Yes! This is what's laid out in the post: they are nervous about us and in response we (re) drew weapons, and we have a choice between a provocative response that risks losses (retreat), a conciliatory response thar risks imprisonment (holding), and an insane response that no one wants (massacre). You don't need to like their analysis but it is what we are dealing with. It is the choice that risks violence. You really hate imprisonment and think it's worth the risk, but this is the provocative choice, and you can't avoid that.
So be it then, let the dirt run red if they wish to infringe upon our freedoms. They'll either attack or not attack. The dice will decide.Lastly, if you react to everything like it could end up in the worst possible way of what you remember, you'll just end up going in a downward spiral.
The dice can also decide whether or not they imprison us. One choice has the chance of bloodshed and misery. The other choice only has the chance of us being imprisoned. In other words. Choice one has a chance of permanent losses. The worst that choice 2 can do is have us temporarily lose stuff that can be resolved at a later date.So be it then, let the dirt run red if they wish to infringe upon our freedoms. They'll either attack or not attack. The dice will decide.
You are expecting us to willingly be captured without defending ourselves when we retreat is foolish.and end up with everyone captured by very miffed locals that now has a reason to treat us badly just as you described.
So you propose we shouldn't have provided armed intervention to prevent further casualties they would have been guaranteed to have suffered if we didn't help? Either way, it's their land and their injured. We are leaving their land and didn't harm any of their injured. Didn't you also vote for this to go through as well?We don't have an inherent freedom to be violent in their own village however we want. It's their land and their injured.
Again. We accidentally grenaded some of their people over in Zone D.We are leaving their land and didn't harm any of their injured.
That just means some of them are already out for blood or at the very least pissed.Again. We accidentally grenaded some of their people over in Zone D.
Edit: Ninja'ed
Guess I missed that part, still. Good intentions and all that jazz. Either way, my vote stands. Freedom or death.Again. We accidentally grenaded some of their people over in Zone D.
Edit: Ninja'ed
So you propose we shouldn't have provided armed intervention to prevent further casualties they would have been guaranteed to have suffered if we didn't help? Either way, it's their land and their injured. We are leaving their land and didn't harm any of their injured. Didn't you also vote for this to go through as well?
Good samaritans especially don't complain when the good work doesn't get recognized. They accept and move on to do more.Sometimes you do the right thing and people don't reward you for it. Shit happens. "Freedom or death" is a response to tyranny, not to not getting what we wanted.
Sometimes you do the right thing and people don't reward you for it. Shit happens. "Freedom or death" is a response to tyranny, not to not getting what we wanted.
Oh yeah, I understand not being rewarded for doing the right thing. We also shouldn't be punished for it as well especially when we are the ones in a position of power. And yes, guess what falling back is doing. Accepting and moving on. Literally.Good samaritans especially don't complain when the good work doesn't get recognized. They accept and move on to do more.
Good samritans should not expect to be punched in the face and spat on for doing good work.Good samaritans especially don't complain when the good work doesn't get recognized. They accept and move on to do more.
No it isn't. It's very much using violence to get out our way.Oh yeah, I understand not being rewarded for doing the right thing. We also shouldn't be punished for it as well especially when we are the ones in a position of power. And yes, guess what falling back is doing. Accepting and moving on. Literally.
People that give up doing good right after hitting the first snag aren't good samaritans. So many good samaritans do good even knowing it can bring harm and misfortune to them. They do it knowing it's the right thing to do. So many people smuggled out Jews from Nazi Germany even knowing they could get killed for doing so. They still did it knowing it was the right thing to do.Good samritans should not expect to be punched in the face and spat on for doing good work.
If they don't get recognized fine but they shouldn't be punished for it.
By the end of the day what matters is you are alive and not a punching bag.People that give up doing good right after hitting the first snag aren't good samaritans. So many good samaritans do good even knowing it can bring harm and misfortune to them. They do it knowing it's the right thing to do.
Huh, this is big. @Just Some Guy do you want to put a pin in our discussion? This can change some stuff. We have 2 omake so far, yes?Omake rewards:
- +10 on your dice roll
- Insight on one of the votes(I will reveal you the rolls, DC and modifiers for the particular vote)
- 1d10 Deduction on a negative modifier from the vote of your choosing
- -5 lower the DC from the vote of your choosing
- Remove a negative modifier from the vote of your choosing
I'll stop my argument then for now.Huh, this is big. @Just Some Guy do you want to put a pin in our discussion? This can change some stuff. We have 2 omake so far, yes?
1d10 Deduction on a negative modifier from the vote of your choosing
Wait what? wouldn't people just choose to remove the highest negative modifier rather than a 1d10?
There's also this.Wait what? wouldn't people just choose to remove the highest negative modifier rather than a 1d10?
Which is a guaranteed +10 instead of the gamble to get a 10 on a d10.
there is also a guaranteed removal of a negative modWhich is a guaranteed +10 instead of the gamble to get a 10 on a d10.