Shadows of the Past

[X] Attack him.
-[X] Sneak up on him and shoot him with your bow. Aim to kill.
-[X] The second he's down from the arrow, close in and finish him off with your dagger.
Hmm... First time Yaxkin will be killing another human, I believe. Best to begin as we mean to go on, this seems sufficiently pragmatic.
 
Why tho. We could fill him with arrows.

[X] Attack him.
-[X] Sneak up on him and shoot him with your bow. Aim to kill.
-[X] Use Curare
Because this:
Edit: Added Curare to the front page. You can apply it to your arrows or knife, but its not that lethal on its own when you want a quick take-down and doing it now would give the guy another chance at spotting you.
Chance of being spotted.

But if you think that's worth it let's go for it.

[X] Attack him.
-[X] Sneak up on him and shoot him with your bow. Aim to kill.
-[X] Use Curare
 
Considering our chemical skills we should really make a blow gun something that should be within our skill set.
 
[X] Go back to the caravan and warn them. You can circle around this spot by taking a detour through the jungle
Better for the bandits not to know someone found them.
 
I have a problem with shooting people which may or may not be a bandit in the middle of the woods. If we at least aimed for non-leathal area (leg or something similar) I could look over it, but as it currently stands only votes are for outright murdering him.

As a side note, we are not being paid to fight, instead we are being paid to scout out ahead. So that means we can walk out on this. Or at least request a raise.

Edit: Honestly just aiming at him with a bow and speaking may be a better option then outright murder.
 
Last edited:
I have a problem with shooting people which may or may not be a bandit in the middle of the woods. If we at least aimed for non-leathal area (leg or something similar) I could look over it, but as it currently stands only votes are for outright murdering him.

As a side note, we are not being paid to fight, instead we are being paid to scout out ahead. So that means we can walk out on this. Or at least request a raise.
It's one thing if you just don't want to bother, but there's a damn good chance that this is a bandit. Normal people don't stay hidden along trade routes waiting for people to pass by. He's hardly an innocent we're swooping down on.
 
It's one thing if you just don't want to bother, but there's a damn good chance that this is a bandit. Normal people don't stay hidden along trade routes waiting for people to pass by. He's hardly an innocent we're swooping down on.

Sure, there is a pretty high chance that he is a bandit, but I have problems with murdering people for just suspecting that they are one. Holding him at bows point, and making him poison himself into unconscious is a better option then murdering a person without knowing who he is or why is he here.
 
Sure, there is a pretty high chance that he is a bandit, but I have problems with murdering people for just suspecting that they are one. Holding him at bows point, and making him poison himself into unconscious is a better option then murdering a person without knowing who he is or why is he here.
Well, let's turn this around. Why do you suspect he isn't a bandit?

We have an account of bandits raiding this specific route, and we found a man very will hidden and positioned to watch the road. I don't see what else that could possibly make him.

But frankly, the extra effort of confirming guilt/innocence is a good way to get killed. In the scenario where we attack, if we go for non-lethal instead of immediately going for a death-blow, the bandit screams, and suddenly all of his friends in the immediate area are alerted.
 
Yeah, I'd rather just go warn the caravan than try and talk to the (not technically confirmed) bandit.
That's just a great way to get killed. Never point your weapon at a thing you don't mean to kill, and if you mean to kill it, why waste time talking?
 
[X] Go back to the caravan and warn them. You can circle around this spot by taking a detour through the jungle

Not going full murderhobo yet please
 
Well, let's turn this around. Why do you suspect he isn't a bandit?

We have an account of bandits raiding this specific route, and we found a man very will hidden and positioned to watch the road. I don't see what else that could possibly make him.

But frankly, the extra effort of confirming guilt/innocence is a good way to get killed. In the scenario where we attack, if we go for non-lethal instead of immediately going for a death-blow, the bandit screams, and suddenly all of his friends in the immediate area are alerted.

Innocent until proven guilty is a thing. Sure the evidence is pretty damning as it currently stands, but I don't approve of mindless killing without checking the facts. He could be anything from a watcher for other caravans, or hunter (yes, I'm aware the chances are low).

Screaming will happen especially if we go for the kill. People scream while they are being stabbed/pierced unless you hit some very specific spots in the body. Going non-lethal by threatening to kill him if he screams has a better chance then throwing the dices and hoping we get a good shot, killing him without releasing a sound.

Likewise, what will happen after we kill him? The bandits are far more mobile then the caravan, and when they find the dead body/notice his missing, they will charge at us. Finding more information about the bandits itself could be worth it's weight in gold.
 
Last edited:
Innocent until proven guiltily is a thing.
We aren't a juror in a nice comfy modern society, we are a stone age hunter gatherer in a jungle full of triple-murder-spirits. Striving for a better tomorrow is one thing, but let's not try to start a moral crusade against the setting.

Still, because Tomcost asked so nicely
[X] Go back to the caravan and warn them. You can circle around this spot by taking a detour through the jungle.
 
I don't have an issue with you guys not wanting to fight, but the dangers of wanting absolute proof of guilt before going for the kill is something I won't support. It's time-consuming and puts us at unnecessary risk.
Innocent until proven guiltily is a thing.
Yeah, in the real world. Our society's rules don't apply IC in a post-apocalyptic jungle world.
Sure the evidence is pretty damning as it currently stands, but I don't approve of mindless killing without checking the facts. He could be anything from a watcher for other caravans, or hunter (yes, I'm aware the chances are low).
There we're definitely going to disagree in the future. In the future if we come across more bandits I'm not inclined to check for all their crimes before attacking. Also, yeah, the chances of this guy not being a bandit are ridiculously low. A watcher from other caravans would be actively scouting like us, not just sitting in a good hiding spot. And a hunter wouldn't be watching a road, he'd be somewhere else looking for animals. Yaxkin herself noted that the area by the road was more or less picked clean of animals.

And that leaves us with a clear result of bandit.
Screaming will happen especially if we go for the kill. People screen while they are being stabbed/pierced unless you hit some very specific spots in the body. Going non-lethal by threatening to kill him if he screams has a better chance then throwing the dices and hoping we get a good shot, killing him without releasing a sound.

Likewise, what will happen after we kill him? The bandits are far more mobile then the caravan, and when they find the dead body/notice his missing, they will charge at us. Finding more information about the bandits itself could be worth it's weight in gold.
This I can accept. This is practical and sound reasoning. It's the morality stuff that gets in the way of survival that I have a serious problem with.

[X] Go back to the caravan and warn them. You can circle around this spot by taking a detour through the jungle.
 
[X] Go back to the caravan and warn them. You can circle around this spot by taking a detour through the jungle

Sure, seems like a optimal solution. I'm just against murdering him due to risks of him being a non-bandit. Societies in general have a harsh way with people who attack others, and even if we are in a jungle full of murder spirits, the most dangerous predators are other people.
 
Sure, seems like a optimal solution. I'm just against murdering him due to risks of him being a non-bandit. Societies in general have a harsh way with people who attack others, and even if we are in a jungle full of murder spirits, the most dangerous predators are other people.
The chances of him not being a bandit are slim to none. What proof would you need to think that he's a bandit?
 
[x] Go back to the caravan and warn them. You can circle around this spot by taking a detour through the jungle.

I'm not on board the train that says it's wrong to attack him without two witnesses and photo evidence, because he is clearly a bandit. But I don't see why we should risk our lives beyond the call of our job. We scouted and found a danger, now let's report back. We're not paid to be Rambo, just to find a safe path.

We don't know how many of these guys there are, this one was pretty hard to spot and perhaps others are more competent at hiding. Shooting him and walking up to confirm the kill seem like a great way of inspiring any other members of his band to jump us while our guard is down incapacitating him.
 
[X] Go back to the caravan and warn them. You can circle around this spot by taking a detour through the jungle.
 
[X] Go back to the caravan and warn them. You can circle around this spot by taking a detour through the jungle.
 
[X] Go back to the caravan and warn them. You can circle around this spot by taking a detour through the jungle.
 
[X] Speak to him.
-[X] Ask what he's doing here

He might be a scout for bandits, but may have any other reason to lurk around here.
First talk, then act.
 
Back
Top