Your opinion is appreciated

[Triple H]

My character would be under the "no killing if I think its possible the person can be innocent or can be repentent" I would kill animals for food. I would kick the crap outta undead but demons and devils I would think twice.

I would probably stop my fellow team mates from killing. IF they tried it would attempt to stop them.

Yes I am all for combat but subdual and even if not subdual enough to knock someone out or unconcious.

 

[Ilen]

If you are intent on stopping them I hope you don't grow to attached to your character because he won't be with the party much longer. Either being a bloody corpse on the side of the road or being told to get lost are in his future.

 

[evileeyore]

I see nothing wrong with a "does not kill" mentality on a character. That is a rather ignored tenent of GOOD. I had a character that refused to kill inocents (wether they be orc children or just bystanders), and the party and I had occasional problems. But you deal with that through roleplaying.

 

[Bagpuss]

Refusing to kill innocents (ie. People that aren't a direct threat to you or the party) and refusing to kill full stop, are two very different situations in D&D, the first case will not cause to much trouble, but standing there while an orc barbarian bashes in your companions head will get you thrown out of the party pretty quick.

 

[Black Omega]

It's definitely a fine line to walk. A total 'Don't kill' code is more at place in four color comic superhero campaigns than in DnD. And any sort of situation where you knock the bad guy out then won't let the other PC's finish him off will definitely lead to RP. What sort of RP will depend on what the rest of the group is like.

 

[Numion]

My opinion is that it doesn't fit in D&D.

There will be combat in D&D game. And if the character won't kill, why would he associate himself with people who kill? (Namely, the other adventurers in the group.)

I wouldn't allow that sort of character in my game, probably. That sort of 'high-brow' RP:ing is better left for other games. A character doesn't have to be entirely unique to be fun to play. (Reason for some people to play pacifist character would be of course just to be different: Every character kills stuff --> I want to be different, mine doesn't kill!)

 

[Bagpuss]

I would probably stop my fellow team mates from killing. IF they tried it would attempt to stop them.

This is going to be the problem, since the other players are unlikely to want to except the attack penalties for striking to subdue.

They are also not going to want to escort a horde of prisoners which will be bound to occur if you don't kill them.

They are unlikely to want to leave enemies tied up behind them to escape and stab them in their back.

Its not practical for you to leave villians alive, Fantasy settings do not have the huge jail facilities or the legal set up to detain the huge numbers of orcs, bandits, goblins, etc. that the average party fights in the course of one adventure.

Even if they did what party wants to lead a group of hog tied prisoners back to town after each combat?

Think about how the arguements would play out, they will have to end with either your character leaving the party or your character changing his point of view. In either case that point of view is not suitable for an adventuring party so DO NOT bring it to an adventuring party to start with.

If you want to be "that special" run my idea of a cleric that will not strike other intelligent beings (to keep his soul pure), but doesn't object to others doing the dirty work, as he understands it is necessary.

 

[BeholderBurger]

doodoo

Im sure when Frodo Flew on that dragons back and fried that town you cant possibly classify him as a pacifist.
I mean cmon Sam didnt even qualify like that cause he killed four hobgoblins , two in their sleep for gods sake.

Now Goblinor , yeah hed make a good pacifist character cause he shoulda killed that She`ra but nah ..he didnt ...why?

 

[Chimera]

While most of the time, players who come up with these kind of characters don't think (or care) about how it impacts the group and the game, it severely po's me as a player and as a GM when people insist on playing characters that make life (and the game) difficult for other players and the GM.

This character would not be welcome at my game table for that reason. As a player, I would promise you that I would do everything in my power to remove this PC from the group, even going as far as leaving the game if this persisted.

Sorry, not a personal thing, no offense intended. I just don't get the attraction for "Monkey Wrench PCs".

 

[N Hammer]

A DM should NEVER tell a player how to play his character.

If the player wants to adopt the 'no killing' persona, then so be it.

If a player starts to radically change the way his character acts, then the GM has to talk to the player and see what's up. If the change goes outside the guidelines of the class (Paladin randomly killing people) then the DM needs to penalize the character.