Re: [HoE] Templar Bad Behavior? [SPOILER]

[Disco92@aol.com]

Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
In a message dated 2/25/99 5:42:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, dschniepp@ldd.net
writes:

<<     The posse defeats a group of ten Savages.  I describe them to the
 players and say that they look to be around twelve years of age. Most of
 the Savages end up scattering back into the forest but they do manage to do
 a number on the NPCs in the group.  After making sure everyone is ok, the
 posse discovers that one of the Savages is still alive and trying to sneak
 his wounded self out of the area.  They see him and hold him at gunpoint as
 he shouts curses and obscenities at them and threatens them that his
 brothers and sisters will come back for them.  He starts crying, saying
 that they were just hungry and wanted the posse's food supply.  A little
 later, the Templar (with his Bloodthirsty Hinderance) Quickdraws his sword
 and runs him through.  The Savage gets a Critical to the Guts and
 collapses.
      The Templar says that since the boy doesn't want their help and isn't
 willing to help himself, he is on his own and that they should leave him. 
 The Doomsayer of the party (who has run out of Strain) stops the Savage's
 bleedin' but agrees to leave him, hoping that the other Savages will come
 back for him.
 
      What are your thoughts on this?  The Doomsayer wanted me to jot down a
 "bad checkmark" on the Templar in the "How to Become a Servitor of War"
 column of the character sheet. >>

If you give the Templar a "bad checkmark" then the whole posse basically needs
to get one.  The character being a Templar does not make him more susceptible
to becoming a Servitor, and since the whole party is participating in the act,
then its all or nothing for them.  And the Templar is not breaking any oaths,
and is even epitomizing the attitude of the Templars it seems in what he did.
(I would have stopped the bleeding, but to each his own)