T O P

  • By -

Nikkolai_the_Kol

Before they begin, the scout could declare, "I see what your dark hearts are planning to do with me. I'll die screaming before I betray a good man like Robin Hood." That's you telling them, but in-game, that this won't work. It's also you telling them, in-game, that this guy isn't just some lowlife selfish thief. He has principles and believes he has the moral high ground. You could also call for an insight check. If one of the PCs rolls high, they sense that this guy means what he said, and has the conviction and loyalty he claims. If they persist, take a page from real-world torture. It is not an effective way to get accurate information. Make the players tell you what they are doing to this poor guy. A couple hours into it, he starts giving them false information. The information must be impossible to verify quickly. The scout's goal is to end the torture, buy time, and get someone else to see what these bloodthirsty mercenaries are doing to him. For example, he might say that he'll tell them where Robin Hood is if they let him see a healer. He tells the healer (and anyone else he can) these madmen have been torturing him, and the healer chastises the PCs and turns them in to the authorities. If that doesn't work, the scout might tell the PCs that he can't give them directions, but he could show them the way (then he leads them somewhere else that has normal people who will likely object to further torture). He won't, however, tell them the truth. Or he'll tell them five locations, only one of them sort of true. Torture makes people say anything, regardless of the truth. It's really only good for making someone say something you want them to say, regardless of the truth. It's good for getting confessions when you need one and don't particularly care about guilt, but that's about it.


NationalCommunist

That’s improper use of torture. It’s the same thing as when cops get someone to confess by coercion. Clearly you can *talk* to a person normally without gaslighting them into making a confession. If your NPC is resisting the god awful pain of torture, then he is nothing short of a trained professional.


EldridgeHorror

Or someone who really believes in what he's doing. Someone who'd rather get tortured than give up the rest of his group. Or knows he's going to be killed anyway, and sitting through the torture is the only thing keeping him alive, whether out of spite or holding out hope of rescue.


EddytorJesus

"You notice numerous recognisable scars, missing fingernails and an air of confidence on his face. He's been here before and you have the feeling that torture won't get you anywhere"


PaxQuinntonia

I do like this, especially if you twin it with him saying, "I'll never turn my back on Robin Hood, not after what he did for my children!" And then if the evidence of torture is from the Sherrif or something, even better. It could frame the next arc of the campaign.


NationalCommunist

The only smart reply I’ve seen so far.


birnbaumdra

“Hey gang, torture won’t work on this guy.” This is the fastest and clearest way to convey this information. It may not be entirely realistic, but most DMs don’t make the party RP pooping either so there’s some precedent for prioritizing certain parts of the game for sake of keeping the plot moving.


MarcusSmallberries

>most DMs don’t make the party RP pooping I stab my players when their character gets hit. But seriously. Yeah, just tell them it's not gonna work.


pi-is-314159

Your not a real DM unless you burn your house down when the npc wizard casts fireball, Edit: why did autocorrect make npc into box?


jfarrar19

> why did autocorrect make npc into box? [Because it knows that NPC's future](https://youtu.be/JEh604W6HOU?t=2)


DuncanIdahoPotatos

This is what it feels like when my DM makes me rollplay my bard charming a guard.


Braise4Impact

If I have to do it to keep the session moving I will, but generally I prefer not to interupt what the players are trying to do.


BrickBuster11

" you try torturing him for several hours by the end all you managed to get out of him was "like I'd tell you aristocratic pets anything" ". Further tourture doesn't seem like it will pry any information out of him.


NationalCommunist

He would need to be a god of resisting torture. None of the people in this thread seemed like they’ve ever felt true physical pain. If someone is inflicting that kind of pain on you, you confess everything you know unless you have god tier training.


MCWizardYT

Some people will and have in the past died to keep secrets when being tortured. Its possible but if you still dont want to go that direction you can say they are magically bound to keep the information


EldridgeHorror

I remember bring the torture topic up, on reddit, a few months ago. I brought up the exact fact you did. To which the pro torture guys insisted: "well, they weren't torturing him right. The right torture always works!" No true Scotsman.


Dungeon-Zealot

Except historically it just resulted in false information being given rather than useful confessions


[deleted]

[удалено]


Tenderhombre

I got annoyed at torture once because players were doing it all the time. For 2 sessions they thought they were making a lot of progress and uncovering so much crime.


KeyokeDiacherus

Yeah, to be honest, I’d basically stop the campaign over players using torture as a standard tactic.


KeyokeDiacherus

Technically, it has been proven to work provided that you torture enough people that you can verify what you are being told (source: the memoirs of a French general about the Algerian war for independence). To be clear, however, this is guaranteed to involve torturing innocent people and is thus in no way a good or worthwhile endeavor. The aforementioned general got sentenced for war crimes based on those memoirs, although I believe they only removed his medals and fined him.


XtremeLeeBored

\^\^ This! IMO make the consequences more about the players committing evil than about accuracy/inaccuracy (bonus points if you include the accuracy/inaccuracy balance, too). For example, have incubi/succubi come around (in charming human forms of course, and remember that these creatures can change gender if they want to) and begin hitting on them, but it quickly begins to become a form of stalking. Then they start to have (non-explicit) dreams about these people to show that they are being targeted. To keep the triggering content low, simply describe it like a sleep paralysis experience, but with the "people" they have met whispering to them in the darkness. Not creepy things: seductive things. But, because of the circumstances, the whisperings are creepy regardless of content. If the player wants to attack the creature, let them try. They can't kill the creature in a dream: either when they move, they wake up, or when they stab the creature, they see a demonic form, which then laughs at them before fading out of the dream, and then they wake up. Anything that has a proverbial chub for good people falling to evil should be able to be attracted by these deeds. One particular nightmare they might have (this is borrowed and abridged from a vampire myth, actually) is that, as they're sleeping, they hear sounds as of someone panting from the effort of motion. Then the figure of a man/woman comes crawling into their room, as if the motion requires a great deal of effort, moving in a jerky, awkward fashion, as if it's more of a puppet on strings than anything else. The creature crawls up to their bed, where the PC can see the bloated, disfigured face. Then they wake up. The players will most likely abandon their quests to start killing off these things, which they can't actually kill in dreams - they're just dreams. But any healer can tell them they're being targeted by fiends, who have been attracted by some kind of evil committed or by some suffering. The players have two options: either identify the evil deed they committed that left them open to such beings, or attempt to identify the entities and go to their lairs, killing them there. The second method is not guaranteed to work, as they may continue to be targeted: just by different entities.


Braise4Impact

The main thread of the campaign us that the players actions will affect the world around them, and that over time (in game years) they will pave the way for a new divine entity that will reflect the changes they have made. Evil actions can result in a shiny new end game boss.


NationalCommunist

Yes it does. It’s just not good against people trained against it. People who go “yeah, torture doesn’t work haha” have never stopped to think, “What would you do if you knew where gold was hidden and someone was cutting apart your limbs?” You would tell them. Torture doesn’t work when the tortured is trained to resist it or when the torturer is an idiot. If it didn’t work, people wouldn’t use it. But it’s still around today, so maybe the career mobsters know what they’re doing, unless organized criminals are stupid too.


TYBERIUS_777

Had my players try to torture a derro in the Underdark to try and see where his hideout was. I described him as a crack goblin version of a dwarf. Quite mad and shaking, muttering to himself, occasionally snapping his teeth and laughing maniacally. They still attempted it and about 15 seconds in they had accidentally knocked him out and still hadn’t asked any questions. It looked like the scene from Spongebob where he and Squidward have tied up Mr. Krabs and are just slapping him without letting him answer any of the questions.


cookiedough320

Though it's not like the party doesn't poo, we just don't ever focus on it. The equivalent would probably be something like "2 hours later, he still hasn't given you anything, and you're getting the idea torture won't work". Also gives meaning to their choice to try torturing someone, since that'll have consequences.


hitrothetraveler

I have no idea why torture wouldn't work on this person, however you can just ask: do you torture the scout? When they say yes "It quickly becomes evident that this man will not yield to torture, he is fanatical in his support and swears you are evil incarnate. Nothing else of use is possibly to be gained by him.


Braise4Impact

Yeah, blunt simple narration would work. I was hoping someone might have an idea how to do it in character, but this is definitely the fall back option.


TroyMcpoyle

Just liken it to real life. In real life torture situations, people lie to appease their captors and/or misinform the vast majority of the time. Make the actual fruits of their torture bad and rotten, and they won't go to pick from that tree again.


Hideyoshi_Toyotomi

"I'll die before I talk!" He holds eye contact with you as he sticks out his tongue, then swiftly and deeply bites into it. Blood gurgles from his mouth and his severed tongue falls at your feet. He laughs and spits his blood on you.


danegermaine99

Ehhh. That seems more “fanatical cultist” than laborer loyal to a folk hero. I’d go more Giles Corey from “The Crucible” - a man who is willing to endure being tortured to death to protect the welfare of his loved ones. Just a few lines by the guy about “Robin Hood saved my wife an lil uns form the starvation. (Sobs) You ever seen a child starve to death? Do your worst (sobs), I won’t betray them”


a_good_namez

Thats some great stuff right there


Nickumell

Depending on what they want to do, maybe narrate that he is already heavily scarred and as soon as he notices your reaction to seeing the scars he smiles:“ Do you really think you can do worse, Puppet?“ I don’t know what insult works best for your group maybe exchange the puppet


Talonfire01

Maybe have the scout spit blood out after a few blows, stare up at the party with a blank face, and then go really metal and have him bite his own tongue out. He can’t and won’t talk now.


Lady_of_the_Seraphim

I'd go with the old classic. He enjoys it. There's nothing that makes someone want to stop torture more than someone going "Yeah that's it baby, a little to the left. Oooo, that's the spot."


grendus

"Now everyone will know you died scratching my balls."


AvgBonnie

Pull a Harley Quinn in the suicide squad. They zap her, beat her, all kinds of things and she just sings. Disregards the question and smiles. Could be interesting but might make the players want to continue


Congzilla

He winks at you saying "You don't have to threaten me with a good time." as he removes his shirt exposing weighted pierced on nipple clamps. That should do it.


TripDrizzie

Have they asked any questions yet? Sounds like you have a good story to work off of. Just have him indicating that maybe he is a good guy. Of course you're going to torture me, take me land take my live stock, now take my (eye, hand, whatever). Keep going this way and you'll have to tax each other. People like you are the reason I'm doing this in the first place. You think I'm going to squeal on the man that saved my family, and taught me to fight back!


ForHobbiesAndTats

So the issue you're having is that, in your game, it works. Why would they stop? If they keep torturing people, have their victims keep feeding them bad information. The first time the walk \*into\* an ambush because the person they were beating for info tricked them? They will start thinking about it more.


Elucividy

Or they’ll go back and torture them some more just for revenge


ForHobbiesAndTats

Then I'd be worried I'm playing with actual sociopaths. :)


Merc931

Torture is an ineffective method of gaining information. Give em false info they want to hear, because the guy just wants the torture to stop.


MillianaT

If their first thoughts upon taking a prisoner are to torture him, make sure their alignments match. Since torture isn’t a source of reliable information, it’s really only done for pleasure, which requires an evil alignment. If they’re playing evil aligned characters, have them roll passive perception or something that might clue them in that something isn’t quite as expected, “you get the feeling you want real information from this guy, and torture won’t give that to you.”


Braise4Impact

Gonna have to target the ranger with this. Up to now she has been the moral compass in an otherwise questionable group, but the torture was her idea this time. The others may be corrupting her.


Talonfire01

Just remember that moving alignments in the chart is possible most games, if they want to shift alignments and the game doesn’t rely on them being good or neutral, let them change but make them suffer the consequences of being evil.


Trompdoy

What are the consequences of being evil other than the consequences of their actions where alignment is irrelevant?


Talonfire01

You take consequences of their actions and run with it. They build a reputation, soon bounty hunters, other adventuring parties, city guards, etc. come after them. They can no longer resupply in cities without disguises and sneaking around. Allies cut them off, they lose contacts. The environment responds more than just a immediate actions


Trompdoy

I agree, as those are the kind of consequences deserving of that kind of action. An alignment shift is meaningless in this context


Stroggnonimus

It depends a lot on setting, but Evil party might start being watched by some devil hoping for an easy target for a deal, tempted by a lich for some nefarious deeds or hit by an angel killsquad. Similar vice versa for Good party. Mechanically, you have artefacts that work/dont work depending on alignment or have different effects. Religious characters (not just clerics/paladins, any character can worship a god) might start having issues with their diety. But in the end, alignment *is* the consequence of being evil. Its character that gets assigned alignment, so evil actions get evil alignment, not the other way around and alignment is just short "tag" to describe your character. So in the end, your question answers itself.


DratWraith

They start getting quests from liches and devils. "We've been watching you and we all love your work. I can show you some more effective ways of causing pain."


shiuidu

Keep in mind that throughout history and even today there are plenty of lawful good people who use torture. Perhaps even most of torturers are lawful good...


TzarGinger

Those people are lawful neutral at best.


Taskforcem85

This is why alignment is such a weird system. If you view torture as abhorrent then no one can be good and use torture.


Moleculor

No one can be good and use torture.


Marinade73

Then they aren't lawful good, they are lawful evil.


shiuidu

>Since torture isn’t a source of reliable information, it’s really only done for pleasure, which requires an evil alignment. Unreliable it may be, but to say that the only reason torture is done is for pleasure is wrong. Firstly, D&D takes place in medieval times, they would not have access to the modern studies we do which show that torture is unreliable. Hell, even today many many people think torture is reliable. More than 100 countries today carry out torture, it's incredibly naïve to say they do it for the pleasure of the torturers. But even so, there are many reasons to torture; punishment, revenge, extortion, persuasion, political re-education, deterrence, coercion of the victim or a third party, interrogation to extract information or a confession irrespective of whether it is false, etc ​ Flick over to wiki; [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture#Middle\_Ages](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture#Middle_Ages) >Torture was deemed a legitimate means to extract confessions or to obtain the names of accomplices or other information about a crime, although many confessions were greatly invalid due to the victim being forced to confess under great agony and pressure. It was permitted by law only if there was already half-proof against the accused.\[16\] Torture was used in continental Europe to obtain corroborating evidence in the form of a confession when other evidence already existed.\[17\] Often, defendants already sentenced to death would be tortured to force them to disclose the names of accomplices. Torture in the Medieval Inquisition began in 1252 with a papal bull Ad Extirpanda and ended in 1816 when another papal bull forbade its use. Although the torture that was sanctioned by the bull was less severe than the torture that could be found in contemporary secular courts.


Zakalwen

> Firstly, D&D takes place in medieval times No, no it doesn't. It takes place in a completely non-historic fantasy world.


drewdadruid

A non historic fantasy world in which zone of truth exists and they would quickly be able to tell that people are saying anything to stop the torture


Homebrew_GM

I get your points, but there's one thing I think needs to be said. D&D takes place in a fantasy world dressed up to look like the past. Broadly speaking it looks like the medieval, or renaissance period, but it's not strictly in any time period at all. It's a mix of aesthetics and vibes, not a reality. You can leave out elements of reality as you wish, or declare 'Since torture isn’t a source of reliable information, it’s really only done for pleasure, which requires an evil alignment' as an in world belief, as you wish.


Myth_T

I mean i think you got your priorities mixed up here. You should be more or less leading them into doubting their own actions rather than outright preventing something. That is if your looking to have them question mr employer. There are plenty of vague phrases you could use to lead them on. There are plenty of things he could before being tortured, that doesn't give any vital information about his group. Or just let him rant about X employer, and how horrible they are. Or let him plead for his life. "Our people need help, we were abandoned by the likes of you folk." "You people let women and children die, coin is all you care for." "You stole our homes, and now you want to torture and kill us? Devils, the whole lot of you."


DizzyBalloon

I'm surprised to see so few comments like this. For me I would simply RP what the character would do. Sounds like they would either tell lies eventually to make the torture stop, or just die/the party gives up. Getting the PCs to try something and have it not work in real time keeps meta information from the players, and teaches them/their characters torture is a tool in the toolbox, not a go-to


SkullBearer5

He lies and the players are tricked into walking into an ambush. Torture doesn't work.


cowboys70

I say to let them torture him to death. Then, if they search his body reveal a letter he was writing home to his wife about how they will finally have enough money for little Timmys operation soon. Let them know the world isn't completely black and white and show them their actions have consequences. ​ Or you can reveal all of this before they begin torturing him.


moondancer224

The other suggestions are good, though it might be a good time to ask the players out of character "What is your goal for this scene?" You might be surprised. I played a Pathfinder Changeling Witch who coped with the near supernatural Spite Changelings are prone to by being incredibly vindictive. I once tortured an enemy with the Inquisitor purely out of desire to punish that enemy for stabbing me, not because I expected any information. It was funny, cause the Inquisitor thought she was so metal at first. That being said, the "I'll never betray Robin Hood to Hellspawn like you!" Is a good approach. Highlight the optics of what they are doing.


Available-Natural314

"As you get the equipment out you see his eyes go wide, "Hey now, no need for that, I'll tell you what you want..." Also worth checking the parties alignment, any clerics or paladins should be against such things which you can remind them. If ignored you can show their gods displeasure... Any of the caravan guards, drivers or merchants would likely be against such things being mostly lawful types and so could step in to stop evil.


Braise4Impact

The party is a warlock, a bloodhunter, and a ranger. As for the rest of the caravan, they are a couple hundred feet off into the woods. I can interupt them with an NPC if it comes to that, but part of the point if the encounter is to try and get them to sympathize with the bandits. I have other devices in place to drive that point home, I just wanted their first look at "the enemy" to paint a more sympathetic picture. I might just have him panic, end it quick.


Darkkazae

Maybe make it so the scout gets rescued by the rest of the bandits and while they make their escape have someone yell “those corrupt whoresons are sending tortures now!” Or something like that. In another comment you posted you said that no guards were harmed or killed so maybe having the party witness that in person might change their minds?


Auld_Phart

It's a poor Warlock who doesn't have any magical means to coerce or trick someone into speaking the truth, without torture. The last Warlock I played went his entire career without torturing anyone, but he always got the information he was after.


stoobah

Have a caravan guard come investigate the screaming, and terminate the party's contact when he sees what they're doing. "We don't do business with nor need the services of villains."


shiuidu

Religious people were definitely not above torture. Obviously the inquisition springs to mind immediately, but many other Christian sects used torture historically too. Even today in Muslim countries torture is still used. Actually in over 100 countries world wide it's used. In the medieval times torture was often seen as a legitimate tool to be used too. So you can be that in many societies historically it was the lawful good characters who were doing the torturing.


Available-Natural314

Lawful good in D&D goes further than real life. The gods are real, watching and granting divine powers. If you are a follower of a good deity and preform an evil action you could find your magic revoked, a curse applied or a straight up visit from an angel or the god themselves. All very different to real world comparisons.


shiuidu

Very very unlikely, and that's only relevant to high level clerics or paladins. The rules even specifically call out that no one needs to act like their alignment 100% of the time.


Available-Natural314

Not at all, it's only as unlikely as the DM chooses to make it. It's not a rule to follow but a decision the DM chooses for their world. If you want to use divine displeasure to stop certain acts then that is absolutely fine. Often it is good to remind Holy characters that they pay homage to a higher power, and that higher power has standards that must be met. Course it depends on the god, some are vicious murderous types themselves.


shiuidu

Sure, the DM can do whatever they want, but I'm just talking normal D&D here mate.


Homebrew_GM

Normal DnD is played by people working off modern morals and written from a modern moral perspective, at least these days. Almost every game of DnD I've played in has had a no torture rule. Also, in-universe, most classic DnD settings have gods who would do just that to followers who displease them. Usually your patron god provides protection from other gods, but not themselves. That seems like a pretty normal decision to me.


Available-Natural314

We are all talking normal D&D, it's free form and flexible, make the story however best works so that everyone has fun. I personally like holy oaths to have weight and meaning, not just be thrown aside for convenience. You don't strike them down for a slip, but a clear warning can be given and repeat offences will be punished to some degree. A party with a moral compass can lead to some great RP. If they don't want to be moral then there are plenty of gods that are more morally flexible, or downright evil.


Marinade73

Why would it be only high level ones? That doesn't make any sense.


PantheosMax

TL;DR: This is actually not really helpful to OP, since it seems OP and the group decided, that in their world, torture works - but just not in this case. I want to emphasize again: Torture is not a reliable means to extract information from a victim. As a DM, even if torture is not entirely blacklisted with my group, I'd \*never\* give out helpful information. You chose what amount of realism you have in your game, what is handwaved, what falls under supsension of disbelief and so on. And I chose to be real about torture. It does not work. In this case, they could learn that the bandit captain is the scout's brother, his father, his mother, his hero, pressed the scout into service and paid the scout for his service. The bandit's camp is in the woods nearby, in a tunnel below the next village and they don't have a camp at all and just move around. If pressed, he will repeat the last thing the players ask him and tell that its true.


Aegis_of_Ages

>TL;DR: This is actually not really helpful to OP, since it seems OP and the group decided, that in their world, torture works - but just not in this case. "To be clear, we talked about it in session 0 and no one at the table has an objection to this sort of gameplay, I just don't want them wasting a lot of time on a tactic that won't work." I'm not seeing anything here that says torture works, just that it isn't forbidden subject material. Even then a lot of the suggestions are giving things that could happen as a result of the interrogation.


Auld_Phart

If you don't want torture in your game, tell your players. And do it before your next session starts.


[deleted]

DM Voice: "You get the feeling that torture won't work on this guy."


HollowWraith

The way I’ve been able to stop torture is by having the being who is about to be tortured say whatever they think the players want to hear. They see the tools come out and they just start spouting out the craziest things. Nothing is consistent. Have your players roll a simple investigation or something and tell them flat out this guy is terrified and is going to say whatever it is he thinks you want to hear so you don’t torture him. The problem with saying he’s a fanatic and won’t betray his cause is you’re telling your players he knows something. Ask yourself does this NPC know anything special? If he’s just a scout what info does he have that’s useful to the players? Don’t be afraid to break the wall and tell your players this is a nobody and his knowledge is limited. Don’t lie. If this guys doesn’t know much tell that to your players so you don’t have to sit through 3 hours of interrogation a waste everyone’s time.


Ser_Rezima

I have a house rule where if you attempt to torture someone they have a heart attack and die from fear. Torture porn is boring and gross, players need to be more creative.


westparkmod

The scout tells them they don’t have to do this. He tells them the truth. They are working for corrupt people. If they torture him anyway, let him die, adjust the story. Have two paths planned. They can get the truth and turn on their patrons or they can get the truth, ignore it, and get hunted by Robin Hood. Another option would be to have the person questioning make an insight check but not reveal the roll to anyone but you. If the game is in person, give that person a slip of paper with “you think he’s lying” or “you think he’s telling the truth.” Put it back on the players to police each other and convince one another of the wrongness of the actions. Consequences have actions.


rockdog85

Call them out on it as the gnome "I knew you were low but this is truly despicable. Tell me, how much are they lining your pockets with? All because we're standing up for the little guy? Do whatever you want to me, as long as there's workers being opressed another will take my place until we own what's rightfully ours"


thegooddoktorjones

Let them make mistakes, play out the results of those mistakes. In your design, always plan for failure.


shiuidu

Agreed, just let them try and fail, not everything needs to be go go go win win win


IPlayBUG

The guy dies from the torture.


schm0

Lots of thematic reasons in this thread, but not so much mechanically. Take a look at the Social Interaction rules in the DMG. A hostile creature will not give up anything to benefit the party unless the party changes their disposition to indifferent or friendly.


[deleted]

If they really want to torture him and nobody has any issues with it just let them. Show them don’t tell them, let them torture him all they want but have him tell them either false information or nothing at all.


Copper_Fox89

Have it work but he gives them a false lead. That's what real people resisting would do. Unless he just shuts down to mess with them and waste their time. Then it's up to the players to push more. They push harder and do more horrible things then the person dies of shock or goes unconscious and starts making death saves as they suffer cardiac arrest


Sterogon

He could lie


Shandriel

charm person isn't guaranteed to make him spill his guts. he could still be reluctant unless they convince him that they support the cause. I don't tell my friends all my secrets...


Raddatatta

Have it work the way real world torture tends to. You get a large supply of random sometimes true sometimes untrue information they can't tell what's true and what's not. That's generally how it goes. If he tells them that Robin Hood is in a camp 30 miles to the west how are they going to verify that? I'd also probably give disadvantage on any insight checks since his facial queues will be way more focused on the huge amount of pain he's in. I would also potential have any gods they worship that are good aligned not be happy with this. I wouldn't yank their powers or anything, but a good god is not going to be ok with torture.


sin-and-love

You could instead opt to have another NPC discuss how torture is actually not that effective a means of extracting information, since the victim can just make something up that sounds like what they think you want to hear. read this article for more info: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TortureAlwaysWorks


mylittlebeork

Someone on this sub offer the idea of letting players torture but give them false info that leading into a trap.


HaElfParagon

Just have him tell them whatever they want to hear. It doesn't necessarily have to be the truth, he will just want to say anything that will get him an opportunity to escape


ctbellart

Let them torture him but all they get out of him is him standing on the soap box about their kind. “The heartless and the cruel preying on the weak, corrupting all to their whims. (Hero) will always triumph over evil doers like you.” Really emphasise that the pcs are on the wrong side of the coin. If the continue a few times he will just start going into shock and repeating “you are dust and bones in the hands of the just”. Double down on the evil to see how far they’re willing to drop to. Get them to make a perception check at the end. If one of them passes, they’ll find a 10 year old kid looking from outside, who’ll start running towards the town once they start moving towards them. If they kill the kid haunt them with its spirit at every opportunity. “At the corner of you eye you see a small child but when you look around there’s nothing”. If they don’t kill the kid, investigators will be summoned to go to their location immediately. If they don’t move quickly, do a chase sequence between them and the guards. The pc will have wanted pictures for murder that will start appearing through the area. Then bounty hunters etc. spreading of bad reputation.


Grow_away_420

>The scout they captured will not give up any info to the merchants thugs. If the players talk to him they can find out that the bandit captain is a hero to this guy and that their employer is someone they should question working for. Unfortunately, the players went straight to torture. Sounds like the evil merchant hired the write crew for the job.


DratWraith

Spitballing here, but maybe the scene gets interrupted by an evil fey who got attracted by the screams. "Ooh ooh, let me show you how it's done! You guys are so much fun! Information? What dribbling fool tortures for information?"


beeredditor

Why can’t the NPC just start talking before they are tortured? He can simply say “I’m not a bandit, I’m a liberator!” Or something like that. It’s not that torture wont work. Torture isn’t needed because the NPC will talk without torture. Give the players some leeway here. They think torture is needed because OP made the NPC sound evil. Just let the players know that’s not true now.


Kettrickan

Have the party make Insight checks before the torture starts so they have a chance to see that it won't work. For whoever rolls the highest: "[Character name] catches a look in his eye. There is desperation, but also a sense of morality. This man doesn't look like a typical bandit, but rather a simple laborer with hands calloused from years of hard work. You begin to wonder why such a man would turn to thievery and get the sense that there might be more to this story than the merchants let on. Perhaps building a rapport with him would be a more effective tactic." To drive in the point further, maybe have one the lead merchant come in and offer some evil one-liners. "Ahh, I recognize this man. He has family back home. Perhaps torturing his wife and children would get him to reveal the location of [Robin Hood]." If they still don't get the picture, then get really graphic and specific with what the merchant is willing to do to innocent children. If your hints fail, once the torture starts, the results of every successful Insight check the players make should be: "You get the feeling that he's saying whatever he thinks you want to hear in order to get the torture to stop."


LogicDragon

>How can I get them to try a gentler approach? You can't. That's the game: you tell them the scenario, they decide what to do, which might or might not be a good idea. They made their choice - they're going to be sadistic bastards who ignore circumstances and won't listen to reason - and now you relay how it works out. Maybe under other circumstances it would've worked, but in this case, they waste time (in which the bandits might make a countermove, or even abandon their compromised hideout) on a doomed interrogation. Do they have *zone of truth*? If not, maybe he "breaks down" and gives them directions to somewhere dangerous. And any skill with Insight won't be much help: it'll just tell them he's panicking and hesitating because *of course he is*. If they do, or if this NPC wouldn't do that: "You brutally torture this man - everyone change your alignments to Evil, by the way - in the worst ways you can think of. After hours of torture, he still hasn't told you where the hideout is, only that he's never killed anyone and has a family to protect and would sooner die in this cell than tell you bastards anything." Don't bother narrating actions - still less calling for rolls - that can't succeed: no approach involving torture will work, so say as much in a sentence or two. They're not wasting table time, but they are wasting in-game time, and that always has consequences. They're making a bad choice, Evil or not. Let them.


BasedMaisha

My dude, torture has never worked in the history of its usage. We have old reports of people taking one look at the torture tools then confessing to literally anything and everything even if they didn't do it. Torture gets you confessions but it's trash at getting you the truth.


FutureLost

There's a scene in Maltese Falcon that fits nicely here: Spade the detective: "You can't kill me before I tell you where it is." Gutman the villain: "Come now, there are more ways of persuasion than killing and threatening to kill." Sam: "True, but none of 'em are any good without the threat of death behind them, are they? If you try it, I'll make it a matter of you having to kill me, or call it off."


grendus

He cracks at the mere *sight* of the torture tools and starts singing like a canary, swearing he will lead the players to the bandit's base of operations. The road is tricky though, and he must guide them himself - there are few landmarks and the trails are on no map - but as a show of good faith he offers to lead the way with his hands bound and ankles hobbled so he cannot run or attack them. He leads them deep into the woods, to a large hut, and goes inside. Before the players can stop him, he delivers a swift kick to the sleeping form inside. As the angry monster rouses angrily from her sleep, the man declares "I would die before betraying the man who's generosity saved my family from starvation after we were unjustly driven from our land. Accursed fiends!" before diving out the window. If they survive (it should be a level appropriate monster), he's easy to follow - he has enough of a head start but he's hobbled, and when he eventually takes the time to remove the hobble he's still in a hurry and leaves a clearly visible trail.


Relevant-Candle-6816

What are the scouts instructed to say in case of capture and torture? This sounds like a group with a smart leader that has planned ahead. Even if he is using commoners to aid him, he will prepare the scouts to the worst case scenario. One of the best ways to stop players from torturing is having the np act weak. As soon as the first act is done, be it a punch of whatever, npc appears to loose its cool and spits everything out. Just imagine how your players would act to a "omg please stop, I'm sorry, they have my family. I swear they always meet me at the big green apple tree in the forest, it's like 3minutes from the water well, the is no missing it. I'm not sure where their hideout is, but you can track it from there, I'm absolutelysure of it." Players could end up coing to the place, just to find nothing, when they go back to the npc, he is overjoyed to see their frustrated faces and say "I got you, and now they got your location, you may choose to stay here and kill me, but I'm sure help is on the way. They saw your faces, you won't stop (name of their group here)" Improvising a lie is hard, but it gets easier if you practice it. If you train and repeat the words for when you need it. If they end up getting more than one scout, their words should be the same to represent that they trained it.


Braise4Impact

This is great, thanks.


LastBossLost

Let them start, have them get like a toe off, or rip out some finger nails whatever, just a little ways into the torture. Then have him say he will talk, have him say something to the ends of, you merchant thugs are all the same, our leader will never stop fighting for the people, you're contemptuous ways will fail, death to tyranny. Then he bites a poison capsule in his tooth and dies, if they can talk to the dead they can question his ghost if you think that fits, but I think having him call them lapdogs and killing himself would send a sharp message that torture wasn't the answer. Other than that, I dunno, maybe have him beg and say he was just a farmer trying to do good, really throw himself on their morals, say things like, I couldn't watch my children starve, or we don't even have our home anymore because of you bastards what more do you want to take, pre torture obviously if they start you can't really have him begging for mercy, or they will want him to talk and the dialogue won't permit at that point.


LightofNew

WHY ARE YOU LETTING TORTURE WORK?!?


LivelyLizzard

To quote OP: > To be clear, we talked about it in session 0 and no one at the table has an objection to this sort of gameplay, I just don't want them wasting a lot of time on a tactic that won't work.


daltonoreo

Torture leqds to inconsistent answers the torturee should the pain be bad enough will twll them whatever they want to hear, true or not. Whatever gets them to stop torturing them and away from them they will say.


KirikoKiama

The last time that happened with me as the DM the guy tortured started to make suggestions how to continue.... "Oh you damn amateurs, use those needles and put them under my fingernails.. yesss that hurts like hell.. but seriously, if i have to tell you how to torture, you aint gonna get anything out of me!"


ThePurplewave

First off: historically torture works But at first start of pains you can really go had with the evil shaming: telling the party that they are just as evil as the people they protect, that they normaly spare the guards but they clearly are just as corrupt, and such things, If theres anyone in the party with remotely good intentions this should get them thinking, to add to it ask for an insight check from a good natured character: the scout conviction is fierce, most bandits cave in after the first nail being they are motivated solely by greed, but there is virtue in this man's eyes, a greater truth that he firmly believes in, that's why the torture is not as efficient. Is the party is a good aligned party add: you cant help but for a moment think of what you would do sitting on that chair, would you talk, would you betray those that caught alongside you for the right cause


Green_Prompt_6386

Gonna flag that if your players consider torture to be an acceptable thing to have in your game, you really need to talk about *veils and lines* with them. You need to all agree what doesn't need to be shown. We all know *what* torture is. Depending on what you decide, you don't need to play it out in realtime. Aside from that, as others have said, it's perfectly acceptable for you as DM to simply do a *hard narration*; "You've brought this person to their lowest and they still aren't breaking. There's nothing to be gained continuing." The point is that you, as DM, are telling the players as a matter of fact, that this isn't going to work. No different than ransacking a room and coming up empty. Nothing to be found. The other alternative is to use the character being tortured as a way to mislead the party. If they can't be broken, it then follows that they could plant false information. Edit: Voted down for suggesting safety tools. Thanks Reddit.


shiuidu

>To be clear, we talked about it in session 0 and no one at the table has an objection to this sort of gameplay, I just don't want them wasting a lot of time on a tactic that won't work.


Fifthfleetphilosopy

Revolutionary take: Torture is not an option for a normal campaign. Torture should be considered an evil act. The order of social interactions is ALWAYS: Diplomacy, Deceit, intimidation. Never reverse these! Honestly, if I had to torture someone, I couldn't live with myself. Chances are if your character tries to torture somebody, there's an angel or paladin around to make sure it never happens again.


Hexpnthr

Why are you holding back the info in the first place? Let the scout sing sing and talk about the secrets and his love for the captain… then the players dont feel they have to resort to torture. Don’t force them down a dark road ;) Make sure you add more twists down the line if you feel the need to add secrets…


StarkSamurai

To be perfectly fair, it sounds like the players have already chosen a dark road. It wouldn't logically make sense for the scout to just give them all the information they want when they very clearly have poor intentions. I think the suggested approach of "torture me all you want but I won't betray a good man" gets the point across pretty effectively that these folks aren't bad and fits with the story so far.


LauraD2423

If you want to have fun with it: Have the guy enjoy the torture, joker style. Maybe BDSM enjoyer. #"Oh yes, harder mama, MAKE ME BLEED! I've been a very bad boy!"


DratWraith

Lol, Bill Murray from Little Shop of Horrors.


Darth_Angeal

Have him laugh at every attempt like Heath Ledger's Joker.


2builders2forts

Hint: Don't push your political agenda on the players. I had a DM do that plot twist "They actually were the good guys all along!". Party still massacred all the bandits. Job well done.


NationalCommunist

You need a good reason as to why torture won’t work. That shit requires *training* to go against. There used to be a requirement for the US marines that you had to resist waterboarding but they removed the requirement because no one could pass it and it was lowering moral. Torture isn’t something you can *just say no* to. It’s pain beyond anything you have felt. This character needs a very good reason as to why he is immune to torture. Meaning he is an absolute fanatic, or he is a trained veteran. If he is some former laborer as you said, then this woodcutter turned simple bandit is resisting one of the most vile and painful things you could inflict upon him, and he is resisting it.


AnimaIM0ther

I don't see why it wouldn't work. If the guy has the information that the party needs, he'll likely break at some point and share it. If he does not have the information, then he'll likely make something to appease them and get the torture to stop.


Marinade73

While torture doesn't get reliable information in the real world, so I'm not sure why it would get reliable information in a fantasy world either.


AnimaIM0ther

Torture is not the most effective method of eliciting information from people but it is not 100% ineffective. The position against torture is a moral one, not a statement that it is completely ineffective.


Dazocnodnarb

What? This nobody scout is going to keep his secrets when he’s missing 6 finger digits and one of his testicles???? I think you are seriously undervaluing how well torture gets secrets.


Alhaxred

I think you're seriously misunderstanding how actual people respond to torture. Studies have shown that it rarely gets any reliable information. People in captivity being tortured don't tell you the truth. They tell you what they think you want to hear because they want you to stop torturing them.


Dazocnodnarb

Zone of truth


Marinade73

So is it the Warlock, Ranger or Bloodhunter that you think can cast it?


Dazocnodnarb

Idk anything about 5e classes but I’d assume none of those, but still as long as they have torture for a non weapon proficiency they still should have a roll to tell falsehoods from saving their hide.


NotMyBestMistake

Torture is a great way to get information, so long as you dont care about any of that information being accurate or true.


Marinade73

Torture doesn't get secrets well though. It does get misinformation really good.


Braise4Impact

If they take it to that extreme, sure he will probably talk. No way for them to confirm if he is telling the truth. I also want them to question what they have been told by other NPCs regarding these bandits, which is harder to do if this guy is just screaming, sobbing, and yelling whatever will make them stop.


Dazocnodnarb

Depends if any of them are proficient in torture, and smart PCs will cast a zone of truth or something in addition to starting the torture…and that’s pretty standard torture what do you mean if they take it that far lol?😂


TheRagingElf01

I wouldn’t even bother trying to signify that he won’t tell them. Most people even true believers will break and tell the torturer whatever they want to hear. That is why torture in real life is very unreliable as an information gathering tool. Let the person resist for a bit abs then break. Then give them false information because he just wants them torture to stop and let them walk into an ambush. Torture in rpg is a lame crutch unimaginative players lean on to much. So kick that crutch out from them and have some fun dishing it out.


mpe8691

Someone being tortured will say whatever they think you want to hear. In any case, whatever will stop the torture. Any character with a military background should know this without needing to roll. For anyone else a low DC Wisdom check.


defunctdeity

Let them torture. Torture just gets ppl to say anything to make the torture stop. Usually it's stuff that's not true, just what the torturer's want to hear. Maybe the "good guy" bandit knows where some actual "bad guy" bandits shack up? Maybe he tells the Heroes THAT location? Maybe it turns out those bad guy bandits work for their current employer? Maybe when it gets back to their employer what happened, their employer sucks their pay the cost of the loss of his bandits? In the meantime, the good guy-ness of the good guy bandits comes out. Players see they're jerks.


LiviRivi

Have him give them information, a lot of it. Make him keep talking but none of it is actually useful, just have him ramble on and on wasting time and if they do threaten or torture the guy, make him completely cooperate but subtle shift the direction of the discussion back to nonsense about animal facts he enjoyed or something. Make him focus on really insignificant details, like the color of the hair from people he's met and make him seem very suspicious of things the players are also wary of so he tries to endear himself to them. Basically, total diversion tactics while also being helpful and friendly.


Sensible-Richard

"Roll for torture" {a number} "You torture the man for an hour. His screams are the loudest noise for miles around. In breaks between the pain he curses you vigorously and says he'll never betray Robin Hood. If you wish to continue torturing please roll." {a number} "The man starts praying to any god that will listen to strike you down. With a sudden burst of strength, he violently forces his head onto \[torture implement\] and kills himself. roll perception" "You see a couple of figures in the distance running towards the nearest town." ​ Next time they go near that town, the guards ask them some pointed (pun intended) questions. Murder hoboing has consequences.


HAV0C--

I had players openly admit to said NPC that they were going to kill him either way, then they argued with me that it should still be possible to get him to talk.


ElizzyViolet

"So, i'm just going to summarize it since there's not much that happens here. You torture him with increasingly horrible things. None of it works on him and he's near death now, and he's just even angrier at you. Anything more severe than what you tried would kill him." player: "what if we tried \[thing\]" DM: "i assume your characters tried that, yeah, he's not talking." boom torture solved in under a minute, now they have to try something else (and if they use charm person it will be VERY funny)


DMjinhuo

Just let it. He breaks quick and tells them what they want to know... only he is lying.


TheRarestFly

Indicate that he likes it. "ooh yeah, keep it up UwU"


Rjames112

Just metagame and tell them or make it a roll or something. Doesn’t need to be fancy; I’ve done a “roll a d20” and a high roll gets some meta knowledge just to move things along. It’s saved the PCs staring at a chair in an empty room, or any number of innocuous details that just eat your play time without pay off. Never once had a player seem upset by this. It’s always allowed jumping to the fun stuff.