is shit then expects them to just leave? If anything, the half brother now is the only one with a solid claim, the PC's are seen as a rogue, kingslaying element who the half brother should approach to hire them as a scapegoat. He'll tell them that he will publicly denounce them but restore their fortunes and titles, and that their first task is to either put down those elements loyal to the first prince, without his public support and rhey keep the spoils, or send them on a dangerous mission far from the capital, depending on how you want the game to go.
Treating your nobles like shit is a good way to make them revolt.
This half brother would have had to kill the king anyway, he is just a fool for pissing them off then outright telling them to go fight for his rival.
Kind of reminds me of when one of the party members knowingly pulled an Oedipus because he got snubbed from the throne and exiled, all arguably wrongfully.
We helped him assuming he just wanted to get back what he was owed, but the crazy guy went nuclear and ended up full on king after killing the old king and force marrying the queen, his parents.
>>45935296
Change the campaign to a hunter and hunted storyline then since they fucked your plans.
Basically they go to a town, towners tell on them to the guard for a bounty of obscene wealth.
They rest at the inn, the guards burn the inn down and if anything comes out they fucking fire 1000x crossbow bolts at the fuckers.
If you want these murder hobos dead then take all civilization away from them, hell the rebel king would sell them out for a warchest to fund his struggle to take the throne.
>>45936871
You also shouldn't act like there's no one in the kingdom happy that new king fuckstick got incinerated. If everyone was on board with him being king it wouldn't matter if the half-brother came back with proof the throne was rightfully his, no one would back his claim.
There are agents other than the half-brother who would be willing to help the kingslayers, especially if they played a major roll in a previous war.
>>45936910
This, if the guy is willing to be a dick to his fathers retainers for no reason then he is probably not very popular among the nobility.
>>45936942
A dick and an idiot. The safest way to deal with retainers you don't want anymore is to give them a cushy job somewhere far away or stick a knife in their throat while they're sleeping and blame it on foreigners.
>>45935296
GM is failing to introduce peril.
If you want realistic actions, you have to give players realistic responsibilities.
Realistic responsibilities have to be met with realistic punishments if not upheld.
Unless the party had already ascended to godhead, there is no realistic way they should be able to overpower an entire citadel of guards and make good their escape.
Doing "The Right Thing" in such a wrong way as that should get the gift of the TPK.
>>45936983
Well the smart thing for the new guy to do would be to offer them a reward for helping him gain the throne. And then instead of being a dick give them a lucrative mission far, far away from him.
>>45936892
You sound like a fun GM.
>>45936883
what a sick motherfucker.
>>45936990
He said that they teleported the dude's ashes into a lake after incinerating him, so I assume the group of knights has a wizard in it that could can just port them out.
They probably just chopped the king into jelly cubes and killed whatever other guards happened to be standing in the room at the time. No need to overpower an entire castle.
>>45936892
A wilderness bandit kingdom game could be fun, but not like this. No should be a passive agrees I've, vengeful asshole.
>>45936998
>offer them a reward for helping him gain the throne
That's precisely what I wouldn't do as the new guy. You're basically confirming your opposition's thoughts that you're the kind of guy that hires assassins to murder opponents and wrongfully usurp power. It'll make it harder to convince such people that your proof is legit too (not trustworthy + he organized the assassination before revealing his 'evidence', how convenient)
>>45937047
No I get that they were able to game-play their way out of the situation. But I'm saying the situation itself was unrealistic.
In a kingdom where a bunch of random vagabond plebs can dish out sufficient magic skills to break a king, the king is going to know this and be aware and his chambers will nullify magic, prevent teleports, etc etc.
Basically, the king would know they *could* do what they did, and would be prepared. Because that's how kings are kings. A game world where players are able to do whatever, and you're basically just testing their moral character with "will you CHOOSE to slay this king?" is a bust and unrealistic game world. They should have ample warning not to attack the king. Then, if they still do, they find their magic is bust, the king is instantly protected, and then they have to fight through an infinity wave of mid-level grunts. The trick being that they can kill these guards one-on-one, but the GM just gives them an endless wave of new guards to kill so they deplete all their heals and are given the most piss-weak, ignoble death possible:
"Killed by palace guards".
*Yawn*
tl;dr: if a world can produce adventurers that can kill a king, then it also produces kings who are able to deal with magical regicide adventurers. Because otherwise they wouldn't be king.
>>45937055
That's only a problem if you're not winning the civil war. I'd win the war first, then decide on what history was going to say, and to do that I need powerful men.
>>45937103
You complain the situation is unrealistic, then suggest that the GM throw waves of infinitely respawning suicidal guards at the players?
>>45937103
>random vagabond plebs
Mid level knights who've fought wars for the former king is 'random vagabond plebs'?
Also, see >>45937002
Also, this particularly king has showed himself to be an idiot by pissing off the kingdom's heroes. He didn't last long in the world of magic regicide.
Also, the court wizard on hand who would've been the one to do those magic shutoffs in the first place is probably the same one as the party. Wizards don't grow on trees.
>we attack the king
>all your spells instantly fail because I say so, a division of guards form a barricade in front of the king instantly before you can get in melee range, an infinite stream of soldiers floods into the throne room and kills you, game over
>guess you shouldn't of done something besides what I wanted you to, would you like to rewind time and follow the plot correctly? :^)
>>45937007
To be fair, he'd been wronged pretty badly, and at the end of the day his actions worked out well for him. We were just kind of like "Dude wtf" till he thanked/rewarded us for our help, then we overlooked it and patted him on the back.
>>45937103
It's clear that these were formerly the people who WOULD jump to the king's aid, they're mid-level folks, who were literally knights of the court and probably knew most of the people there on a first name basis.
If you're pompously dismissing folks like an idiot in person, you're not going to realise the hole in your plot being these were the people who were previously help prevent assassination attempts.
If they had been random vagabond adventurers, that is more of a reason to be careful.
This guy is an idiot and obviously WOULDN'T have survived. The court doesn't suddenly grow 3d6 wizards with shield spells simply because a new idiotic king takes power.
>>45937221
oh I actually didn't think he was sick, I just wanted to use 'motherfucker' in the literal sense for once.
>>45935296
Well, the main problem is your story is shit and people don't actually work like any of that.
Why the fuck would the new King act in such a blatantly -- needlessly -- stupid manner?
Your players reacted perfectly understandably. I would never call it murderhobo-ish -- they've been insulted, rendered useless, lost their privileges, all because of this shitstain of a king. Who they can replace.
>>45937288
Ah right. Well motherfucker he was, to great benefit at least to himself, even if it wasn't something appealing to him. Like, not like he ever wanted to slam his mom when setting out on his plans, or ever looked forward to it.
Okay, let's do these in order shall we?
First of all: "vagabond plebs" is obvious hyperbole, used to distinguish from self-made adventurers, and inherited wealth kings.
Right.
>>45937138
A household guard for a king would have more than enough knights to beat a team of elite adventurers through attrition and weight of numbers. It's not suicidal to attack a powerful individual when you have such great weight of numbers - and every one of those household guards is hoping to make a name for himself. In a game-world, the gap between royal guard and adventurer should be far far narrower than the gap between adventurer and king. Hence "realism".
>>45937187
You're stuck in a false dichotmoy of "railroading" Vs "No responsibility". This is wrong. The game world should be clearly constructed so dumb shit like OP described cannot happen, unless the party has advanced way beyond "mid-level". If they are "mid-level", then there are literally thousands of other, equally strong teams wafting around the game world. It'd be like today, a Black Water mercenary team *could* perform a hit on the British monarchy. But they don't because there is no means of escape. If that is not created as a truth in the game world too, then dumb shit will happen.
>>45937260
The character build-up seems spot-on, I agree. The scenario makes perfect sense that the party WOULD eventually kill the king. But the GM has to build in a situation so it happens in a decent way.
Have you ever been fired from a job? The HR guy has some big dude with him, and then you are escorted off the premises. This is to avoid you kicking off at him. Even the most inbred idiot king would have advisers and protectors of above-equal strength to ensure he didn't get merked after firing them.
tl;dr: OP, learn from this, *Your* mistake. Build responsibility and expectation into the fabric of your gameworld. Expect opportunistic dumb shit, because, as gamers, we are opportunistic dumb shits.
>>45937288
I was trying to find this one joke I heard about Oedipus and wound up on the Wikipedia page for motherfucker. Did you know the oldest know instance of the word is in a Texas court document labeling the defended a "God damned mother-f—cking, bastardly son-of-a-bitch"?
>Be new fucker on throne, son of king.
>Decide to mistreat guys that helped your father in war, treat them like shit, take their lands and titles.
>Act like retarded bastard.
>Be surprised when they deal with you as fast as some who have right to throne appears.
Seriously, this retard would die anyway. If he was so weak at politics it is damn fucking favour for kingdom. If you mistreat your nobles without making sure you have backup, you are asking for quick death.
>>45935296
King in a medieval or ancient society belittles, insults and dishonor his warriors before releasing them from their bonds? Yeah, he was asking for a killing
>>45937103
Sounds to me like the way the old king stayed king was by having magical adventurers who liked and trusted him and whose service he rewarded with titles, gold and prestige.
The new king failed to maintain this system and as a consequence it sounds like there will be a new new king, who presumably will. Stable equilibrium.
And. while magical adventurers with a ton of purely personal power are not a real life thing, new kings falling because they pissed off and alienated the powerful allies who kept their predecessors on the throne very much was a real life thing and not uncommon.
>>45937325
Sure, it's not suicide to the first wave. Not to the second either. The third's feeling slightly less pumped about it, but it still doesn't feel like suicide.
It's in the middle when you start to get this niggling little thoughts that the guy who would be paying you for this isn't in any state to do that anymore. That sweet spot where the pcs have killed a bunch of guys just like you but haven't killed enough to look like they're losing steam. That's when you get people evaluating whether or not it's really worth it.
>>45937325
You're still suggesting throwing an endless wave of guards at the pcs, presumably to teach them a lesson about going off your railroad, and calling it realistic when it's the most video game things you could possibly do in that situation, you motherfucking hypocrite.
>>45937416
it's not endless. You could set the number to a realistic but high value - 1,000 soldiers stationed in the city's military barracks / academy, for example. Then add all the civilians who have been mobilised by the "Seize Them!!" Cry. And then the various seers and wizards loyal to the king who are shuffling about in the background.
Face it, in this instance, the video game version (though hugely different to what I suggested) is still way more realistic than "let's kill the king! And so we killed the king" ending that happened to OP.
>>45937515
No, they would still kill them.
Thing is, they would then be killed. Or have to go full heroic and subterfuge their way out of there.
>>45935296
>Dickbag king releases party from his service and tells them to fuck off and join his half-brother if they want.
yeah this is where you beefed it
if this evil king really didn't like the PCs he wouldn't advise they start a coup against him or join his enemies, that's just retarded
>>45937378
There. We have something there. That is a thing you can run with and create a spur of the moment development/twist. If the party can cut a swathe through say 30% of the guard, then that demonstrates they ARE tough enough to king-kill. They have earned their life. The remaining guards could split - some afraid, others seeing that the power has shifted and now wanting to side with the new powerbrokers, etc.
Point is, you have given them something to prove they were tough enough to kill the king and live. Just going "so we wreck the king because our stats allow it, and then we teleport out" is unsatisfying, and rewards silly, non-immersive gameplay.
>>45937541
OP wanted them to go off and -- start a coup against him/join his enemies. He was just heavy-handed as shit.
It's like swinging a sledgehammer at your kid so they move forward and being surprised when they fly fifteen metres and splatter against the wall.
>>45937547
I remember how our DM did thing like that for our high level party. We were eb route to capital when one of barons decided to deal with us for old shit. He did two mistakes - it happend on his land. Near his Castle and he used around 50 guards, but he couldn't know how powerful we became. Slaughtered his first wave, slowly moving toward his Castle, our wiz fucked up gate and we get inside.
After two waves of slaughtered guards, around 120 people, they gave up and gave us baron. Damn, even his family forced them to do that. They were scared so much that they fucking started running when our wizard scratched his beard.
I also would be scared if group of 5 people would slaughter 180 people without much effort, while those people are armed and trained soldiers.
>>45937772
To be honest, I wouldn't want to fuck around with any medium-level caster if I was a person in power. The guy that can kill an entire population of the city with one cleverly-placed cloudkill spell should either be revered as a demigod or assassinated in his sleep.
>>45937795
In my setting, I have bunch of archmages called Circle, that helped to kill another group of wizards from other plane that became Gods (however, they couldn't exit from their pocket plane due to pact they formed in past with other pantheons of Dwarven gods).
Currently, nine of them that are still alive pretty much rule half of world and maintain peace, not without inner games and conflicts, of course. But nobody is retarded enough to try fuck with any of them.
They are cool as far as you don't fuck into Game (political intrigue that make nobles and other important people entertained and let other people become someone. They are pretty much most important players. I have quest/CYOA with main character as one of their agents)
Yeah, fucking with some that can literally unmake you isn't wise.
>>45935853
This
He was probably a dickbag king too so no, that party is still a bunch of noble as shit do gooders, and the half brother should be thanking them and giving them their own cities.
>>45937515
So you mean to say that if you were near the whitehouse and someone yells that the prez has just been assassinated by a group of mercenaries, that you, a regular fucking person, would try and stop highly trained killers who are slaughtering secret service left and right? Cause that's what you're suggesting by saying villagers would want anything to do with that.
>>45935296
>"Psychopathic party stories"
More of a That DM story.
I'd have have flipped out, myself. Lesson learned: don't be amazed if parties blow up when abused.
OP here, I think I explained a certain point badly as I greentexted this little story so let me give you more details.
Lord Dickbag wasn't insulting them as he was releasing them, he simply had insulted them previously as the prince and later the king. While releasing them he was actually unusually polite and understanding, admitting he didn't like them or treat them very well and that they were likely to go work for his half brother soon regardless of what happened. He wanted them gone so this worked in his favor and offered them a substancial amount of cash as a parting payment. Even the release of them from his service was an offer, though plainly one they couldn't really refuse. Basically "I don't like you, you don't like me, you're probably gonna help my brother soon so just take this gold and leave. No point with this charade anymore, right?"
Their response was to immediately attack and slaughter everyone in the room, barring a few guards who surrendered, and then cremate and teleport his ashes into a lake before running away before the alarm could really be raised.
Not saying Dickbag didn't deserve a good stabbing, dude was basically the new BBEG, just didn't expect such an immediate and brutal response. I'm more than happy to roll with the fallout of this, though, not gonna unduly punish then for "messing up my campaign!" or anything.
>>45937325
A mid level party to me is 9thth to 12th level, which is in legendary hero range. Most soldiers are a fraction of a CR and most random vagabonds are between 1st and 5th.
Fuck, 1st ed iend Folio truly was the holy grail of badass retro sword and sorcery artwork. Got my dad's 1st ed collection and the art always tickles me right where it should.
>>45940281
Me? No. But that is literally the NRA argument for citizens owning assault weaponry, so...
>>45942358
Yea, but since the weapons in this world are swords and pointy things, 90% of townsfolk would be terrified normies who never touched a sword with the exception of maybe a few retired soldiers.
>>45935296
Just have a dragon rez the king or something if it ruins the plot.
You're the DM, the rules don't apply to you. You can even set up your civil war that way.
>>45942947
Actually, the difference would be much less extreme. The difference between tooled up adventurers with medieval weapons compared to citizenry would be much narrower than today's black loquacious mercenaries versus the public.
English longbow was a peasant weapon made at home from the trees found in graveyards. It killed the armoured chivalric class and brought the aristocracy to heel.
>>45942358
>assault weaponry
You should avoid this term, only ignorant people and scaremongerers use it. And that is not what the NRA says at all, it just sounds like you are trying to be petty.
>>45942947
If its a shit setting maybe, in the real middle ages every adult male who was not a serf was REQUIRED to own a weapon and be available for military service if necessary. And in towns there are no serfs by definition unless one has permission to be there on an errand.
Not that you can practically mobilise the town on such short notice of course but this ridiculous idea that normal medieval people were unarmed needs to die.
>>45943081
>It killed the armoured chivalric class and brought the aristocracy to heel.
That is not how anything worked in real life at all.
For a start longbows cannot actually reliably penetrate plate and injure at anything other than point blank range and even then not on the thick parts. Its only when you have a few thousand guys firing at a few thousand guys that statistics starts getting involved with eye slits, armpits and lucky hits on weaker spots.
And fully armoured cavalry survived Agincourt by over 150 years. Guns, changes in military training and tactics and social changes did far more to 'bring the aristocracy to heel' than longbows ever did.
>>45943081
Loquacious? My autocorrect changes "ops" to loquacious? Good grief, my tablet is more pretentious than I am.
Yeah, you kind of fucked up OP. I really don't see how you didn't see it coming. He denies them their rewards, titles, and honor, openly insults them, and then blatantly says "you don't work for me. Maybe go join my brothers attempt to kill me?"
>>45943156
there was cavalry in the world war one. but the status of the 'invincible knight' was demystified by the use of longbow.
>>45943097
I use assault weaponry as it communicates the point being made to the widest audience, not the specialist knowledge of the trigger fetishists. I don't really know a great deal about the minutae of US politics because it is, quite frankly, fucking ludicrous.
>>45943063
>literally cheating because 'I'm the DM'
>destroying the feeling that player's actions matter
They incinerated him and teleported his ashes into a lake. There aren't any spells that could bring him back from that, and not a single god would give a shit so no divine intervention.
>I perform this action to make this thing impossible as I know it would make it impossible in the setting's lore
>thing happens anyway lol I'm the GM
>>45943081
>The difference between tooled up adventurers with medieval weapons compared to citizenry would be much narrower
Adventurers aren't normal humans with historically accurate power levels. They're magical superbeings that can all tank meteor strikes to the face and keep trucking.
A citizen with a gun is much closer to a trained mercenary than a stupid peasant is to a demigod.
>>45943364
But its a ridiculous point. Calling me a 'trigger fetishist' because I don't hysterically pretend black paint and a different handle makes a gun more dangerous is anti-intellectual nonsense.
What is the point of making an irrelevant post on a subject you outright admit you do not know about? Using the term 'assault weapons' communicates nothing other than the fact you are either ignorant or think things should be banned for looking scary.
>but the status of the 'invincible knight' was demystified by the use of longbow.
No, it wasn't. If that status even existed longbows did not 'demystify' it by themselves. Crossbows killed plenty of knights too, they were far more common and used before the longbow was popular yet nobody wanks over them.
>>45943063
What an awful, awful way to DM. >>45943081
>>45943694
<<</pol/
<<</k/
(Didn't read any of that btw)
>>45944123
So you were just trolling, well I hope you feel special for posting stupid shit on the internet.
>>45937325
>A household guard for a king would have more than enough knights to beat a team of elite adventurers through attrition and weight of numbers. It's not suicidal to attack a powerful individual when you have such great weight of numbers - and every one of those household guards is hoping to make a name for himself. In a game-world, the gap between royal guard and adventurer should be far far narrower than the gap between adventurer and king. Hence "realism".
That's assuming they communicate perfectly, actually still care about their jobs after they failed, and don't agree with the adventurers.
>>45937325
>You're stuck in a false dichotmoy of "railroading" Vs "No responsibility". This is wrong. The game world should be clearly constructed so dumb shit like OP described cannot happen, unless the party has advanced way beyond "mid-level". If they are "mid-level", then there are literally thousands of other, equally strong teams wafting around the game world. It'd be like today, a Black Water mercenary team *could* perform a hit on the British monarchy. But they don't because there is no means of escape. If that is not created as a truth in the game world too, then dumb shit will happen.
Mid level DnD is still crazy high power, more than enough to teleport out if the king wasn't specifically planning to trap them with antiteleport wards. (And passive antiteleport wards would be to keep people OUT while still letting the king escape, so they would likely be one-way)
>>45935344
There is a part of the ye olde knighting ceremony where they hit you in the face and say something on the lines of
"Let that be the last time a man strike you with out retribution"
They are knights. They have pride. If little shit stain has spent some considerable time fucking them over in front of their peers for no other reason than because it amused him to do so then he was a fucking idiot.
He was even more of a fucking idiot to release them from oaths of service that was all that was keeping them from acting on the oath of retribution.
If the party hadn't fucked him up they would have been oath breakers.
Can someone please explain to me why a player would become king then treat the other people playing with him like shit?
That's so stupid. He deserved to have his character killed. There shouldn't be any punishment for the party killing a party member who acted like a cunt.
>>45945663
>player
You do realize that the prince was an NPC, right?
>>45945711
oh. In which case all the more reason to fucking kill that son of a bitch and replace him with one of the party members.
No problem with that. The GM needs to keep it fun though.
>>45937295
>People don't actually work like that
>your story is shit
>why would ____ act in such a blatantly -- needlessly -- stupid manner?
You're a retard.
>>45944769
Perhaps teue about the levels. I get that many players want to feel 'uber' as quickly as possible. But to me while you are numerically mid-level, there ought to still be challenges existant in the world, or it grows tiresome. If there are more formidable people living, they should/would be in the court of the kings.
or, if mid-level is meant to be truly formidable, then even the dumbest king would know that these were people who would messnhis shit in an instant, and would act differently.
I'm still saying this problem was 100% GM error, that's all. The game world did nothing to dissuade the players from just playing their statlines and damn the consequences. Which isn't how it should play out.
>>45937295
>Why the fuck would the new King act in such a blatantly -- needlessly -- stupid manner?
you have met people, right?
The players shouldn't have been able to touch the king in the first place.
Any universe in which adventurers have higher powerlevels than the common man, the ruling powers will have a similar powerlevel as the adventurers. Because if they didn't the adventurers would just slaughter the ruling powers and place themselves as ruling, making the result of higher powerlevel ruling parties happen anyways.
So the problem is that your setting was retarded and someone the king was weaksauce and didn't even have guards strong enough to protect him from some random bandit, brigands, and sellswords. The kingdom shouldn't have even existed for the players to have killed the king in the first place.
You're just a bad DM.
>>45945876
You might as well call all fantasy settings retarded, then, because it's the same in Forgotten Realm to Golarion. Adventurers are absurdly powerful individuals capable of destroying kingdoms on a whim with basically nobody able to stop them because magic is rare (unless you're an adventurer, then it's common as piss).
>>45945950
No, because the gods exist and are active forces in DnD and PF's settings. They would kill any adventurers who create too much strife and turmoil like that.
>>45946021
So basically adventurers aren't extraordinarily powerful because... the GM says so? Thanks for reminding me never to play premade fantasy settings.
>>45935296
That's actually very genre-savvy and efficient of them. There shouldn't be a civil war, given that a successor seems at hand, sparing the kingdom much suffering. However, they WOULD be murderers any way you cut it, even under the new king.
>>45935344
>What I had planned, anyway.
How did you get halfway through your novel without realizing that the king's guards were all low-level nobodies?
>>45946212
>novel
Now that's just snide. If he was railroading them, then he wouldn't have let them kill the king in the first place. Fuck off.
>>45946212
>>45946234
Is it really railroading when you apply "If the players can think of it, others people have thought of it as well and adjusted their defenses accordingly" to the game world?
>>45946309
It would depend on the setting. If magic is supposed to be a rare thing (like in Forgotten Realms and PF's setting) then even kings might not have personal wizards or magic defenses. Just mid-level adventurers are already superhuman in all respects, and it's a bit insulting to your players if all their hard-earned experience and power and heroism isn't at all unusual and there's high level casters and martials all over the place ready for them to try something so they can waltz in and kick their asses.
In a setting where magic is not rare and class levels are common, then what good are adventurers even for? You could round up the village and go clear out the necromancer's dungeon. Hell, the village would probably have ten necromancers living in it to keep the skeletons working in the crops.
>>45946423
If even if magic is rare, and player tier NPCs are rare that just means all the more that the people in positions of power are going to be player tier because there is even less people to oppose or resist their rule. All it would take is 1 wizard who wants to be a ruler to create a dynasty of wizard kings passing down their magical knowledge to their heirs. An heir doesn't have the magical aptitude? More heirs.
It's not a "depends on the setting", it's "depends on how competent the world building is"
It's weird how /tg/ can be autistic about world design but completely ignore sociopolitical design. You guys should really focus less on "here's how my elves are different" and more on "here's how the various political powers of elf interact" because the latter actually gives you fuel for the campaign.
>>45943081
>English longbow was a peasant weapon made at home from the trees found in graveyards. It killed the armoured chivalric class and brought the aristocracy to heel.
Not true in the slightest. Even if made by a master craftsman with the best materials a longbow had more than 50% chance of breaking when being stringed for the first time.
>>45943097
>serfs not making up 90% of the population
>every city is a Free City
These shitty memes need to die. They may have been true in some places for some time but were not a staple of medieval times at all.
>>45946083
This. And also why would gods choose weaklings to be 'their guy', and not the uber adventurers?
>>45946703
But entire hills were covered in longbow firing peasantry. Armoured nobility numbered in their tens.
>>45946703
90% of the population being serfs is hardly common so I am not sure what your point is. Hell, 10% or so of the population in most countries was clergy, knights and nobility and the population of towns could easily make up another 10% or more. So your maths is a bit off there.
Nobody mentioned 'free cities'. Never mind that serfdom is defined as occupying a plot of land owned by a lord in exchange for service and is pretty much universally a rural thing. So where you think these towns full of serfs were I do not know.
>>45945876
Kings aren't warriors, so they wouldn't be super powered. This king in particular was just some entitled bitch prince.
Most kings probably have a group of loyal adventurer-tier heroes serving as knights who protect him, but in this case, that was literally the party.
The sworn knights, who would've been the people to protect the king if some adventurers ever came to start shit, revolted and butchered the king.
I feel all the posts saying the party should've gotten rekt by a super elite royal group are not realizing that the party WAS the super elite royal group.
>>45946021
The gods pretty much don't give a shit. Most adventures wouldn't even be possible if they just came down to personally fix all the big issues.
>>45935296
Honestly, if he failed to realize the danger AND worth of a party of loyal adventurers, he probably deserved something like that.
With a broken military holding the throne, maybe the half-brother could use a neighboring power, maybe a lesser petty kingdom, to invade his own country and restore his crown in return for benefits and alliances?
Still plenty of opportunities for fun and intrigue (which the party will set on fire).
>>45935296
sounds fine to me OP.
>>45947336
>Kings aren't warriors
The medieval idea of Kingship rested heavily on martial prowess or at least not losing wars. The ideal king was a competent warrior and many were. That is why weak/ineffectual kings had so many rebellions.
>>45935344
>princeling insults and disowns vassals who made sure he would have a kingdom to inherit
>breaks the fundamental contract that makes feudalism work
>all while a competing successor is vying for his throne
>does all of this in the presence of said vassals (who we can presume are nasty, violent brutes who got to this point by climbing over the hacked corpses of hundreds of enemies).
Not surprised at all. Doubly so because post TSR D&D is a heroic fantasy where a very skilled person can easily outfight dozens of "normal" humans without the slightest risk.
If he didn't want to get ganked, he should have sent a letter.
>>45947336
>Kings aren't warriors, so they wouldn't be super powered.
Kings are trained from birth to rule, they also have combat training. While they won't be able to compete with the dedicated warrior class, they are still better than the untrained majority of the population. That already places them somewhat above level 0 tier.
>Most kings probably have a group of loyal adventurer-tier heroes serving as knights who protect him
That's dumb as fuck. No one would rely on some unreliable wandering vagabonds as their defense against forces who would ursurp them. If the king didn't have defenses that could protect them from random murderhobos killing them, the kingdom would have long since fallen.
>I feel all the posts saying the party should've gotten rekt by a super elite royal group are not realizing that the party WAS the super elite royal group.
The problem is that the party shouldn't have been the super elite royal guard group in the first place.
You also have to consider the formation of the kingdom itself.
Okay,
So the kingdom formed.
Why? How?
It -HAD- to have had enough power to overcome adversaries, and usurp the previous powers of the land. So from it's conception it's already contending with player tier threats. There is no logical reason why these defenses would have been neglected or decayed and otherwise not be maintained.
If the players can dick around and become superhuman in a few months of slaughtering monsters, there is no narrative consistent reason others haven't done the same. These others are threats to the kingdoms security, so the kingdom would have defenses against them.
>>45941973
>"yeah we both know you're probably going to try and kill me in the future, so-"
>surprised when they just kill him then and there
He was literally asking for it.
>>45947513
>unreliable wandering vagabonds
>random murderhobos
>the former king's loyal retainers who have been knighted
Are you illiterate?
>The problem is that the party shouldn't have been the super elite royal guard group in the first place.
Oh no you're just a shit DM. Do you keep your party living on the fringes of the wilderness, sucking the marrow the monster bones, constantly rejected by civilization?
>>45947513
This whole quandary is what makes the superhero editions a bit of a drag for me.
I never experienced the caster edition memes back when I played 3.x but it was painfully obvious that characters beyond level 10 either had to have supervillain level opponents come wreck shit like in a super man comic, or the whole world has to "level up" with them.
>>45947655
>Oh no you're just a shit DM.
Pot meet kettle.
Yes, because a king would totally allow some vagabond who could effortlessly murder him and get away with it anywhere near him near himself.
Because everyone but the players have a case of terminal incompetence and wouldn't be prepared for existences like player characters.
Because it's totally impossible to knight someone as a show of good faith and trying to get them on your side without actually trusting them with you and your kingdoms life.
Because the players can teleport, but somehow the royalty, with all that wealth and resources at their disposal, has NO protections against any potential teleporting murderhobos, even though it's literally [insert age of kingdom here] years of history on the line at any given moment.
Yeah, I'm a terrible DM for even thinking about these things.
>>45947917
In my setting, at least, most wards keep things out, if the party was already inside they could teleport off easily, no one wants to be trapped with the enemy.
>>45947917
the new king didn't knight them
His recently deceased father did after they had worked for him
>>45947917
>Yeah, I'm a terrible DM for even thinking about these things.
You are. This hairbrained reasoning results in GMs who kill players with ridiculous bullshit then stares at them with a shit-eating grin on their face while thinking to themselves that they're super clever.
>some vagabond
heroic knight
>wouldn't be prepared for existences like player characters.
I'm sure they've got a big red alarm they sound every time a traveler with a sword passes through town. He could be one of those rare 'adventurer' types who can kill 1,000 men without breaking a sweat and cleave through stone walls with one swing of his Nippon steel.
>knight someone as a show of good faith and trying to get them on your side without actually trusting them
The king they killed didn't like them and was dismissing them as knights at the time.
>the players can teleport, but somehow the royalty, with all that wealth and resources at their disposal, has NO protections against any potential teleporting murderhobos
This wasn't some highly thought out assassination months in planning, the king just summoned some guys to his chamber and told them to leave. They were standing right it front of him, they had been loyal to his father and the kingdom up to that point, and he had no way of knowing they would chimp out on the spot and kill him. He was probably dead in seconds with no time to react. It's like inviting your sworn enemies into your room to stand right in front of you and then letting your guard down, except he didn't realize they were his sworn enemies, because as you seem so eager to ignore,
The players were NOT random meatheaded thug murderers travelling from place to place seeing how many kings they could kill for the D&D high score
They were the kingdom's knights, literally heroes.
>>45948699
>who kill players with ridiculous bullshit
Wow, people being rational and wanting to preserve their life and acting in such a manner is ridiculous bullshit.
You sound like a shitty player who only plays for power fantasies to me.
>I'm sure they've got a big red alarm they sound every time a traveler with a sword passes through town
More like things that are precious are defended. And since player tier existences obvious well, -exist-, the defenses involved compensate for those kinds of people.
>The king they killed didn't like them and was dismissing them as knights at the time.
This has no relevance at all other than it being more evidence of the DM incompetence translating to NPC incompetence.
>They were standing right it front of him, they had been loyal to his father and the kingdom up to that point, and he had no way of knowing they would chimp out on the spot and kill him.
Oh wow, so a bunch of muderhobos were loyal to the previous king for years ( more likely months, but I don't want to assume ) in game time? How the hell did the kingdom even survive against plots that lasted after generations of established trust if it can't survive some vagabonds turning traitor?
>They were the kingdom's knights, literally heroes.
And? They can be a hero all they want, but that doesn't mean I'm going to trust these muderhoboes with your life, especially when you're rudely firing them. And if I wouldn't trust them, what makes you think someone who is actually trained from birth and has to worry about exactly such things happening would trust them?
Again, you're making the mistake of thinking that because you're a fallible human DM means the players you're representing must also be just as incompetent. And because of your human inability to think of everything, it means you MUST bullshit whenever something you haven't considered comes up and you can reason why it shouldn't work the way the players plan.
