How Do I Have Consequences for Murderhoboism?

[Grim Portent]

Enjoy the suggestion about the blood war, but is there a way to run the game like this without it becoming tedious?

I kind of imagine that if I do it incorrectly it could be immensely boring. Like if I have to roll to attack for every single balor or dretch or ghoul etc on the battlefield, combats with 15 participants is bad enough, but near infinite seems to be a problem.

I have also heard people say that my problems are inherent of the D&D system in and of itself, what systems would you recommend to address the progression from characters who can get killed by a housecat, to characters who can conquer worlds on a whim while reading a book?

Mass combat can be resolved in two main ways,

1) The mass combat is more of a backdrop, the battle is won or lost by the PCs fighting the enemy champions and breaking the enemy morale or shattering the strongest point in their battle line. The hordes of the Abyss would quail to see their Balor commander cast from the air with their back broken and wings tattered for example.

2) A lot of systems have rules in them for mass combat resolution based on a simple roll off with modifiers for army composition, access to magic and terrain. If you can't find one that's specific to your system any generic one should do. Stuff like +1-5 for outnumbering the other army by certain amounts, +1-4 for having magic in varying amounts, +3 for favorable terrain, that sort of thing.

You could also use a spreadsheet to work out which NPCs would win and then just extrapolate that out so battles are won based on which side averages out to more damage in Excel, but that takes more work and is less able to accomodate changes in circumstances.

[tomandtish]

Thank you for all the replies

I like the idea of townsfolk avoiding them and what not and the whole the players get nothing for slaughtering a bunch of random villagers. Though the main reason my players murderhobo is because they want to instill fear in the commoners. They don't care about the EXP or gold, they just want to be the scariest things on the planet.

In response to the villagers pooling resources I am not sure that will work, because even the good guys are largely selfish too (i run a grim and gritty swords and sorcery world). But thanks for the suggestion.

Lord's suggestion was excellent, but I fear as stated above that their main thing is becoming famous. However since they only terrorize small backwater villages it doesn't make much sense that the king is going to send his army to save a village of less than 50 people.

Maybe this idea is too complex to implement, but how long would a region be able to economically sustain a group of murderhobos even if they can stave off repercussions from the authorities? How long can shops stay in business when they get picked clean and their employees murdered every week? Who they do go belly up, would anyone want to replace them? How long before people start moving away because the village, town or even entire region is undergoing total economic collapse?

So yeah, congrats, the players have effectively destroyed the place through their actions. Now what? Where are they going to get their stuff from now? Move to another place and start over? That's not sustainable either, provided they don't run afoul of a bigger fish sooner or later.

And these two together hit the important thing to understand. Sooner or later, ANY ruler, regardless of alignment, is going to care about their actions. Whether they care about the people being killed (good rulers), see them as a threat to their own power, or even are just worried about the loss of revenue from taxes, at some point their actions are going to annoy the ruler(s) enough that they'll take action. What that action will be depends a lot on the ruler and their goals.

Truly good rulers will probably try and bring them to justice.

Evil rulers might try and bring them under their banner ("Come be a murderhobo FOR me"). If that fails they'll eliminate the competition.

Neutral rulers might just want to get them out of the territory by any means possible.

Yes it is rather fun, and they are all perfectly okay with having evil as their character alignment. In fact they used to play exclusively good characters before it got boring for them.

Edit: Forgot to finish post, the main issue at hand for me isn't the murderhoboism or the evilness it is how do I justify things. Most of the time I imagine that characters levels 1-4 make up 1% of the population, 5-10 0.01% of the population 11-16 0.0001% of the population and finally 17+ 0.000001% of the population. And the players aren't dumb either, they have several back up plans just in case including but not limited to a fortress of ingenious design that exists on the Astral Plane. They also have several people in their employ, so it isn't just them it's them and an army. At this point they are a world power, and it feels like it is only going to get worse. What about when they reach epic status, do I tell them that now armies of 17th level characters come after them?

By they way I like the reverse-psychology suggestion, I might consider trying that.

This actually makes it easier*. At these levels/ratios, they have set themselves up as one of THE challenges in at least the kingdom, if not the continent. They are casting spells only 1 in a million people can cast. When high priests and paladins are asking their gods what the biggest threat in 100 miles is, THEY are the answer.

To clarify, using the ratios you gave, for every 100 million beings with PC classes, 1 is level 17 or higher, 100 are in the level range of your characters (11-16), 10,000 are levels 5-10, and 100,000 are levels 1-4. So actually, unless you have a hugely populated world, there may NOT be anybody able to come stop them who is substantially more powerful.

(Incidentally, if you are curious, our estimated world population for 1500 AD was 585 million, so even rounding up that would be 6 characters of level 17 or higher). We hit 1 billion sometime between 1800 - 1850, and 2 billion sometime between 1900-1950. By comparison, the surface of Farerun according to the FRCS has 68 million humans and demihumans.).

So anyone actually wanting to stop them with force is probably going to have to do it with numbers, or something other than a "character".

*Are they aware that they are in a campaign where the level ratio is that rare (as opposed to D&D defaults)? This is why communication and a "Game Zero" is important so everyone is playing under the same expectations.

Esit:

I found this amusing.

But it's starting to sound like your party is in the Xykon range. Have a goblin ask them to get involved in a world domination scheme if you don't want them to continue their random rampages.

Forgot to hit post so came back, posted, then saw this and read it.

Kish, you owe me a keyboard. Snarfed my soda on it!

[Delta]

Edit: Forgot to finish post, the main issue at hand for me isn't the murderhoboism or the evilness it is how do I justify things. Most of the time I imagine that characters levels 1-4 make up 1% of the population, 5-10 0.01% of the population 11-16 0.0001% of the population and finally 17+ 0.000001% of the population. And the players aren't dumb either, they have several back up plans just in case including but not limited to a fortress of ingenious design that exists on the Astral Plane. They also have several people in their employ, so it isn't just them it's them and an army. At this point they are a world power, and it feels like it is only going to get worse. What about when they reach epic status, do I tell them that now armies of 17th level characters come after them?

You're going about this the wrong way. Yes, people/entities who will be able to keep up with them will get rarer and rarer the more powerful they get. But that doesn't actually matter because when they get more powerful, more powerful beings will take notice of them by default.

The level 10 group pillaging their way through random peasant villages will not be challenged by your standard city guard, but the next bigger city may well have some capable adventurers for hire a noble may hire to stop them from killing his subjects. If they're level 20, yeah, those random adventurers won't cut it. But now they're no just random pillagers either, they're the BBEGs of their region at that point, and sooner or later word about them will reach the main temple of the god of justice where the legendary Lord High Paladin Righty the Righteous may well consider it a holy quest to try and take down this epic threat to the world. Where's the problem with justifying that?

You say they're a world power, so other world powers will take notice of them and react accordingly. If they get to epic level, well misusing powers as theirs for such epic murderhoboiness may well draw the attention of some divine or otherwise "special" entities.

So basically, it comes down to a problem that doesn't really have anything to do with them being murderhobos, it's just about finding an appropriate challenge. A lawful good Level 17 Paladin can maraud through armies of low level Orc bandits without a problem just as the chaotic evil Barbarian can mop the floor with the whole city guard.

[Deepbluediver]

Edit: Forgot to finish post, the main issue at hand for me isn't the murderhoboism or the evilness it is how do I justify things. Most of the time I imagine that characters levels 1-4 make up 1% of the population, 5-10 0.01% of the population 11-16 0.0001% of the population and finally 17+ 0.000001% of the population.

That sounds like a design problem. Personally I prefer a world where adult humanoids start at level 3 (albeit most of them have 3 levels in NPC classes) and there are plenty of other adventuring groups around.

Here's another question though- why do you want to stop them? You built the world, but if your players want to turn evil, why is that a problem? Most groups don't get to level 20 and frankly if they have gotten that far, taking over the world (or at least a continent) seems like the next logical progress, even for some PCs that stay good.

[Grim Portent]

Here's another question though- why do you want to stop them? You built the world, but if your players want to turn evil, why is that a problem? Most groups don't get to level 20 and frankly if they have gotten that far, taking over the world (or at least a continent) seems like the next logical progress, even for some PCs that stay good.

OP never said they want to stop them, just work out where their players can go next. As is they're inter-planar warlords already, but they're spending their time bullying peasants in the material, which is all well and good, but it lacks ambition or challenge.

Given what has been said of the level proportions there's not really much in the material world that can oppose the players apart from the very rare powerful monsters and a few dozen beings with classes, which is why a few of us have suggested beings from the spiritual and metaphysical parts of reality start approaching them and directing them towards actual planar warfare.

[daniel_ream]

In several AD&D and BECMI modules, an Immortal/god showing up and granting the party quests (along with any necessary additional magic items to handle it appropriately) is a common quest starter.

Since the gods of the region the PCs are currently slaughtering their way through are likely none too pleased about the loss of worshipers, one or two of them sending an angelus to the nearest temple, church, itinerant knight's tent or Templar castle would not be amiss.

[Jay R]

Edit: Forgot to finish post, the main issue at hand for me isn't the murderhoboism or the evilness it is how do I justify things. Most of the time I imagine that characters levels 1-4 make up 1% of the population, 5-10 0.01% of the population 11-16 0.0001% of the population and finally 17+ 0.000001% of the population. And the players aren't dumb either, they have several back up plans just in case including but not limited to a fortress of ingenious design that exists on the Astral Plane. They also have several people in their employ, so it isn't just them it's them and an army. At this point they are a world power, and it feels like it is only going to get worse. What about when they reach epic status, do I tell them that now armies of 17th level characters come after them?

If there is nobody left who can threaten them, then there are no more adventures, they can earn no more experience points, and the game is over.

[Deepbluediver]

If there is nobody left who can threaten them...

Until you become gods, there is always someone stronger (and even then, maybe not).
If there is no one on THIS PLANE who can threaten your heroes, feel free to insert some stuff about "your reputation proceeds you" and then start porting in demons, angels, aberrations, etc, whatever you need to hit them with a real threat. Or have the God of Chaos/Battle/Adventurers port them to another plane because he/she/it wants to see what they are REALLY capable of.

Your characters being a higher level really just means that the "local area" where they can find competition in has increased.

[Arkhios]

If townsfolk see the PC's as a threat, they might just refuse cooperating with them, as previously suggested, closing their doors before them, merchants refusing to sell them their wares or a local inn might claim it's full, and local guard might send a patrol to keep a close eye on their every actions. Not engaging directly unless absolutely necessary, but if they did, just have their whole militia to show up. If the players are as unhinged as they seem to be, and murder the whole town, start spreading wanted posters around the region, and lo, you've made a reasonable explanation for a high level group of paladins to show up and mete out justice.

[Frozen_Feet]

Forgot to finish post, the main issue at hand for me isn't the murderhoboism or the evilness it is how do I justify things. Most of the time I imagine that characters levels 1-4 make up 1% of the population, 5-10 0.01% of the population 11-16 0.0001% of the population and finally 17+ 0.000001% of the population. And the players aren't dumb either, they have several back up plans just in case including but not limited to a fortress of ingenious design that exists on the Astral Plane. They also have several people in their employ, so it isn't just them it's them and an army. At this point they are a world power, and it feels like it is only going to get worse. What about when they reach epic status, do I tell them that now armies of 17th level characters come after them?

Let's get to the root of this. For any setting, one of four basic scenarios is true:

1) The world has low power and a low power cap.

At some point, murderhoboism runs into diminishing returns: the PCs have killed all the extraordinary folks, and can get no more powerful by killing the ordinary ones. In this case, the PCs will eventually become the strongest murderhobos around. However, even the strongest murderhobo can be threatened by masses of normal people. So as the PCs grow more infamous, they first lose co-operation of the rule of law, then co-operation of common people, and finally co-operation of other murderhobos. If they do not stop their murderhoboing, this eventually turns into a losing game: one day, someone will get in that lucky shot and they will die.

2) The world has low power but high power cap.

Diminishing returns doesn't exist. In this scenario, you can reach arbitrarily high power by killing normal people and taking their stuff. The strongest murderhobos cannot meaningfully be threatened by ordinary people. There are two subscenarios depending on answers to two questions:

2a) did the PCs hit the cap first? If yes, they have, by now, destroyed anyone who could oppose them and can prevent any new threats from rising. They are, in practice, invincible.

If not, they will now have to face the original murderhobos who hit the cap first - and those might just as invincible to them as they are to common people.

2b) Is murderhoboism sustainable, AKA do the PCs need anything from the common folk anymore? This is important because as has been alluded to by other posters, sufficiently indiscriminate murderhoboing will run the society and surrounding environment to the ground. If the answer is yes, the PCs will have to rethink their strategy so that they can sustain their lifestyle, which might equate to quitting murderhoboing alltogether.

If no, the PCs are effectively gods. They do not need the world and can do whatever they want with it.

3) the setting has high power but low power cap.

There are genuine gods and other supernatural things around in abundance, but the PCs can't close the gap. This is similar to the first scenario expect the time window for murderhoboism is much shorter. The PCs will rather rapidly run into something they can't kill and can't steal from and will have to rethink their strategy.

4) the world has high power and high power cap.

This is the world where yes, you will be sending 17th level armies against the PCs, because despite high-level characters being proportionately rare, in absolute terms their numbers are infinite and they can co-operate and concentrate forces to oppose the PCs. This is how Planes in D&D are set up: there are multiple realities that are infinite, so no matter how powerful a character gets there's always an arbitrary number of other characters just as powerful out there somewhere.

---

Based on your description of your game, you are operating on either 2) or 4). This is a choice you have to make and everything will follow from that choice.

I propose you pick 2). Now, answer the questions: did the PCs hit the power cap first and is their lifestyle sustainable?

[Gizmogidget]

Part of the reason for the small number of very powerful people was that because of the curve it is kind of hard to make sense of the world. From a game standpoint a party of 14th level characters and a squad of decently powerful soldiers as well as countless resoures can well be challenged by only a few things, so from a game stand point the party is rarely going to encounter anything that challenges them. But fi I go the reverse, and have beholders come out as random encounters, then how do I justify the existence of commoners or people on the real low end of the power scale?

I know some people have mentioned that my problems are a fault of the D&D system, are there good systems that have say a lateral progression wherein a 20th level character or whatever while powerful isn't a demigod disguised in mortal flesh?

[Quertus]

XP, treasure, and corpses to animate - there's 3 consequences right there.

You need more? Ok, fine. In RPGs, there's this little thing called role-playing. At the risk of oversimplifying matters, it involves characters taking the actions that it would make sense for the character to take. That'll give you all the consequences that you could ever need, and probably all the extra consequences you should ever use.

What is in character for the denizens of your world to do in this situation? Um, it's your world - you tell me. Same answer to the question, "what can they do?".

[Frozen_Feet]

@Gizmo: there's a simple answer to "why do/how can ordinary people co-exist with powerful creatures?"

Any creature powerful enough to both be unthreatened by them and to not need anything from them can just ignore them.

There is an analogous phenomenom in the real world. Ants, like humans, famously go to war. However, ants only war against other ants of similar size. They do not fight other ant species which are much smaller or larger.

Why? Because differently-sized ants occupy different ecological niches. They do not compete for the same resources.

Similarly, a big shark could easily devour plenty of smaller fishes, but they don't because there wouldn't be a point to it. Because of this, some smaller fish actually flock to sharks to escape other predators, such as seals, which are big enough for the shark to eat.

Same applies to monsters. F.ex. a dragon living on a mountaintop might be happy to leave human farmers alive as long as they produce delicious cattle for it to snack on. It will only take serious steps to eliminate those humans which become powerful enough to climb to its nest or which have treasure to steal.

A vampire or a mindflayer actually needs humans, so they would at some point try to cultivate them to have a lasting supply - and in the process, drive off, destroy or subjugate other monsters which might threaten human existence.

Once you examine the foodchain of evil in detail, you might come to notice that you can actually have huge amounts of powerful monsters who are mostly harmless to humanity because they are deadlocked in combat with other powerful monsters or just don't give a crap. It's only when the PCs cross the treshold to becoming powerful monsters in their own right that the hammer comes down and suddenly they have to fight all the other big fish.

[Max_Killjoy]

@Gizmo: there's a simple answer to "why do/how can ordinary people co-exist with powerful creatures?"

Any creature powerful enough to both be unthreatened by them and to not need anything from them can just ignore them.

There is an analogous phenomenom in the real world. Ants, like humans, famously go to war. However, ants only war against other ants of similar size. They do not fight other ant species which are much smaller or larger.

Why? Because differently-sized ants occupy different ecological niches. They do not compete for the same resources.

Similarly, a big shark could easily devour plenty of smaller fishes, but they don't because there wouldn't be a point to it. Because of this, some smaller fish actually flock to sharks to escape other predators, such as seals, which are big enough for the shark to eat.

Same applies to monsters. F.ex. a dragon living on a mountaintop might be happy to leave human farmers alive as long as they produce delicious cattle for it to snack on. It will only take serious steps to eliminate those humans which become powerful enough to climb to its nest or which have treasure to steal.

A vampire or a mindflayer actually needs humans, so they would at some point try to cultivate them to have a lasting supply - and in the process, drive off, destroy or subjugate other monsters which might threaten human existence.

Once you examine the foodchain of evil in detail, you might come to notice that you can actually have huge amounts of powerful monsters who are mostly harmless to humanity because they are deadlocked in combat with other powerful monsters or just don't give a crap. It's only when the PCs cross the treshold to becoming powerful monsters in their own right that the hammer comes down and suddenly they have to fight all the other big fish.

Maybe the OP's players end up destroying villages that "belonged" to a Great Wyrm, coven of Elder Vampires, or a nest of mind flayers...

[Lord Raziere]

A vampire or a mindflayer actually needs humans, so they would at some point try to cultivate them to have a lasting supply - and in the process, drive off, destroy or subjugate other monsters which might threaten human existence.

Now this actually explains well why vampires would be relative protectors in certain worlds-if your options are a bunch of parasites who need humans to live and a race of being who don't are bent on your complete extermination, the vampires look like the better option. I could easily imagine some less cosmic morality-esque fantasy worlds where the vampires are no secret but fulfill the basic role of feudal nobility: protect people from outside threats and whatnot in exchange for commoners who give up some of their blood as tribute. you'd hardly have to change anything about feudal politics for it to work. though how inheritance and dynasties work might change, they ARE undead after all, so their heirs will have to work differently. It probably means the people currently in power have a lot more control over who gets to succeed them though, since the infection has to be intentional.

[Jay R]

Any creature that preys on people will work. Dragons would protect the humans from genocidal PCs for the same reason that humans protect cows from wolves.

[Frozen_Feet]

Indeed. The conditions for a monster mafia to form are pretty broad. Sapient monsters may create sophisticated rules for managing prey, similar in purpose to human hunting laws. These may involve an ethical aspect, similar to human principles of ethical hunting.

Due to this, it's not a given a powerful anthrophage is purely detrimental to a human community. They may take active part in preserving or improving human conditions because happy humans taste better.

[2D8HP]

I...because happy humans taste better.

So sig-worthy!

[Pauly]

Another solution is to play out murder hobo events in excruciating detail with lots and lots of checks. Point out every rock that rolls, every door that swings. Make them spend tedious hours murdering the village.
For 0 XP
For 0 GP

Justify it by saying there's a rumor from a villager that a great mage is in the area.

The consequence becomes a meta game consequence. Instead of murderating the village in a 1 minute, "yeah we made a bunch of attack rolls and the village is exterminated ho-ho-ho" and now lets get onto our main adventure. It becomes "The ladt time we did this it was no fun, so how about we skip it".

[Jay R]

Another solution is to play out murder hobo events in excruciating detail with lots and lots of checks. Point out every rock that rolls, every door that swings. Make them spend tedious hours murdering the village.
For 0 XP
For 0 GP

Justify it by saying there's a rumor from a villager that a great mage is in the area.

The consequence becomes a meta game consequence. Instead of murderating the village in a 1 minute, "yeah we made a bunch of attack rolls and the village is exterminated ho-ho-ho" and now lets get onto our main adventure. It becomes "The ladt time we did this it was no fun, so how about we skip it".

Intriguingly, I would do the exact opposite, for the same reason.

DM: OK, you kill whoever you want, pillage what ever you want burn whatever you want. Nobody there can affect you. That night, ...
Player: Wait. First we want to...
DM: I don't need any details. Nothing can stop you; there's no adventure. You finish. That night, ,,,
Player: But we wanted to...
DM: Don't waste time. Total pillage is not enough money to affect you. That night, carrion eaters come in - wolves, ravens, etc. What do you do?
Player: But we wanted to play through it.
DM: You did. Nothing stopped you; you did anything you wanted to the town. That night ...


Again and again, refusing to let them "play" something with no adventure. No attack rolls, no spot checks, nothing.

[Deepbluediver]

Intriguingly, I would do the exact opposite, for the same reason.

DM: OK, you kill whoever you want, pillage what ever you want burn whatever you want. Nobody there can affect you. That night, ...
Player: Wait. First we want to...
DM: I don't need any details. Nothing can stop you; there's no adventure. You finish. That night, ,,,
Player: But we wanted to...
DM: Don't waste time. Total pillage is not enough money to affect you. That night, carrion eaters come in - wolves, ravens, etc. What do you do?
Player: But we wanted to play through it.
DM: You did. Nothing stopped you; you did anything you wanted to the town. That night ...


Again and again, refusing to let them "play" something with no adventure. No attack rolls, no spot checks, nothing.

I feel like we might be drifting off of the OP's original intent. There's a difference IMO between just being dirty violent jerks and actually being down-and-out evil. And if your player want to play an evil campaign, is that wrong? Ideally you should have discussed it with them ahead of time, but I don't think there's anything inherently wrong from a gameplay perspective if their characters want to do a swan dive into the deep end of the alignment pool. It might change their motivations and maybe the sorts of enemies they start facing, but it's not a wrong way to play.

[Koo Rehtorb]

The GM does not have the sole right to frame scenes. Cut that bull**** out.

[Max_Killjoy]

The GM does not have the sole right to frame scenes. Cut that bull**** out.

Nor do the players have the right to make the GM go through the slaughter of the innocents in detail.

(And it depends on what you mean by "frame scenes".)

[Delta]

Intriguingly, I would do the exact opposite, for the same reason.

DM: OK, you kill whoever you want, pillage what ever you want burn whatever you want. Nobody there can affect you. That night, ...
Player: Wait. First we want to...
DM: I don't need any details. Nothing can stop you; there's no adventure. You finish. That night, ,,,
Player: But we wanted to...
DM: Don't waste time. Total pillage is not enough money to affect you. That night, carrion eaters come in - wolves, ravens, etc. What do you do?
Player: But we wanted to play through it.
DM: You did. Nothing stopped you; you did anything you wanted to the town. That night ...


Again and again, refusing to let them "play" something with no adventure. No attack rolls, no spot checks, nothing.

To be honest, this sounds like a terrible idea to me that will end up frustrating both DM and players.

Basically, the players are telling you: "We'd like to play this!" and the DM telling them: "No, we're not gonna do that. No discussion, shut up, you don't get to have an opinion here.", in my book, that's not exactly a foundation for a game everyone will have fun with.

[Jay R]

I feel like we might be drifting off of the OP's original intent. There's a difference IMO between just being dirty violent jerks and actually being down-and-out evil. And if your player want to play an evil campaign, is that wrong? Ideally you should have discussed it with them ahead of time, but I don't think there's anything inherently wrong from a gameplay perspective if their characters want to do a swan dive into the deep end of the alignment pool. It might change their motivations and maybe the sorts of enemies they start facing, but it's not a wrong way to play.

This isn't primarily about wanting to play an evil alignment. It's about players who want to waste time being bullies where there is no challenge and no consequences. Specifically, I'm replying to an OP who asked about a 14th level barbarian against ordinary town guards.

I will not waste time on cheap, easy pillage. You want an evil campaign? All right, I'll set up some paladins on your level to fight. But I will not invent 140 four-hit-point targets so your 14th level party can kill somebody on 19 attacks out of 20.

To be honest, this sounds like a terrible idea to me that will end up frustrating both DM and players.

Basically, the players are telling you: "We'd like to play this!" and the DM telling them: "No, we're not gonna do that. No discussion, shut up, you don't get to have an opinion here.", in my book, that's not exactly a foundation for a game everyone will have fun with.

Not at all. I'm telling them we won't waste time on "encounters" with no challenge.

If players want to be villains, or play an evil campaign, that's fine, and I can build some serious challenges for them. That does not mean I will waste time on them pillaging a village of 1st-level commoners. This has nothing to do with alignment, as I will also not waste time on a high-level party of heroes ambushing random kobolds or commoner thieves.

Pillage a defenseless village? Fine. That takes one sentence. You will not roll for every attack against peasants for the same reason you won't roll for each chop of the axe when cutting firewood.

[Winter_Wolf]

Here's a thought: as regular folk move out of the area it creates opportunities for monstrous races to move in. Monstrous races with highe hit dice and combat abilities. 'Cause frankly if we're going full Evil anyway it's not more wrong to kill the non combatants of say a bugbear village than it is to kill humans or demihumans. What's got higher racial HD and forms settlements above ground?

Say a war band comes around and finds everything abandoned, but the brighter among them notices that everything's still useable and man this place is a lot nicer than the crappy lands we've been living in. Let's bring the families and make our headquarters here. Then the PCs roll in and find that the lowly villagers aren't quite as lowly anymore.

[Jay R]

Here's a thought: as regular folk move out of the area it creates opportunities for monstrous races to move in. Monstrous races with highe hit dice and combat abilities. 'Cause frankly if we're going full Evil anyway it's not more wrong to kill the non combatants of say a bugbear village than it is to kill humans or demihumans. What's got higher racial HD and forms settlements above ground?

Say a war band comes around and finds everything abandoned, but the brighter among them notices that everything's still useable and man this place is a lot nicer than the crappy lands we've been living in. Let's bring the families and make our headquarters here. Then the PCs roll in and find that the lowly villagers aren't quite as lowly anymore.

I like it.

It's the idea behind an old castle full of monsters, and therefore the basis of dungeons in the first place. Using the village the PCs pillaged as a base for a group of higher-level brigands or demihumans makes sense, and just extends the traditional D&D approach.

[NichG]

I feel like the issue of how to challenge a party of murderhobos and the issue of how to portray the consequences of murderhoboism are completely independent.

That is to say, a party of non-murderhobos will also be challenged, no? So don't make the mistake of assuming that because the party has engaged in murderhoboism, now suddenly all of the challenges they face must originate from that decision. If an elder evil is bent on destroying the world, even a party that kills shopkeepers and orphans will still have to deal with it if they want a place to keep their stuff.

Once you abandon the idea that consequences = direct challenge, then I think things become much easier. Your job is then to convincingly and evocatively portray 'what happens next' now that a great and unstoppable force of evil has descended upon the countryside (e.g. the PCs). So, what are some things that could happen? I'm going to assume for the following that the usual proofs of power have occurred (guards/forces of the kingdom/etc tried to stop the PCs and were summarily obliterated and their entire chains of command assassinated). So this is a high level, PCs-are-effectively-an-evil-empire take on things.

- Those who hold grudges against others, those who are drawn to power, and those who have cracked under the strain and are seeking self-preservation flock to the PCs' side, trying to preemptively buy their way into the PCs' good graces. The more extreme the PCs actions and the more they turn on or abuse these new allies, the higher percentage of 'crazy' is present in these recruits.

- Occasionally, someone will try to convert or redeem one of the PCs - not through force, but by attaching themselves to the party in some capacity and trying to become important to the target PC (via attempting to romance them, providing resources or information in exchange for a few minutes of moralizing, etc). These individuals may in turn become corrupted themselves in the attempt, as they make more and more compromises in order to try to get the PCs to identify with them.

- Attempts at indirect rebellion are likely - things like sabotaging places the PCs are liable to be interested in when they're not around to stop it. There's likely to be a guerilla warfare phase where the remaining hardcore opposition struggles to find some way to spite the PCs despite not being able to directly confront them.

- People with strong ethical constraints living in the area will tend to do one of three things. Some will go out in a blaze of glory attempting to stop the PCs (no need to even run this as a fight, its basically the NPCs committing suicide rather than living in compliance with the world the PCs have created). Some will leave the region immediately, understanding that they'll face impossible decisions if they stay. Some will go into hiding and try to secretly help those who might run afoul of the PCs - move businesses underground, provide means of escape from the region for those in fear for their livelihood or lives, etc.

- Generally people will begin to simply let the PCs have their way and won't even provide token resistance, but in turn there will be almost no enthusiasm or loyalty to it. People will do exactly what the PCs tell them to, no questions and no resistance, even if it goes strongly against their ethics and personality. So a shopkeep might hand over all their goods for free, but then they won't bother restocking and if the PCs e.g. blackmail them to order some custom item, they'll comply but at a higher chance of failure than otherwise. Any kind of sustained action on the PCs' behalf requires some kind of method to make the threat of the PCs' presence persist even when they leave (e.g. secret surveillance, geases, etc).

- Pretenses of society will tend to break down. At first it will be 'okay everyone, we don't charge these guys, just give them what we have and hope they go away' but that sort of exception will gradually erode social order in general, leading to corruption or fragmentation into small fiefdoms and autocracies. This will in turn cause infrastructure to decay - communication between towns and cities will become sporadic or inconsistent, trade may shrink down to essentials or seize up entirely. This sort of decay can be prevented if the PCs actively take charge rather than just laying waste to things and leaving.

- People may abandon the region - ghost towns, abandoned farms, etc might start to become more common sights. If the PCs have a particular preferred victim (they go after shops for their inventory, etc), then that kind of business will tend to dry up and disappear more quickly than the PCs can actually pull resources out of it.

- Various forces of evil both mundane and cosmic may start to default to non-hostile or make overtures with the PCs. An archdevil might send a few imps or lower-tier fiends to serve the PCs as a gift and to keep lines of communication open, etc. If the PCs kill them too, then this stops pretty rapidly, otherwise those forces may try to draw the PCs into their schemes.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Pillage a defenseless village? Fine. That takes one sentence. You will not roll for every attack against peasants for the same reason you won't roll for each chop of the axe when cutting firewood.

Yes, it is reasonable not to make rolls over forgone conclusions. That is not what you're suggesting, though. You're suggesting more than skipping over making attack rolls. You're suggesting skipping over the entire scene.

And what you're doing with that is denying players the chance for characterization. And the example conversation you posted with you repeatedly cutting the players off mid-sentence and bulldozing over their own desires is particularly grating.

[Max_Killjoy]

I feel like the issue of how to challenge a party of murderhobos and the issue of how to portray the consequences of murderhoboism are completely independent.

That is to say, a party of non-murderhobos will also be challenged, no? So don't make the mistake of assuming that because the party has engaged in murderhoboism, now suddenly all of the challenges they face must originate from that decision. If an elder evil is bent on destroying the world, even a party that kills shopkeepers and orphans will still have to deal with it if they want a place to keep their stuff.

Once you abandon the idea that consequences = direct challenge, then I think things become much easier. Your job is then to convincingly and evocatively portray 'what happens next' now that a great and unstoppable force of evil has descended upon the countryside (e.g. the PCs). So, what are some things that could happen? I'm going to assume for the following that the usual proofs of power have occurred (guards/forces of the kingdom/etc tried to stop the PCs and were summarily obliterated and their entire chains of command assassinated). So this is a high level, PCs-are-effectively-an-evil-empire take on things.

- Those who hold grudges against others, those who are drawn to power, and those who have cracked under the strain and are seeking self-preservation flock to the PCs' side, trying to preemptively buy their way into the PCs' good graces. The more extreme the PCs actions and the more they turn on or abuse these new allies, the higher percentage of 'crazy' is present in these recruits.

- Occasionally, someone will try to convert or redeem one of the PCs - not through force, but by attaching themselves to the party in some capacity and trying to become important to the target PC (via attempting to romance them, providing resources or information in exchange for a few minutes of moralizing, etc). These individuals may in turn become corrupted themselves in the attempt, as they make more and more compromises in order to try to get the PCs to identify with them.

- Attempts at indirect rebellion are likely - things like sabotaging places the PCs are liable to be interested in when they're not around to stop it. There's likely to be a guerilla warfare phase where the remaining hardcore opposition struggles to find some way to spite the PCs despite not being able to directly confront them.

- People with strong ethical constraints living in the area will tend to do one of three things. Some will go out in a blaze of glory attempting to stop the PCs (no need to even run this as a fight, its basically the NPCs committing suicide rather than living in compliance with the world the PCs have created). Some will leave the region immediately, understanding that they'll face impossible decisions if they stay. Some will go into hiding and try to secretly help those who might run afoul of the PCs - move businesses underground, provide means of escape from the region for those in fear for their livelihood or lives, etc.

- Generally people will begin to simply let the PCs have their way and won't even provide token resistance, but in turn there will be almost no enthusiasm or loyalty to it. People will do exactly what the PCs tell them to, no questions and no resistance, even if it goes strongly against their ethics and personality. So a shopkeep might hand over all their goods for free, but then they won't bother restocking and if the PCs e.g. blackmail them to order some custom item, they'll comply but at a higher chance of failure than otherwise. Any kind of sustained action on the PCs' behalf requires some kind of method to make the threat of the PCs' presence persist even when they leave (e.g. secret surveillance, geases, etc).

- Pretenses of society will tend to break down. At first it will be 'okay everyone, we don't charge these guys, just give them what we have and hope they go away' but that sort of exception will gradually erode social order in general, leading to corruption or fragmentation into small fiefdoms and autocracies. This will in turn cause infrastructure to decay - communication between towns and cities will become sporadic or inconsistent, trade may shrink down to essentials or seize up entirely. This sort of decay can be prevented if the PCs actively take charge rather than just laying waste to things and leaving.

- People may abandon the region - ghost towns, abandoned farms, etc might start to become more common sights. If the PCs have a particular preferred victim (they go after shops for their inventory, etc), then that kind of business will tend to dry up and disappear more quickly than the PCs can actually pull resources out of it.

- Various forces of evil both mundane and cosmic may start to default to non-hostile or make overtures with the PCs. An archdevil might send a few imps or lower-tier fiends to serve the PCs as a gift and to keep lines of communication open, etc. If the PCs kill them too, then this stops pretty rapidly, otherwise those forces may try to draw the PCs into their schemes.

All very true, and well detailed. My comments about challenges (and those too will arise as consequences, even if separate from your examples) was more a rejection of the idea that the PCs can ever guarantee their own superiority over all threats -- if the PCs can do something, someone else can do it too.

But really, society should start to break down around the PCs, exactly as you describe, until they realize they broke it and it doesn't work any more. Another example -- if they don't know how to fix their own gear and everyone who could fix it is either dead because "LoL, Y pay when U can kill?" or have gone out of business or have fled the region... then the PCs have broken gear.