General Discussion

[Armando]

So Armando votes for greed. Does anyone else care to vote?

Look, what I'm saying is that you can't do crazy shit in a role-playing game to prove a point out-of-game. Yeah, they were being greedy but you almost killed off Lyulf over a couple of gold. We can't turn a blind eye to that in-game, that'd be metagaming. Hell, Cid sat an entire session out just to stay in character that one time he was following us from a distance.

[Mezlo]

but you almost killed off Lyulf

I did not almost kill him. Dead is -7 or -10 or something, he was at 2, and I hit him with a force missle that hits for maximum of 5. The worse that could've happened was him being at -3, and on top of that, if dead was -3 (even though it's not) i doubt Yyg as DM would've killed him off. So don't make excuses for the way individuals were behaving. Again, vote for greed lot, or for equal lot, don't make silly excuses that aren't accurate, he wasn't going to die and there's no way he could have with a single force missle, that i knew when making my decision. I would not have killed someone to make a point.

- - - Updated - - -

Edit: He had even more life than I was giving him credit for. A character dies when they have negative hit points equal to their constitution score, so there's no way I could've killed him, which is what I knew from the start.

- - - Updated - - -

And as far as "metagaming" is concerned, my force missle to keep someone away from the person I had intended to loot, based upon the way the party was currently handling looting dead enemies, is nothing different than Cid slapping away the hands of Jarre from looting his prisoner. Instead of using my hands to slap away Lyulf since he was too far away, I used a small force missle, something that would not kill him. So if you can't "metagame" against me for using a force missle on someone that was goign to take my loot, you also can't "metagame" against Cid for slapping away Jarre for trying to take his loot. The only slight difference is my actions deducted a few HP from Lyulf, but Cid's and my intentions were the same. Again, if we chose Greed over the good of he party, then I'll just have to memorize some extra spells for defending of party members when the time comes. To me that's silly, but if that's the direction the party takes, then I'm cool with that.

[Armando]

Dead is -7 or -10 or something, he was at 2, and I hit him with a force missle that hits for maximum of 5. The worse that could've happened was him being at -3, and on top of that, if dead was -3 (even though it's not) i doubt Yyg as DM would've killed him off. So don't make excuses for the way individuals were behaving.

You left Lyulf unconscious and bleeding to death. Do that to someone in real life while other people watch, see how they react. What you did is way more severe than the slap on the wrist Jarre's character received.

[Mezlo]

You're being overly dramatic. Let's vote and be done with it.

[Firewind]

Well I was AFK when the entire thing happened so I can only go with what my character saw which is:

1. The ditzy monk being herself and rushing ahead of everyone.
2. The trigger happy wizard who she doesn't fully trust (though to be fair the only person my character does seem to trust trust is Armando's character Theron, though she does like the rest of the party), firing a spell at the nearly dead ditz of a monk, seemingly killing her.
3. An incredibly angry rant from the wizard.

Also a couple of point about my character:

1. Yes my character is good aligned (chaotic good) but is into adventure partially for pretty selfish reasons (she wants treasure and remember she joined the party by mistake after planning to pickpocket them but being mistaken for part of the group by the guard captain).
2. She is also dishonest and prone to greed and has been fully established as the kind to swipe a bit of gold off the top if nobody is looking (the pile of gold in the Myconolid cave and the shiny key the gnome in the Obelisk room dropped) or can get away with it (why she kept the +1 dagger but handed over the gold that the gnomes dropped).
3. Yes my character is a hypocrite and will be the first to complain if someone else tries to pull off the above shit.
4. The reason why she didn't attempt to loot the gnome that Vince (Cid's character) had captured if because she knew that it would just piss him off and didn't expect to be spotted by Andy (Lyulf's character) while ninja looting the other gnome.
5. Yes my character is usually the first one to yell at Andy (Lyulf's character) for running off ahead especially after she nearly got her (Lili) killed by setting off that trap.
6. My character would actually be willing to share if someone at some point in the campaign has said "Hey why don't we split the loot?" as the only time we have agreed on this is out of character.

Basically the actions I took when you left:

1. Lili attempted to "revive" Andy with an untrained Heal check but failed though Theron did heal her so she's at least back on her feet
2. Lili is basically about to smack Mezlo (non-lethal damage) and ask him why he thinks that attacking other people is fine

Also please remember that you ran past both Lili AND Jarre without either of us being given any sort of chance to stop you from running over to Sinruth (because I was AFK and everyone kept talking over me when I got back when I was trying to ask Yyg how your PC had run to Sinruth). Also note that from my character's PoV you are also running over to the party member who your character just tried to murder which IS going to set off alarm bells. Remember that there are 3 Good Aligned members in the party who are definitely going to object to party members trying to kill each other over loot when a simple "Hey, I thought we were going to split everything we find!" in character would have been fine.

Anyway to answer Mezlo's question:

My vote is to resolve everything in character.

[Armando]

The DnD campaign you guys are playing sounds pretty intense.

The Rogues are greedy, Mezlo is trigger-happy. Jarre has some sort of Zelda/Skyrim OCD where he loots and hoards even the most seemingly useless items in case they come in handy in obscure situations. It makes for some good drama and I'm sure Yyg is enjoying every second of it.

[Mezlo]

The Rogues are greedy, Mezlo is trigger-happy. Jarre has some sort of Zelda/Skyrim OCD where he loots and hoards even the most seemingly useless items in case they come in handy in obscure situations. It makes for some good drama and I'm sure Yyg is enjoying every second of it.

And armando wants to buy all of our enemies a drink and try to talk them out of fighting us.

- - - Updated - - -

Basically the actions I took when you left:

1. Lili attempted to "revive" Andy with an untrained Heal check but failed though Theron did heal her so she's at least back on her feet
2. Lili is basically about to smack Mezlo (non-lethal damage) and ask him why he thinks that attacking other people is fine

.

We can resolve things "in character" next session if you wish, but it would commence after Armando failed to grapple me and before you attempted to revive Lyulf.

[Firewind]

Yeah I didn't want to have #2 happen without you being around to RP your character which is why I said it's what she is planning to do.

[cidbahamut]

How can I put this succinctly?

Your wizard tried to kill a party member and then proceeded to angrily lecture the rest of the party about teamwork.

He just went from "that quirky spellcaster with a crossbow" to "raving madman and a liability".

[Mezlo]

How can I put this succinctly?

Your wizard tried to kill a party member and then proceeded to angrily lecture the rest of the party about teamwork.

He just went from "that quirky spellcaster with a crossbow" to "raving madman and a liability".

Not going to repeat 1.5 pages even if your reading comprehension / logic is that bad. Summation is theres no way that couldve killed Lyulf.

[cidbahamut]

Not going to repeat 1.5 pages even if your reading comprehension / logic is that bad. Summation is theres no way that couldve killed Lyulf.

The math behind it doesn't matter Mezlo. You tried to kill a party member. Period.

[Firewind]

Not going to repeat 1.5 pages even if your reading comprehension / logic is that bad. Summation is theres no way that couldve killed Lyulf.

And there is no way our characters could have known that without metagaming. Especially since everyone kept talking over me or just flat out ignored me when I was trying to take any kind of action.

[Mezlo]

The math behind it doesn't matter Mezlo. You tried to kill a party member. Period.

LOL. Ok.

- - - Updated - - -

Summation is theres no way that couldve killed Lyulf.

Cid and Fire, I get your point. Your point is in game it looks like i tried to kill Lyulf and you won't know otherwise until our characters talk about it in game. Summation though, metagaming or not, there's no way I could've killed Lyulf and that was not my intent. My intent was to stop rushing to loot the dead, and I accomplished that.

[cidbahamut]

Seriously Mezlo, think about how it comes across to the rest of the party in-game. This is going to cause way more trouble than some squabbling over loot distribution.

It's akin to shooting someone in the gut and then telling us "Why are you all getting so upset? I clearly missed the vital organs so it's fine".

We could have resolved this issue after the session ended, but now we have to figure out how we're going to resolve the huge problem you've created in-game. I don't know how we're going to accomplish that without some serious hand-waving.

[Mezlo]

\We could have resolved this issue after the session ended, but now we have to figure out how we're going to resolve the huge problem you've created in-game. I don't know how we're going to accomplish that without some serious hand-waving.

What's hand-waving? And I think we can figure it out in game. If not, kill my character off in game and I can leave, lol...