Request for rules clarification: attacking lawbreakers?

[Charraj]

In this thread about summoning planar beings in front of guards, Darkwind made the following suggestion:

If they tell you to pound sand or ignore you, then NEXT time banish / dismiss / slay the creature yourself as you gave fair warning.

Which I generally agree with. In fact, the PvP rules state:

If you commit an IC crime either within city limits or in front of witnesses, you are considered to have consented to PvP for the players who have witnessed or been a victim of the crime, and no RP out is required.

However, the rules also state:

Screenshots sent to the DM Team clearly showing a PC emoting hostility, or initiating PvP, in sight of NPC guards (Baldur's Gate, the Friendly Arm Inn, or any map with an NPC guard/watchman) may result in a hanging and/or perma-strike against the PC.

Godmodding
You only speak for your character's actions, not anyone else's. Do not "godmod" other peoples' characters or NPCs, or dictate their actions without the consent of the character's player or the DM(s) stewarding the NPCs. NPCs are not soulless entities to be disregarded when a DM is not present. Treat them as if they are able to react to your actions regardless if someone is behind the wheel or not.

It is currently not clear (to me, anyways) whether a character attacking a law-breaker in front of NPC guards is guilty of ignoring/godmodding NPCs. DM clarification would be appreciated; until then, I suspect most players will err on the side of caution and more or less ignore the situation.

Apologies if this has been answered elsewhere.

Incidentally, I honestly wouldn't mind if the angels, demons, and devils were re-skinned or removed entirely. But if having them out made you valid PvP targets, maybe things would balance themselves out.

Edit: I know that attacking only a summon is not technically PvP, so that is probably fine. But it would still be nice to deal with the more general issue of attacking a law-breaker in front of NPC guards.

[Korchas]

Incidentally, I honestly wouldn't mind if the angels, demons, and devils were re-skinned or removed entirely. But if having them out made you valid PvP targets, maybe things would balance themselves out.

While I mostly agree with your question, I'm...kinda curious what you mean by that, cause I don't really get what you mean with re-skinning or removing them. Like, as a mechanic? Or how?

[Charraj]

I meant mechanically, yeah. If you can PvP summoners, then it's probably okay to leave them in, since hopefully such summons will become rarer. But if you can't PvP summoners, then maybe we should remove angels, demons, and devils as summon options.

I guess it's just a matter of personal preference; I feel like angels and demons and devils and such are rarer and more ICly awe-inspiring than even dragons, so I find it a bit jarring when they're summoned for casual RP or grinding.

Angels especially; since they typically only help powerful mortals on missions of good (according to the Monster Manual anyways), it doesn't make much IC sense for them to be summoned for no special reason.

On the other hand, demons and devils might be perfectly happy to hang out on the material plane to corrupt their summoner or whatever, so I actually don't consider it as jarring to see them around. And having them out invites IC repercussions, so it balances itself out in the end.

So really, I guess I am saying, get rid of angels?

[Korchas]

Then I wonder what the spell Planar Ally/Greater Planar Ally or Planar Binding are supposed to be for, were we to remove the ability to summon anything that can actually fight for you. Or how the currently-skilled dedicated summoners/Thaumaturges are supposed to work out in any beneficial way.
And/or how summoning ancient elementals is less troublesome than Angels/demons/devils.

Edit: And all the things about the binding mechanics for named beings, too.

[chad878262]

Planar binding could be from any plane. Doesn't have to be from celestial or the hell's or abyss.

[Korchas]

Why are the other planar beings more acceptable, however? I am quite certain more people have heard of the various devil or demon-types than about, say, Slaadi from Limbo. (Which I have been asked about near every time I called one, too.)

It may just be my honestly differing opinion, but I do not see how removing celestials, devils and demons solves the issue given as the core issue, namely the random fellows running about with their planar buddies out and about. Or how these, which are:
A. more commonly heard from by the Forgotten realms' populace,
B. more likely to actually listen to a call if an actual situation arises and
C. in the case of devils, quite literally invading us in legions from Dragonspear at the moment,
are supposed to be rarer than entities that require a lore:the planes check to even be recognized.

I also believe the 'lesser' demons and devils to be rather not quite as rare as dragons, from what experience I can offer.
Celestials I can't speak about much, granted.

[Planehopper]

Reactionaries abound!

Let's keep this on topic, which was a question regarding the dilemma of attacking a lawbreaker or his/her summon in front of guards. I dont know how this became a "let's get rid of stuff" topic, but if you'd like to discuss that, lets do so in a new thread, please.

[DarnathS]

i think some people are bored and are just looking for reasons to pvp others

because some people do just forget to unsummon when going closer to town....just as people do forget to take out their weapon...or for that matter...re equip a weapon after leaving town...

[Darkwind]

i think some people are bored and are just looking for reasons to pvp others

because some people do just forget to unsummon when going closer to town....just as people do forget to take out their weapon...or for that matter...re equip a weapon after leaving town...

This is likely true, it is just as likely true that some people are very flippant and simply run around with them because they can or they like having their little demonic / angelic army in tow.

I want to amend my statement from the now locked thread. Given that it states that guards would be VERY upset about this behavior the original poster KOPOJIbPAKOB is actually more on target than I was. From a purely mechanical standpoint this should be verboten.

But!! As I said, my libertarian sensibilities also say that others rules are often bent / broken and this would be something that is easily player enforced as well. Charraj sort of alludes to this in the original topic here. It is a case of six of one, half a dozen of the other. As both solutions seem to be technically viable.

From a purist roleplay perspective I like IC enforcement just because it is more interesting. But from a purist rules perspective it shouldn't happen at all, that is also correct.

Lastly, not to derail, re: removal; I think the issue here is that again by the letter of the law it would be exceptionally uncommon to see intelligent beings such as this flitting about willy nilly as they are now. The solution in my mind is terribly simple. There are -manifold- creatures you can summon from beyond that are not of the caliber of angels/devils/etc. So take something existing 'hell hound' as an example, and either create 'Greater Hellhound' w/ stats similar to a devil or simply use another monster from the MManual that would be comparative in stats to the aforementioned higher beings. No need to make this needlessly complex IMHO.

[Montleberry]

As I interpret the rules as written;

Summoned creatures may be attacked on sight, but regular PvP rules must be followed for the aggressor and the owner of the summoned creatures.

so you can attack/dismiss summons freely within the rules, yet not the summoner without ensuring the appropriate option for a PVP out is extended. The summoner may not respond to this, defending his summon against another player or by initiating PVP after it is dismissed, without also following the normal PVP rules of offering a PVP out. Summoning it, or attacking
a summon do not give PVP consent.

If I am interpreting correctly, you can't PVP someone because of having a summon along unless they consent. You cannot PVP defend your summon unless the person attacking it consents.

As for my interpretation of the godmodding rules you should not be able to summon things in front of guards where it is against the law as you are godmodding by not letting them react. You also can't take the law into your own hands and attack the player doing this in PVP as this is also godmodding the guards. You can choose to let it go and move on, or alert a DM of a rules violation if you are so inclined.

Not commenting with an opinion of the rules, just summarizing how I understand/would try to follow them based on that understanding.

[Charraj]

i think some people are bored and are just looking for reasons to pvp others

Definitely. But I personally dislike PvP and probably wouldn't engage in it even if it were allowed in this situation. Nonetheless, I want to know what the rules are, since they seem to be drafted in a contradictory way.

From a purist roleplay perspective I like IC enforcement just because it is more interesting. But from a purist rules perspective it shouldn't happen at all, that is also correct.

Exactly. I think that is the core of the issue here. Which approach do we want to take? Unfortunately, both approaches are expressed in the rules right now.

A lot of people seem to think that a PvP response to IC crime is not allowed at all in front of NPC guards, given that the most common IC response is, "Tell the guards." And that's workable, to be sure. But if PvP is not allowed in this situation and no DM is on, people are kind of stuck with someone godmodding the NPC guards, and not being able to do much about it. Allowing a more interactive approach has its merits, especially if you consider that after-the-fact retcons can be slow and awkward.

But on the other hand, if the people trying to PvP the lawbreaker are level 5, but the lawbreaker is a level 30 with DC 41 Wail of the Banshee or something, PvP won't solve the issue of godmodding the NPCs. In that case, the only way to really handle the godmodding is by taking the purist rules perspective, saying it shouldn't happen at all, and retconning the whole thing.

I'm not advocating for either approach, I'm just asking for a rules clarification.

Also, hidden because it's off-topic:

Hidden: show

Why are the other planar beings more acceptable, however?

I think I addressed your question already, actually:

Angels especially; since they typically only help powerful mortals on missions of good (according to the Monster Manual anyways), it doesn't make much IC sense for them to be summoned for no special reason.

On the other hand, demons and devils might be perfectly happy to hang out on the material plane to corrupt their summoner or whatever, so I actually don't consider it as jarring to see them around. And having them out invites IC repercussions, so it balances itself out in the end.

So really, I guess I am saying, get rid of angels?

If you read the Monster Manual, a lot of the angel sub-types either serve their deities directly, or only get involved with powerful mortals to accomplish major good-aligned objectives. That is why I think angels in particular should not be usable in most situations. By all means, keep demons and devils available; I don't think they have as much of a problem being summoned for grinding. Angels are what really make me scratch my head.

[Steve]

I'd add that part of the problem is the ease of which this happens, and the ease in which ignoring IC consequences can happen (because BGTSCC lacks a 24/7 enforcement system).

Let's also address the issue that an Angel/Devil would very likely CRUSH a group of BG Guards anyway...so any NPC enforcement is rather OOC forced as a Rule.

The discussion about uber-NPCs has been had before, and how there is a "reality" gap between what their Level should be versus our Level 30 Characters.

Anyway, I personally thoroughly enjoy the summoning system on BGTSCC, but I also wholeheartedly agree with Charraj that it is IC ridiculous the Types of Beings that can be summoned with such ease and flippancy.

I'd suggest doing with Lesser Beings what our Mobs are like: simply take the Lesser types and inflate their Stats to Epic proportions appropriate to the Level of the Spell.

IMHO that utilizing the upper echelon of Creatures and Beings of the Forgotten Realms too often and with ease eventually just waters down the experience, and after dealing with Ancient Red Dragons, Angels and Devils and Gods on a regular basis, the expectation of possibility reached a total ceiling, and that has the result of cynical plus proposturous RP results.

[Snarfy]

As I interpret the rules as written;

Summoned creatures may be attacked on sight, but regular PvP rules must be followed for the aggressor and the owner of the summoned creatures.

so you can attack/dismiss summons freely within the rules, yet not the summoner without ensuring the appropriate option for a PVP out is extended. The summoner may not respond to this, defending his summon against another player or by initiating PVP after it is dismissed, without also following the normal PVP rules of offering a PVP out. Summoning it, or attacking a summon do not give PVP consent.

Mechanically speaking, I do not believe that attacking a summoned creature on sight is possible anymore. I was, quite literally, just in game and about to leave Beregost(on my lawful cleric) when I saw a skeleton zone in(... that old 'summon appearing before the character does' thing). Immediately I tried to target and cast dismissal on it, which did not work. By the time I attempted to cast dismissal at the skeletons feet, the owner of the summon had zoned in and used their "remove effects" button to dismiss the skeleton. I distinctly remember a time when one could outright attack a summon(many a time I have outright killed undead summons on my rogue in the past), but I think(?) that one needs to set the summoner hostile in order to attack a summon now.

Given the potential for creating a PvP cluster-fudge, especially where multiple characters are present(good luck guessing who owns that summon!) or how setting-hostile might be interpreted(not to mention the RP that should take place before such), I don't believe that, in the case of summons specifically, attacking skeleton/angel/demon summoning lawbreakers is ever going to be the easiest thing to implement a set of rules around.

[Charraj]

I think you can set the summon itself hostile, but the game will tell the summoner that you set him hostile. Which shouldn't matter because setting hostile is an OOC thing, but people tend to respond poorly regardless (maybe because it's understandably perceived as a pseudo-IC signal).

Maybe an OOC statement like ((Just setting the summon hostile)) would clear the air? *shrug*

Either way, the rules as currently drafted aren't clear on how far people can take this.

[aaron22]

You gotta give them a chance to defend the summon. Just up and killing the summon is ridiculous.

RP?

you should try it.