Ye Olde Inn

I've been intrigued by this rule from the EU version of Prince Magnus' gold. If you keep the treasure instead of returning it to its rightful owner, you are declared an outlaw and can never become a champion. Maybe this has been discussed ages ago, but it comes fresh into my mind today.

I like that idea, especially if you incorporate the 1st edition rule wherein becoming a champion actually means something (like getting a reward, or in my homebrew rules, leveling up your abilities based on how many quests you complete.... much like Phoenix's rules and several other ideas on here).

But then what? What if there are other ways to become an outlaw, like say, attacking Sir Ragnar instead of saving him?

If players become so branded, I wondered how to keep them playing rather than just punishing them to the point where they don't want to play anymore, period (and good riddance!).

Can they atone for their actions and become good again?

I imagine a scenario where the "outlaw" is recruited by Zargon. The Hero is placed before the face of evil (let's say the game screen, if you you have a custom Zargon figure, he's behind an impenetrable force field or its just a magical vision so he can't be attacked). "Join me... " and if he agrees, he becomes a monster, like a Chaos warrior (and uses black shields to defend, but everything else remains the same). If he REFUSES... he gets attacked by a bunch of Chaos Warriors. If he kills them and flees, he can get back into good standing with the Heroes, perhaps with just a slight gold penalty (paying a "fine" for reparations to the Emperor).

Or maybe if he just pays back the gold, he gets in free.

I could imagine a player switching alliances back and forth. But what about the "monster hero"? Does he just get controlled by Zargon (meaning the bad guys now have a really strong monster.... and the player who controlled him previously just gets a brand new "basic" hero) OR perhaps the traitorous player gets to take part in a PvP style thing. Maybe after the second or third room Zargon reveals the "former Hero" (and that player gets to control him) and attack the good guys. But if he changes his mind and starts killing the monsters instead, the monsters will start targeting him and in the next quest, he'll be "Good" again and start defending with white shields. An apology or official surrender to the "true" Heroes wouldn't hurt, for role-playing purposes.

Perhaps over time you could teach a creative (but unruly) player that the path of righteousness is better. Just some ideas... feel free to throw out yours.

Of course the easy solution is just to say "you can't attack your own guys" and not give them an option to betray. But this could be interesting... based on ideas originating in the earlier versions of the game. Thoughts?

We did have “outlawed” characters in our games. With the reward that came with being a Champion after just 3 quests it made no sense to steal Magnus’ gold and trade the contents for what you would get anyway one quest later. But we were kids, and some liked to goof around, so Outlaws we sometimes became .
I’ve said it before somewhere, but I always gave such Heroes a full pardon if they managed to complete Kellar’s Keep (there’s no way the Emperor can still be angry after a Hero just saved his ass from the Karak Varn death trap).
We are running a campaign currently in which the Elf is an outlaw (it kind of made sense on this occasion to steal the gold considering that I set the quest completion level for becoming a Champion at 7 instead of 3, and the players need cash in order to survive my early quests). If he survives up to KK I’ll give him a pardon.
I’ve had some question whether this is compatible with heroism in Heroquest, and argue that Mentor wouldn’t give further missions to an Outlaw. But Mentor is not the Emperor, and he can make his own decisions for the greater good. He understands the bigger picture with Loretome in his possession.

We’ve not yet had a character actually join with the monsters then change back. I wouldn’t encourage it but possibly wouldn’t disallow it either. There are some situations where it could happen I suppose.

If the Hero becomes an outlaw, Mentor would still give jobs but any jobs given by the Empire wouldn’t be offered.

Many good points. Becoming an outlaw vs. going full monster would give different degrees. In these desperate times though I think alliances can change.. and yes I'd separate out the difference between Mentor's big picture decisions and the Emperor's more immediate concerns.

That's a simple solution... you still get to keep playing, but you don't get the special rewards from the Emperor (might get gold from others.. including the other Heroes if they are so inclined to share).

The euro version actually was worded in such a way that you could attack your fellow Heroes. Basically the most dangerous thing in the Quest? It was the heroes you came in with.

j_dean80 wrote:If the Hero becomes an outlaw, Mentor would still give jobs but any jobs given by the Empire wouldn’t be offered.

I think that's fair. But remember that Mentor is the go between, and the Heroes usually never need to have contact with the Imperial court or even visit it during the first pack. Mentor trains the Heroes, meets with them, gives them their missions and updates, and probably is the one who pays them in the end. He doesn't need to OK everything with the Emperor. Hell, Mentor might even be more powerful than the Emperor in a certain (non political) sense.