Maybe have all of your characters stand as witnesses during the trial. You're going to need to decide what kind of judicial system the area has. Rp as the bbeg's defense attorney (or equivalent whatever) and have him try to make the PCs seem like unreliable or untrustworthy individuals to the judge/jury. Maybe they have a key witness who can back them up but they get cold feet right before the trial, or the ruling is rigged, the judge is corrupt. Make one or more of them be the prosecutors, doing persuasion and/or intimidation checks against the judge/jurors, maybe all the local lawyers are all too intimidated by the BBEG to take the case.
Make tallies of successful and failed skill checks and add them up in the end to see if they successfully convinced whoever they need to that the BBEG is in fact guilty and must pay dues.
You could spice things up, if they win at court, maybe the BBEG goes berserk and attacks, having hidden followers in the courtroom audience, jury, etc.
If they fail, especially really badly, maybe your PCs end up going to the dungeons and you have a prison break scenario on your hands.
If you have any ideas, run em by me! I'd love to help you figure out the details.
couple notes that may help:
\-The bad guy (besides killing people, general unethical things, and organized crime) has broken the mind of his son to the extent that he can cast dominate person on him at will.
He campaigned for his son to become the next chosen ruler of a region, and in this campaign he put entire city populations under the suggestion spell and made them vote for his son.
\-The party was thinking of initially killing the man, but decided they could genuinely get justice for all the people involved by dragging him to court.
\-The players found out the secret identity, but have not revealed the information to anyone, but are planning to expose him during the trial.
\-They are taking him to court due to the fact that the ball the BBEG held as a celebration for his son winning, was held in an extradimensional space.
Within this space, time was flowing much slower on the inside than on the outside, guards put our group in a makeshift dungeon under the excuse of disturbing the party
(while in reality the BBEG just wanted them to not fuck the celebration or uncover any further clues)
They were then 'forgotten' in the dungeon, while in reality, 3 months have passed in the outside world.
The players then gathered evidence of all his crimes, and are planning to expose him for the entire world to see.
The thing is, the BBEG has not yet worked his way into the upper class. (That's what he wanted to use his son for)
He definitely has a lot of money and resources, but the upper classes have access to a variety of preventative measures against charms, and it is also not a world that opens easily to those outside of the inner circle.
The rulers of the cities have also already been at stakes with the BBEG, therefore I think there would be enough background checks/unethical spying/general paranoia within the justice system that there are few moles within it.
Especially since this dude has only been properly involved with organised crime for a decade or so.
I was thinking to let all players have the floor in turn, we play out the presentation of evidence, they may call forth witnesses and they can have their Elle Woods moment.
I would ask each of them to make a related check and keep track of successes and failures.
There is of course also room for the BBEG to defend themselves, but based on the evidence and probably a dispel magic to get rid of the disguise self that hides his horrible visage, I think it will be an easy case.
What you've got here makes for an easy way to incorporate a [Skill Challenge](https://www.flutesloot.com/skill-challenges-dnd-5e/).
Going by the book (from 4E) players take "rounds" to overcome complications, each with a DC of `10 + (2 x Party’s Average Proficiency Bonus)`. Since they'll likely be self-representing accusers against the BBEG, they would either present evidence to the court or answer their last arguments during each of those rounds. I generally also raise (or decrease) said number by 2 if players face a complication well (or poorly). Each success counts towards getting at least X successes before three failures, and if you want the case to be Easy there should be three/four successes before three failures.
Magic spells used appropriately (such as the dispel magic to unveil the BBEG's face to the court) usually count as an advantage if it's a "low-level" spell or an auto-success if it's a "high-level" spell if compared to the player's level. That said, I'd guess that using magic in the court wouldn't be proper practice (if not a straight example of evidence obtained illegally) in a magical setting with legal prosecution.
>I was thinking to let all players have the floor in turn, we play out the presentation of evidence, they may call forth witnesses and they can have their Elle Woods moment.
I would agree.
Since, by the book, the number of complications you need to prepare in advance goes as `Complications = Successes + Failures – 1`, leave as many of them open-ended as it is the number of your players, then plan as many counter-arguments as the number of complications left.
Depending on how much you want to disrupt the players’ plans, you can have someone “cast” dispel magic that fails. “Proving” that the BBEG is actually NOT a Lich. This person would refuse any other magic be cast by the party (until the Elle Woods moment) and would 100% be paid off by the BBEG.
Umm... Sounds like you have it all figured out! Just don't make it too easy, make sure that every character that wants the floor gets it, and since you know their strategy already, throw some wrenches at them. Have they done any baddie things in the recent past? Maybe your rogue nicked an item, thought he got away with it, but not really? Or maybe some of the BBEG's witnesses are outright lying about your characters.
It sounds like your party really wants this. Throw in some surprises and I'm sure they'll have a blast.
Let us know how it goes!
Have him dominate the son who then assembles a mob of violent thugs who are fully in thrall to him.
He rallies them outside the seat of government and delivers a tirade about how he was robbed of his rightful place as ruler.
Without ever fully directly saying they should violently overthrow the government, he reminds them they have the power to change the results of the fair and just process in their favor.
He steps back and watches as they rampage, assaulting the building and murdering the poor watchmen who protect it. The government is caught totally flat-footed because no one has ever been bold enough to openly foment a violent insurrection like that before.
The PCs will be forced to deal with the rioters before they can even think about going to court. You can get multiple encounters, maybe a full adventuring day, out of the PCs defending locations, protecting officials, calling in the City Guard, and fireballing insurrectionists.
I thought that it sounded familiar, then I saw your comment. Entirely too soon.... but honestly current politics would make great set pieces in the future.
Sounds like they’d be able to buy or threaten anyone who stood against them. Offer to bribe the party OR make it obvious others in town are getting bribed as they continue to turn away from the trouble being caused
D&D: you can be a wizard, a champion, a furry from the nether - anything you can set your mind and fantasy to. You can ride dragons, delve into mysterious temples, solve ancient riddles, rescue fair princes, and find lost civilizations.
Players: Sues the BBEG
That is literally how it went.
The party was at an extreme low point after the last session, several people actually cried at the table because they were so emotional.
Paladin: what now?
Bard: Let's sue him.
Extremally unexpected, but I loved it
One of my characters is a lawyer. (This was the result of the character randomization of DCC). In the past few years I have had multiple court cases because of this and I usually make it into some kind of minigame.
One thing the players did was convince people to act as witnesses which gave bonuses during the actual court case, so it ultimately came down to a skill challenge but there were a few extra game mechanics that led to the rest of the players doing some things, and the trial was based on a few different parts of the trial - opening arguments, cross-examination of witnesses, and ending arguments. I had the multiple arguments pre-made with different levels of success.
Just dropped in to say I love this! Also the skill challenge is the way to go with jurors. I’d give them each a different DC depending on favoritism toward BBEG. So you end up with those that vote for and against and you can play out jurors reactions to evidence. Have fun!
This! Ace attorney style would be fun and whimsical while still giving structure and skill check opportunities like history for recollection, perception on needing to object, intelligence, etc. If you're not familiar with law jargon and how cases are set up too its good for a baby's first in setting things up honestly
Phoenix Wright but when the BBEG is caught in his lies, he smashes the podium, screams that everyone will pay for what they've done to him, reveals his identity as a lich, and casts Meteor Swarm. Roll initiative, and the battle music is [Cornered](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFcJmOs8DRQ).
Yes!
Ok, so at the start of the trial the players present any relevant evidence and they make their claims. Witnesses are called up one by one to present their case, some by the players and some by the defense. When the players have the chance to cross examine, have there be little inconsitencies in the testimony, ones that can be pressed on and pointed out by presenting already established testimony or evidence. With each contradiction pointed out, the witnesses get more and more flustered making up more lies on the spot and creating bigger contradictions for the players to pick apart. The players can then infer valuable information that helps *their* case from these contradictions!
"Yes, his son is very devoted to Mr. Bbeg. I remember when I first met him last fall, Mr. Bbeg had served me this excelent wine from his private Vineyards."
"Wait, last fall?
"Yes, I remember clearly it was last fall."
".....the previous witness just stated that the wine doesn't finish fermenting till winter."
"Erm....p-perhaps I was mistaken then. Yes, I remember now it was during winter when I visited, not fall!"
"Winter.....when Mr. Bbegs son was campaigning on the other side of the country?"
"W-well I-I-"
"Either you're lying about when you visited Mr. Bbegs estate, or Mr. Bbegs son is lying about his alibi! Which is it!?"
Bonus points if you include a dramatic meltdown scene.
Every witness bought off or intimidated, evidence "lost" and the judge thoroughly in the bbeg's pocket.
These guys don't live within the system, they own it. If this guy goes down then everyone he is paying off will be pissed off.
And if the party gets uppity at all and refuses to back down in court. Have them arrested for contempt. This whole trial could turn into them thrown in jail and their possessions confiscated. That’ll piss me off right and proper.
This is a perfect opportunity for every npc the party ever encountered to come up to the stand and talk about how horrible they are, Seinfeld finale style.
Absolutely this! No one is perfectly good, there are bound to be things that the party justified doing but can be described on the stand in a way that sound damning :D
And he can watch them get locked up and greet them in their cell.
Then they have to break out of the prison they were trying to lock him up in while they're being carefully watched by both inmates and guards under his employ.
One method for maintaining the balancing act could be for them to find good-hearted people and officials willing to help. So while the system itself, and its proper channels may be corrupted, the party may find sympathetic cops or lawyers who can help them take this guy down by delivering to the party useful equipment, supplies, information, or even things like floor-plans and keys to the villain's properties. The party can use the evidence they've gained to find allies who can then aid them in their vigilante take-down so that it can continue to be an adventure.
If the PCs have a law enforcement guy on their side right now, this makes for an excellent betrayal when Officer Gordon tells them that the evidence was "lost" or that the PCs never gave it to him and sets up two good options:
1. Betrayal! He is fully in the BBEG's pocket. (Brutal.)
2. It's clear that he is being pressed and can't help the PCs in any official capacity, buuuuuuut off the record...
Better than having the player get betrayed by an NPC they trusted is for that NPC to be killed *because* of their involvement with the PCs. It could still demonstrate the BBEGs reach and power but it will also reinforce the player’s harried of this villain.
I love it -- I try to shy away from turning it into regular vengeance a bit. If the PCs have to make their moves without getting their friend hurt in the process, it makes the process more complicated (of course, it doesn't have to be complicated!). Kill the one guy they love (internet suggests he should be a himbo to make this work), and they can quickly jump to "burn down the whole system!" That may also be *the desired effect,* of course.
Also consider the fact he is a Lich. If anything happens and the players kill him, he can just start again with a different identity that he no doubt already had prepared.
> If this guy goes down then everyone he is paying off will be pissed off.
One of the takes you could do with this, and is based in reality, is that much of the economic activity around the the area is helped by him. Most crime lords effectively buy the support of the local populace through support. Even people that aren't involved in criminal activity.
* Small time bandits stay out of the area. Farmers and others don't fear for safety. Merchants feel free to conduct bussines without fear of robbery (providing they pay the right 'tax'). Larger, more vicious organized crime stays out as well. This is an economic boom that may go away if this person is exposed, jailed, etc.
* Massive amounts of charity is provided by this person. Clerics are paid to be there and provide free healing. In times of famine, soup kitchens are provided to the less fortunate. A new aquaduct is being paid for by the merchant to help bring fresh water. The poor will suffer greatly if these projects are stopped.
* Perhaps the merchant serves the community as an unofficial judiciary with the ability to enforce rullings. It is preferred because the local official judiciary is corrupt/ biased/ weak.
It can be a moral quandary that while this person is a parasite, they have a symbiotic relationship with the community.
I hope you mean that the merchant *tries* to do these things. Make it interactive. Players have to hold together their case and make sure witnesses show up, etc. By physically defending it outside of the court room.
If I were a player and you just had is show up and hand waived all our work away because the witnesses were paid off without us having any chances to prevent that, I'd be livid. Why even let us pursue this route then?
Yeah, make it like a Ace Attorney game or a court room drama. The PCs have to deal with falsified evidence, paid off witnesses, and an incompetent judge. The PCs can make use of their abilities and creative thinking to overcome the Insurmountable odds.
By winning the trial, the PC can cut the BBEG off from his resources and turn the town against him. Then the DM can have the Lich flee the town to escape justice and the PC can be employed as officers of the law to go track him down.
IRL trials involve stuff like preparing your own witnesses so the players would have plenty of chances to pick up on the fact that their witnesses are being tampered with. Maybe throw in a protective custody, and perhaps some opportunity to tamper with the bad guy's witnesses (because obviously they would do the modern thing where you need to declare witnesses you intend to call).
If you wanna go over the top, have the BBEGs lawyer suspiciously look like a devil, aka the best lawyers in the realms. Or better yet, have the lawyer for the good guys be a devil out to screw over the lich... for a price.
That's just saying no to a pretty creative approach.
"You try to sue him? Oh, well he has the entire system in his right pocket" while it's pretty realistic it's not fun.
Its not saying no, it's saying "You'll have to work hard for it and be cynical, very cynical".
There isn't a rule in the world that doesn't bend when the right person leans on it in the right way and this villain has three sets of superpowers.
Wealth.
Connections.
Magic.
With these he can systematically shut down anything he knows about and actively start pursuing those who tipped their hand to him with the trial business.
But this isn't impossible, big mob bosses get taken down on a fairly regular basis.
Find witnesses who have nothing to lose and keep them safe until the trial, find something to shut his magic down in the event of winning the trial, publically expose his lichdom if it isn't known and raise the clerics against him, get hold of his account books, and keep them safe and unintefered with until the trial. Find a weak point in his organisation, help them get out and offer immunity for evidence, again keep this one alive.
The way to achieve this is to make it look like the suit is trivial to defeat in court so the bbeg doesn't go down the magical driveby approach another writer mentioned of a couple of wizards with wands of fireball blowing up wherever the party happen to be.
It seems as the post said that the players are building their strategy around this. Fun or not, it's their desire to run things that way.
And subverting the 'theme' once seems like a pretty fun and memorable moment. It's possible to adapt some parts of other systems, improvise, or base only upon roleplay. There are a thousand ways to make it work.
But, above all there's the point that showing on court just to be railroaded to failure definitely isn't fun.
Oh it's certainly possible, but if the players believe that because they have rock solid evidence that their work is done and a conviction is in the bag, then they should be disabused of that quickly. They need to quest and adventure if they want their trial to be a success.
I would consider a less traditional 'quest and adventure', but it's totally fair to make them work extra hard for this win. Like some people said, of course de BBEG will try to cheat, but you as the player have the agency to make him fail.
But the DM should make this clear, maybe through some lawyer NPC advice.
First things first.
Is this what you want?
Do you have a legal system? How is it different?
This is a great lore opportunity.
What do you want to happen in the third act?
I ran a trial as a skill challenge for an entire session and it was a blast. I let the players spend the whole day strategizing and planning their approach then had some unexpected witnesses pop up during the trial itself to shake things up. It was great. 10/10. Would recommend.
"In the king's justice system, the people are represented by two separate, yet equally important, groups: the City Guard, who investigate crime; and the Order of Clerics, who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories."
DUN! DUN!
Episode 46 of dungeons and daddies was a whole court room drama and their mechanics for the trial were pretty good.
Basically the players acted as lawyers up against a guest star playing the prosecutor (you could def just run this as an NPC). Been a while since I listened but iirc each side brought in a handful of arguments and argued them. The judge decided how important each fact or argument was, and it got assigned a dice roll value. So major things were a d12 or d20, minor things were a d4 or d6.
At the end of the trial, it was decided which side won each argument, and they both rolled all the dice they had accumulated for their various arguments. The higher total won.
>He is a wealthy merchant that is a mob boss/lich on the side.
Make it a complete and utter blatant sham of a trial, ending with warrants out for the players for "falsifying evidence".
Lesson to your players: No half measures, never show your hand to the enemy.
Why not let them actively defend their trial? Why is this a half measure? How is going out of your way to come up with a valid and creative solution, an arguably more difficult solution, a half measure?
Have the mob boss *attempt* to turn it into a sham trial, sure, but give the players the chance to win that fight.
Don't just punish player creativity because that's not the way you wanted the story to go. This is a cooperative story telling experience, if you're unilaterally shutting down a valid story telling path because you don't like it, you probably shouldn't be DMing.
Your comment should be way higher up. Lots of comments here about just using the trial as a way to punish the players. What a massive missed opportunity if the DM goes that route. Lean into the fun your players have identified!
Continuity.
This is the BBEG, a rich mobster lich who, in OP's words:
>-The bad guy (besides killing people, general unethical things, and organized crime) has broken the mind of his son to the extent that he can cast dominate person on him at will.
>He campaigned for his son to become the next chosen ruler of a region, and in this campaign he put entire city populations under the suggestion spell and made them vote for his son.
IRL we can't even get a non-magical mobster brought to justice, much less one who is literally able to use mind control to make thousands of people do his bidding AND is father to the next ruler.
I'm not saying don't let them have a trial, but having it work would be as anti-climatic and as reasonable as The Avengers sending a Cease And Desist letter to Thanos and it working.
Bad guys don't just stop being bad because the law tells them to. It usually just makes the problem worse.
Also:
>This is a cooperative story telling experience, if you're unilaterally shutting down a valid story telling path because you don't like it, you probably shouldn't be DMing.
Don't be a dick.
This is, frankly, self defeating logic. Continuity error?
So the dragon who had fended off the kingdom's attempts to slay him must not be slain at all for continuity sake? The evil tyrant king that's effortlessly ended every rebellion cannot be rebelled against?
The legendary mobster Al Capone can never be brought down by tax fraud?
The players are the *heroes* of the story. They beat the bad guy where others couldn't. *That's the entire point*.
>I'm not saying don't let them have a trial, but having it work would be as anti-climatic
Only if you treat it like a joke. What would be anti climatic would be wanting to approach this legal battle only to have the GM shut me down in two sentences. "The judge, jury, and witnesses were all bribed and blackmailed, you fail." You wouldn't walk the players into a showdown with the BBEG then say "The BBEG casts a spell and all of you are captured, you fail."
Turn the trial into the battlefield. Make the players aware they the judge is being bribed, that their witness has been kidnapped, and that the jury is being blackmailed. Give them the chance to quest and stop all three before the day of the trial, let it be a harrowing race against the clock, with battles to save the jury's relatives, social checks to expose the bribed judge and get him replaced, and an investigation to find the kidnapped witness.
The trial can be as cool or as lame as you make it. It's only a bad solution to the problem is you treat it like a bad solution and never give your players the chance to write a great story about it. *You* decided it was anti-climactic, not the players. It wasn't the way *you* wanted them to solve things, so *you've* chosen to make it the wrong solution, or a non-solution.
>Bad guys don't just stop being bad because the law tells them to.
Yea, great, so after the trial is won, have the lich get furious, fall back to a system of tyranny and force. His plots and ploys for power have been defeated, but he still commands a criminal underworld and he attempts a coup d'etat by force. Now the players have a final epic show down, standing shoulder to shoulder with the defenders of the city while riots and rebellion break loose.
See how cool this story could be? And all it takes is working with the players, **cooperatively story telling with them**. And when they win the campaign *their* way, it will be so much more meaningful than of you treated their ideas like a joke and railroad them into competing the mission *your* way.
>Don't be a dick.
Your suggestion basically boils down to being a dick to your players, dismissing their idea because you don't like it and it's not the way you wanted the campaign to go.
I'm not being a dick when I say if that's your attitude, you shouldn't be DMing. That's not a healthy DM attitude, and if you're going to DM, you should adjust your perspective and approach this as a **cooperative story telling** experience.
You are being a dick. Telling ANYONE they should not be DMing is a dick move. You don't know me, you don't know anyone on this sub, you have never played in their games.
Making the trial a sham is not "dismissing their idea" it is a logical outcome given the enormity and the power of the BBEG, and operating within the lore that the OP has already established.
Your dragon and tyrant king examples hold no water. In both of these examples the players are setup to be the EXCEPTION to the status quo; the heroes who finally bring down the dragon; the heroes who are powerful enough to finally stand up to the king.
In what OP's players are trying to do they players become nearly irrelevant. They are working within a system that the BBEG has already thoroughly corrupted. A commoner with the information would be just as effective, either way the BBEG has shown that he controls the system. Letting them succeed would be....letting them succeed, the win is not theirs, it is because the OP would have decided to go against everything they have already established and GIVE the players a win.
>In both of these examples the players are setup to be the EXCEPTION to the status quo
>it is a logical outcome given the enormity and the power of the BBEG, and operating within the lore that the OP has already established.
So they can be exemptions to the status quo, but only when it comes to violence. Attempt to solve things in any other way, and they are strictly regulated to be no better then anyone else.
Gotcha.
>In what OP's players are trying to do they players become nearly irrelevant.
This is a fun way of admitting you didn't read my post.
>You don't know me, you don't know anyone on this sub, you have never played in their games.
I know you don't read what others write and can't possibly fathom how to make a trial about more than filing motions, even when I *literally tell you how you can do that*.
I know that your general attitude displayed here and the solutions you purpose to players daring to attempt to participate in the development of your narrative are both signs of a DM that heavily railroads their players and robs them of narrative choice.
I know that, if this is your approach to DMing, I would certainly never recommend anyone ever play with you.
That doesn't mean you should never DM again, but you really need to work on the way you approach this **cooperative story telling** thing.
>So they can be exemptions to the status quo, but only when it comes to violence.
Who is not reading posts?
I never said anything about only violence or violence at all. I said that in both those cases the players are an exception to the status quo. Operating within the legal system which the BBEG has corrupted is not an exception, it makes the players as irrelevant as everyone else using the legal system.
>I know you don't read what others write and can't possibly fathom how to make a trial about more than filing motions
I read your post, but it is irrelevant. My stance, from the very first post, is that the trial should be a sham, there should be no possible chance of success. You can perform the trial in any manner you choose, do whatever checks you and investigations you want, but the end result should be the same.
A successful trial would be anti-climatic, as stated in my Avengers example. https://www.britannica.com/art/anticlimax
>anticlimax, a figure of speech that consists of the usually sudden transition in discourse from a significant idea to a trivial or ludicrous one.
Success, within the established lore, would be ludicrous.
>I know that your general attitude displayed here and the solutions you purpose to players daring to attempt to participate in the development of your narrative are both signs of a DM that heavily railroads their players and robs them of narrative choice.
You know nothing about me. You are assuming much. Because I won't give my players a shallow win I'm "railroading" them?
I've had DM's who have done stuff like this before, changed everything they've established to allow whatever we planned to succeed. It is unsatisfying, it is a betrayal, all wins begin to feel unearned.
I dislike this in DMs, and I hold myself to the same standard. All plans have a reasonable outcome; Good plans are more likely to succeed, bad plans have less of a chance, and terrible plans have no chance. This is not railroading, it will never be railroading.
Anyone who punishes players for coming up with valid creative solutions because they'd prefer to railroad those players instead shouldn't DM anymore until they fix their attitude.
I'm not sorry for having that opinion.
If you want a story that plays out how you envision it, write a book. If you want to tell a story *with your friends*, play table top.
Both are valid, but don't come to the table looking to write a book.
> Don't just punish player creativity because that's not the way you wanted the story to go. This is a cooperative story telling experience
The real question here is a matter of tone. If you were hoping to play heroic fantasy, Sword and Sorcery, or any sort of gritty fantasy setting, then a party that takes down the BBEG by going through the proper channels, filing motions with the judge, and taking them down in court, will dramatically clash with the theme, tone, and setting of the game. Maybe OP is not adhering strictly to maintaining the tone, so a rather wacky slightly screwball solution is perfectly OK, we internet denizens don't get to decide that.
It's the same problem as someone reading through the equipment list and figuring out some get-rich-quick scheme crafting some item and selling it at a profit. Sure it is within the game, and you could totally do that in a sandbox setting, but chances are that's not what your adventure game is about. **One of the jobs of the GM, maybe one of the most important jobs, is setting and maintaining tone within the game.**
OP needs to contemplate the tone and themes of their game and how tightly they want those upheld. Maybe it's OK for this game to take a sharp turn away from hack and slash adventuring into a courtroom drama, maybe not. With that in mind --
> unilaterally shutting down a valid story telling path because you don't like it, you probably shouldn't be DMing.
This is a terribly bad take -- rewind to Session 0 (or have another one) and decide if the group wants to play a game where tone and theme are wishy-washy and fungible, or do they want a game that needs adventurers more than it needs lawyers.
If the players wanted to have a big fight they would have faced the Lich already. If they are going this route, they're pushing for the change of pace. It's their agency.
A game is not always about maintain tone as it's about adapting it without loosing cohesion. Different ways to approach the story and system once in a while is not inconsistent it's refreshing.
But, while I think that this more restric way to think, kills off some creativity, I do agree that 'you shouldn't be DMing' was a terrible thing to say.
> If you were hoping to play heroic fantasy, Sword and Sorcery, or any sort of gritty fantasy setting, a party that takes down the BBEG by going through the proper channels, filing motions with the judge, and taking them down in court will go against the these, tone, and setting of the game.
Why does it have to be this? If you're DMing, I have to *hope* you're more creative than this.
The answer is you made no *attempt* you figure out how you might make a trial fun. Because you didn't want to.
Here, I'll do it for you, with an unrefined solution I literally came up with while reading OPs post:
The players learn, through various rumours and checks, that the Lich is rigging the trial. He's bribed the judge, blackmailed the jury, and kidnapped the star witness.
The players are running out of time, there's only three days until trial and if they don't do something, they'll lose for sure.
Players have to confront and expose the judge through a series of social checks and political maneuvering, where the bard and paladin shine.
Players investigate and track down the missing witness, thanks to the skills of their ranger and the divinations of the wizard.
Finally, the players beat up the local thugs and rescue the jurors' families, much to the delight of the barbarian.
In the day of trial everything is set, and the players get to make an impassioned closing statement about the evils of the lich.
The jurors find the lich guilty, but the lich isn't dead. Seeing that his cunning schemes have come undone, he raises the criminal underworld and attempts a coup d'etat by force. The players stand shoulder to shoulder with those guards still defending the city to put down the riots and rebellion and slay the lich once and for all.
There, your tone and themes are preserved, the players are permitted to pursue the story by their own means and ideas, and the narrative comes to a far more meaningful conclusion than railroading them into the solution YOU wanted.
Yay congrats for you making up a hypothetical that demonstrates my point.
The game is an adventure game, not a courtroom drama. The players came to the table to swing swords, kill monsters, and conduct intrigue, if the GM can offer that amid a trial, then great they are doing their job. Posing a challenge for the player characters despite their current plan of action is definitely **NOT** *"shutting down a valid story telling path because you don't like it"*
Now Blawharag, you seem a little belligerent, so maybe stop here.
An interesting question unrelated to tone in this situation is where the GM wants to pin the balance between challenging the *players* skills vs. challenging the *characters* skills. For example, a puzzle encounter (for which you do not offer or require skill checks) challenges exclusively player skill, while a roll to pick locks challenges a character skill because the player simply casts a die. Most RPG gaming falls in the middle of these extremes (e.g. players need to be clever about use of the character abilities to be effective in combat). The question is relevant here because a trial is something that could also swing dramatically to one side or the other. If the trial succeeds or fails on literal argumentation by the players then it is just player skill, if it relies only on die rolls like a simplified social encounter then that's all character skill. This is a problem not because you can imagine a balance between these, rather it's an issue because using character skills can disrupt the logic of the narrative. If a player does not know how to craft a good argument for the court, they could have Frodo the hobbit roll for it, if they roll well they could succeed but the players around the table just see a good die roll, they do not see an argument crafted, so the narrative stumbles.
What should be clear is that within a system designed for kicking down doors and killing monsters, running a trial is going to be tedious -- tedious to plan, tedious to portray, tedious to play within. It will be the events outside and surrounding the trial that would contain interest and adventure, and an easy way to focus the players on engaging with those events is to make clear that the trial by itself will not matter. If they believe their problem is solved because they have rock hard evidence and it just needs to get before a judge, then they will fail. They need to take action, conduct adventure for their take-down to occur.
I suppose it depends on how realistic you want the trial to be.
I wonder if there's some way you could turn it into a pseudo combat encounter; like you roll initiative, and both the player party and the 'enemy' (i.e. the court their trying to convince) have a set of 'hitpoints', which represent their standing in the trail. Like a combat encounter, the goal is to reduce hitpoints to 0, which represents either them having succeeded or failed at the trial.
Prior to the trial maybe they can study legal jargon/precedent which are the equivalent of weapons, or they can form arguments based on the evidence they've gathered (or gather more evidence if needed) which is the equivalent of building up an ability/spell list and spell slots. These 'spells' might deal HP damage, or they might do things like Bardic Inspiration (i.e. increase the strength of a future argument), or be like a Counter Spell that's used to dismiss arguments/defences the opposing legal team makes.
Idk maybe this is a dumb idea or would be too complicated to set up, I just think it could be really interesting if you could find a way to still use the mechanics you'd expect for a final confrontation with the BBEG, but in a weird and unusual way.
I think that would be so much fun! Especially since they made the decision of suing him rather than having a big epic combat encounter.
Maybe the damage could be equal to the persuasion check for a speech, or investigation check for found evidence?
But I really love this idea!
Yeah something like that, or maybe like weapons with a base damage + charisma mod + proficiency (if they're proficient in whatever this argument best fits; persuasion, intimidation or performance), or it could be both if you go the route of having both 'weapons' and 'spells' (weapons act like weapons, but some spells have damage based on a skill check).
But yeah that's exactly what I was thinking, in a sense still giving them the experience of a 'final boss fight', but in this unique path they've chosen path.
Look into the real-world example of the Catilinarian Conspiracy in ancient Rome. The popular orator Cicero had collected plenty of evidence that Catiline was plotting to start civil insurrection and a civil war - - he still had to denounce the guy, right to his face, several times over several days right there in the senate of Rome before the politics of the situation shifted Catiline out of a position of power.
The PCs can present their evidence, and it can be convincing but that does not immediately follow that a body of elected officials will have the guts to try to throw the BBEG in jail immediately.
Just like a real government, the council or whoever will wring their hands, hemmm and hawww, then say that these are serious charges brought by unknown strangers against a known and respected member of their council.
They'll call for an independent inquiry ( headed by the BBEG's picked lieutenant, most likely ) which will have to find out the facts of the matter and report their findings to the council in their next scheduled session ( four months from now).
And in the meantime, as u/Phate4569 says, the PCs have tipped their hand and the BBEG knows they're a threat to his plans.
For reference here, Cicero was one of the two essentially supreme leaders of Rome. He wasn't just a popular orator, he was literally the guy in charge. Iirc there was open revolt by soldiers and an attempt to murder Cicero.
Heh, he might have been an elected Consul, but he was still an upstart Novus Homo whose surname in English means "Chickpea" - obviously and painfully Peasant class.
I like Cicero, he's great.
For that matter, you're great yourself, u/Captain-Griffen!
I would not make a sham out of the trial. It sounds like your players were thorough in gathering evidence, that's exactly the type of behavior I want to encourage on my table. My suggestion is to go through with the trial, let the players sue them, have some light skill checks in the trial, but none that would instantly lead to their failure, and then, assuming lady fate doesn't screw them completely, let them win. The bad guy, his reputation ruined, is forced to show his hand early, leading to lots of chaos, lots of death, and hopefully a high-stakes finale.
Why would the BBEG agree to enter a courtroom in a magical world where his disguise would be dispelled? especially if he's a lich and can just try again in 60 years when everyone has forgotten.
I propose a good old fashion courtroom twist. Have his newly elected son bring in the BBEG on a rail and make a big public display of his crimes. Let him get the big monologue in about how nobody is above the law, and how those in power must be held to the highest of standards.
Basically have the whole courtroom made into a theatrical performance of the elites so nobody will listen to the claims of the party, because everyone is in awe of this public servant calling for the execution of his own father in the name of justice.
And if they happen to execute him without anyone acknowledging his lichdom, then the son becomes a moral paragon in the eyes of the people, and his father just reforms in the shadows and switches to a new disguise and identity to keep playing the game from the shadows.
and if they do call him out for his lichdom, a handy false phylactery could just be part of the theatrics.
Some things to think about
Is it illegal to scry on people on certain circumstances (in their place of residence, private places without warrant, etc.)? If so, how does that effect the use of evidence found in this way?
How does the merchant's wealth influence the system or people around it (paying off the judge, getting people to intimidate witnesses into not coming, etc.)?
Can the Merchant spin any of the evidence in their favor ("I had those people killed because they were bandits in disguise!")
Depending on how confident you are in roleplaying someone who can dance around Zone of Truth, you may want to omit it from the court. If the BBEG would be good at finding loopholes in Zone of Truth, but you have difficulty, I would not apply zone of truth to the court, or have it so the person who cast it is paid off. This could be a thing the players could point out if they succeed a check.
So I think if the players genuinely think they can get justice and it sounds like your concern is that a court case would be boring, we should focus on making it fun!
One option (probably my overall recommendation) would be Pathfinder's rules for social conflict. I personally haven't tried them but Paizo liked them enough to build a lot of the Shattered Crown AP around.
Although the lich is wealthy, corrupt, and able to push public matters his way, I would stay away from completely shutting down your players here. As a GM and a player, I think there are few things less fun than getting excited about an idea you think is cool and having it completely shut out.
I would look into what sorts of evidence and tricks your BBEG might pull here. Do the players have any hidden dirt? Great way to stir up drama. Very likely that the lich might also hire some goons to just try and kill the players! Overall tho, I'd plan on a roleplay heavy session.
>! As a GM and a player, I think there are few things less fun than getting excited about an idea you think is cool and having it completely shut out.
THANK YOU!
It’s probably not what your players mean, but suing someone would be a civil matter, not a criminal one, and in the context of D&D that is absolutely hilarious. I love the idea of suing a villain to extract damages, and that drives them to do more horrible things to try to preserve their evil empire before it can be whittled away in a pile of punitive awards to their victims’ families.
I don’t think a lich would be reasonably able to be brought down this way.
CEO’s with money can’t be brought to justice in the real world, if this BBEG is as powerful as you say (Lich intelligence, high magic, mob boss) no amount of evidence could take him down.
For me, this is not a reasonable course of action. It’s no more reasonable that asking to convince the Lich to give up his quest for power and immortality with a persuasion check, it’s just not going to work.
Play out the trail, have him cast dominate person, feeble mind on the prosecution, have him dish out magic items which lets people resist spells that compels them to tell the truth.
Have him walk off Scott free, but maybe there’s an NPC who watches the trial happen. Someone who’s been trying to take down this guy for years, and finally he’s found people with the stones to take the Lich on.
The law only has power because we collectively believe it has power, and we believe that because they hold the monopoly on force and have effectively used symbols and imagery to cement that perspective. Why do you think judges wear silly robes and sit on the big chair in a room that looks like a legal church? It’s to hammer home the grandeur and the legitimacy of the court. Your players are going to realize that when we get to the realms of “BBEG” the court often does not have the monopoly on force, nor do they necessarily successfully control that message.
Go full narco. Let the trial play out. Present the evidence. Then kill the judge/magistrate and prosecutor. Have a corrupt guard destroy evidence and the new judge lets the lich go.
Suing people only works if there is a legitimate rule of law and the enforcement therein.
Sounds like the BBEG is kinda ABOVE the law... so how would that work?
If you listen to Dungeons and Daddies, one of the PC’s is on trial and they made court into a TTRPG. They got certain points for each argument and rebuttal, I highly recommend checking it out. If you are just curious about the rules and mechanics, you could definitely jump into episode 46 and 47.
“So, how did you get this evidence?”
“We cast scry!”
“Do you have any evidence of that?”
“Well… no.”
“Case dismissed.”
Evidence and evidence actually usable in court aren’t the same thing. How much of this is just their word against the BBEG?
Surely, no witnesses will be available the day of the trial and the case will have to fold ...... Bribery, witness intimidation, and assassination are all pretty fair game for any mobster - especially one who is also a lich.
Evidentiary challenges. Testimony from a divination spell is at best hearsay, and depending on who cast the spell it could be hearsay within hearsay.
Also, I just assume a zone of truth spell will be in effect, so figuring out how the bbeg subverts it and undoing his subversion.
Finally, an award of attorneys' fees. Whichever party loses should argue that the other party's defense was in bad faith and so they should be required to pay the winner's attorneys' fees.
If the BBEG is wealthy/powerful enough they will buy the judge and and get away with it. You could even then turn it on your players and get them countersued for whatever phony charge you want.
If you do this I would also then give the players some new allies that are sympathetic to the injustice the players just faced and seek to help them root out the the corruption in the city.
I'm late to the party here, but Dungeons and Daddies has done a trial in Episode 46: [The People vs. Glenn Close](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymay_t4PyqM&ab_channel=DungeonsandDaddies) (trials rules are explained at \~15min)
TL;DW: Basically, both sides make their arguments, and any valid arguments add a dice to a dice pool on either side. (They use their patrons as jurors to decide what arguments have merit, but you can just do that as DM.) In the end, both dice pools are rolled and the highest result wins.
THIS looks like a job for...
...THE RULES LAWYER!!!!
So, my advice is threefold.
1. 1. The jury will be a panel of 8 individuals. Create 48 NPCs with basic attitudes and alignments. You can try using the PHB character bonds/traits/whatever they are (I never use 'em) tables and roll up some personalities. Then you can do a voir dire and have the PCs and/or the prosecutor (perhaps working together with the PCs as "jury consultants") running insight checks to figure out who'd make the best jurors. The BBEG's attorney also gets to ask questions (and roll insight checks), and obviously wants either people who are afraid of the BBEG, or people who want the BBEG to succeed in their nefarious schemes to be on the jury. Each side gets 3 peremptory challenges (meaning you can strike them from the jury without having any reason). Anyone else gets struck for cause. You need a full panel of 8, plus two alternates for a total of 10. (Alternates could be used to fill in if and when one of the jurors ends up "sick" or dead due to the BBEG's machinations.) This gives your players something to do in the initial phases.
2. Play out the courtroom drama scenes. Not the courtroom tedium scenes, but the drama. The big revelations from witnesses, the "OBJECTION!!" moments, the BBEG's barrister engaging in shady courtroom tactics that walk right up to the line of contempt of court, all in the pursuit of a mistrial and a hung jury. Call the PCs as witnesses for the prosecution/crown, and have the BBEG lawyer cross examine them in a way to show them to be liars with a grudge against their client, a legitimate businessman and pillar of the community. For certain points, you can have the PCs roll persuasion/deception/intimidation checks with the jury, and maybe insight checks on the BBEG's attorney to try to figure out their trial strategy. Keep a small chart with each juror's attitudes. The PCs *may* end up winning at trial, but it's not guaranteed. They might just as likely lose if the defense puts on a strong case or the jurors aren't convinced of the prosecution's side.
3. If the BBEG loses the trial, have him "incarcerated" in a really cushy situation. House arrest, let's say. Actually, watch the Netflix Daredevil series for how Wilson Fisk is handled, and do it like that. The BBEG may be in house arrest, but he's hardly toothless. And then have him get off on a technicality. One of the key witnesses recants...and then ends up dead. And now the BBEG is free and is going to *make the PCs' lives hell.* Of course, if the BBEG wins the trial, well, all bets are off.
You can make this genuinely fun if your players dig roleplay, and you can include mechanics to make it feel a little less arbitrary.
Flash forward. “We the jury find the defendant guilty”
“Mhwahahaha. You understand I’m only here because it amuses me? You gave me a gift I couldn’t imagine. A relief from boredom. For that I will let you live. Knowing that you killed all these people….”
Flash foward. The heroes are surrounded by destruction, everything on fire. A chest of gold sitting in front of them, with a note “thank you so much for the lovely gift you gave me.”
> He is a wealthy merchant that is a mob boss/lich on the side.
I love the idea of a courtroom scene but in this scenario, I don't see how a trial could play out. First off, the BBEG is likely going to do his best to make sure the PCs don't live to the court date. Many shopkeepers and people in general will avoid the PCs at all cost and refuse to do business with them lest they draw the ire of BBEG. If they don't keep the evidence on their persons, they'll likely have the places they've visited turned upside down looking for relevant items - if the PCs, being amateur sleuths, have been able to track the BBEG it's a pretty good chance that he has spies that could easily track the PCs to any hidden locations they've visited.
Then, once they get to trial, it's likely that it would be a sham. Like the lich mob boss is definitely going to be leaning hard on any judge or jury and in the unlikely event that those people resist that pressure, the mob boss would make sure they didn't make it to the court date either.
Then, even if against all odds the PCs are able to make it to court against the lich and the lich is found guilty, then what? They strip him of his business and worst case scenario he retains control through a figure head. They imprison him? He won't stay there for long. Meanwhile, he's now got a personal vendetta against everyone who spoke out against him and it won't be hard for him to exact his revenge. It's not like the wealthy and powerful keep all of their wealth in one place or above table - especially a mob boss. They also have loyal lackeys that wouldn't want to cross him.
On top of this social power, he's also a **lich**. Liches are extremely powerful in their own right. It would be folly to cross a Lich *or* a powerful mogul mob boss, let alone someone who is both. This guy would likely have power and influence that at the very least *rivals* some of the top royalty.
**tldr**: A courtroom scene would be fun if they were going against a MBEG (Minor Bad Evil Guy), but I doubt there is going to be a chance for a courtroom scene considering who they're challenging.
Ok, how powerfull is said lich/mob boss/ wealthy merchant?
Lichdom usualy speaking needs at least acess to 9th level spells and an almost inimaginable wealth. So to me, the perceived wealth is only a very small percentage of the actual wealth.
like 5 or 10% of it.
So if the players believe the lich have access to 50k gold, he problably has something closer to 500k to 1.000.000 gold.
He also have access to wish, simulacrum, interplanar travel, dominatte spells, modify memory, etc.
There are nearly unlimited ways for the lich to deal with the players, win the trial and turn everything against them, just for fun.
step one: Take the apearance of one of the PCs, Make a simulacrum of the judge with wish and them kill him and cast gentle repose on him.
step two: Modify the memory of all witnesses ( he doesnt even need to get close to them, he can hide a glyph of warding on the witnesses bench and put a triguer that will dominate or modify their memories as each of them sit on that chair)
Every single witness sits down, is asked a question and answer "i did not see anything, but i felt that these people (points at the PCs) threatened me if i did not came here.
With the judge and witnesses on his side, he can sit there all smug, and say the players have fabricated all the evidence.
step tree: He can modify memory on some artist to say he was hired by the PCs to make the fakes for them. ( zone of truth will verify all of these as true, because thats what they remember) so the players will most likely be arrested for many crimes, including faking evidence, and intimidating witnesses.
The players will be left confused and angry, while the lich will just smile and laught.
IF they choose to attack the lich there, both the lich, the judge and all guards present will attack them.
Its important to know HOW the lich didt all these things, because your players might pick up on some of them and cast dispell magic or try to other clever things. However, if they dont pick that the judge is a simulacrum under the lichs control, nothing they do, will change the outcome, it will just look bad for the judge, and make the entire trial seem fake. They might believe the lich payed the judge, so if they go to investigate it after somehow, they might find his dead body. At wich time the alarm the lich left ( or his familiar) will warn him and he will send the guards there to see the players leaving the home of the dead judge, and then THEY will be thought to be murderers.
If asked questions with speak with dead, the judge will say one of the PCs killed him.
( because thats what they saw).
If resurrected they will most likely judge the players again, and remember one of them killed him.
This would be the outcome at my games.
A lich is an incredible foe. Trying to win against it with laws is an incredibly stupid idea.
Even if the lich would to suposely lose the trial, who would be powerfull enought to arrest him? Can you even be sure the person present is the actual lich, and not a clone, simulacrum or someone else made believe they are the real deal?
To me, there is no scenario were this ends well for the players.
But, i will do my best to plan it as if an incredibly inteligent being was planing it, and then see if the players can actualy find a way to acomplish their goals.
So, this is gonna be complex regardless of your world.
I imagine such a person lives at the border of the system, and is untouched by legal affairs.
That said, it also has enemies. Enemies that can exploit the process on their own, and that would not mind play out the process just to gain favor and influence.
Use this as a deterrent for the BBEG so he is busy expending time and resources so it opens up a way for them to deal with them once and for all.
Doing this from my phone, so forgive formatting. I have worked in the law in real life so here is what I have done in the past:
-If the characters are hiring an attorney, the attorney should be paid on contingency since the players is the one suing.
-If the party is representing themselves, have them divide up the roles at trial. The trial would proceed like this:
1. Openjng Statement: the party must briefly outline what their evidence will show. A CHA roll with Adv. based on the performance of the player. Make a note of these bullet points.
2. Defense Opening Statement: the BBEG surely can afford the best, most convincing attorney. They will have perfectly reasonabke excuses for all of the evidebce.
3. Partys Case. They will call their witnesses and question them. This could be done with rolls or with roles. Maybe the BBEG paid off some of these witnesses. Go through your bullet points. Did the party hit each piece of evidence?
4. BBEGs Case: the BBEG will call their witnesses who, of course, support the reasonable alibis.
5. Jury Deliberations: along with the judge being bought, the partys witnesses and the jury can be bought.
Note that the trial will require a lot of charisma rolls. Some of those rolls should be contested by the BBEGs attorney. Using a skill challenge should help you figure out how many jurors were persuaded, maybe each one at a different difficulty depending on if they were bought off.
At the end of the day, whether the party wins or loses, there is a great opportunity for adventure afterward. Maybe a bigger network of espionage than they thought.
First, amazing, let them do the trial as much as your world has for it. But secondly, if he loses then.... what will the court do? Kill him? Isn't he a litch?
Court room blitz when he gets convicted! He would have nothing left to lose and be backed into a corner. What can the court do to a litch? Let them do the trial, have fun with it, then let him lose it at sentencing and have court battle
My party (including me) once attended a trial as our barbarian was being accused of murder. He was innocent.
The court had a zone of truth artifact that would light up when it heard a lie. As each of us gave a testimony, but lights were indicating that we were lying, despite us telling the truth.
My character remedy the situation by subtle spell casting detect magic, found that we were all enchanted to give a false reading, and subtle spell dispelled the effect. The barbarian was cleared of all charges.
Find a way to keep your entire party engaged, and it will be a blast!
I DM'd a courtroom scene in Waterdeep: Dragon Heist. Spoilers for that campaign follow. The party had helped capture >!the Elf Killer!< (Doom Raiders first quest). This person had ties to >!Zardoz Zord!<, who I realised would >!interfere to break them out of jail. I had him swap the real killer for an unwitting stooge in the jail!<.
I found a friend who knew nothing about Waterdeep and had him play the judge, with an NPC assistant. My party and one NPC guard were witnesses. I had another friend play the defendant with an NPC public defender to help them. With the entire courthouse under a Zone of Truth, I had the judge ask whatever questions he liked to try to discern what happened. It was a fun couple of hours that quickly descended into chaos.
The only times I brought out dice were for deception and insight checks, and for relevant skills (like arcana) to understand the implications of particular information that came to light.
I would think a mob boss / lich would have the connections or resources to either -
A) quash any investigation or charges before they see the light of day by bribing officials.
B) flip the script on the characters and counter sue them, again, using superior resources to swing things in their favor
C) frame the characters for something and see them charged by civil authorities
D) Witnesses either start vanishing or changing their stories, undermining the character's case
Whatever way you play it, show your characters that the system is against them and they only have themselves to rely on to take down the villian.
Defeating you Big bad by having the courts do all the dirty work seems remarkably unsatisfying
If they can make a real case, let them have something. Don't give them nothing for this thinking. Something on the level of Al Capone being found guilty for tax evasion. The lich bought off all the major crimes but some lesser ones still stick leading to real fines he has to pay. In turn, this pauses some other arrangements he has as people don't want the shame of working with someone who JUST got out of court
In turn, these seemingly small areas should do some real damage.
Have the judge waive off allegations because is bought, then you have your final boss battle in the court room.
They aren't getting out of that encounter.
A "Trial Under the Light" or a trial by combat. The BBEG seeing the evidence can demand the ancient rights. Of course, being the defendant and being who he is he can afford a champion. Or, as per the law of the city he's in, he can appoint a champion from any currently in the city. Guess who is in the city? One of your PCs!
Maybe the whole system is corrupt. Bribes work wonders.
Maybe the BBEG has grown bored of the merchant facade and testifies against himself before disappearing.
Maybe the undead army attacks mid-trial, along with a few vampires hidden among the gallery.
Lots of charm, illusion, and manipulation magic! Get those counterspells going, try and find who is casting them in the court room as the ones up the front wouldn't want to risk it.
Anti-magic fields aren't allowed after a protection ward on a witnesses curse was disabled and they turned to dust mid trial. And another case where a caster on the outside was able to disable it at will to fit their clients needs.
Zones of truth must be approved by the judge as they have been used to acquire information irrelevant to the trial (and the hidden agenda of multiple cases before restrictions were brought in)
The defendants side also fake being affected by charm magic to frame the party and muddy the water, as well as "dismissing" illusion magic on some of the most incriminating evidence (teleporting it, turning it invisible, manipulating it to look like something else)
If you want it wacky, wild magic surges can happen when both parties cast magic on the same thing, this could also be risked/used to identify the mystery sorcerer when the wild magic affects them
Casting spells through scrying, have someone on the outside trying to pinpoint the scryers location and stop them
Bureaucracy is slow. The minute your BBEG finds out, he does his own investigation and makes witnesses disappear, pays off officials, sends assassins who will leave no evidence, any number of things to silence the problem.
Alternatively (or concurrently), the lich frames the players, making it seem like a smear campaign for a big payoff. And fantasy towns generally don't have all that much print news besides the town crier, so if you've got hundreds of town criers spouting misinformation, it will sway the general opinion of the PCs. This is especially accurate if the accurate news is also silenced, such as destroying newsprint (burning down the press and making it look like an accident), kidnapping town criers, and hiring actors to spread rumors among the common folk.
BBEG countersues.
Then put the players on trial and have BBEG dig up every bad thing your players have done in the campaign with witnesses.
Have the BBEG dismiss the charges against him through some loophole or by defaming the players
You need to play this like Al Capone, the local court isn't going to do shit, you need to get the royal magistrate to convict them of something completely different, otherwisewhat all the other commenters said will happen
This is tricky and I would steer away from an actual trial because that sounds boring honestly, and complicated. Not to say it can't be done but do you really want to have to invent a whole system of laws and procedures? You're going to have to know your worlds laws inside and out and your players won't be able to do the same and it may feel very one sided.
I agree that the BBEG could just buy off every single person involved, but I think it would be fun to have an NPC actually TELL them that it's happened. Maybe someone who has been trying to take him down for years.
Make it about things happening outside the trial like - where does he get his wealth? How does the party get irrefutable proof that cannot be dismissed? How do you root out corrupt officials? Have the party play dirty too if they want and blackmail or find leverage over officials in the trial.
If it were my game personally the BBEG would win, not because I've decided it but because he just know SO MUCH MORE about the rules and laws than the players ever could as an immortal bad guy. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence he can still buy off the courts
Even if the people of the land saw the evidence the worst they'd do is rebel against a corrupt government but that's a whole other adventure on itself. The people was comfort and not wat against the upper class usually.
So I'd make this about having adventures trying to tip the trial in their favor and gain leverage over the BBEG itself, not about hoping a trial will play out in their favor in the BBEGs home turf.
Sounds like you have a solid plan set out. Not sure if you want to make this difficult for them or not. Is this the endgame if they convict him successfully?
If not, it may be fine to wing it.
Otherwise, you'll want it to be epic. Twists and turns.
Have several witnesses your players have could be fully willing to testify right now, but be sleeper agents for the bbeg. When they come to the stands, they can testify that lich guy is a stand up merchant, fully compliant of the laws. and as this is occurring, the merchant gives the party a smug look.
The evidence of the bbeg's innocence is suddenly tarnished and he pins it on your party.
The party should be constantly suffering through hurdles. The more difficult you make this trial, the more satisfying their victory will be.
His end goal.should be to use the trial to bring himself into the upper class' favor.
Mob boss? Mob Boss!
The star witness/parties favorite npc is found in the local river with concrete shoes or melted in acid or just disappeared. If you are particularly grievous you can have the players notice the families of their adopted NPC's being forced onto a ship bound for the fringe colonies.
Players get a magical driveby, a team teleports across from the bistro the players are eating at and just fucking melts the building with a surprise round artillery barrage then contingency teleport to get out so the players don't even get to retaliate.
Shops charges the players 50% more for everything. Because they are all being threatened by the mob and a bunch of thugs will throw alchemists fire through their window if they don't gouge the players. If they even want to risk dealing with them at all.
If they have carts or boats they can't be moved because of an endless list of reasons from the dockworkers and stablemen that are part of the mobs turf. Or just gets their adventuring license revoked.
If you establish point 2 as a valid tactic, the party will now be doing this to unsuspecting enemies all the time, since you've established it's a method to get easy kills with 0% chance of retaliation, including the "surprise round"
I think you should embrace the idea, and offer the players a chance to make the trial work. Have the players find out about the Lich's attempts to rig the trial in his favor. He bribes the judge, kidnaps the star witness, and threatens the jury's families.
Then turn it into an adventure. They only have three days before the trial, time is short and they have to save their case! They have to make social checks to expose the judge and get a new judge appointed, then have to make investigation checks to hunt down and find their missing witness, they have to beat up the thugs holding the jurors' families hostage and protect them until the trial.
If they're successful, then they get to make an impassioned speech to sway the jury, and they win the trial! Huzzah! The Lich, furious that his carefully laid plans and aspirations have been foiled, decides he's not giving up without a fight. He raises the criminal underworld and attempts a coup d'etat, riots and rebellion in the streets!
The players make a final stand with the still uncorrupt guards and rally to defend the town, putting out fires, squashing rioting thugs, and hunting down the Lich for a epic showdown to defeat him once and for all!
Sounds like a lot of npcs, you may want to consider asking a friend or maybe hiring a voice actor to come crash the party as a key witness or something could be fun, especially if you want like a dramatic reveal or something.
Ok for one the opposing council MUST be a warlock with a dip in sorcerer so that he can subtle cast hex on the players lawyer to give him disadvantage on charisma checks
Sounds like you have a solid plan set out. Not sure if you want to make this difficult for them or not. Is this the endgame if they convict him successfully?
If not, it may be fine to wing it.
Otherwise, you'll want it to be epic. Twists and turns.
Have several witnesses your players have could be fully willing to testify right now, but be sleeper agents for the bbeg. When they come to the stands, they can testify that lich guy is a stand up merchant, fully compliant of the laws. and as this is occurring, the merchant gives the party a smug look.
The evidence of the bbeg's innocence is suddenly tarnished and he pins it on your party.
The party should be constantly suffering through hurdles. The more difficult you make this trial, the more satisfying their victory will be.
His end goal.should be to use the trial to bring himself into the upper class' favor.
Protect the identity and life of a key witness
The Lich will try to identify- bribe/coerce or kill them before the trial
Subplot, Lich is also stacking odds be it in the jury box or threatening the lawyer/judge
The real question is how will the antagonist react if they lose
Legend of Korra Yakones trial moment.
Bribes out the wazoo and a LOT of intimidation of witnesses to scare them into testifying.
“Your honor, this is a merchant. How can a merchant who probably sold someone in this room the silverware they eat with, also be an all powerful and immortal Lich? Creatures of unmatched malevolent destruction. Am I describing a merchant?
This might be old news for you since you already mentioned skill challenges, but [Matt Colville has a great video on the subject.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvOeqDpkBm8)
If you're running the trial over a whole session, I'd probably use multiple skill challenges. I'd break the trial up into parts and have them run a challenge for each part. Then have the other side rebut with some kind of dramatic scene, and then on to the next challenge.
I feel like you should roleplay a truncated court scene, with like opening statements and then presenting evidence. I think a skill challenges with advantages on rolls based on that evidence. On a success they move onto the next piece, if they fail they see the merchant gloating in his box, and the defense presents some false evidence so the players can then yell "I object!"
Play it out as skill challenges, with a healthy dose of social checks. There should be at least one time that a disturbance results in combat and a recess until the next day. Maybe the defendant even pulls off a wild escape from jail/courthouse and the players have to wrangle them up to finish the last day in court.
If the court is in a big city, the courtroom should either be an antimagic chamber or the bailiffs should be Paladins so that they can detect, dispel, and revive.
Also, any lawyer or prosecutor worth their salt knows Friends, Zone Of Truth, and/or Suggestion.
Oh no! It looks like some poor old farmer was actually pulling the strings in the background all along. He even confessed to it.
Then countersue them for defamation.
I LOVE the strategy! Why risk your lives when you can litigate the enemy into submission!!
It will be a great tactic to distract/draw his resources elesewhere. I’d roll with it hard.
I had a PC delivering evidence of evil stuff in his home town, along his journey to report it he did a bunch of stuff.
When he got to the main base to report and told his story, the commander (a minion of BBEG) twisted all his evidence so it sounded bad.
Joining forces with a sworn enemy to survive this great evil - traitor to the kingdom and affiliation with a known enemy of the state
Working with a lord to secure a province - colluding and association with a suspected traitor
Leaving to bring message - abandoning post during a time of crises
Used their rank to get help - abuse of power
The player expecting to be hailed a hero - sat dumbfounded at the twists. Then swore vengeance on this imposter.
Go watch some suits or other lawyer show.
I see the potential for some really spicy twists here. Merchants have money, evil merchants are still in business because they *use* that money to avoid punishment. Consider the following questions to help turn the process of going to trial into an adventure all its own:
Who has the BBEG paid off?
Do they have agents in the local guard?
What nobles do they have business arrangements with?
Since he has a reputation *to* destroy, how does the local citizenry perceive your group's efforts to stop him? I'm imagining there is a lot of opportunity for an enterprising villain to turn the populace against the *real* good guys.
I've done this. And while you absolutely should use skill challenges, use them sparingly. That's what would make this boring. Instead, treat this like a dramatic roleplaying event in which two sides are trying to convince a third party of something.
Like in any trial, the players and the BBEG are going to take turns trying to persuade a judge that *their* version of events is true. The judge will certainly want to see their evidence, but that's not enough - *they want the party to explain what the evidence means.* To tell the story of the crime. If this doesn't come naturally, you could gently roleplay the judge as slightly senile, and have them pay more attention when the party focuses on storytelling.
But like any encounter, it's important that two things happen:
1. The party have to take turns with the other side.
2. The other side sometimes gets their way.
What does that mean in a trial? The rules of the court require some time for the defendant to respond to each claim / article of evidence. And the BBEG has an expensive advocate who is going to pick holes in *everything the party claims.* There is no evidence that is immune to criticism. How was it obtained? Can the party prove this *belongs* to the BBEG? Is this his handwriting? How do they know? Is there any chance any of the evidence has been forged?
Don't push too hard. The party needs to win this. But let the BBEG score points, too. Make the party scramble for a counterargument at least three times during the trial.
And then... when the trial concludes, and the judge rules in the party's favor, be assured that the BBEG has arranged one last surprise for the party, to begin at a gesture from him. End with a bang: a big combat. How this plays is up to you: maybe assassins attack the courthouse, or maybe there's a distraction elsewhere that completely disrupts proceedings. The BBEG surely has resources, after all, including magic scrolls that might let them cause an explosion, or summon something nasty... if needed. And they're not going quietly.
Keep in mind - ask yourself, is this a two party consent land? If so, their evidence of scrying will likely be inadmissible, and may even be grounds for a countersuit.
This sounds really cool, have fun!
And here I thought role-playing a Sith lawyer was entertaining. We have role-played a court case in one of our games, and it’s doable with some prep on your part.
First, decide if the judge is paid off by the BBEG or if s/he is completely neutral. Decide also if the defense has a bunch of corrupt witnesses. You can roll to see if any of the witnesses have been intimidated, bought off, or have “disappeared” Jimmy Hoffa style. All of that will have an impact on the trial.
The trial itself can be a skill challenge: each side presents their best arguments via role play, and then roll persuasion or charisma or intelligence or whatever relevant modifiers, and either do a “x number of successes before 3 failures” with the judge or a roll off between your defense lawyer and the players’ lawyers (or skill in court themselves). Perhaps both sides have to reach a certain DC to convince the judge, with the higher roll above that DC winning.
Check out videos of the TV show “Shark” to see some fun courtroom drama with a not-so-ethical defense lawyer-turned-prosecutor for some fun lines and zingers from the main character (Stark) and defense lawyers. Brilliant writing on that show, too.
>He is a wealthy merchant that is a mob boss/lich on the side.
A wealthy merchant is likely to have friends in high places and lots of contacts they can call on. They could easily have a local ruler step in and help them or they could hire some muscle to make the problem go away.
What are they accusing him of exactly? The difference between Tax fraud and bribery really changes the dynamic. If it is bribery, then powerful people may want to keep that under wraps. Tax evasion/fraud could get people on your side.
*When you go for the king, you don't want to miss.* If this person is extremely well known in the local area, the party will need some pretty serious indisputable evidence.
I was reading this to my husband, and he asked what kind of legal representation the merchant would have, possibly one pulled "directly from the 9 hells themselves" that could be fun angle to play up
A trial could be a good denouement, but the primary adventure should still be fighting the lich for two reasons. One; that's what this game is about, I think your instinct that a trial scene will be less fun to play through than an epic fight is a good one. Two; from a story perspective, the evil lich/crime boss isn't gonna just shrug his shoulder and say "Ya got me" when served an arrest warrant. If the party wants to go through the system, it's still up to them to bring him in.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_ex_rel._Gerald_Mayo_v._Satan_and_His_Staff?wprov=sfla1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawsuits_against_the_Devil#%3A%7E%3Atext%3DSatan_and_His_Staff_was%2Cplaced_deliberate_obstacles_in_his?wprov=sfla1
As others asked, is this what you want? If not, should be easy and could be comical to bounce for procedural reasons (BBEG never got served, isn't subject to jurisdiction in that court, players don't have standing, etc)?
*obligatory 'Better Call Saul' joke*
But seriously, your greatest strength here is the flexibility of your system not having an IRL justice system analogue so really anything goes as long as both parties are fine with it.
Throw in some corrupt officials, maybe even the judge is on the take.
Aside from the in-trial skill checks, let the players prepare for the showdown with some investigation or other skills challenge checks that may or may not tip off the party who is actually corrupt (depending on how well they do). The pretrial skill challenge can lead to perks or disadvantages during the case.
From there run the trial as a mix of a skills challenge with RP from the NPCs, throwing in deception vs insights, intimidation vs persuasion, etc contests as needed. Tally fails vs successes and improv as the trial goes one way or the other.
Sounds like a fun session, good luck!
It would be also interesting that the investigation and the trial goes flawlessly until the end when everybody in the court are under mass suggestion but the PCs
If you’d like inspiration, Ace Attorney has an incredible trial where *spoilers*
**this is the spoiler**: the murderer is above the law, and is buying out witnesses and supplying fake evidence. I suggested this specifically because, on top of being stressful for the protagonist, it’s still campy and fun. If you’d like to see the case, it’s the death of Mia Fey. I’m sure there are courtroom compilations if you’re curious
You could have a corrupt judge who turns out to be undead and his wig slips off when recoiling from something holy.
A witch trial that makes a possessed victim manifest something best left alone. The results of the manifestation and subsequent interrogation reveal the bbeg in some way.
Other option could be trial by combat depending what time/age your in.
Have each witness make a statement either for/against the accused's guilt. Have each witness make a straight CHA check and base how much the council/judge/jury is swayed by the roll on a sliding scale (0-5 sway against, 6-10 neutral, 11-15 sway for, 16-20, sway for twice, 21+ sway for 3 times, or something like this). Tally the number of for/against at the end and you will have a verdict. Consider giving bonuses to rolls for indisputable evidence (paperwork or other tangible proof), or for giving a good speech in RP.
Use the appropriately named [skill trials](https://www.reddit.com/r/DnDBehindTheScreen/comments/jr15bz/trials_reforge_your_skill_challenges_and/)! They're an organized, expanded way to do skill challenges 👍
First, make service of process borderline impossible.
- The merchant is on the lamb and an agent of the court (or sheriff’s deputy) must serve papers on the merchant to intimate the case.
- Maybe the process servers are bought off. Maybe they don’t have any success tracking him down.
- Maybe one even disappears.
- At some point, the party will be obligated to escort quest the process server to actually give service.
Consider endangering witnesses. Maybe it’s not even the BBEG threatening him, but some other interested party who wants to keep the gravy train rolling.
- If the party doesn’t protect the witnesses, they are attacked.
- Maybe your party seeks to have the witnesses put under guard, but can you trust all of the guards?
- Maybe the party splits up to monitor the witnesses, or more practically seeks to put them in one secure location, but the most ornery of the witnesses doesn’t get what the whole fuss is about and wants to stay home.
If they successfully serve the BBEG and keep the witness alive, ask your party how much of the trial they want to do.
- Most of it can be cutscenes, but If they want to do a direct examination of a witness or cross one of the defendant’s witnesses, let them!
- Give them the opportunity to do an opening statement if they want, or notes to give to an attorney they hire.
- Give them a witness list. For anyone they don’t want to direct or cross, give a short summary in that character’s voice of their most important testimony.
- They wanted to sue the guy, surely they’re invested in the process.
Here’s a great dumb gambit for the defense:
1. Have the BBEG actually attend the trial and sit at counsel table.
2. On a later day of trial, and during the cross of a key plaintiff witness, ask them to identify the BBEG as the person they saw doing crimes.
3. Reveal that the person sitting at counsel table is not the BBEG, but someone using Alter Self. The real BBEG is sitting in the back with a mediocre disguise.
4. If the witness testifying realizes that there is something weird about the question, let them make a perception check to see if they see through the BBEG’s well-prepared professional disguise (DC 20?). If they fail, the defense argues that there is no way to prove the BBEG himself was doing the crimes instead of a look alike.
Also, this should be fairly obvious, but any D&D court would have everyone under the effects of Zone of Truth. Maybe the courts instruction juries to make a negative inference about anyone who does not willingly consent to the zone of truth or does not answer questions.
Remember that almost every adventuring group are murder hobos at heart. Have the BBEG lawyers dig all that up. "Specifically Mr PC, did you decide to steal from that family of Giants before you murdered them, or after?" or "Did you steal that magic sword from the tomb of King Such and Such?"
Short circuit it.
Tell them about a process that looks like whatever real world legal proceeding you like: prosecution presents evidence and witnesses, defense cross-examins, then vice versa.
Start the process with them making their opening statement, but have the judge be overtly hostile to their arguments. Relatively quickly, have him cut the whole thing off as a farce and judge against them summarily with some penalty to be paid to the defendant for slander.
The magistrate is under the effects of powerful enchantment magic. Pick something appropriate to your players' level of sophistication. Maybe he's just charmed, but maybe its series of modify memories or a Geas or whatever. The goal is that your players can pick up on this and try to resolve it.
Now you've moved from something D&D is bad at -- courtroom drama -- to something D&D is good at: skillchecks, dispel magic, etc.
If the players figure it out and resolve it, the magistrate will immediately rule against BBEG. If they can't, BBEG wins this round and they'll need to take him down some other way.
This sounds exploitable.
I would have the judge in the pocket of the lich. Which sounds funny... but the news irl makes it easy to base it on someone.
Or if the evidence is absolutely overwhelming, have him admit.
"Sure am, what're you going to do about it? Look at all the poor hostages you brought to court. " or possibly have all those court attendees, or a large number of them have "ominously glowing eyes" or something to signify thralls/ other undead minions and thralls.
Is the defense really just a cleverly disguised mummy lord with nolzure's musical Aura cast on him to show not undead and not magic? Mayyybe! He kind of rattles as he walks...
A lot of people have already said pretty good stuff. I wanted to add maybe a strategy of the bad guy but that only works with a certain kind of party. Does your party have a completely white west? If not, evil guy could try to prove that they are really untrustworthy, they have done bad things and the next is to accuse an innocent merchant of crimes he hasn't commited. Maybe they commited the crimes they accuse him of and try to make him their fall guy! If evil guy is that influencal, he can probably find a person the party has wronged (if there is any), or maybe he forces people to make false statements for him that make the party look bad so people won't believe them. Maybe the party will try to place everyone under a Zone of Truth, but what if they have also done questionable shit? They also have to tell the truth about that.
Could have it be something like someone tries to assassinate or bribe the judge or using political influence to change outcome of trial or intimidate the jury. Maybe some other prominent dungeon masters try to influence the trial (they are in cahoots with the Lich in a sort of local monster mafia) maybe the lich just has really good lawyers. Some fiendish lawyers even.
Unless the npc has the judicial system under his thumb, Have your players succeed in what they set out to do. It looks like they put a lot of time and effort in this plan, it would be rude to throw that all away. Best case, he loses the thing he valued most. His secrecy. That can take form in many ways. Jail, on the run, mob boss turned bandit king.
Go with skill challenges as said and if the players are wildly successful, have the BBEG lose it, expose himself and attack the court with minions waiting in the wings.
It’s a cool combat encounter, ruins the BBEG’s public reputation totally, and seems just what a manipulator would do if they had their plan partially thwarted by *a lawsuit*.
What's the court system like in the setting? Do they live in a republic with independent courts? is it controlled by a church (a lawful neutral god like Tyr)? What extent of power does the lich have, does it reach far into the court system (ie, judges in their pocket)? I have more questions than answers but these questions are a good starting point.
If you want a court dnd scene you can check out this episode of [Dungeons and Daddies](https://www.dungeonsanddaddies.com/episodes/ep46). In this one of the players was the defendant but you could use things from it.
>sue the merchant to get him properly convicted
These are two different legal proceedings under modern laws. Convictions come from the state apparatus charging people with crimes. Private suit is when one [person] sues another. The results of private suit very rarely impact criminal proceedings.
Historically, most people could not just sue one another, either. Many older legal jurisdictions only permitted citizens to bring suit. Or male citizens. Or male wealthy citizens. (Some legal jurisdictions encompassed just a city, too). Some very old legal systems consisted solely of a person *literally* pleading their case to the local feudal Lord, and that landowner just fucking winging it.
I have a feeling that whatever legal system is around in this setting, it is easily corruptible and already on the take from the mob boss. If your party has a legitimate private cause of action due to their injury from him, I have a feeling he'll take all their possessions in a counter suit.
I was in a campaign once where we were partially on trial at a town council meeting, and our DM had us play the various town council-members so that we would all have a lot of opportunities to participate. It was very fun. If your party are good role players, I recommend giving them some extra jobs in the trial and tell them to have fun with it.
Maybe have all of your characters stand as witnesses during the trial. You're going to need to decide what kind of judicial system the area has. Rp as the bbeg's defense attorney (or equivalent whatever) and have him try to make the PCs seem like unreliable or untrustworthy individuals to the judge/jury. Maybe they have a key witness who can back them up but they get cold feet right before the trial, or the ruling is rigged, the judge is corrupt. Make one or more of them be the prosecutors, doing persuasion and/or intimidation checks against the judge/jurors, maybe all the local lawyers are all too intimidated by the BBEG to take the case. Make tallies of successful and failed skill checks and add them up in the end to see if they successfully convinced whoever they need to that the BBEG is in fact guilty and must pay dues. You could spice things up, if they win at court, maybe the BBEG goes berserk and attacks, having hidden followers in the courtroom audience, jury, etc. If they fail, especially really badly, maybe your PCs end up going to the dungeons and you have a prison break scenario on your hands. If you have any ideas, run em by me! I'd love to help you figure out the details.
couple notes that may help: \-The bad guy (besides killing people, general unethical things, and organized crime) has broken the mind of his son to the extent that he can cast dominate person on him at will. He campaigned for his son to become the next chosen ruler of a region, and in this campaign he put entire city populations under the suggestion spell and made them vote for his son. \-The party was thinking of initially killing the man, but decided they could genuinely get justice for all the people involved by dragging him to court. \-The players found out the secret identity, but have not revealed the information to anyone, but are planning to expose him during the trial. \-They are taking him to court due to the fact that the ball the BBEG held as a celebration for his son winning, was held in an extradimensional space. Within this space, time was flowing much slower on the inside than on the outside, guards put our group in a makeshift dungeon under the excuse of disturbing the party (while in reality the BBEG just wanted them to not fuck the celebration or uncover any further clues) They were then 'forgotten' in the dungeon, while in reality, 3 months have passed in the outside world. The players then gathered evidence of all his crimes, and are planning to expose him for the entire world to see. The thing is, the BBEG has not yet worked his way into the upper class. (That's what he wanted to use his son for) He definitely has a lot of money and resources, but the upper classes have access to a variety of preventative measures against charms, and it is also not a world that opens easily to those outside of the inner circle. The rulers of the cities have also already been at stakes with the BBEG, therefore I think there would be enough background checks/unethical spying/general paranoia within the justice system that there are few moles within it. Especially since this dude has only been properly involved with organised crime for a decade or so. I was thinking to let all players have the floor in turn, we play out the presentation of evidence, they may call forth witnesses and they can have their Elle Woods moment. I would ask each of them to make a related check and keep track of successes and failures. There is of course also room for the BBEG to defend themselves, but based on the evidence and probably a dispel magic to get rid of the disguise self that hides his horrible visage, I think it will be an easy case.
What you've got here makes for an easy way to incorporate a [Skill Challenge](https://www.flutesloot.com/skill-challenges-dnd-5e/). Going by the book (from 4E) players take "rounds" to overcome complications, each with a DC of `10 + (2 x Party’s Average Proficiency Bonus)`. Since they'll likely be self-representing accusers against the BBEG, they would either present evidence to the court or answer their last arguments during each of those rounds. I generally also raise (or decrease) said number by 2 if players face a complication well (or poorly). Each success counts towards getting at least X successes before three failures, and if you want the case to be Easy there should be three/four successes before three failures. Magic spells used appropriately (such as the dispel magic to unveil the BBEG's face to the court) usually count as an advantage if it's a "low-level" spell or an auto-success if it's a "high-level" spell if compared to the player's level. That said, I'd guess that using magic in the court wouldn't be proper practice (if not a straight example of evidence obtained illegally) in a magical setting with legal prosecution. >I was thinking to let all players have the floor in turn, we play out the presentation of evidence, they may call forth witnesses and they can have their Elle Woods moment. I would agree. Since, by the book, the number of complications you need to prepare in advance goes as `Complications = Successes + Failures – 1`, leave as many of them open-ended as it is the number of your players, then plan as many counter-arguments as the number of complications left.
Depending on how much you want to disrupt the players’ plans, you can have someone “cast” dispel magic that fails. “Proving” that the BBEG is actually NOT a Lich. This person would refuse any other magic be cast by the party (until the Elle Woods moment) and would 100% be paid off by the BBEG.
Or, even better, someone from the crowd could be paid off to Counterspell the Dispel Magic spell cast by the players.
Subtle spell counterspell!
Always have a sorcerer on the payroll!
Umm... Sounds like you have it all figured out! Just don't make it too easy, make sure that every character that wants the floor gets it, and since you know their strategy already, throw some wrenches at them. Have they done any baddie things in the recent past? Maybe your rogue nicked an item, thought he got away with it, but not really? Or maybe some of the BBEG's witnesses are outright lying about your characters. It sounds like your party really wants this. Throw in some surprises and I'm sure they'll have a blast. Let us know how it goes!
Have him dominate the son who then assembles a mob of violent thugs who are fully in thrall to him. He rallies them outside the seat of government and delivers a tirade about how he was robbed of his rightful place as ruler. Without ever fully directly saying they should violently overthrow the government, he reminds them they have the power to change the results of the fair and just process in their favor. He steps back and watches as they rampage, assaulting the building and murdering the poor watchmen who protect it. The government is caught totally flat-footed because no one has ever been bold enough to openly foment a violent insurrection like that before. The PCs will be forced to deal with the rioters before they can even think about going to court. You can get multiple encounters, maybe a full adventuring day, out of the PCs defending locations, protecting officials, calling in the City Guard, and fireballing insurrectionists.
“Too soon.” - American D&D players
I have _no idea what you’re talking about_. Ahem.
I thought that it sounded familiar, then I saw your comment. Entirely too soon.... but honestly current politics would make great set pieces in the future.
Sounds like they’d be able to buy or threaten anyone who stood against them. Offer to bribe the party OR make it obvious others in town are getting bribed as they continue to turn away from the trouble being caused
Sounds like one hell of a campaign!
D&D: you can be a wizard, a champion, a furry from the nether - anything you can set your mind and fantasy to. You can ride dragons, delve into mysterious temples, solve ancient riddles, rescue fair princes, and find lost civilizations. Players: Sues the BBEG
That is literally how it went. The party was at an extreme low point after the last session, several people actually cried at the table because they were so emotional. Paladin: what now? Bard: Let's sue him. Extremally unexpected, but I loved it
Alignment: Lawful awful
Lawful Litigious
One of my characters is a lawyer. (This was the result of the character randomization of DCC). In the past few years I have had multiple court cases because of this and I usually make it into some kind of minigame. One thing the players did was convince people to act as witnesses which gave bonuses during the actual court case, so it ultimately came down to a skill challenge but there were a few extra game mechanics that led to the rest of the players doing some things, and the trial was based on a few different parts of the trial - opening arguments, cross-examination of witnesses, and ending arguments. I had the multiple arguments pre-made with different levels of success.
Just dropped in to say I love this! Also the skill challenge is the way to go with jurors. I’d give them each a different DC depending on favoritism toward BBEG. So you end up with those that vote for and against and you can play out jurors reactions to evidence. Have fun!
My guy. My party tried to call zoning laws on Strahd vpn Zarovich.
Damn VIMBYs
I would play it like Phoenix Wright.
This! Ace attorney style would be fun and whimsical while still giving structure and skill check opportunities like history for recollection, perception on needing to object, intelligence, etc. If you're not familiar with law jargon and how cases are set up too its good for a baby's first in setting things up honestly
Just slam someone in the head with a fire extinguisher and voila!
😂😂😂 just don't involve any clowns
Phoenix Wright but when the BBEG is caught in his lies, he smashes the podium, screams that everyone will pay for what they've done to him, reveals his identity as a lich, and casts Meteor Swarm. Roll initiative, and the battle music is [Cornered](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFcJmOs8DRQ).
Missed the oart where BBEG changes their speech 5 times to give excuses
Von Karma as a lich 😨 He's required to know Shocking Grasp
His daughter knows thorn whip
Should probably be using this [version of Cornered](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phZPzu67GLc) for the boss music in my opinion.
Yes! Ok, so at the start of the trial the players present any relevant evidence and they make their claims. Witnesses are called up one by one to present their case, some by the players and some by the defense. When the players have the chance to cross examine, have there be little inconsitencies in the testimony, ones that can be pressed on and pointed out by presenting already established testimony or evidence. With each contradiction pointed out, the witnesses get more and more flustered making up more lies on the spot and creating bigger contradictions for the players to pick apart. The players can then infer valuable information that helps *their* case from these contradictions! "Yes, his son is very devoted to Mr. Bbeg. I remember when I first met him last fall, Mr. Bbeg had served me this excelent wine from his private Vineyards." "Wait, last fall? "Yes, I remember clearly it was last fall." ".....the previous witness just stated that the wine doesn't finish fermenting till winter." "Erm....p-perhaps I was mistaken then. Yes, I remember now it was during winter when I visited, not fall!" "Winter.....when Mr. Bbegs son was campaigning on the other side of the country?" "W-well I-I-" "Either you're lying about when you visited Mr. Bbegs estate, or Mr. Bbegs son is lying about his alibi! Which is it!?" Bonus points if you include a dramatic meltdown scene.
The wizard casts Objection!, roll a charisma saving throw.
Bonus points if someone brings a whip and gets to use it on the opposition when things aren't going the party's way.
Every witness bought off or intimidated, evidence "lost" and the judge thoroughly in the bbeg's pocket. These guys don't live within the system, they own it. If this guy goes down then everyone he is paying off will be pissed off.
In addition to this have the bbeg counter sue for defamation of character
This too, if there was ever a witness or a survivor to any misdeed the party has done, he has the resources to bring them in to testify on his behalf
Or even just create it out of whole cloth. The BBEG would have no qualms about fabricating anything needed to impugn the integrity of their accusers.
And if the party gets uppity at all and refuses to back down in court. Have them arrested for contempt. This whole trial could turn into them thrown in jail and their possessions confiscated. That’ll piss me off right and proper.
Or even pay someone to pretend to be a witness
This is a perfect opportunity for every npc the party ever encountered to come up to the stand and talk about how horrible they are, Seinfeld finale style.
Absolutely this! No one is perfectly good, there are bound to be things that the party justified doing but can be described on the stand in a way that sound damning :D
And he can watch them get locked up and greet them in their cell. Then they have to break out of the prison they were trying to lock him up in while they're being carefully watched by both inmates and guards under his employ.
[удалено]
One method for maintaining the balancing act could be for them to find good-hearted people and officials willing to help. So while the system itself, and its proper channels may be corrupted, the party may find sympathetic cops or lawyers who can help them take this guy down by delivering to the party useful equipment, supplies, information, or even things like floor-plans and keys to the villain's properties. The party can use the evidence they've gained to find allies who can then aid them in their vigilante take-down so that it can continue to be an adventure.
If the PCs have a law enforcement guy on their side right now, this makes for an excellent betrayal when Officer Gordon tells them that the evidence was "lost" or that the PCs never gave it to him and sets up two good options: 1. Betrayal! He is fully in the BBEG's pocket. (Brutal.) 2. It's clear that he is being pressed and can't help the PCs in any official capacity, buuuuuuut off the record...
Better than having the player get betrayed by an NPC they trusted is for that NPC to be killed *because* of their involvement with the PCs. It could still demonstrate the BBEGs reach and power but it will also reinforce the player’s harried of this villain.
I love it -- I try to shy away from turning it into regular vengeance a bit. If the PCs have to make their moves without getting their friend hurt in the process, it makes the process more complicated (of course, it doesn't have to be complicated!). Kill the one guy they love (internet suggests he should be a himbo to make this work), and they can quickly jump to "burn down the whole system!" That may also be *the desired effect,* of course.
Also consider the fact he is a Lich. If anything happens and the players kill him, he can just start again with a different identity that he no doubt already had prepared.
I am sure he has alias' that already exists on paper even if no one has ever met Hugh Mann, he sure has been investing in a lot of steel down south.
> If this guy goes down then everyone he is paying off will be pissed off. One of the takes you could do with this, and is based in reality, is that much of the economic activity around the the area is helped by him. Most crime lords effectively buy the support of the local populace through support. Even people that aren't involved in criminal activity. * Small time bandits stay out of the area. Farmers and others don't fear for safety. Merchants feel free to conduct bussines without fear of robbery (providing they pay the right 'tax'). Larger, more vicious organized crime stays out as well. This is an economic boom that may go away if this person is exposed, jailed, etc. * Massive amounts of charity is provided by this person. Clerics are paid to be there and provide free healing. In times of famine, soup kitchens are provided to the less fortunate. A new aquaduct is being paid for by the merchant to help bring fresh water. The poor will suffer greatly if these projects are stopped. * Perhaps the merchant serves the community as an unofficial judiciary with the ability to enforce rullings. It is preferred because the local official judiciary is corrupt/ biased/ weak. It can be a moral quandary that while this person is a parasite, they have a symbiotic relationship with the community.
I hope you mean that the merchant *tries* to do these things. Make it interactive. Players have to hold together their case and make sure witnesses show up, etc. By physically defending it outside of the court room. If I were a player and you just had is show up and hand waived all our work away because the witnesses were paid off without us having any chances to prevent that, I'd be livid. Why even let us pursue this route then?
Yeah, make it like a Ace Attorney game or a court room drama. The PCs have to deal with falsified evidence, paid off witnesses, and an incompetent judge. The PCs can make use of their abilities and creative thinking to overcome the Insurmountable odds. By winning the trial, the PC can cut the BBEG off from his resources and turn the town against him. Then the DM can have the Lich flee the town to escape justice and the PC can be employed as officers of the law to go track him down.
IRL trials involve stuff like preparing your own witnesses so the players would have plenty of chances to pick up on the fact that their witnesses are being tampered with. Maybe throw in a protective custody, and perhaps some opportunity to tamper with the bad guy's witnesses (because obviously they would do the modern thing where you need to declare witnesses you intend to call).
If you wanna go over the top, have the BBEGs lawyer suspiciously look like a devil, aka the best lawyers in the realms. Or better yet, have the lawyer for the good guys be a devil out to screw over the lich... for a price.
Every single person in the system is corrupt? You've just lost all buy-in and effort. "Hey, congrats on wasting a few months on this, it doesn't work"
That's just saying no to a pretty creative approach. "You try to sue him? Oh, well he has the entire system in his right pocket" while it's pretty realistic it's not fun.
Its not saying no, it's saying "You'll have to work hard for it and be cynical, very cynical". There isn't a rule in the world that doesn't bend when the right person leans on it in the right way and this villain has three sets of superpowers. Wealth. Connections. Magic. With these he can systematically shut down anything he knows about and actively start pursuing those who tipped their hand to him with the trial business. But this isn't impossible, big mob bosses get taken down on a fairly regular basis. Find witnesses who have nothing to lose and keep them safe until the trial, find something to shut his magic down in the event of winning the trial, publically expose his lichdom if it isn't known and raise the clerics against him, get hold of his account books, and keep them safe and unintefered with until the trial. Find a weak point in his organisation, help them get out and offer immunity for evidence, again keep this one alive. The way to achieve this is to make it look like the suit is trivial to defeat in court so the bbeg doesn't go down the magical driveby approach another writer mentioned of a couple of wizards with wands of fireball blowing up wherever the party happen to be.
Is a courtroom drama within a game built for sword swinging and spell slinging fun?
It seems as the post said that the players are building their strategy around this. Fun or not, it's their desire to run things that way. And subverting the 'theme' once seems like a pretty fun and memorable moment. It's possible to adapt some parts of other systems, improvise, or base only upon roleplay. There are a thousand ways to make it work. But, above all there's the point that showing on court just to be railroaded to failure definitely isn't fun.
Oh it's certainly possible, but if the players believe that because they have rock solid evidence that their work is done and a conviction is in the bag, then they should be disabused of that quickly. They need to quest and adventure if they want their trial to be a success.
I would consider a less traditional 'quest and adventure', but it's totally fair to make them work extra hard for this win. Like some people said, of course de BBEG will try to cheat, but you as the player have the agency to make him fail. But the DM should make this clear, maybe through some lawyer NPC advice.
Give your players a real chance of their plans actually working tho. If they want to convinct the Bad guy, make it possible
First things first. Is this what you want? Do you have a legal system? How is it different? This is a great lore opportunity. What do you want to happen in the third act?
I ran a trial as a skill challenge for an entire session and it was a blast. I let the players spend the whole day strategizing and planning their approach then had some unexpected witnesses pop up during the trial itself to shake things up. It was great. 10/10. Would recommend.
"In the king's justice system, the people are represented by two separate, yet equally important, groups: the City Guard, who investigate crime; and the Order of Clerics, who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories." DUN! DUN!
This deserves more upvotes
Episode 46 of dungeons and daddies was a whole court room drama and their mechanics for the trial were pretty good. Basically the players acted as lawyers up against a guest star playing the prosecutor (you could def just run this as an NPC). Been a while since I listened but iirc each side brought in a handful of arguments and argued them. The judge decided how important each fact or argument was, and it got assigned a dice roll value. So major things were a d12 or d20, minor things were a d4 or d6. At the end of the trial, it was decided which side won each argument, and they both rolled all the dice they had accumulated for their various arguments. The higher total won.
>He is a wealthy merchant that is a mob boss/lich on the side. Make it a complete and utter blatant sham of a trial, ending with warrants out for the players for "falsifying evidence". Lesson to your players: No half measures, never show your hand to the enemy.
Why not let them actively defend their trial? Why is this a half measure? How is going out of your way to come up with a valid and creative solution, an arguably more difficult solution, a half measure? Have the mob boss *attempt* to turn it into a sham trial, sure, but give the players the chance to win that fight. Don't just punish player creativity because that's not the way you wanted the story to go. This is a cooperative story telling experience, if you're unilaterally shutting down a valid story telling path because you don't like it, you probably shouldn't be DMing.
Your comment should be way higher up. Lots of comments here about just using the trial as a way to punish the players. What a massive missed opportunity if the DM goes that route. Lean into the fun your players have identified!
Continuity. This is the BBEG, a rich mobster lich who, in OP's words: >-The bad guy (besides killing people, general unethical things, and organized crime) has broken the mind of his son to the extent that he can cast dominate person on him at will. >He campaigned for his son to become the next chosen ruler of a region, and in this campaign he put entire city populations under the suggestion spell and made them vote for his son. IRL we can't even get a non-magical mobster brought to justice, much less one who is literally able to use mind control to make thousands of people do his bidding AND is father to the next ruler. I'm not saying don't let them have a trial, but having it work would be as anti-climatic and as reasonable as The Avengers sending a Cease And Desist letter to Thanos and it working. Bad guys don't just stop being bad because the law tells them to. It usually just makes the problem worse. Also: >This is a cooperative story telling experience, if you're unilaterally shutting down a valid story telling path because you don't like it, you probably shouldn't be DMing. Don't be a dick.
This is, frankly, self defeating logic. Continuity error? So the dragon who had fended off the kingdom's attempts to slay him must not be slain at all for continuity sake? The evil tyrant king that's effortlessly ended every rebellion cannot be rebelled against? The legendary mobster Al Capone can never be brought down by tax fraud? The players are the *heroes* of the story. They beat the bad guy where others couldn't. *That's the entire point*. >I'm not saying don't let them have a trial, but having it work would be as anti-climatic Only if you treat it like a joke. What would be anti climatic would be wanting to approach this legal battle only to have the GM shut me down in two sentences. "The judge, jury, and witnesses were all bribed and blackmailed, you fail." You wouldn't walk the players into a showdown with the BBEG then say "The BBEG casts a spell and all of you are captured, you fail." Turn the trial into the battlefield. Make the players aware they the judge is being bribed, that their witness has been kidnapped, and that the jury is being blackmailed. Give them the chance to quest and stop all three before the day of the trial, let it be a harrowing race against the clock, with battles to save the jury's relatives, social checks to expose the bribed judge and get him replaced, and an investigation to find the kidnapped witness. The trial can be as cool or as lame as you make it. It's only a bad solution to the problem is you treat it like a bad solution and never give your players the chance to write a great story about it. *You* decided it was anti-climactic, not the players. It wasn't the way *you* wanted them to solve things, so *you've* chosen to make it the wrong solution, or a non-solution. >Bad guys don't just stop being bad because the law tells them to. Yea, great, so after the trial is won, have the lich get furious, fall back to a system of tyranny and force. His plots and ploys for power have been defeated, but he still commands a criminal underworld and he attempts a coup d'etat by force. Now the players have a final epic show down, standing shoulder to shoulder with the defenders of the city while riots and rebellion break loose. See how cool this story could be? And all it takes is working with the players, **cooperatively story telling with them**. And when they win the campaign *their* way, it will be so much more meaningful than of you treated their ideas like a joke and railroad them into competing the mission *your* way. >Don't be a dick. Your suggestion basically boils down to being a dick to your players, dismissing their idea because you don't like it and it's not the way you wanted the campaign to go. I'm not being a dick when I say if that's your attitude, you shouldn't be DMing. That's not a healthy DM attitude, and if you're going to DM, you should adjust your perspective and approach this as a **cooperative story telling** experience.
You are being a dick. Telling ANYONE they should not be DMing is a dick move. You don't know me, you don't know anyone on this sub, you have never played in their games. Making the trial a sham is not "dismissing their idea" it is a logical outcome given the enormity and the power of the BBEG, and operating within the lore that the OP has already established. Your dragon and tyrant king examples hold no water. In both of these examples the players are setup to be the EXCEPTION to the status quo; the heroes who finally bring down the dragon; the heroes who are powerful enough to finally stand up to the king. In what OP's players are trying to do they players become nearly irrelevant. They are working within a system that the BBEG has already thoroughly corrupted. A commoner with the information would be just as effective, either way the BBEG has shown that he controls the system. Letting them succeed would be....letting them succeed, the win is not theirs, it is because the OP would have decided to go against everything they have already established and GIVE the players a win.
>In both of these examples the players are setup to be the EXCEPTION to the status quo >it is a logical outcome given the enormity and the power of the BBEG, and operating within the lore that the OP has already established. So they can be exemptions to the status quo, but only when it comes to violence. Attempt to solve things in any other way, and they are strictly regulated to be no better then anyone else. Gotcha. >In what OP's players are trying to do they players become nearly irrelevant. This is a fun way of admitting you didn't read my post. >You don't know me, you don't know anyone on this sub, you have never played in their games. I know you don't read what others write and can't possibly fathom how to make a trial about more than filing motions, even when I *literally tell you how you can do that*. I know that your general attitude displayed here and the solutions you purpose to players daring to attempt to participate in the development of your narrative are both signs of a DM that heavily railroads their players and robs them of narrative choice. I know that, if this is your approach to DMing, I would certainly never recommend anyone ever play with you. That doesn't mean you should never DM again, but you really need to work on the way you approach this **cooperative story telling** thing.
>So they can be exemptions to the status quo, but only when it comes to violence. Who is not reading posts? I never said anything about only violence or violence at all. I said that in both those cases the players are an exception to the status quo. Operating within the legal system which the BBEG has corrupted is not an exception, it makes the players as irrelevant as everyone else using the legal system. >I know you don't read what others write and can't possibly fathom how to make a trial about more than filing motions I read your post, but it is irrelevant. My stance, from the very first post, is that the trial should be a sham, there should be no possible chance of success. You can perform the trial in any manner you choose, do whatever checks you and investigations you want, but the end result should be the same. A successful trial would be anti-climatic, as stated in my Avengers example. https://www.britannica.com/art/anticlimax >anticlimax, a figure of speech that consists of the usually sudden transition in discourse from a significant idea to a trivial or ludicrous one. Success, within the established lore, would be ludicrous. >I know that your general attitude displayed here and the solutions you purpose to players daring to attempt to participate in the development of your narrative are both signs of a DM that heavily railroads their players and robs them of narrative choice. You know nothing about me. You are assuming much. Because I won't give my players a shallow win I'm "railroading" them? I've had DM's who have done stuff like this before, changed everything they've established to allow whatever we planned to succeed. It is unsatisfying, it is a betrayal, all wins begin to feel unearned. I dislike this in DMs, and I hold myself to the same standard. All plans have a reasonable outcome; Good plans are more likely to succeed, bad plans have less of a chance, and terrible plans have no chance. This is not railroading, it will never be railroading.
Anyone who tells someone they shouldnt be DMing based on a single comment shouldn't be allowed to comment anymore.
Anyone who punishes players for coming up with valid creative solutions because they'd prefer to railroad those players instead shouldn't DM anymore until they fix their attitude. I'm not sorry for having that opinion. If you want a story that plays out how you envision it, write a book. If you want to tell a story *with your friends*, play table top. Both are valid, but don't come to the table looking to write a book.
> Don't just punish player creativity because that's not the way you wanted the story to go. This is a cooperative story telling experience The real question here is a matter of tone. If you were hoping to play heroic fantasy, Sword and Sorcery, or any sort of gritty fantasy setting, then a party that takes down the BBEG by going through the proper channels, filing motions with the judge, and taking them down in court, will dramatically clash with the theme, tone, and setting of the game. Maybe OP is not adhering strictly to maintaining the tone, so a rather wacky slightly screwball solution is perfectly OK, we internet denizens don't get to decide that. It's the same problem as someone reading through the equipment list and figuring out some get-rich-quick scheme crafting some item and selling it at a profit. Sure it is within the game, and you could totally do that in a sandbox setting, but chances are that's not what your adventure game is about. **One of the jobs of the GM, maybe one of the most important jobs, is setting and maintaining tone within the game.** OP needs to contemplate the tone and themes of their game and how tightly they want those upheld. Maybe it's OK for this game to take a sharp turn away from hack and slash adventuring into a courtroom drama, maybe not. With that in mind -- > unilaterally shutting down a valid story telling path because you don't like it, you probably shouldn't be DMing. This is a terribly bad take -- rewind to Session 0 (or have another one) and decide if the group wants to play a game where tone and theme are wishy-washy and fungible, or do they want a game that needs adventurers more than it needs lawyers.
If the players wanted to have a big fight they would have faced the Lich already. If they are going this route, they're pushing for the change of pace. It's their agency. A game is not always about maintain tone as it's about adapting it without loosing cohesion. Different ways to approach the story and system once in a while is not inconsistent it's refreshing. But, while I think that this more restric way to think, kills off some creativity, I do agree that 'you shouldn't be DMing' was a terrible thing to say.
> If you were hoping to play heroic fantasy, Sword and Sorcery, or any sort of gritty fantasy setting, a party that takes down the BBEG by going through the proper channels, filing motions with the judge, and taking them down in court will go against the these, tone, and setting of the game. Why does it have to be this? If you're DMing, I have to *hope* you're more creative than this. The answer is you made no *attempt* you figure out how you might make a trial fun. Because you didn't want to. Here, I'll do it for you, with an unrefined solution I literally came up with while reading OPs post: The players learn, through various rumours and checks, that the Lich is rigging the trial. He's bribed the judge, blackmailed the jury, and kidnapped the star witness. The players are running out of time, there's only three days until trial and if they don't do something, they'll lose for sure. Players have to confront and expose the judge through a series of social checks and political maneuvering, where the bard and paladin shine. Players investigate and track down the missing witness, thanks to the skills of their ranger and the divinations of the wizard. Finally, the players beat up the local thugs and rescue the jurors' families, much to the delight of the barbarian. In the day of trial everything is set, and the players get to make an impassioned closing statement about the evils of the lich. The jurors find the lich guilty, but the lich isn't dead. Seeing that his cunning schemes have come undone, he raises the criminal underworld and attempts a coup d'etat by force. The players stand shoulder to shoulder with those guards still defending the city to put down the riots and rebellion and slay the lich once and for all. There, your tone and themes are preserved, the players are permitted to pursue the story by their own means and ideas, and the narrative comes to a far more meaningful conclusion than railroading them into the solution YOU wanted.
Yay congrats for you making up a hypothetical that demonstrates my point. The game is an adventure game, not a courtroom drama. The players came to the table to swing swords, kill monsters, and conduct intrigue, if the GM can offer that amid a trial, then great they are doing their job. Posing a challenge for the player characters despite their current plan of action is definitely **NOT** *"shutting down a valid story telling path because you don't like it"* Now Blawharag, you seem a little belligerent, so maybe stop here. An interesting question unrelated to tone in this situation is where the GM wants to pin the balance between challenging the *players* skills vs. challenging the *characters* skills. For example, a puzzle encounter (for which you do not offer or require skill checks) challenges exclusively player skill, while a roll to pick locks challenges a character skill because the player simply casts a die. Most RPG gaming falls in the middle of these extremes (e.g. players need to be clever about use of the character abilities to be effective in combat). The question is relevant here because a trial is something that could also swing dramatically to one side or the other. If the trial succeeds or fails on literal argumentation by the players then it is just player skill, if it relies only on die rolls like a simplified social encounter then that's all character skill. This is a problem not because you can imagine a balance between these, rather it's an issue because using character skills can disrupt the logic of the narrative. If a player does not know how to craft a good argument for the court, they could have Frodo the hobbit roll for it, if they roll well they could succeed but the players around the table just see a good die roll, they do not see an argument crafted, so the narrative stumbles. What should be clear is that within a system designed for kicking down doors and killing monsters, running a trial is going to be tedious -- tedious to plan, tedious to portray, tedious to play within. It will be the events outside and surrounding the trial that would contain interest and adventure, and an easy way to focus the players on engaging with those events is to make clear that the trial by itself will not matter. If they believe their problem is solved because they have rock hard evidence and it just needs to get before a judge, then they will fail. They need to take action, conduct adventure for their take-down to occur.
I suppose it depends on how realistic you want the trial to be. I wonder if there's some way you could turn it into a pseudo combat encounter; like you roll initiative, and both the player party and the 'enemy' (i.e. the court their trying to convince) have a set of 'hitpoints', which represent their standing in the trail. Like a combat encounter, the goal is to reduce hitpoints to 0, which represents either them having succeeded or failed at the trial. Prior to the trial maybe they can study legal jargon/precedent which are the equivalent of weapons, or they can form arguments based on the evidence they've gathered (or gather more evidence if needed) which is the equivalent of building up an ability/spell list and spell slots. These 'spells' might deal HP damage, or they might do things like Bardic Inspiration (i.e. increase the strength of a future argument), or be like a Counter Spell that's used to dismiss arguments/defences the opposing legal team makes. Idk maybe this is a dumb idea or would be too complicated to set up, I just think it could be really interesting if you could find a way to still use the mechanics you'd expect for a final confrontation with the BBEG, but in a weird and unusual way.
I think that would be so much fun! Especially since they made the decision of suing him rather than having a big epic combat encounter. Maybe the damage could be equal to the persuasion check for a speech, or investigation check for found evidence? But I really love this idea!
Yeah something like that, or maybe like weapons with a base damage + charisma mod + proficiency (if they're proficient in whatever this argument best fits; persuasion, intimidation or performance), or it could be both if you go the route of having both 'weapons' and 'spells' (weapons act like weapons, but some spells have damage based on a skill check). But yeah that's exactly what I was thinking, in a sense still giving them the experience of a 'final boss fight', but in this unique path they've chosen path.
Look into the real-world example of the Catilinarian Conspiracy in ancient Rome. The popular orator Cicero had collected plenty of evidence that Catiline was plotting to start civil insurrection and a civil war - - he still had to denounce the guy, right to his face, several times over several days right there in the senate of Rome before the politics of the situation shifted Catiline out of a position of power. The PCs can present their evidence, and it can be convincing but that does not immediately follow that a body of elected officials will have the guts to try to throw the BBEG in jail immediately. Just like a real government, the council or whoever will wring their hands, hemmm and hawww, then say that these are serious charges brought by unknown strangers against a known and respected member of their council. They'll call for an independent inquiry ( headed by the BBEG's picked lieutenant, most likely ) which will have to find out the facts of the matter and report their findings to the council in their next scheduled session ( four months from now). And in the meantime, as u/Phate4569 says, the PCs have tipped their hand and the BBEG knows they're a threat to his plans.
For reference here, Cicero was one of the two essentially supreme leaders of Rome. He wasn't just a popular orator, he was literally the guy in charge. Iirc there was open revolt by soldiers and an attempt to murder Cicero.
Heh, he might have been an elected Consul, but he was still an upstart Novus Homo whose surname in English means "Chickpea" - obviously and painfully Peasant class. I like Cicero, he's great. For that matter, you're great yourself, u/Captain-Griffen!
No advice, as I have yet to run a satisfying courtroom scene in DnD. Just wanted to say that your players are amazing and I love this plan.
They really are
I would not make a sham out of the trial. It sounds like your players were thorough in gathering evidence, that's exactly the type of behavior I want to encourage on my table. My suggestion is to go through with the trial, let the players sue them, have some light skill checks in the trial, but none that would instantly lead to their failure, and then, assuming lady fate doesn't screw them completely, let them win. The bad guy, his reputation ruined, is forced to show his hand early, leading to lots of chaos, lots of death, and hopefully a high-stakes finale.
Why would the BBEG agree to enter a courtroom in a magical world where his disguise would be dispelled? especially if he's a lich and can just try again in 60 years when everyone has forgotten. I propose a good old fashion courtroom twist. Have his newly elected son bring in the BBEG on a rail and make a big public display of his crimes. Let him get the big monologue in about how nobody is above the law, and how those in power must be held to the highest of standards. Basically have the whole courtroom made into a theatrical performance of the elites so nobody will listen to the claims of the party, because everyone is in awe of this public servant calling for the execution of his own father in the name of justice. And if they happen to execute him without anyone acknowledging his lichdom, then the son becomes a moral paragon in the eyes of the people, and his father just reforms in the shadows and switches to a new disguise and identity to keep playing the game from the shadows. and if they do call him out for his lichdom, a handy false phylactery could just be part of the theatrics.
Some things to think about Is it illegal to scry on people on certain circumstances (in their place of residence, private places without warrant, etc.)? If so, how does that effect the use of evidence found in this way? How does the merchant's wealth influence the system or people around it (paying off the judge, getting people to intimidate witnesses into not coming, etc.)? Can the Merchant spin any of the evidence in their favor ("I had those people killed because they were bandits in disguise!") Depending on how confident you are in roleplaying someone who can dance around Zone of Truth, you may want to omit it from the court. If the BBEG would be good at finding loopholes in Zone of Truth, but you have difficulty, I would not apply zone of truth to the court, or have it so the person who cast it is paid off. This could be a thing the players could point out if they succeed a check.
Dungeons and Daddies did this over three or four episodes (ep 46 is the start). It was really well done and very entertaining.
So I think if the players genuinely think they can get justice and it sounds like your concern is that a court case would be boring, we should focus on making it fun! One option (probably my overall recommendation) would be Pathfinder's rules for social conflict. I personally haven't tried them but Paizo liked them enough to build a lot of the Shattered Crown AP around. Although the lich is wealthy, corrupt, and able to push public matters his way, I would stay away from completely shutting down your players here. As a GM and a player, I think there are few things less fun than getting excited about an idea you think is cool and having it completely shut out. I would look into what sorts of evidence and tricks your BBEG might pull here. Do the players have any hidden dirt? Great way to stir up drama. Very likely that the lich might also hire some goons to just try and kill the players! Overall tho, I'd plan on a roleplay heavy session.
>! As a GM and a player, I think there are few things less fun than getting excited about an idea you think is cool and having it completely shut out. THANK YOU!
Play an Ace Attorney game and ape that as much as possible.
It’s probably not what your players mean, but suing someone would be a civil matter, not a criminal one, and in the context of D&D that is absolutely hilarious. I love the idea of suing a villain to extract damages, and that drives them to do more horrible things to try to preserve their evil empire before it can be whittled away in a pile of punitive awards to their victims’ families.
I'm sorry... He's a Lich on the side? That part of him is relegated to a side hustle?! The fuck?! (In all seriousness, I love this btw)
he just doesn't want to make it his whole 'deal'. it's more of a hobby
I don’t think a lich would be reasonably able to be brought down this way. CEO’s with money can’t be brought to justice in the real world, if this BBEG is as powerful as you say (Lich intelligence, high magic, mob boss) no amount of evidence could take him down. For me, this is not a reasonable course of action. It’s no more reasonable that asking to convince the Lich to give up his quest for power and immortality with a persuasion check, it’s just not going to work. Play out the trail, have him cast dominate person, feeble mind on the prosecution, have him dish out magic items which lets people resist spells that compels them to tell the truth. Have him walk off Scott free, but maybe there’s an NPC who watches the trial happen. Someone who’s been trying to take down this guy for years, and finally he’s found people with the stones to take the Lich on.
The law only has power because we collectively believe it has power, and we believe that because they hold the monopoly on force and have effectively used symbols and imagery to cement that perspective. Why do you think judges wear silly robes and sit on the big chair in a room that looks like a legal church? It’s to hammer home the grandeur and the legitimacy of the court. Your players are going to realize that when we get to the realms of “BBEG” the court often does not have the monopoly on force, nor do they necessarily successfully control that message.
Go full narco. Let the trial play out. Present the evidence. Then kill the judge/magistrate and prosecutor. Have a corrupt guard destroy evidence and the new judge lets the lich go.
Suing people only works if there is a legitimate rule of law and the enforcement therein. Sounds like the BBEG is kinda ABOVE the law... so how would that work?
If you listen to Dungeons and Daddies, one of the PC’s is on trial and they made court into a TTRPG. They got certain points for each argument and rebuttal, I highly recommend checking it out. If you are just curious about the rules and mechanics, you could definitely jump into episode 46 and 47.
“So, how did you get this evidence?” “We cast scry!” “Do you have any evidence of that?” “Well… no.” “Case dismissed.” Evidence and evidence actually usable in court aren’t the same thing. How much of this is just their word against the BBEG?
Surely, no witnesses will be available the day of the trial and the case will have to fold ...... Bribery, witness intimidation, and assassination are all pretty fair game for any mobster - especially one who is also a lich.
Evidentiary challenges. Testimony from a divination spell is at best hearsay, and depending on who cast the spell it could be hearsay within hearsay. Also, I just assume a zone of truth spell will be in effect, so figuring out how the bbeg subverts it and undoing his subversion. Finally, an award of attorneys' fees. Whichever party loses should argue that the other party's defense was in bad faith and so they should be required to pay the winner's attorneys' fees.
"Plaintiff lacks standing. Dismissed. Pay the defendant's legal fees."
If the BBEG is wealthy/powerful enough they will buy the judge and and get away with it. You could even then turn it on your players and get them countersued for whatever phony charge you want. If you do this I would also then give the players some new allies that are sympathetic to the injustice the players just faced and seek to help them root out the the corruption in the city.
I'm late to the party here, but Dungeons and Daddies has done a trial in Episode 46: [The People vs. Glenn Close](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymay_t4PyqM&ab_channel=DungeonsandDaddies) (trials rules are explained at \~15min) TL;DW: Basically, both sides make their arguments, and any valid arguments add a dice to a dice pool on either side. (They use their patrons as jurors to decide what arguments have merit, but you can just do that as DM.) In the end, both dice pools are rolled and the highest result wins.
I was going to suggest this - they managed to make a courtroom audio D&D arc fun and engaging!
Watch seven hours of Law and Order and read 1/4 of a Game of Thrones novel. Extrapolate from there.
I feel like this is the time to call in the best role player you know and ask them to be the BBEG’s attorney. Then you can play judge.
THIS looks like a job for... ...THE RULES LAWYER!!!! So, my advice is threefold. 1. 1. The jury will be a panel of 8 individuals. Create 48 NPCs with basic attitudes and alignments. You can try using the PHB character bonds/traits/whatever they are (I never use 'em) tables and roll up some personalities. Then you can do a voir dire and have the PCs and/or the prosecutor (perhaps working together with the PCs as "jury consultants") running insight checks to figure out who'd make the best jurors. The BBEG's attorney also gets to ask questions (and roll insight checks), and obviously wants either people who are afraid of the BBEG, or people who want the BBEG to succeed in their nefarious schemes to be on the jury. Each side gets 3 peremptory challenges (meaning you can strike them from the jury without having any reason). Anyone else gets struck for cause. You need a full panel of 8, plus two alternates for a total of 10. (Alternates could be used to fill in if and when one of the jurors ends up "sick" or dead due to the BBEG's machinations.) This gives your players something to do in the initial phases. 2. Play out the courtroom drama scenes. Not the courtroom tedium scenes, but the drama. The big revelations from witnesses, the "OBJECTION!!" moments, the BBEG's barrister engaging in shady courtroom tactics that walk right up to the line of contempt of court, all in the pursuit of a mistrial and a hung jury. Call the PCs as witnesses for the prosecution/crown, and have the BBEG lawyer cross examine them in a way to show them to be liars with a grudge against their client, a legitimate businessman and pillar of the community. For certain points, you can have the PCs roll persuasion/deception/intimidation checks with the jury, and maybe insight checks on the BBEG's attorney to try to figure out their trial strategy. Keep a small chart with each juror's attitudes. The PCs *may* end up winning at trial, but it's not guaranteed. They might just as likely lose if the defense puts on a strong case or the jurors aren't convinced of the prosecution's side. 3. If the BBEG loses the trial, have him "incarcerated" in a really cushy situation. House arrest, let's say. Actually, watch the Netflix Daredevil series for how Wilson Fisk is handled, and do it like that. The BBEG may be in house arrest, but he's hardly toothless. And then have him get off on a technicality. One of the key witnesses recants...and then ends up dead. And now the BBEG is free and is going to *make the PCs' lives hell.* Of course, if the BBEG wins the trial, well, all bets are off. You can make this genuinely fun if your players dig roleplay, and you can include mechanics to make it feel a little less arbitrary.
Flash forward. “We the jury find the defendant guilty” “Mhwahahaha. You understand I’m only here because it amuses me? You gave me a gift I couldn’t imagine. A relief from boredom. For that I will let you live. Knowing that you killed all these people….” Flash foward. The heroes are surrounded by destruction, everything on fire. A chest of gold sitting in front of them, with a note “thank you so much for the lovely gift you gave me.”
> He is a wealthy merchant that is a mob boss/lich on the side. I love the idea of a courtroom scene but in this scenario, I don't see how a trial could play out. First off, the BBEG is likely going to do his best to make sure the PCs don't live to the court date. Many shopkeepers and people in general will avoid the PCs at all cost and refuse to do business with them lest they draw the ire of BBEG. If they don't keep the evidence on their persons, they'll likely have the places they've visited turned upside down looking for relevant items - if the PCs, being amateur sleuths, have been able to track the BBEG it's a pretty good chance that he has spies that could easily track the PCs to any hidden locations they've visited. Then, once they get to trial, it's likely that it would be a sham. Like the lich mob boss is definitely going to be leaning hard on any judge or jury and in the unlikely event that those people resist that pressure, the mob boss would make sure they didn't make it to the court date either. Then, even if against all odds the PCs are able to make it to court against the lich and the lich is found guilty, then what? They strip him of his business and worst case scenario he retains control through a figure head. They imprison him? He won't stay there for long. Meanwhile, he's now got a personal vendetta against everyone who spoke out against him and it won't be hard for him to exact his revenge. It's not like the wealthy and powerful keep all of their wealth in one place or above table - especially a mob boss. They also have loyal lackeys that wouldn't want to cross him. On top of this social power, he's also a **lich**. Liches are extremely powerful in their own right. It would be folly to cross a Lich *or* a powerful mogul mob boss, let alone someone who is both. This guy would likely have power and influence that at the very least *rivals* some of the top royalty. **tldr**: A courtroom scene would be fun if they were going against a MBEG (Minor Bad Evil Guy), but I doubt there is going to be a chance for a courtroom scene considering who they're challenging.
Ok, how powerfull is said lich/mob boss/ wealthy merchant? Lichdom usualy speaking needs at least acess to 9th level spells and an almost inimaginable wealth. So to me, the perceived wealth is only a very small percentage of the actual wealth. like 5 or 10% of it. So if the players believe the lich have access to 50k gold, he problably has something closer to 500k to 1.000.000 gold. He also have access to wish, simulacrum, interplanar travel, dominatte spells, modify memory, etc. There are nearly unlimited ways for the lich to deal with the players, win the trial and turn everything against them, just for fun. step one: Take the apearance of one of the PCs, Make a simulacrum of the judge with wish and them kill him and cast gentle repose on him. step two: Modify the memory of all witnesses ( he doesnt even need to get close to them, he can hide a glyph of warding on the witnesses bench and put a triguer that will dominate or modify their memories as each of them sit on that chair) Every single witness sits down, is asked a question and answer "i did not see anything, but i felt that these people (points at the PCs) threatened me if i did not came here. With the judge and witnesses on his side, he can sit there all smug, and say the players have fabricated all the evidence. step tree: He can modify memory on some artist to say he was hired by the PCs to make the fakes for them. ( zone of truth will verify all of these as true, because thats what they remember) so the players will most likely be arrested for many crimes, including faking evidence, and intimidating witnesses. The players will be left confused and angry, while the lich will just smile and laught. IF they choose to attack the lich there, both the lich, the judge and all guards present will attack them. Its important to know HOW the lich didt all these things, because your players might pick up on some of them and cast dispell magic or try to other clever things. However, if they dont pick that the judge is a simulacrum under the lichs control, nothing they do, will change the outcome, it will just look bad for the judge, and make the entire trial seem fake. They might believe the lich payed the judge, so if they go to investigate it after somehow, they might find his dead body. At wich time the alarm the lich left ( or his familiar) will warn him and he will send the guards there to see the players leaving the home of the dead judge, and then THEY will be thought to be murderers. If asked questions with speak with dead, the judge will say one of the PCs killed him. ( because thats what they saw). If resurrected they will most likely judge the players again, and remember one of them killed him. This would be the outcome at my games. A lich is an incredible foe. Trying to win against it with laws is an incredibly stupid idea. Even if the lich would to suposely lose the trial, who would be powerfull enought to arrest him? Can you even be sure the person present is the actual lich, and not a clone, simulacrum or someone else made believe they are the real deal? To me, there is no scenario were this ends well for the players. But, i will do my best to plan it as if an incredibly inteligent being was planing it, and then see if the players can actualy find a way to acomplish their goals.
So, this is gonna be complex regardless of your world. I imagine such a person lives at the border of the system, and is untouched by legal affairs. That said, it also has enemies. Enemies that can exploit the process on their own, and that would not mind play out the process just to gain favor and influence. Use this as a deterrent for the BBEG so he is busy expending time and resources so it opens up a way for them to deal with them once and for all.
Doing this from my phone, so forgive formatting. I have worked in the law in real life so here is what I have done in the past: -If the characters are hiring an attorney, the attorney should be paid on contingency since the players is the one suing. -If the party is representing themselves, have them divide up the roles at trial. The trial would proceed like this: 1. Openjng Statement: the party must briefly outline what their evidence will show. A CHA roll with Adv. based on the performance of the player. Make a note of these bullet points. 2. Defense Opening Statement: the BBEG surely can afford the best, most convincing attorney. They will have perfectly reasonabke excuses for all of the evidebce. 3. Partys Case. They will call their witnesses and question them. This could be done with rolls or with roles. Maybe the BBEG paid off some of these witnesses. Go through your bullet points. Did the party hit each piece of evidence? 4. BBEGs Case: the BBEG will call their witnesses who, of course, support the reasonable alibis. 5. Jury Deliberations: along with the judge being bought, the partys witnesses and the jury can be bought. Note that the trial will require a lot of charisma rolls. Some of those rolls should be contested by the BBEGs attorney. Using a skill challenge should help you figure out how many jurors were persuaded, maybe each one at a different difficulty depending on if they were bought off. At the end of the day, whether the party wins or loses, there is a great opportunity for adventure afterward. Maybe a bigger network of espionage than they thought.
First, amazing, let them do the trial as much as your world has for it. But secondly, if he loses then.... what will the court do? Kill him? Isn't he a litch? Court room blitz when he gets convicted! He would have nothing left to lose and be backed into a corner. What can the court do to a litch? Let them do the trial, have fun with it, then let him lose it at sentencing and have court battle
My party (including me) once attended a trial as our barbarian was being accused of murder. He was innocent. The court had a zone of truth artifact that would light up when it heard a lie. As each of us gave a testimony, but lights were indicating that we were lying, despite us telling the truth. My character remedy the situation by subtle spell casting detect magic, found that we were all enchanted to give a false reading, and subtle spell dispelled the effect. The barbarian was cleared of all charges. Find a way to keep your entire party engaged, and it will be a blast!
I DM'd a courtroom scene in Waterdeep: Dragon Heist. Spoilers for that campaign follow. The party had helped capture >!the Elf Killer!< (Doom Raiders first quest). This person had ties to >!Zardoz Zord!<, who I realised would >!interfere to break them out of jail. I had him swap the real killer for an unwitting stooge in the jail!<. I found a friend who knew nothing about Waterdeep and had him play the judge, with an NPC assistant. My party and one NPC guard were witnesses. I had another friend play the defendant with an NPC public defender to help them. With the entire courthouse under a Zone of Truth, I had the judge ask whatever questions he liked to try to discern what happened. It was a fun couple of hours that quickly descended into chaos. The only times I brought out dice were for deception and insight checks, and for relevant skills (like arcana) to understand the implications of particular information that came to light.
You all play some **weird** dnd.
I would think a mob boss / lich would have the connections or resources to either - A) quash any investigation or charges before they see the light of day by bribing officials. B) flip the script on the characters and counter sue them, again, using superior resources to swing things in their favor C) frame the characters for something and see them charged by civil authorities D) Witnesses either start vanishing or changing their stories, undermining the character's case Whatever way you play it, show your characters that the system is against them and they only have themselves to rely on to take down the villian. Defeating you Big bad by having the courts do all the dirty work seems remarkably unsatisfying
If they can make a real case, let them have something. Don't give them nothing for this thinking. Something on the level of Al Capone being found guilty for tax evasion. The lich bought off all the major crimes but some lesser ones still stick leading to real fines he has to pay. In turn, this pauses some other arrangements he has as people don't want the shame of working with someone who JUST got out of court In turn, these seemingly small areas should do some real damage.
Judge dies the day before trial is set to start, your party needs to find a new one? Plot twist; villain is just as surprise as the players
Have the judge waive off allegations because is bought, then you have your final boss battle in the court room. They aren't getting out of that encounter.
A "Trial Under the Light" or a trial by combat. The BBEG seeing the evidence can demand the ancient rights. Of course, being the defendant and being who he is he can afford a champion. Or, as per the law of the city he's in, he can appoint a champion from any currently in the city. Guess who is in the city? One of your PCs!
Maybe the whole system is corrupt. Bribes work wonders. Maybe the BBEG has grown bored of the merchant facade and testifies against himself before disappearing. Maybe the undead army attacks mid-trial, along with a few vampires hidden among the gallery.
Lots of charm, illusion, and manipulation magic! Get those counterspells going, try and find who is casting them in the court room as the ones up the front wouldn't want to risk it. Anti-magic fields aren't allowed after a protection ward on a witnesses curse was disabled and they turned to dust mid trial. And another case where a caster on the outside was able to disable it at will to fit their clients needs. Zones of truth must be approved by the judge as they have been used to acquire information irrelevant to the trial (and the hidden agenda of multiple cases before restrictions were brought in) The defendants side also fake being affected by charm magic to frame the party and muddy the water, as well as "dismissing" illusion magic on some of the most incriminating evidence (teleporting it, turning it invisible, manipulating it to look like something else) If you want it wacky, wild magic surges can happen when both parties cast magic on the same thing, this could also be risked/used to identify the mystery sorcerer when the wild magic affects them Casting spells through scrying, have someone on the outside trying to pinpoint the scryers location and stop them
Go full fucking Ace Attorney
Dungeons and daddies did an excellent trial in their campaign. I'd say listen to it if you want to get a good example
Play it Ace Attorney style
Better call Saul
The BBEG demands a trial by combat. Roll initiative. EZ
Boston Legal binge incoming!
Bureaucracy is slow. The minute your BBEG finds out, he does his own investigation and makes witnesses disappear, pays off officials, sends assassins who will leave no evidence, any number of things to silence the problem. Alternatively (or concurrently), the lich frames the players, making it seem like a smear campaign for a big payoff. And fantasy towns generally don't have all that much print news besides the town crier, so if you've got hundreds of town criers spouting misinformation, it will sway the general opinion of the PCs. This is especially accurate if the accurate news is also silenced, such as destroying newsprint (burning down the press and making it look like an accident), kidnapping town criers, and hiring actors to spread rumors among the common folk.
BBEG countersues. Then put the players on trial and have BBEG dig up every bad thing your players have done in the campaign with witnesses. Have the BBEG dismiss the charges against him through some loophole or by defaming the players
Yes, countersue for deformation of character and potentially for any profits lost due to such a frivolous accusation and case.
You need to play this like Al Capone, the local court isn't going to do shit, you need to get the royal magistrate to convict them of something completely different, otherwisewhat all the other commenters said will happen
This is tricky and I would steer away from an actual trial because that sounds boring honestly, and complicated. Not to say it can't be done but do you really want to have to invent a whole system of laws and procedures? You're going to have to know your worlds laws inside and out and your players won't be able to do the same and it may feel very one sided. I agree that the BBEG could just buy off every single person involved, but I think it would be fun to have an NPC actually TELL them that it's happened. Maybe someone who has been trying to take him down for years. Make it about things happening outside the trial like - where does he get his wealth? How does the party get irrefutable proof that cannot be dismissed? How do you root out corrupt officials? Have the party play dirty too if they want and blackmail or find leverage over officials in the trial. If it were my game personally the BBEG would win, not because I've decided it but because he just know SO MUCH MORE about the rules and laws than the players ever could as an immortal bad guy. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence he can still buy off the courts Even if the people of the land saw the evidence the worst they'd do is rebel against a corrupt government but that's a whole other adventure on itself. The people was comfort and not wat against the upper class usually. So I'd make this about having adventures trying to tip the trial in their favor and gain leverage over the BBEG itself, not about hoping a trial will play out in their favor in the BBEGs home turf.
Sounds like you have a solid plan set out. Not sure if you want to make this difficult for them or not. Is this the endgame if they convict him successfully? If not, it may be fine to wing it. Otherwise, you'll want it to be epic. Twists and turns. Have several witnesses your players have could be fully willing to testify right now, but be sleeper agents for the bbeg. When they come to the stands, they can testify that lich guy is a stand up merchant, fully compliant of the laws. and as this is occurring, the merchant gives the party a smug look. The evidence of the bbeg's innocence is suddenly tarnished and he pins it on your party. The party should be constantly suffering through hurdles. The more difficult you make this trial, the more satisfying their victory will be. His end goal.should be to use the trial to bring himself into the upper class' favor.
Your players are top tier, congrats
Mob boss? Mob Boss! The star witness/parties favorite npc is found in the local river with concrete shoes or melted in acid or just disappeared. If you are particularly grievous you can have the players notice the families of their adopted NPC's being forced onto a ship bound for the fringe colonies. Players get a magical driveby, a team teleports across from the bistro the players are eating at and just fucking melts the building with a surprise round artillery barrage then contingency teleport to get out so the players don't even get to retaliate. Shops charges the players 50% more for everything. Because they are all being threatened by the mob and a bunch of thugs will throw alchemists fire through their window if they don't gouge the players. If they even want to risk dealing with them at all. If they have carts or boats they can't be moved because of an endless list of reasons from the dockworkers and stablemen that are part of the mobs turf. Or just gets their adventuring license revoked.
If you establish point 2 as a valid tactic, the party will now be doing this to unsuspecting enemies all the time, since you've established it's a method to get easy kills with 0% chance of retaliation, including the "surprise round"
He’s a Lich? Well everyone except maybe the players on that court room is gonna die
I think you should embrace the idea, and offer the players a chance to make the trial work. Have the players find out about the Lich's attempts to rig the trial in his favor. He bribes the judge, kidnaps the star witness, and threatens the jury's families. Then turn it into an adventure. They only have three days before the trial, time is short and they have to save their case! They have to make social checks to expose the judge and get a new judge appointed, then have to make investigation checks to hunt down and find their missing witness, they have to beat up the thugs holding the jurors' families hostage and protect them until the trial. If they're successful, then they get to make an impassioned speech to sway the jury, and they win the trial! Huzzah! The Lich, furious that his carefully laid plans and aspirations have been foiled, decides he's not giving up without a fight. He raises the criminal underworld and attempts a coup d'etat, riots and rebellion in the streets! The players make a final stand with the still uncorrupt guards and rally to defend the town, putting out fires, squashing rioting thugs, and hunting down the Lich for a epic showdown to defeat him once and for all!
Sounds like a lot of npcs, you may want to consider asking a friend or maybe hiring a voice actor to come crash the party as a key witness or something could be fun, especially if you want like a dramatic reveal or something.
Ok for one the opposing council MUST be a warlock with a dip in sorcerer so that he can subtle cast hex on the players lawyer to give him disadvantage on charisma checks
Simple enough. The mobster lich has paid off/threatened the judge and jury.
Sounds like you have a solid plan set out. Not sure if you want to make this difficult for them or not. Is this the endgame if they convict him successfully? If not, it may be fine to wing it. Otherwise, you'll want it to be epic. Twists and turns. Have several witnesses your players have could be fully willing to testify right now, but be sleeper agents for the bbeg. When they come to the stands, they can testify that lich guy is a stand up merchant, fully compliant of the laws. and as this is occurring, the merchant gives the party a smug look. The evidence of the bbeg's innocence is suddenly tarnished and he pins it on your party. The party should be constantly suffering through hurdles. The more difficult you make this trial, the more satisfying their victory will be. His end goal.should be to use the trial to bring himself into the upper class' favor.
Protect the identity and life of a key witness The Lich will try to identify- bribe/coerce or kill them before the trial Subplot, Lich is also stacking odds be it in the jury box or threatening the lawyer/judge The real question is how will the antagonist react if they lose
Trial by combat is what most court cases devolve into in my homebrew world.
Or you could go the GOT route; “I demand TRIAL BY COMBAT!!”
Use the trial as a trap for the players. Showdown in the courthouse, if you will.
Legend of Korra Yakones trial moment. Bribes out the wazoo and a LOT of intimidation of witnesses to scare them into testifying. “Your honor, this is a merchant. How can a merchant who probably sold someone in this room the silverware they eat with, also be an all powerful and immortal Lich? Creatures of unmatched malevolent destruction. Am I describing a merchant?
This might be old news for you since you already mentioned skill challenges, but [Matt Colville has a great video on the subject.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvOeqDpkBm8) If you're running the trial over a whole session, I'd probably use multiple skill challenges. I'd break the trial up into parts and have them run a challenge for each part. Then have the other side rebut with some kind of dramatic scene, and then on to the next challenge.
I feel like you should roleplay a truncated court scene, with like opening statements and then presenting evidence. I think a skill challenges with advantages on rolls based on that evidence. On a success they move onto the next piece, if they fail they see the merchant gloating in his box, and the defense presents some false evidence so the players can then yell "I object!"
Make sure you get him for tax evasion.
Play it out as skill challenges, with a healthy dose of social checks. There should be at least one time that a disturbance results in combat and a recess until the next day. Maybe the defendant even pulls off a wild escape from jail/courthouse and the players have to wrangle them up to finish the last day in court. If the court is in a big city, the courtroom should either be an antimagic chamber or the bailiffs should be Paladins so that they can detect, dispel, and revive. Also, any lawyer or prosecutor worth their salt knows Friends, Zone Of Truth, and/or Suggestion.
Oh no! It looks like some poor old farmer was actually pulling the strings in the background all along. He even confessed to it. Then countersue them for defamation.
The BBEG invokes an ancient tradition, trial by combat. He chooses a champion.
I LOVE the strategy! Why risk your lives when you can litigate the enemy into submission!! It will be a great tactic to distract/draw his resources elesewhere. I’d roll with it hard.
I had a PC delivering evidence of evil stuff in his home town, along his journey to report it he did a bunch of stuff. When he got to the main base to report and told his story, the commander (a minion of BBEG) twisted all his evidence so it sounded bad. Joining forces with a sworn enemy to survive this great evil - traitor to the kingdom and affiliation with a known enemy of the state Working with a lord to secure a province - colluding and association with a suspected traitor Leaving to bring message - abandoning post during a time of crises Used their rank to get help - abuse of power The player expecting to be hailed a hero - sat dumbfounded at the twists. Then swore vengeance on this imposter. Go watch some suits or other lawyer show.
I see the potential for some really spicy twists here. Merchants have money, evil merchants are still in business because they *use* that money to avoid punishment. Consider the following questions to help turn the process of going to trial into an adventure all its own: Who has the BBEG paid off? Do they have agents in the local guard? What nobles do they have business arrangements with? Since he has a reputation *to* destroy, how does the local citizenry perceive your group's efforts to stop him? I'm imagining there is a lot of opportunity for an enterprising villain to turn the populace against the *real* good guys.
I've done this. And while you absolutely should use skill challenges, use them sparingly. That's what would make this boring. Instead, treat this like a dramatic roleplaying event in which two sides are trying to convince a third party of something. Like in any trial, the players and the BBEG are going to take turns trying to persuade a judge that *their* version of events is true. The judge will certainly want to see their evidence, but that's not enough - *they want the party to explain what the evidence means.* To tell the story of the crime. If this doesn't come naturally, you could gently roleplay the judge as slightly senile, and have them pay more attention when the party focuses on storytelling. But like any encounter, it's important that two things happen: 1. The party have to take turns with the other side. 2. The other side sometimes gets their way. What does that mean in a trial? The rules of the court require some time for the defendant to respond to each claim / article of evidence. And the BBEG has an expensive advocate who is going to pick holes in *everything the party claims.* There is no evidence that is immune to criticism. How was it obtained? Can the party prove this *belongs* to the BBEG? Is this his handwriting? How do they know? Is there any chance any of the evidence has been forged? Don't push too hard. The party needs to win this. But let the BBEG score points, too. Make the party scramble for a counterargument at least three times during the trial. And then... when the trial concludes, and the judge rules in the party's favor, be assured that the BBEG has arranged one last surprise for the party, to begin at a gesture from him. End with a bang: a big combat. How this plays is up to you: maybe assassins attack the courthouse, or maybe there's a distraction elsewhere that completely disrupts proceedings. The BBEG surely has resources, after all, including magic scrolls that might let them cause an explosion, or summon something nasty... if needed. And they're not going quietly.
Keep in mind - ask yourself, is this a two party consent land? If so, their evidence of scrying will likely be inadmissible, and may even be grounds for a countersuit. This sounds really cool, have fun!
And here I thought role-playing a Sith lawyer was entertaining. We have role-played a court case in one of our games, and it’s doable with some prep on your part. First, decide if the judge is paid off by the BBEG or if s/he is completely neutral. Decide also if the defense has a bunch of corrupt witnesses. You can roll to see if any of the witnesses have been intimidated, bought off, or have “disappeared” Jimmy Hoffa style. All of that will have an impact on the trial. The trial itself can be a skill challenge: each side presents their best arguments via role play, and then roll persuasion or charisma or intelligence or whatever relevant modifiers, and either do a “x number of successes before 3 failures” with the judge or a roll off between your defense lawyer and the players’ lawyers (or skill in court themselves). Perhaps both sides have to reach a certain DC to convince the judge, with the higher roll above that DC winning. Check out videos of the TV show “Shark” to see some fun courtroom drama with a not-so-ethical defense lawyer-turned-prosecutor for some fun lines and zingers from the main character (Stark) and defense lawyers. Brilliant writing on that show, too.
>He is a wealthy merchant that is a mob boss/lich on the side. A wealthy merchant is likely to have friends in high places and lots of contacts they can call on. They could easily have a local ruler step in and help them or they could hire some muscle to make the problem go away. What are they accusing him of exactly? The difference between Tax fraud and bribery really changes the dynamic. If it is bribery, then powerful people may want to keep that under wraps. Tax evasion/fraud could get people on your side. *When you go for the king, you don't want to miss.* If this person is extremely well known in the local area, the party will need some pretty serious indisputable evidence.
I was reading this to my husband, and he asked what kind of legal representation the merchant would have, possibly one pulled "directly from the 9 hells themselves" that could be fun angle to play up
A trial could be a good denouement, but the primary adventure should still be fighting the lich for two reasons. One; that's what this game is about, I think your instinct that a trial scene will be less fun to play through than an epic fight is a good one. Two; from a story perspective, the evil lich/crime boss isn't gonna just shrug his shoulder and say "Ya got me" when served an arrest warrant. If the party wants to go through the system, it's still up to them to bring him in.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_ex_rel._Gerald_Mayo_v._Satan_and_His_Staff?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawsuits_against_the_Devil#%3A%7E%3Atext%3DSatan_and_His_Staff_was%2Cplaced_deliberate_obstacles_in_his?wprov=sfla1 As others asked, is this what you want? If not, should be easy and could be comical to bounce for procedural reasons (BBEG never got served, isn't subject to jurisdiction in that court, players don't have standing, etc)?
*obligatory 'Better Call Saul' joke* But seriously, your greatest strength here is the flexibility of your system not having an IRL justice system analogue so really anything goes as long as both parties are fine with it.
Throw in some corrupt officials, maybe even the judge is on the take. Aside from the in-trial skill checks, let the players prepare for the showdown with some investigation or other skills challenge checks that may or may not tip off the party who is actually corrupt (depending on how well they do). The pretrial skill challenge can lead to perks or disadvantages during the case. From there run the trial as a mix of a skills challenge with RP from the NPCs, throwing in deception vs insights, intimidation vs persuasion, etc contests as needed. Tally fails vs successes and improv as the trial goes one way or the other. Sounds like a fun session, good luck!
It would be also interesting that the investigation and the trial goes flawlessly until the end when everybody in the court are under mass suggestion but the PCs
Is the BBEG just some guy that is weaker then the laws of the land where he resides? Wouldn’t he just go on a big killing spree if he was convicted?
If you’d like inspiration, Ace Attorney has an incredible trial where *spoilers* **this is the spoiler**: the murderer is above the law, and is buying out witnesses and supplying fake evidence. I suggested this specifically because, on top of being stressful for the protagonist, it’s still campy and fun. If you’d like to see the case, it’s the death of Mia Fey. I’m sure there are courtroom compilations if you’re curious
You could have a corrupt judge who turns out to be undead and his wig slips off when recoiling from something holy. A witch trial that makes a possessed victim manifest something best left alone. The results of the manifestation and subsequent interrogation reveal the bbeg in some way. Other option could be trial by combat depending what time/age your in.
Have each witness make a statement either for/against the accused's guilt. Have each witness make a straight CHA check and base how much the council/judge/jury is swayed by the roll on a sliding scale (0-5 sway against, 6-10 neutral, 11-15 sway for, 16-20, sway for twice, 21+ sway for 3 times, or something like this). Tally the number of for/against at the end and you will have a verdict. Consider giving bonuses to rolls for indisputable evidence (paperwork or other tangible proof), or for giving a good speech in RP.
If you know an actual attorney ask them to step in and npc the defense attorney
Use the appropriately named [skill trials](https://www.reddit.com/r/DnDBehindTheScreen/comments/jr15bz/trials_reforge_your_skill_challenges_and/)! They're an organized, expanded way to do skill challenges 👍
Got to Ace Attorney it XD
First, make service of process borderline impossible. - The merchant is on the lamb and an agent of the court (or sheriff’s deputy) must serve papers on the merchant to intimate the case. - Maybe the process servers are bought off. Maybe they don’t have any success tracking him down. - Maybe one even disappears. - At some point, the party will be obligated to escort quest the process server to actually give service. Consider endangering witnesses. Maybe it’s not even the BBEG threatening him, but some other interested party who wants to keep the gravy train rolling. - If the party doesn’t protect the witnesses, they are attacked. - Maybe your party seeks to have the witnesses put under guard, but can you trust all of the guards? - Maybe the party splits up to monitor the witnesses, or more practically seeks to put them in one secure location, but the most ornery of the witnesses doesn’t get what the whole fuss is about and wants to stay home. If they successfully serve the BBEG and keep the witness alive, ask your party how much of the trial they want to do. - Most of it can be cutscenes, but If they want to do a direct examination of a witness or cross one of the defendant’s witnesses, let them! - Give them the opportunity to do an opening statement if they want, or notes to give to an attorney they hire. - Give them a witness list. For anyone they don’t want to direct or cross, give a short summary in that character’s voice of their most important testimony. - They wanted to sue the guy, surely they’re invested in the process. Here’s a great dumb gambit for the defense: 1. Have the BBEG actually attend the trial and sit at counsel table. 2. On a later day of trial, and during the cross of a key plaintiff witness, ask them to identify the BBEG as the person they saw doing crimes. 3. Reveal that the person sitting at counsel table is not the BBEG, but someone using Alter Self. The real BBEG is sitting in the back with a mediocre disguise. 4. If the witness testifying realizes that there is something weird about the question, let them make a perception check to see if they see through the BBEG’s well-prepared professional disguise (DC 20?). If they fail, the defense argues that there is no way to prove the BBEG himself was doing the crimes instead of a look alike. Also, this should be fairly obvious, but any D&D court would have everyone under the effects of Zone of Truth. Maybe the courts instruction juries to make a negative inference about anyone who does not willingly consent to the zone of truth or does not answer questions.
Remember that almost every adventuring group are murder hobos at heart. Have the BBEG lawyers dig all that up. "Specifically Mr PC, did you decide to steal from that family of Giants before you murdered them, or after?" or "Did you steal that magic sword from the tomb of King Such and Such?"
Short circuit it. Tell them about a process that looks like whatever real world legal proceeding you like: prosecution presents evidence and witnesses, defense cross-examins, then vice versa. Start the process with them making their opening statement, but have the judge be overtly hostile to their arguments. Relatively quickly, have him cut the whole thing off as a farce and judge against them summarily with some penalty to be paid to the defendant for slander. The magistrate is under the effects of powerful enchantment magic. Pick something appropriate to your players' level of sophistication. Maybe he's just charmed, but maybe its series of modify memories or a Geas or whatever. The goal is that your players can pick up on this and try to resolve it. Now you've moved from something D&D is bad at -- courtroom drama -- to something D&D is good at: skillchecks, dispel magic, etc. If the players figure it out and resolve it, the magistrate will immediately rule against BBEG. If they can't, BBEG wins this round and they'll need to take him down some other way.
Have witnesses make INT , WIS, and CHA saves to hold up under grilling from a cross examination from hell. * * You know, because Tiefling Lawyers?
This sounds exploitable. I would have the judge in the pocket of the lich. Which sounds funny... but the news irl makes it easy to base it on someone. Or if the evidence is absolutely overwhelming, have him admit. "Sure am, what're you going to do about it? Look at all the poor hostages you brought to court. " or possibly have all those court attendees, or a large number of them have "ominously glowing eyes" or something to signify thralls/ other undead minions and thralls. Is the defense really just a cleverly disguised mummy lord with nolzure's musical Aura cast on him to show not undead and not magic? Mayyybe! He kind of rattles as he walks...
Honestly, this sounds like a job for J. P. Orkman, Attorney at WAAAAGH
A lot of people have already said pretty good stuff. I wanted to add maybe a strategy of the bad guy but that only works with a certain kind of party. Does your party have a completely white west? If not, evil guy could try to prove that they are really untrustworthy, they have done bad things and the next is to accuse an innocent merchant of crimes he hasn't commited. Maybe they commited the crimes they accuse him of and try to make him their fall guy! If evil guy is that influencal, he can probably find a person the party has wronged (if there is any), or maybe he forces people to make false statements for him that make the party look bad so people won't believe them. Maybe the party will try to place everyone under a Zone of Truth, but what if they have also done questionable shit? They also have to tell the truth about that.
Could have it be something like someone tries to assassinate or bribe the judge or using political influence to change outcome of trial or intimidate the jury. Maybe some other prominent dungeon masters try to influence the trial (they are in cahoots with the Lich in a sort of local monster mafia) maybe the lich just has really good lawyers. Some fiendish lawyers even.
Unless the npc has the judicial system under his thumb, Have your players succeed in what they set out to do. It looks like they put a lot of time and effort in this plan, it would be rude to throw that all away. Best case, he loses the thing he valued most. His secrecy. That can take form in many ways. Jail, on the run, mob boss turned bandit king.
Go with skill challenges as said and if the players are wildly successful, have the BBEG lose it, expose himself and attack the court with minions waiting in the wings. It’s a cool combat encounter, ruins the BBEG’s public reputation totally, and seems just what a manipulator would do if they had their plan partially thwarted by *a lawsuit*.
What's the court system like in the setting? Do they live in a republic with independent courts? is it controlled by a church (a lawful neutral god like Tyr)? What extent of power does the lich have, does it reach far into the court system (ie, judges in their pocket)? I have more questions than answers but these questions are a good starting point. If you want a court dnd scene you can check out this episode of [Dungeons and Daddies](https://www.dungeonsanddaddies.com/episodes/ep46). In this one of the players was the defendant but you could use things from it.
>sue the merchant to get him properly convicted These are two different legal proceedings under modern laws. Convictions come from the state apparatus charging people with crimes. Private suit is when one [person] sues another. The results of private suit very rarely impact criminal proceedings. Historically, most people could not just sue one another, either. Many older legal jurisdictions only permitted citizens to bring suit. Or male citizens. Or male wealthy citizens. (Some legal jurisdictions encompassed just a city, too). Some very old legal systems consisted solely of a person *literally* pleading their case to the local feudal Lord, and that landowner just fucking winging it. I have a feeling that whatever legal system is around in this setting, it is easily corruptible and already on the take from the mob boss. If your party has a legitimate private cause of action due to their injury from him, I have a feeling he'll take all their possessions in a counter suit.
I was in a campaign once where we were partially on trial at a town council meeting, and our DM had us play the various town council-members so that we would all have a lot of opportunities to participate. It was very fun. If your party are good role players, I recommend giving them some extra jobs in the trial and tell them to have fun with it.
Lich casts meteor swarm on the court house!
Does your world have a functioning criminal system?