If a Dustman violates the Dead Truce, what happens next?

4 posts / 0 new
Last post
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 2011-09-07 20:09
If a Dustman violates the Dead Truce, what happens next?

I know that if a Dustman attacks an Undead creature or creatures, those creatures are free to attack in return. But what about after that particular encounter is over... will other Undead the Dustman meets know of the violation and attack, or does is the violation of the Truce considered over with the end of one such encounter? That is, does the Dustman have to do anything special to get "covered" under the Truce again? If a Dustman attacks Undead in one room of a dungeon/catacomb, does that end the Truce for only the Undead in that specific room, or the entire dungeon?

KnightOfDecay's picture
Last seen: 4 weeks 14 hours ago
Joined: 2013-02-14 15:23
I don't think that any of the

I don't think that any of the official sources cover the specific duration of the consequences of a violation of the Dead Truce. As there are so many different ways how faction abilities might be incorporated into the game (standard abilities, feats, bloodlines, faction points...), the best solution is probably, that the DM should react "appropriately".
As fights are an integral part of D&D it shouldn't be impossible for Dustmen to fight undead, but as such an act is is rather contradictory to the belief of the Dustmen faction, there should be at least some minor consequences.
For the example you mentioned, that might mean, that the dustman looses the benefits of the Dead Truce for the next 24 hours.
In a game where the faction abilities depend on a score of "faction points", it might mean that he looses one or more factions points which, at some point in the future, might result in the permanent loss of his faction ablities, if he breaks the Dead Truce too often.
Creative solutions to avoid the PCs dilemma should definitely be awarded: "Well I only casted some protective spells on my friends and healed some of them. I never actually hit any of the undead. Thus I haven't actually 'fought' them, right?"

Last seen: 2 days 1 hour ago
Joined: 2005-07-26 19:14
I'd call a Tribunal with

I'd call a Tribunal with Skall projecting himself into the Courtroom for people who are relatively high up in the faction.

Though you could just have an underling make the same projection for noobs, no one has to know...

Jem's picture
Last seen: 1 day 57 min ago
Joined: 2006-05-10 19:50
Here are two options that

Here are two options that make some sense to me.

1.) If the Dead Truce holds because the Dustman believes in the principles of his faction, and attacking an undead violates those principles, then presumably for some reason or another the Dustman has been shaken in his beliefs. The Dead Truce will no longer hold for him until he goes through some process of reconciling with those beliefs -- anything from a single scene in which he comes to terms with his "error" or a fullblown atonement adventure.

2.) The Dead Truce holds the same way a truce between living beings holds. If the Dustman attacks an undead creature, any undead allied with that creature will no longer consider themselves bound by the Truce either. For mindless undead, this will apply solely to those undead that were operating under the same compulsion, such as guarding the same site or treasure. For conscious undead, this will apply insofar as the undead in question consider themselves somehow on the same "team" as the undead attacked (the same undead army with a clear chain of command, or the same vampire bloodline with accepted honor rules), just as attacking a person of one country doesn't violate a truce with someone of another country. Few undead, I think, would be so expansively minded as to take umbrage at an earlier assault on one of their kind simply on general principles.