@Tiorn: The players did propose the zombies and in hindsight it would have been a great idea but at this stage I was still on the defensive and I said ‘no’ to the idea.

The great thing about where we left off (as you’ll see in part 2) is that it’s not too late to recoup on the whole thing and set a satisfying finale in the next session.

@Yan: As we discussed, there are some cool ways this can end. And yes, I’m being too hard on myself. That’s one of my trademarks

Still I look forward to seeing this adventure through.

The drow is the only thing so far that can work we’ve investigate all kind of solution which ended up as dead ends.

Reading the game report and the comment here hints at some stuff that might work but this was not there during the game.

In any case it might have troubled Phil but we had a good session none the less and laughed like crazy with the antics been said around the table.

I understand the moral dilemma with the Drow. They may seem to be scum, no matter how sadistic and evil they really are (and in this case, they don’t appear to be that at all, but who knows?? They COULD be anyhow). They could very well become allies of the city and party also. Who knows? I mean, they are just trying to make a living, basically, right? That doesn’t make them bad… just they do some ‘bad’ things. My point is that they may be redeemable. There are choices that can be made with the Drow that could be a GOOD thing.

However, there are a bunch of animated zombies running around that can not be redeemed. There is only one way out with them: destroy them. Why not lure 5 of them out to a ‘controlled’ location and use the artifacts on them? And then lure them to the big bads waiting to ‘collect’ the tribute? Sure, they won’t be ‘willing’ sacrifices like this. But, they are not going to be UNwilling either. Whatever fight they put up will more than likely seem like a natural reluctance and reflex. I think it would work, unless the artifacts can’t hide the undead taint. haha

The party still has to deal with the zombies anyhow. Plus, there is still a hungry dragon waiting for its next snack.

And while that moral discussion might have been something you’d have prefered happen ‘in character’, it’s the type of discussion that I love having with my friends, and which works a lot better around the game table than that same discussion works in the average Internet bulletin board. Don’t think I’ve ever been called a Nazi at the game table.
.-= pjstoneson´s last blog ..DM Briefing Room: DDI Compendium In Action =-.

And I agree that I should have phrased the whole thing as ‘valiant Sacrifice’ or ‘willful sacrifice’ to hint at some sort of heroic deed as a solution.

About the only thing I can think of that you really did “wrong” is to use the term ‘sacrifice’. That opens up a whole lot of doors, most of which you obviously didn’t intend to open. A better phrase would have been ‘willing sacrifice’. It’s more in tune with heroes fighting to save a city, and opens up interesting situations where the heroes need to Diplomacy, Bluff and (perhaps) even Intimidate others into willingly sacrificing themselves to save the city.

In fact the whole sacrifice thing was supposed to be amiscomprehension of what ‘tribute/sacrifice’ meant. The old record were mis-translated or mis-repropduced. I wanted Yan, whose PC is heavily invested in the game, to sweat about the possibility of having to sacrifice his PC.

Given the small number of available solutions, discussing sacrifice was unavoidable. So I don’t fault anyone but me in this situation.

That being said, I’ve already envisioned how to end the adventure and to do it in such a way that I won’t have any moral qualms about the whole thing.

And Colmar, you are entirely right that my campaign’s Drow were meant to be hustlers and small time crooks instead of the the classic sadistic CE jerks…. except I never told the players that.

In fact I now realize that what was supposed to be a light summer game is turning out to be much more about world building and Campaign background than I initially anticipated.

Then again, I never got the hang of the whole ‘KISS Principle’ thing.

The “they’re drow” seems the clincher for me. It plays on stereotypes rather than past actions, suggesting that Math was judging these drow against the yardstick of classic “most evil race under(ground) under the sun” drow rather than simply as the swindlers Phil intended them to be.

Of course, I could be wrong. You and Phil were present

Your discussion abour alternatives is exactly the pragmatism that I referred to in my first post. We need to sacrifice someone. Better these guys than some innocent citizen.

You see, so far no other alternative had been found and a sacrifice seamed to be mandatory in order to save the city. With this in mind, I would rather sacrifice a criminal than myself or innocent bystanders. If other means to solve this are a possibility it is not obvious.

That seems like exactly the sort of pragmatism that an Unaligned PC should have.

However, it seems clear to me that Franky was thinking of ‘Drow’, not ‘Primal/Within Drow’, probably as a result of long exposure to classic drow and little exposure to the campaign-specific drow that Phil is using. The racial overtones are completely different.

I put it down (at least in part) to misunderstanding.

Especially if, like me, you enjoy your settings with a lot of religious stuff. Religion plays a bit part in my setting for example. I don’t know yet if I’m ready for any possible moral/religious debates that may occur in playing my setting, though thankfully none have yet to occur. I still really like the idea of clerics wielding maces so as not to literally shed blood, for example.

Yet, I also like evil games when the player-DM social contract dictates that you are all going to be evil bastards and that yes, the suggestion box is for sacrificial virgins. Weird.
.-= Wyatt´s last blog ..Skill Challenges of Eden I =-.