Court trials hosue rules.

Ley Line walkers, Juicers, Coalition Troops, Samas, Tolkeen, & The Federation Of Magic. Come together here to discuss all things Rifts®.

Moderators: Immortals, Supreme Beings, Old Ones

User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6229
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Court trials hosue rules.

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

How do you deal with court trials in your games when for some reason a PC goes to trail.
I will start by giving the house rules I use.

I do an opposed die roll modified by the fallowing.

Player Input 1 to 10. (Rather than RPing the whole trail I have the players come up with a opening aurgment and rate it on a scale of 1 to 10 and appply that as a modifier.)

Skill- law skill provides the fallowing bonuses -secondary skill +1, OCC/OCC related skill +3, professional two OCC/OCC related skill choices +5.

Stats-I use the highest MA on each side to provide a influence bonus to roll. Use the bonus to strike from a PP stat at the rating of MA (so a 19 MA provides +2)

Witness
Charter witness- +1 (may only get this bonus 1 time)
Expert witness- +2 (may only get this bonus 1 time)
Sworn statement from eye witness not present +1 (may only get this bonus 1 time)
Single eye witness +2 (does not stack with other eye witness bonsues)
Multiple eye witness +3 (does not stack with other eye witness bonus)

Evidence 1to 3 (depending on the quality and amount of evidence provided)
Proven allieby +2

Judge
Hanging judge -2 to defense
impartial judge no modifier
sympathetic judge +2 to defense

Mind control
Subtle mind control ( a little push to believe something no obvois casting) +2 to use spotted by a trained observer on a perception roll 19 or higher.)
Mind control overt (extensive change in actions thoughts to the point of being almost out of charter) +4 spotted by a trained observer on a roll of 12 and untrained on a roll of 18)
Mind control obvious (acting out of charter basically a mind puppet) +6 spotted by a trained observer on a perscpetion roll of 6 and a untrained on a roll of 12.)
Note: a trained observer is some one trained to detect the use of mind control. In addition any one that can detect the type of power in use can detect it as normal(such as a dog boy detecting magic).

Criminal activity
Bribes: small bribes(less than 2K) +1; Medium (less than 4K more than two K) +3; large (more than 4K) +5
False eye witness +2
False evidence +2
Jury tampering (use of threats or corrections) +2

I use a standard range for public defenders and prosecuting atternies of 5-7 (4+ 1/2D6 rounded up)
special PC/NPC lawyers have different stats such as Johny Lawspeaker being +15 (8 for stats 5 pro lawyer 2 for subtitle mind control)
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
HWalsh
Hero
Posts: 1178
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 9:36 am

Re: Court trials hosue rules.

Unread post by HWalsh »

Well...

I only ran 1 trial (they aren't a common thing in my games), but the rules I used were as follows:

Phase 1 - Opening Statements
The prosecution gets to go first, they make their opening please. Then they make a Charm/Impress roll, modified by the Roleplay in the statement.

The defense then does the same.

Each success nets them 1 point.

-----

Phase 2 - Present Evidence
This is where skills come into play. The prosecutor can present any evidence they want. This takes no skill. The defense however can shoot down any evidence they can defeat with the proper skill. Law for things inadmissable, science for physical evidence, etc. Every successfully entered evidence nets the prosecution a point. Every failure nets the defense a point.

Then the defense goes with roles reversed.

-----

Phase 3 - Testimony
Prosecutor calls witnesses. Each witness gives testimony. Each witness is cross examined. At the end of cross examination they roll trust modified by how well the statement went or how badly the cross examiner rattled them.

Then flip roles.

Any testimony that passes nets the side a point. Any that fails gets the other side a point.

-----

Phase 4 - Closing Argument

Prosecutor goes first, defendant goes last. Same as the first bit but now using trust/intimidate rather than charm/impress.

-----

Phase 5 - Verdict

If the Prosecution nets 50% more points than the defense they get a conviction. If they get less than 50% more then the jury cannot come to a conclusion. This is a mistrial. If the defense gets more points then the verdict is not guilty.

-----

Psionic tampering - My trial had a Dogboy on hand to stop this. Lawyers couldn't use Psionics and anyone else was escorted out.
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Court trials hosue rules.

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Or.. just require people to actually....

roleplay.

would NEVER dice-roll something like this.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Court trials hosue rules.

Unread post by eliakon »

I have only had a few trials in my games.

Usually instead, the situation is either the PCs know they are guilty, and they plea-bargain, or they do something like escape/Find The Proof That Clears It All Up before the trial.

In the few trials we HAVE had though...

It really depended on the game. Two of the last games that had trials? Totally different. (Summations changed slightly to 1) protect the characters and 2) to make the point a bit more clear)
In one the entire trial was the Judge casting Words of Truth on the PC and asking them:
<Judge> "Did you do <crime X"
<PC> "yes"
<Judge> "Why did you do it"
<PC> "I did it because of blah blah blah"
<Judge> "did you know it was illegal"
<PC> "no"
<Judge> "Did you have reason to think it was illegal"
<PC> "Yes"
<Judge> "Can you state extenuating circumstances"
<PC> "Yes, there are circumstances blah blah blah"
<Judge> *to court* "Is there any one else that has further evidence or information on this case?"
*crickets chirp*
<Judge> "very well, I find you guilty of the crime of blah, and sentence you to blah. The sentence is reduced from blah because of blah." *cancels spell*
<PC> "Thank you your honor"

In the other the case involved a modern court system with lawyers on both sides, character witnesses, video, forensic examinations, psychologists, expert testimony on dozens of subjects and even then the court was unable to find the defendant guilty of something that they were filmed doing on National Television...

The biggest flaw I see with the rules presented by Blue_Lion...
...is that if I have fifty eye witnesses that testify that I didn't do it (+3), the victims finger prints on the gun, the victims suicide note, and a video tape of the victim shooting themselves (+3), and can prove that I was in Jamaica at the time of the death(+2)...
That is not, quite, as valuable as a fairly competent lawyer who has a moderately decent MA
Ummmm
Okay, I know. I get it. There is the trope of The Really Hotshot Lawyer getting the bad guy off (though it is usually on a technicality or by inducing some plausible doubt). And I get it that there is a lot of false conviction, especially when you factor in stuff like biased judges and juries...
but in an open, impartial court overwhelming evidence should be THE deciding factor.
The lawyers should, maybe, do a quick contest of their law skills and the winner gets to add 1/10th of the difference (maximum +3) to their roll.

If bribes and mind control are in play then, there is no roll. If no one catches it then what you buy/mind control goes...
Of course in any world where there IS mind control I would expect a court to be making at least some efforts to prevent it.
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
User avatar
Zamion138
Hero
Posts: 1569
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:34 pm
Location: Carson City NV

Re: Court trials hosue rules.

Unread post by Zamion138 »

I dont think you should roll for an important case, like if its gonna be for a financial amount like your party or a players being sued, sure but if it is to determine long incarceration or a death penalty you should roll play it out.

Maybe roll for parts of the case like convincing a jury of a point, if the legal system in question even gets a jury. But if you are to be put to death or prison time that would remove in essence from the game you should do it all, selection of the jury, legal briefs, hiw you dress for court, presenting evidence.
You would be like making a fight to the death be vased on only two or three rolls and killing off a player, save or die style trap. Thats lazy GMing and unfair to the player/party.
Freemage
Explorer
Posts: 143
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Court trials hosue rules.

Unread post by Freemage »

Zamion138 wrote:I dont think you should roll for an important case, like if its gonna be for a financial amount like your party or a players being sued, sure but if it is to determine long incarceration or a death penalty you should roll play it out.

Maybe roll for parts of the case like convincing a jury of a point, if the legal system in question even gets a jury. But if you are to be put to death or prison time that would remove in essence from the game you should do it all, selection of the jury, legal briefs, hiw you dress for court, presenting evidence.
You would be like making a fight to the death be vased on only two or three rolls and killing off a player, save or die style trap. Thats lazy GMing and unfair to the player/party.


The flipside argument to this is that your approach favors players who are naturally good at making arguments (even if they are playing Mongo the Thick-Headed), and is biased against those who want to play someone who is actually more charming than they are. For someone who isn't able to make a clever argument that twists their opponent's words into knots, it's kind of like being told that you (the player) have to shoot a can off a post at a 100 yards before you (the character) can hit an opponent in combat.

It's not a "one right answer" situation; each group needs to figure out where they want to lay on the line. One common approach is to use a combination approach--you let the players declare a broad outline of their argument (ie, are they pushing for a claim of mistaken identity, a frame-up, justification, etc), the GM decides how sympathetic the judge (or jury) is to such arguments, and whether or not the actual evidence fits such a claim, and uses that to modify the final roll.

If you want to break it down further, you can do different sequences the same way, on a smaller scale. So first you get to try to discredit the prosecution's witnesses, then you can try to undermine their physical evidence, then you can present your version of events (including emotional appeals as appropriate), with each of those things being a new roll, possibly modified by earlier success/failure.
boring7
Explorer
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 1:48 am

Re: Court trials hosue rules.

Unread post by boring7 »

You just have a tribunal of vagabonds. With 5 level 1d4+3 vagabonds you have a pretty darned accurate lie detector.

I still love that power, it's hilariously abuseable in campaigns that have more than "shoot first, ask questions never".

Okay, okay, serious answer. The rules look as good as any I would find in a book.

For other options to use (or steal from, or compare and discard) there are apparently quite complex (and applicable) court rules in Aces and Eights (the kenzerco product). It's a frontier setting (like a large percentage of Rifts Earth) and there are optional steampunk/supernatural rules (I haven't read them, I don't know how far they go) that probably pull things further into the weird. Of course it doesn't have psychics, and it's still a completely different system.

My gut reaction is to say courts would be more medieval Europe (1-3 judges, other things I'm only vaguely remembering) but then I remember that joining a jury was also entertainment for communities that didn't have TV or Radio (or literacy).

If you want to add complications and flavor to the situation you can add attempts to discredit witnesses (Everybody knows Dog Boys don't count) and ways that could backfire (Juror #4 is best friends with the leader of a mutant dog pack).

Those are my random thoughts.
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6229
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Court trials hosue rules.

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Zamion138 wrote:I dont think you should roll for an important case, like if its gonna be for a financial amount like your party or a players being sued, sure but if it is to determine long incarceration or a death penalty you should roll play it out.

Maybe roll for parts of the case like convincing a jury of a point, if the legal system in question even gets a jury. But if you are to be put to death or prison time that would remove in essence from the game you should do it all, selection of the jury, legal briefs, hiw you dress for court, presenting evidence.
You would be like making a fight to the death be vased on only two or three rolls and killing off a player, save or die style trap. Thats lazy GMing and unfair to the player/party.


So combat is a matter of life and death is decided by dice but a trail can be so important that you can't use dice?
The problem with a RPing is the results is just the GM dictating your charters fate, while I think a players action should influence the outcome RPing a important trial can take multiple sessions for the GM to just tell you your charters fate. I do not think a PC fate should every be just a GM call.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
parkhyun
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2014 12:06 am

Re: Court trials hosue rules.

Unread post by parkhyun »

Yikes.

Okay, I'm not going to put myself out as an expert here. I did my 17th court-martial yesterday. Guilty plea. Only issue was degree of punishment. That was still way, way up in the air.

I think dice rolls are appropriate in role-playing a trial, because from what I've seen so far, there just ain't no rhyme or reason. I've seen clients convicted of things we blew up in court and acquitted for things they confessed to on the stand. That's not to say that the lawyer doesn't matter and it's all random, that's just to say that there are things you can't completely predict.

Here are things I think you need to role-play:
- Finding witnesses
- Pleading guilty or not guilty
- Investigation
- Going jury or judge-alone (a.k.a. "bench trial")
- Basic, obvious legal rulings (e.g. habeas corpus rights, pleading the fifth, requiring Batman to testify as Bruce Wayne instead of with his face masked)

Here are things you should probably roll for:
- Rulings on motions (e.g. excluding evidence, suppressing statements)
- Results of hearings (bail, parole)
- Results of trial

How should you do these rolls? Wow. I gotta think about that.
User avatar
taalismn
Priest
Posts: 48602
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:19 pm
Location: Somewhere between Heaven, Hell, and New England

Re: Court trials hosue rules.

Unread post by taalismn »

(Points to knobs sticking out of head) "I'm Crazy. What do you think I'm going to plead?"
-------------
"Trouble rather the Tiger in his Lair,
Than the Sage among his Books,
For all the Empires and Kingdoms,
The Armies and Works that you hold Dear,
Are to him but the Playthings of the Moment,
To be turned over with the Flick of a Finger,
And the Turning of a Page"

--------Rudyard Kipling
------------
parkhyun
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2014 12:06 am

Re: Court trials hosue rules.

Unread post by parkhyun »

Let's consider how complicated this is. Say your client is accused of sex-texting with a 14-year-old. That's a crime if he's an adult. You should probably request a bench trial, right? So that would be a bonus on your "guilty/not-guilty" roll. Except you need to know the judge - is he or she defense-friendly, or prosecution-friendly? Heavy on punishment or light? Does the judge have pet peeves about, for instance, evidence that might matter in the trial (e.g. police searches of citizens' phones)? Let's say everything is in your favor, but hey - the judge happens to have a 14-year-old daughter. Are these things bonuses, or does the GM apply them ex-post-facto in order to explain the result of the roll?

Keep in mind, these things are just the anticipated issues. Nothing goes according to plan in the actual trial.

PS - I wrote this whole thing out on my phone only to find that the text box extended, covering over the "submit" and "full editor" buttons. I then pasted it in the full editor and also found the same problem. Palladium needs to update its forums so that longer comments won't prevent the contributor from submitting it.
Post Reply

Return to “Rifts®”