Re: Consequences

[Wright Frazier <khelek@ns1.cioe.com>]

*nod* I agree.  Consequences are the name of the game at the moment.  There are
none whatso ever really.  Granted the messengers guild has decided it wanted
revenge on me, so I think that makes me one of the few suffering the
consequences of my actions. =)  And it is funny, but the thing I worry about is,
will it get out of hand?  My original action was I wanted to try something, so
I picked some random kid walking down the street and immobilized him, I did
the same thing a month or 3 later.  Granted I was not aware we had a messengers
guild in Rougtero, or that I was picking on 2 of their members.  *shrug* I can
deal with the implausability cause it makes it fun to roleplay.  But my worry
as I said, will it get out of hand.  To date Pat has been the one having
fun torturing me, but will some other GM take this up and instead of having
some guy knock me over and swipe some money, will they send a full blown
assassin after me?  In character I gave both of the boys money after I did it,
but I can certainly see them paying some thug to bludgeon me and then swipe some
of my money.  But it will be utterly silly for some assassin to come after me
for it.  Minor actions should recieve minor consequense that should be, if at all
possible, entertaining for all involved, including the party.  I think the party
all had a great laugh when I got knocked down a peg or 4 because my character
is an utter ass with the largest ego since Alexander the Great.  I enjoyed it
they enjoyed it, and the Gm had fun.  Minor consequenses for minor actions.

In the past I have seen both major and minor things done with the opposite reprocussions.
I've seen a quiet remark result in an immedate 6d6vs hea or die, and it still
resulted in the loosing of _ALL_ magical items(this one was done to me).  And I've seen
someone walk up and openly butcher a man in public result in a torite showing up
blowing a whistle and getting cutdown himself, and that being the end of it.
In my opinion if you kill a torite in the rougero setting where the torites run
the show, then there should very definately be some serious consequenses for it, a man
hunt may be?

Anyways, the jist is that things should be kept into proportion.  And if you think
something is 'iffy' ask about it, even if it happened to you.  The last thing
I think folks want to see is people soaking a 10d6vs pwr check with no
reasoning behind it short of 10 was the number the GM came up with off the top
of their head(note the above DID happen).  Also, in our quest for consequenses,
we should avoid the major thing that is the hallmark of the current consequenses,
and that is cruelty.  Avoid it, unless the person truely has called down a shitstorm
on themselves.  You wack a merchant, cover your tracks, or a priest of anubis will
most likely ID you, and there'll be a reward for you, if not may be a bounty hunter
or two after you.  You kill a king, expect to die suddenly, without warning, and without
a whole hell of a lot of chance to get out of it.

Wright


> All of this banter seems to fall under the one banner that we have already
> discussed.  When GMs are more in control of the inner workings of the
> setting, then we can have more fitting and just consequences than party
> conflict and jihads.  The answer to disruptive characters, whether they be
> Hirudo or hypersensitive "good guys" that kill in the name of religion, a
> solid set of GMs can deal out realistic consequences.  The only thing that
> I would be apprehensive about is that GMs in their own balliwick would
> hand out politically charged judgement (witch hunt).  Yet again, as Steve
> professes, good GMs can make anything possible.  
> 
>