labcats | Shackled City: Finished Reading First Adventure

Okay, some stuff is less silly than it seemed, or perhaps less implausible. Other stuff is more implausible, but not a problem. But, other stuff -- well, that would tick me off as a player, and it is unnecessary.

Okay, it seems that the noble wasn't utterly unconnected to the kidnappings. That is, he didn't do any kidnappings, but, up until the orphanage was hit, he knew all about it and took his cut -- the kidnappings are done by a group of slavers -- and that was fine.

But, now, the kid he's interested in was kidnapped. So, his default plan: Let the slavers sell the kid, so long as the kid isn't mistreated while with the slavers. The slavers are happy, because they've made their sale. Then, take the kid from the new owner.

As a default plan, it's not bad. This guy is really powerful.

Now, does this make roughing up the priest easier to understand? Yes. The noble actually has an interest in seeing the kidnappings continue, so long as that particular kid winds up back in the orphanage.

Does this make roughing up the priest in any way smart? No. The noble isn't likely to be linked to the kidnappings / slave ring. The priest is still from a lawful order that has publicly declared it will get the children back and punish the perpetrators. Roughing him up is not going to help, as any moron knows. And, again, there is no good reason to try to stop the investigation, rather than co-opting it.

But, there is a bad, but entirely believable reason that the noble would act this way: Greed. Okay, we have a moronic noble leading to a cliched scene that really isn't necessary, and that I would do differently, but I can believe that this guy would be a moron. Heck, the head of the local slavers isn't the brightest guy on the block, and he has received a letter from a fellow slaver who a) doesn't ever write his own name down and b) cautions the slaver the PCs are after that he's getting too greedy and being too successful, and that this will draw unwanted attention, and that he'd better slow down.

Okay. Smart thieves' guild taking one silly assignment, and then dropping it when it is clearly unviable. Dumb noble. Smart slaver behind the scenes. Less smart slaver where the PCs can whack at him. Cool.

Then, the twist:

Okay, our noble is actually a beholder using magic to appear as a human noble. This is fine. This justifies quite a lot of stupidity on the grounds that I can believe a beholder just wouldn't think of the obvious details. And, the beholder deals with the slavers always and only in beholder shape.

And, at the climactic point of the scenario, the beholder will show up so that all the PCs can see it, and will:

1. Say, "Okay, this kid should never have been taken. I'm taking him back to the orphanage. Kid, come with me, and you'll be safe. Everyone else, as you were."

2. Decide not to kill the PCs, as he has plans for them in later adventures.

The PCs are first level and have no chance against a beholder. At least, this is what the authors are assuming, and I will take it as true.

So, you are playing a first level PC charged with rescuing four children and returning them to an orphanage. A beholder shows up and says, "I'm taking this one back to the orphanage, no negotiations, and no one can stop me. Nyah nyah."

How do you, the player, feel about this?

Me, I'd be pissed off. The GM has just sprung this unstoppable monster on me to keep my PC from doing what he was hired to do, what the GM wanted him to agree to do. That sucks right there.

The monster says he is taking the kid where I want to take the kid. Why should I believe it? But, I don't have a choice, because it's too powerful. If I can't believe it, yuck!

If I can, that's as bad, if not worse. This monster is doing what my PC would do anyway. Why does it have to show up, slam its weight around, keep my PC and my fellow players' PCs from shining in their own, modest 1st level way? The kid is winding up back at the orphanage either way.

The kid might wind up dead? True even with a beholder present. But, the beholder will then take the body, have the kid raised from the dead -- this is D&D, and we can do that -- and returned to the orphanage.

Well, fine. That's guaranteed to make the PCs and the Church of St. Cuthbert not investigate the kid, now, isn't it? Even if I'm a beholder, I ought to see the idiocy in that. How can I let the PCs live now that they know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that there's something weird about this kid? It wouldn't surprise me if a group of PCs then tried to adopt the kid, or at least move him somewhere.

And all of this is utterly, utterly unnecessary. Let the PCs do their stuff. They have instructions that, if the kids are or wind up dead, they should bring the bodies back for a decent funeral. So, if the Special Kid is dead, well, the PCs learn that a noble donor who wishes to remain anonymous paid for one raise dead for the kid. All the kids wound up dead? Well, if I'm a smart villain, I pay to raise them all. Wonderful camoflauge! If I'm greedy? Well, I tell the orphanage, through whatever proxies and cut outs I use, that I can only afford to raise one dead kid. If I'm clever and greedy, I do something to make it appear my proxy is picking the kid at random, even though we aren't. This leaves a mystery, but one the PCs may not parse as such, and one that isn't utterly moronic.

Maybe it is necessary for some reason for the PCs to see that there is a beholder. Fine. They see it leaving the slaver. If they are dumb enough to attack it, it either uses non-lethal force on them, noting their foolish bravery and potential usefulness as pawns, or it goes all out, and I as GM have no compunction saying, "Right, roll up new PCs, and this time, guys, don't attack beholders who aren't in your way." And there are plenty of options in between.

So, the PCs spot the beholder, maybe overhear something, maybe not. The beholder leaves behind the NPC servant it has, and this servant can pretend to be some undercover agent for good and bale out the PCs if need be. Or the PCs win on their own. Either way, the PCs want what the beholder wants -- the kid to be returned to the orphanage.

Why perform an act that is stupid on the in-game level and offensive on the out-of-game level?