![]() ![]() So anyway, the Druid only knows of beholders from those tales and obviously those tales are all of evil beholders with massive egos who maim and kill in their pursuit of magical artefacts and more and more power or who otherwise tricked or controlled people for their own ends. I have been rather sneaky here and metagamed the time period to add something cool to her backstory. Slight meta stuff here - but in game this would have been during the time of AD&D 2nd Edition, through D&D 3.0 - and beholders featured prominently in the Spelljammer setting, so her in game parents would have dealt with lots of beholders during their adventures. Her parents were adventures too and when they finished adventuring and settled down to raise their family, they told their children stories of their time as adventures. The Druid knows of beholders from stories that her parents used to tell her. They were really appreciated and I especially liked the "let them fight the behold, loose and then have to do something to make up for it" idea. What would the Beholder do, if attacked? Have it do that. What is the legal status of the Beholder? Is it a citizen? Does it enjoy full protection under the Law? Then have the town and the authorities act accordingly. Don't try and restrict the players' actions, but inform them of what their characters would know, and allow them to make informed character choices based on what they know, and try to find out. Let the world unfold in a rational, consistent manner. ![]() ![]() I don't agree with advice to cater to Players' ( not Characters' ) expectations, or change up your world to cushion player stupidity. If they follow through with an attack under those circumstances, then it is no different than if they had tried to murder a random human librarian The DM should then ask "why are you attacking this creature?" If the answer is "because it's a Beholder!", then that's meta-gaming ( and not the good kind ). If none of that is true - the party is ignorant as to the nature of Beholders, or they recognize them and Beholders are good in your world ( doesn't sound like it, you're making this Beholder an exception it seems ), then the character has no motive for attacking the Beholder. If the characters had encountered a Beholder before and it had acted in an evil manner, or there was common knowledge/legend that beholders existed and that they're evil in your game world, or someone in the party had made an Arcana check that's indicated that Beholders were evil, that's possible moral justification for the character to make an attack. Monstrous Compendium Vol 3: Minecraft CreaturesĪ DM does not need to shift their game world to accommodate player stupidity, or change the outcome to make players feel good about stupid actions. They do have to create a consistent world, that behaves in a reasonable manner, and they need to be fair about what the characters would know independent of what the Players know or think they know - and they have to tell their players when those two don't agree. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |