Dragon Article: To Live Defeated

[Runestar]

For me, it is not so much the act, but rather, the fallout from said action. Usually, we don't really think too much into what the consequences may bring. Enemy dies, we move on to the next challenge, they don't come back to bug us. End of story. Everyone is happy.

But if you knew that by blinding or crippling your foe, you would effectively be consigning them to eke out a bleak and harsh life, would you still do it? Tell me you wouldn't feel the least bit responsible if you returned a few years later and saw said villain reduced to being a beggar, eating filth and being spat on.

Though it might make for an interesting twist if the villain managed to find a new and decent life despite (or rather, because of) his disability.

Granted, I am assuming each entry is as graphic as the sample blinded one, since I am not a subscriber.

 

[The Little Raven]

Granted, I am assuming each entry is as graphic as the sample blinded one, since I am not a subscriber.

They aren't. This has been blown hugely out of proportion. The majority of them are not violent or graphic in any way, and the ones that do reference that stuff are a small list (blinding, crippling, isolated, eternal torment, plague, to the pain), and even several of those are from literature that is common with children, whether fairy tales or Bible stories.

 

[Dice4Hire]

They aren't. This has been blown hugely out of proportion. The majority of them are not violent or graphic in any way, and the ones that do reference that stuff are a small list (blinding, crippling, isolated, eternal torment, plague, to the pain), and even several of those are from literature that is common with children, whether fairy tales or Bible stories.

Just to ask, would you show that literature common with children or all the bible stories to YOUR children?

 

[The Little Raven]

Just to ask, would you show that literature common with children or all the bible stories to YOUR children?

I wouldn't show Bible stories to my children, but that's because I'm an atheist.

As for things like Brothers Grimm and other children's literature that is dark and bloody, I would have absolutely no problem showing my children if they are interested, so long as the stories do not depict graphic violence or things that can truly disturb them psychologically (no Saw-style stuff).

I see children's cartoons on television today that feature imprisonment, curses, petrification, and the like. Look at the list I provided. Only a handful of things would be objectionable to me when it comes to my children, as the rest is relatively tame compared to things children are taught (like the story of what happened to Jesus).

 

[Rabbitbait]

I for one didn't like the article, but I do like the fact that both Dungeon and Dragon magazines seem to be providing 'experimental' feeling stuff that play with ideas rather than mechanics.

While I thought the article was a bit silly I do like ideas that are morally ambiguous and make both players and DMs think about what sort of people the characters actually are.

 

[FireLance]

So, yeah, I totally see why someone said that several of the options were appropriate for Heroes of Hesiod, since several of the options come straight out of children's stories.

It's probably a fine line, but at least to me, there is a difference between reading or hearing about some terrible punishment meted out to the bad guy, and actually having your in-game avatar mete out said punishment. It's similar to (though not exactly the same as) the difference between agreeing that a murderer is worthy of death and actually being the one to chop his head off.

 

[LostSoul]

This thread makes me realize that the designers of 4E knew what they were doing. My position is that 4E is about being a hero - full stop. No choice you make can do can take that heroic quality away from your PC. The article allows players to make anti-heroic choices, and therefore people who like 4E don't like this article.

I'm not sure how I feel about it - if you can imprison someone in the heart of a volcano where they are constantly regenerated, what does that mean? Could you constantly regenerate someone without imprisoning them in the heart of a volcano? That seems like it should be easier to do. (Maybe not if you worship Imix.) If you can send someone to your god to be tortured, how about sending someone willing to your god who serves your god? That might come in handy.

I do like the fact that a lot of these options are nasty - more Swords & Sorcery than High Fantasy.

 

[Scribble]

It's probably a fine line, but at least to me, there is a difference between reading or hearing about some terrible punishment meted out to the bad guy, and actually having your in-game avatar mete out said punishment. It's similar to (though not exactly the same as) the difference between agreeing that a murderer is worthy of death and actually being the one to chop his head off.

Seems like then this type of thing would be a perfect way to get your message across about why such things are bad.

Instead of the in game avatar just doing it, then moving on to the next adventure, there will be consequences- SHOW them why it's a bad action.

 

[Imaro]

As for things like Brothers Grimm and other children's literature that is dark and bloody, I would have absolutely no problem showing my children if they are interested, so long as the stories do not depict graphic violence or things that can truly disturb them psychologically (no Saw-style stuff).

I think a better question would be... Would you find it enjoyable to roleplay through some of these "punishments" with your children... or have another player describe, in graphic detail,these actions in a game they were participating in? Especially since technically there are no mechanical drawbacks in 4e for one's behavior? And before you answer, please think about the fact that these could be inflicted for reasons both petty and major on a variety of villains of differeing gender, age and motivation.

Personally I don't particularly relish the thought of roleplaying the detailed blinding of an enemy by my 10 year old son's Slayer... or going through the details of how he mutilates the body of a beaten enemy... I agree that many of the suggestions aren't that bad... but claiming it's... "much ado about nothing" may be just a little dismissive. I think a simple note about the article containing "mature subject matter" would have been sufficient for most people.

On a side note... I don't get this. I thought 4e's design philosophy was about HEROIC action... you know one of the reasons they didn't want to do up monster races for players (But torturing, mutilating, etc. is ok.). I personally wouldn't have a problem with the suggestions in a campaign of mature individuals where we agreed the tone would be on the dark side... but as a general article for D&D... not so sure what I think of it on the whole, it's not particularly innovative or original.... so, meh... is more my feelings towards it.

 

[Imaro]

Seems like then this type of thing would be a perfect way to get your message across about why such things are bad.

Instead of the in game avatar just doing it, then moving on to the next adventure, there will be consequences- SHOW them why it's a bad action.

I thought, in general, we showed how bad some of these actions were by regulating said actions to the villains and others who are not heroes in our adventures... and then letting our players give them their just desserts as well as take their stuff because of said actions.

I guess what I'm trying to say is... why do I need to pay for an article to encourage my PC's to become torturers or mutilaters in order to turn around and punish them for drawing on said article as inspiration (when it is an "official" D&D article)... in order to show them why these are "bad" actions? Just seems a little... pointless, when that's the point of villains.