This. Once I was a player in an adventure where we were escorting someone. Each passing day, the BBEG was mustering opponents against us, to prevent us from reaching our destination (where the escorted person would be safe). And, then, for three days, nothing happens. I say "well, this is strange, instead of escalation, nothing happens and I don't see the BBEG giving up... the next logical step of escalation would be scry-and-die tactic against us, with all available forces. Let's sell our wagon, clothes... and dress as poor pilgrim instead. It won't make us immune but it could work". And the Dm's plan was foiled. The big attack party destroyed our just-sold wagon, but we had left unnoticed. I enquired about XP for the challenge and the answer was "none, you didn't even see the bad guys". I felt I should have said nothing and just fight. So if you want to decrease excessive use of violence, my advice is "don't reward fighting with XP". Don't tempt players ;-)
D&D General Violence and D&D: Is "Murderhobo" Essential to D&D?
This. Once I was a player in an adventure where we were escorting someone. Each passing day, the BBEG was mustering opponents against us, to prevent us from reaching our destination (where the escorted person would be safe). And, then, for three days, nothing happens. I say "well, this is strange, instead of escalation, nothing happens and I don't see the BBEG giving up... the next logical step of escalation would be scry-and-die tactic against us, with all available forces. Let's sell our wagon, clothes... and dress as poor pilgrim instead. It won't make us immune but it could work". And the Dm's plan was foiled. The big attack party destroyed our just-sold wagon, but we had left unnoticed. I enquired about XP for the challenge and the answer was "none, you didn't even see the bad guys". I felt I should have said nothing and just fight. So if you want to decrease excessive use of violence, my advice is "don't reward fighting with XP". Don't tempt players ;-)
Hexmage-EN
Legend
I just posted this on another forum where a similar discussion is happening and thought it would be relevant here:
A young green dragon has been getting his sycophantic kobold followers, enslaved lizardfolk and ogre minions, and a mysterious nothic ally to raid settlements and caravans for treasure and people to eat. The party was tasked to take care of the threat by the nearby city, assuming that this band of vigilantes would slay all these monsters.
Weeks later, the Lawful Good party returns to the city with a caravan of arrested monsters suspects who had attacked them on sight, despite the party requesting that the suspects peacefully turn themselves in for questioning. Now the city has to figure out how to securely detain and feed a large, poison breathing dragon, two ogres, a nothic with dangerous gaze abilities, and dozens of other suspects. Evidence has to be collected, witnesses found, defense attorneys have to be assigned to the dragon and other creatures, trials have to be held, you've gotta figure out if it's even the right young green dragon or if some of the arrested kobolds stayed home while others went on the raids, etc.
Going by the laws of the Clovis Concord detailed in Explorer's Guide to Wildemount (laws which do not include capital punishment even for murder), let's say the young green dragon stands accused of:
If judged guilty on all counts, the young green dragon faces:
Even assuming that this young green dragon is six years old, the beginning point of its age category, by the time its sentence is over it will be 228 years old and in the adult category. At this point the now adult green dragon will possess lair actions while in his prison lair (summoning grasping roots, thorny bushes, fog that inflicts a short term charm affect). In addition, the region within a mile around the prison lair will spawn thicket mazes, and the adult green dragon will be able to see and hear through the eyes and ears of rodents and birds.
So if the Clovis Concord is really serious about applying the law equally to a captured dragon, they'll need to construct a special prison in anticipation of the abilities their prisoner will eventually develop. Then they'll need to pay to keep the dragon fed for over two centuries. Even if the dragon doesn't escape on its own and isn't broken out by dragon-worshiping cultists or whatever during that entire time, what happens when the now adult green dragon's sentence is up and by law is free to go? Is it going to be a reformed Lawful Good adult green dragon, is it going to relish the newfound freedom to exercise the power it has gained as its grown to immediately go on a rampage, is it going to go off somewhere and amass an army to raze the countryside while it searches for its captors' descendants to systematically slaughter them?
Realistically, I imagine that dragon is going to be mysteriously assassinated in its prison before it reaches the adult age category.
Thinking more about it, considering that metallic and chromatic dragons both are very proud creatures that covet treasure, being imprisoned by "lesser beings" and denied the ability to amass treasure would be an overwhelming source of shame that could drive a dragon mad.
Frankly, considering how much money and space keeping a single dragon imprisoned and fed would require (not to mention the martial and magical power needed to stop an escape attempt), I can't imagine it happens often at all, even in a place like the Clovis Concord where there is no such thing as capital punishment.
Maybe metallic dragons take this responsibility? Maybe they are apprehending and maintaining prisons for evil dragons somewhere?
A young green dragon has been getting his sycophantic kobold followers, enslaved lizardfolk and ogre minions, and a mysterious nothic ally to raid settlements and caravans for treasure and people to eat. The party was tasked to take care of the threat by the nearby city, assuming that this band of vigilantes would slay all these monsters.
Weeks later, the Lawful Good party returns to the city with a caravan of arrested monsters suspects who had attacked them on sight, despite the party requesting that the suspects peacefully turn themselves in for questioning. Now the city has to figure out how to securely detain and feed a large, poison breathing dragon, two ogres, a nothic with dangerous gaze abilities, and dozens of other suspects. Evidence has to be collected, witnesses found, defense attorneys have to be assigned to the dragon and other creatures, trials have to be held, you've gotta figure out if it's even the right young green dragon or if some of the arrested kobolds stayed home while others went on the raids, etc.
Going by the laws of the Clovis Concord detailed in Explorer's Guide to Wildemount (laws which do not include capital punishment even for murder), let's say the young green dragon stands accused of:
- theft in the amount of 85,000 gp
- 15 counts of slave ownership
- failure to pay taxes
- 10 counts of damage to private property
- 5 counts of assault with intent to kill
- 22 counts of murder
If judged guilty on all counts, the young green dragon faces:
- 200,170 gp in fines
- repossession of wealth equal to unpaid taxes to the Clovis Concord
- 222 years, 195 days imprisonment
Even assuming that this young green dragon is six years old, the beginning point of its age category, by the time its sentence is over it will be 228 years old and in the adult category. At this point the now adult green dragon will possess lair actions while in his prison lair (summoning grasping roots, thorny bushes, fog that inflicts a short term charm affect). In addition, the region within a mile around the prison lair will spawn thicket mazes, and the adult green dragon will be able to see and hear through the eyes and ears of rodents and birds.
So if the Clovis Concord is really serious about applying the law equally to a captured dragon, they'll need to construct a special prison in anticipation of the abilities their prisoner will eventually develop. Then they'll need to pay to keep the dragon fed for over two centuries. Even if the dragon doesn't escape on its own and isn't broken out by dragon-worshiping cultists or whatever during that entire time, what happens when the now adult green dragon's sentence is up and by law is free to go? Is it going to be a reformed Lawful Good adult green dragon, is it going to relish the newfound freedom to exercise the power it has gained as its grown to immediately go on a rampage, is it going to go off somewhere and amass an army to raze the countryside while it searches for its captors' descendants to systematically slaughter them?
Realistically, I imagine that dragon is going to be mysteriously assassinated in its prison before it reaches the adult age category.
Thinking more about it, considering that metallic and chromatic dragons both are very proud creatures that covet treasure, being imprisoned by "lesser beings" and denied the ability to amass treasure would be an overwhelming source of shame that could drive a dragon mad.
Frankly, considering how much money and space keeping a single dragon imprisoned and fed would require (not to mention the martial and magical power needed to stop an escape attempt), I can't imagine it happens often at all, even in a place like the Clovis Concord where there is no such thing as capital punishment.
Maybe metallic dragons take this responsibility? Maybe they are apprehending and maintaining prisons for evil dragons somewhere?
Stormonu
Legend
Call of Cthulhu comes to mind. Also, the FATE engine doesn't stress combat over any other sort of way to resolve conflict and it's entirely possible to create games that don't involve a single fight (for example, a Backdraft-esque game where the PCs are all firefighters).
World of Darkness has many mechanics for combat, but the feel of game tends to emphasize emotional clashes and getting into combat can be very terminal for some well-built characters.
Manbearcat
Legend
There are many that have robust conflict mechanics for all kinds of tropes/obstacles/situations where "escalating/resorting to violence" isn't the exclusive mode of play.
Mouse Guard and Dogs in the Vineyard are two. Both of these games have lethal violence, but they certainly don't default to them. In fact, a game like Dogs truly has lethal violence as the last resort. Virtually all conflicts start out as "just talking". Many of them end there. Some of them "escalate to blows." VERY few of them "escalate to guns." This is because (a) the resolution mechanics for resolving the prior two state are robst, (b) the cost/stakes are VERY HIGH for escalating to guns (despite the fact that your duty as a PC is to uphold the faith and mete out justice in a wild west frontier that never was), and (c) advancement/PC evolution does not require lethality as a matter of course in the play paradigm.
GreenTengu
Adventurer
The whole D&D mechanics system is primarily about combat. That was incredibly true in the earliest editions where there was hardly a single space on the entire character sheet that did not relate entirely to combat, and the "thief skills" section that involved most of the non-combat actions one could take and still roll a die, were primarily only used by a single class.
Even once skill points became part of the game-- that was simply one roll to resolve things, pass or fail, just a single roll. There were complaints that if one boosted their Diplomacy as much as possible that, with a single roll, they could get people whose fundamental role in the story to become extraordinarily helpful in ways that just didn't make a whole lot of narrative sense and undermined a ton of the story.
You compare that to combat where round after round, a character has to choose from their array of skills or weapons or spells, roll die and the outcome will generally only result in some portion of a single one of the enemies' hitpoints being reduced. And all players in the game have some sort of combat skills, some die that they can roll to affect the outcome of the combat and combats generally last 5-6 rounds, which in a group of 5 players means that the players each got to take 5-6 actions, at least, in order to determine the outcome of the combat. And most of those actions would come with clearly spelled out narratives about exactly what was happening.
4E tried to introduce skill challenges, but they never felt nearly as organic as combat. You needed a certain amount of "passes" to succeed in the skill challenge, and arguably the same is true with combat, but the whole narrative aspect of just how much or how little you have made progress with that success could never really exist in skill challenges the way they do in combat.
So even if enemies dropped no XP, even if there were generally no rewards that directly improved the stats of your character as a result, then players would almost certainly still seek out combat because combat is the one part of the entire game where virtually all the cool skills and abilities that their class grants them can actually be used.
And, yes, 5E has a number of class features, and certainly spells, that are virtually entirely non-combat focused-- but then those tend to be limited to only a few classes and often only to very specific circumstances. So although you might have a class that can be super cool in circumstance X-- if none of the other classes can even contribute in that circumstance, then none of the other players are going to be able to contribute in that circumstance and so the DM isn't going to be encouraged to make that circumstance occur during the course of the game.
But, combat? Combat is where everyone, simply by being of one of the classes that exists within Dungeons and Dragons, has uniquely designed abilities that they can use and contribute to the groups' success.
Even once skill points became part of the game-- that was simply one roll to resolve things, pass or fail, just a single roll. There were complaints that if one boosted their Diplomacy as much as possible that, with a single roll, they could get people whose fundamental role in the story to become extraordinarily helpful in ways that just didn't make a whole lot of narrative sense and undermined a ton of the story.
You compare that to combat where round after round, a character has to choose from their array of skills or weapons or spells, roll die and the outcome will generally only result in some portion of a single one of the enemies' hitpoints being reduced. And all players in the game have some sort of combat skills, some die that they can roll to affect the outcome of the combat and combats generally last 5-6 rounds, which in a group of 5 players means that the players each got to take 5-6 actions, at least, in order to determine the outcome of the combat. And most of those actions would come with clearly spelled out narratives about exactly what was happening.
4E tried to introduce skill challenges, but they never felt nearly as organic as combat. You needed a certain amount of "passes" to succeed in the skill challenge, and arguably the same is true with combat, but the whole narrative aspect of just how much or how little you have made progress with that success could never really exist in skill challenges the way they do in combat.
So even if enemies dropped no XP, even if there were generally no rewards that directly improved the stats of your character as a result, then players would almost certainly still seek out combat because combat is the one part of the entire game where virtually all the cool skills and abilities that their class grants them can actually be used.
And, yes, 5E has a number of class features, and certainly spells, that are virtually entirely non-combat focused-- but then those tend to be limited to only a few classes and often only to very specific circumstances. So although you might have a class that can be super cool in circumstance X-- if none of the other classes can even contribute in that circumstance, then none of the other players are going to be able to contribute in that circumstance and so the DM isn't going to be encouraged to make that circumstance occur during the course of the game.
But, combat? Combat is where everyone, simply by being of one of the classes that exists within Dungeons and Dragons, has uniquely designed abilities that they can use and contribute to the groups' success.
GrahamWills
Hero
Frankly, D&D is one of the most pro-combat of any of the popular, or even semi-popular games out there. It came from a historical background of being about combat and has strongly stuck with its theme. Super-hero games might be more about combat, but if you're looking in the fantasy genre, D&D is all about combat and so pretty much any other choice will be less combat-heavy.
If you want a game that typically is played with zero combat, you're into niche games. Hillfolk (DramaSystem), Bluebeard's Bride and many Indie games offer options here. These are games that focus on inter-personal relationships. In my experience, games that focus on relationships rarely feature combat (but can have a lot of violence)
If you want games that by design prioritize non-combat, then investigative games are a good art to look in: Call of Cthulhu, Trail of Cthulhu and other GUMSHOE games are probably the big popular ones. In investigative games, combat is an option, but it's a less common one and often a bad choice. In my experience, combat takes up less than 20% of time in investigative games.
Then there are a large set of games that have fairly balanced rules for combat and non-combat. These are systems where one campaign may see a lot of combat, and another very little. FATE and Numenera are examples I have played and run that can vary quite a bit, but the system does not have a bias to combat over non-combat. If I had to put a number on these, I'd say that combat is between 25%-50% of the time when I run campaigns, but I likely am a bit biased to con-combat for these campaigns when I run them.
Then there are systems that are all about combat. D&D and HERO are clear examples. You can play a non-combat style in them, but you're ignoring 80% of the rules if you do and so there's really little point. Some variants encourage non-combat options more than others (I quite like 13th Age) but overall, these systems are built on the expectation that combat will era. regular occurrence.
Oofta
Legend
I think there are games out there were violence is never a good thing and/or is a last resort. D&D is not one of them. I do a very RP heavy game, I would never penalize PCs for avoiding combat, but there are just times when it's more fun to just pull out the dice and have at it.
No game can work for everyone.
No game can work for everyone.
Flamestrike
Legend
If Goblins (or any other evil humanoid like Kobolds) are the antagonist, surely they've done something to warrant the PCs coming after them? Attacking the town, abducting children, raiding villages etc.
Or alternatively the PCs are exploring a ruined (whatever) and the (evil humanoids) start to attack them.
If the humanoids have done nothing wrong, are simply living where they live, and are not hostile to the PCs, and the PCs just get all Kharn the Betrayer on them, then the PCs are evil.
MoonSong
Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
I'm not fond of the murderhobo play, but there is one truth: If it has stats, it can be killed, and if killing it accomplishes something, it will be killed. No way around it, D&D supports murderhobos, and as long as they are supported they will exist. And excising murderhobos would mean turning the game into something else entirely.
Let's also remember that the genie is out of the bottle, even if D&D changes to make murderhobos impossible, there's other D&D like games out there -including every edition to date- already. You can't remove murderhobos, you can only excise them from your own table -and really, what happens in other tables is not of anybody's but those in thoes tables business-
Let's also remember that the genie is out of the bottle, even if D&D changes to make murderhobos impossible, there's other D&D like games out there -including every edition to date- already. You can't remove murderhobos, you can only excise them from your own table -and really, what happens in other tables is not of anybody's but those in thoes tables business-
Similar Threads
