Moral Dilemma: Killing and Deaths in RPGs

[billd91]

What fantasy and sci fi RPGs would you recommend as an alternative to the traditional slay the adversary and take their loot model?

Are you and your players into superheroes at all? Most superhero RPGs can scratch the in-depth combat itch while still not leading to killing everyone and taking their stuff. If this might work for you, Mutants and Masterminds is my current go-to superhero RPG. It's worth checking out.
Technically, you can also press the game system into a variety of genres and its Toughness save mechanic is designed (as appropriate for your average comic book genre) around KO rather than death.

 

[Marc_C]

If the system is lethal for the PCs and they never don't grow into superheroes during advancement it generally forces the players to use other methods than combat to advance the story forward. If they use combat it is only as a last resort.

The Expanse (Green Ronin) and Coriolis (Free League) are like that.

 

[J.Quondam]

Another thing to consider might be playing "little campaigns" of short (real world) duration using different systems*, genres, and/or play-styles. That gets you a couple things. First, it lets you experience a broad range of approaches to gaming. And secondly, it might be easier to get player buy-in on any particular campaign if they know they're only committing to half-a-dozen sessions instead of a huge adventure path for two years. The point is to get into a mindset of trying new things in hopes of finding something that really clicks for everyone.

Also, if your group is married to a particular setting, you might even be able to do these little campaigns all in that same setting. It could be an interesting way to explore that familiar world, but from very different vantage points.


*edit: If switching systems, this is probably a lot more practical with rules-lite games, unless you already know how to play. But quick start rules could be a potential low-overhead, low-cost intro to systems you're curious about.

 

[Ixal]

What fantasy and sci fi RPGs would you recommend as an alternative to the traditional slay the adversary and take their loot model?

Are you looking for a system with less combat/killing (meaning the option to do something else) or no combat at all?

Some examples:
Shadowrun: While the world is dystopian and violent the rules system gives you many option besides combat and in general combat is seen by most groups as plan B when plan A fails. The system also assumes that the PCs will engage in a lot of blackmail, sweet talking, sabotage, etc. The goal is usually to fulfil a mission. How they do it is up to the PCs

Traveller: Very open ended Sci Fi game. You guys have a ship, a huge mountain of debts, go nuts. It supports basically anything the PCs want to do from fighting, trading, having adventures, etc.

Warhammer Fantasy RPG (2E): A bit more on the fighting side but despite the Warhammer license it can be played non violently which, considering how deadly the setting is, many players do and there are enough careers which are not combat focused out there.

 

[Victor Spieles]

A few years ago, when asked to run a game to introduce a couple 13-year-olds to the game, brought this up in my mind. The kids were no strangers to beating up enemies in battle - media is loaded with it. However, in their media, violence is generally used only with justification, and the bad guys do not usually explicitly die.

And while I, as an adult, have no issue with folks who want a game in which life is cheap, I, as a GM, was not going to set that precedent for 13 year olds. So, I made it very clear when bad guys were really bad, by making their actions clear, not relying on labels. And even then, the default was that humanoid opponents were "down, out of the fight" and not explicitly dead.




So, there are two coming out soon that might be of interest - Avatar Legends: The Role Playing Game had one of the biggest kickstarters recently. It is built to model Avatar: The Last Airbender and Legend of Korra series, so while there's lot of possible fighting, actually dying is expected to be less of an issue. This is sceduled to come out in Feburary 2022, iirc.

Also in development - Tales of Xadia, an RPG based on The Dragon Prince animated series. There is a playable set of rules and a couple of adventures out, if you want to give it a try. And the game mirrors the series in trying to make character who are not combat-oriented still be effective, and it is very, very hard for PCs to die.

As others have noted, Fate-based games are also good with non-combat resolution, or effective non-violent actions within combat. And by and large, characters are "taken out" or concede a fight, rather than necessarily killed outright.

Umbran good advice.

I was approached this summer by a friend with a group of 12 year olds who wanted to learn to play Dungeons & Dragons after watching Stranger Things. The friend/parent asked if I would show the four kids how to play. I thanked them, but turned them down. After looking through the D&D starter set and the core rulebooks I didn't want to be the person to introduce the morale question and in-game choice of how to deal with monsters, NPCs and villains. I think it's one thing for teens to discover RPGs and make those choices on their own. It's completely another for an adult to introduce teens to that set of moral decisions. This was the point where this dilemma of killing and death really started to weigh on me.

Are you and your players into superheroes at all? Most superhero RPGs can scratch the in-depth combat itch while still not leading to killing everyone and taking their stuff. If this might work for you, Mutants and Masterminds is my current go-to superhero RPG. It's worth checking out.
Technically, you can also press the game system into a variety of genres and its Toughness save mechanic is designed (as appropriate for your average comic book genre) around KO rather than death.

billd91 I was considering going the superhero RPG route. I'll need to buy the current edition of Mutants and Masterminds. I cleared out my Superhero RPGs after my last move. I just need to find a new like minded group of players. My current rolodex of players prefer classic fantasy style play, Weird West, and cyberpunk. A superhero RPG would be a nice change of pace. It's been a couple years since I played one.

 

[Victor Spieles]

Are you looking for a system with less combat/killing (meaning the option to do something else) or no combat at all?

Some examples:
Shadowrun: While the world is dystopian and violent the rules system gives you many option besides combat and in general combat is seen by most groups as plan B when plan A fails. The system also assumes that the PCs will engage in a lot of blackmail, sweet talking, sabotage, etc. The goal is usually to fulfil a mission. How they do it is up to the PCs

Traveller: Very open ended Sci Fi game. You guys have a ship, a huge mountain of debts, go nuts. It supports basically anything the PCs want to do from fighting, trading, having adventures, etc.

Warhammer Fantasy RPG (2E): A bit more on the fighting side but despite the Warhammer license it can be played non violently which, considering how deadly the setting is, many players do and there are enough careers which are not combat focused out there.

Ixal I am looking for RPG systems suggestion with much less combat/killing. Something where combat/killing is option D after A, B and C ideas don't work out. I'm not opposed to combat. I don't want it to be the go to first and second option every time.

Problem solving where the only solution is to hit it with the hammer. And if that fails hit it with the hammer again.

 

[overgeeked]

So I’m about to turn 50. As I approach this new life milestone I’ve started wrestling with killing and deaths in RPGs.

I don’t know if anyone else has experienced this dilemma.

I see it as no different that killing things in video games or reading about killing things in novels or watching things get killed on TV or in movies. It's all fiction. None of the dead things are real.

I’ve withdrawn from one Dungeons & Dragons group this year that was more combat heavy. The group’s solution was kick asses, stockpile treasure and get information later. It was guys I used to really like to game with, but I have evolved into more of a subtle role-play my character and find interesting non-combat ways of overcoming situations and solving adventures.

Personal growth is always good, even if it's sometimes hard.

I also stopped DMing a Dungeons & Dragons group recently after one of the younger players had their 5th level character die. The player failed their three death saves and then had an unexpected meltdown reaction to it. I talked to the player after the game and a subsequent conversation days later. But the character’s death just put them off gaming with the group any longer. Which led to an older player in the group quitting the group over the younger players reaction to their character’s death. Now I prefer to run a more role-play character driven exploration and information gathering style of play. But even then most players resort to violence as their first option for dealing with monsters, villains and NPCs.

That seems like an immature overreaction to character death on the player's part.

Part of the draw of RPGs is walking that dangerous balance between life and death. The thrill of staring death in the face and vanquishing a foe or faction to be celebrated as a hero.

It really is kind of incredibly to experience these kinds of things vicariously through RPGs. That's probably why D&D is experiencing such a boom and players tend to stick with the hobby so long. We get to say and do and experience things that are not only unwanted in broader society, but things that are impossible in the real world. That's thrilling and amazing.

I have played various RPGs, most heavily Dungeons & Dragons over 20 years. But it didn’t hit me until this incident the amount of killing we as RPG game masters and players do of humanoids, aliens, creatures, demons, devils, dragons, monsters and robots in various RPG games.

The incident struck a weird chord emotionally in me. I sat down and looked at all the RPGs on my bookshelves and tried to find something to run where the main solution to in-game encounters is not killing the adversary. I also did some searching on Drive Thru RPG for an RPG where exploration and out thinking adversaries is more the premise and focus of the game. It was hard to find RPG options like that.

Older editions of D&D were laser focused on exploration and out thinking adversaries rather than simply murdering everything in your path. XP for gold and no XP for killing monsters goes a long way to solve that problem. As does using unbalanced encounters. If all the DM presents is level-appropriate monsters that the PCs can easily slaughter, then that's makes combat the easiest path forward.

Is it just time to put away my dice and RPG hobby?

I wouldn't say so. Just find games and groups that want to do the same things you want to do in the hobby. It might take some doing, but it's not impossible.

Can you play and run Dungeons & Dragons without all the violent encounters and killing?

Absolutely. But you have to work at it. Not giving XP for murder is a start. Not using balanced encounters is another. Using rules like parley and morale checks help a lot, too. Using alternate win conditions for combats is also a great help. Setting 0 hp as defeated rather than dead might help.

What fantasy and sci fi RPGs would you recommend as an alternative to the traditional slay the adversary and take their loot model?

Most RPGs are about action-adventure stories, so violence is a large part of a large swathe of RPGs, but there are some. Call of Cthulhu was mentioned. It's investigation heavy and shies away from most combat. Doctor Who RPG is also light on combat, but it's still there. Similar advice (alternate win conditions, XP for exploration, no XP for murder, etc) will apply to any game you run. Most will have combat.

Some other games: Chuubo's Marvelous Wish-Granting Engine. Do Flying Temple. Golden Sky Stories. Mouse Guard. Most horror games. Generic systems that can do anything, such as Fate, Risus, Cortex Prime, Cypher, etc. Most Powered by the Apocalypse games are not focused on combat. The Extraordinary Adventures Of Baron Munchausen...is a game of competitive lying. Blades in the Dark is a game about heists. Blue Rose is a romantic fantasy game in the vein of Mercedes Lackey books. Bubblegumeshoe is a kids investigation game. The new Dune RPG is about...well, Dune and byzantine politics. Star Trek RPGs tend to include combat but certainly aren't focused on combat. Faery's Tale Deluxe is a game about playing fairfolk on adventures. Misspent Youth is a rebellious punk game in a near-future dystopia. Numenera is a science fantasy game about exploration and discovery. Once Upon a Time is a fairy tale storytelling card game. Over the Edge is a weird conspiracy game. Unknown Armies is much the same. As is Conspiracy X. Shock is an amazing social science fiction game, think Philip K Dick sci-fi. Tales from the Loop is a science fiction RPG. The One Ring is a Lord of the Rings RPG that's more about fellowship and journeys than fighting. Toon: The Cartoon RPG has combat and fighting but no one dies.

 

[MGibster]

And while I, as an adult, have no issue with folks who want a game in which life is cheap, I, as a GM, was not going to set that precedent for 13 year olds. So, I made it very clear when bad guys were really bad, by making their actions clear, not relying on labels. And even then, the default was that humanoid opponents were "down, out of the fight" and not explicitly dead.

In the documentary series The Toys that Made Us, in the episode about 1980s era GI Joe, they interview Larry Hama. Hama wrote most of the GI Joe comics published by Marvel throughout the 80s and also created most of those classic characters many of us came to love. The little biographies in the file cards on the back of the toy packages were written by Hama. Anyway, for those who may be unaware, the comic books series was very, very different from the cartoon series in that everyone used regular firearms and people occasionally died. It's been almost 40 years, but I still remember reading the issue where Kwinn the Eskimo was killed and a later issue where Snakes Eyes buries him at sea. Larry Hama referred to the cartoon series as "morally bankrupt" because they never really depicted the end result of violent behavior. Pilots would eject to safety before missiles struck their aircraft, rifles firing lasers (not bullets) never seemed to find their targets, and everyone walked away at the end of the day.

Maybe I was a weird kid. I was a weird kid. Even at a young age, I understood that using a rifle or an axe on someone was likely to kill them. I don't know if this was the result of lax parents who let me watch almost anything I wanted to watch or growing up on a military base and understanding what all of our fathers did for a living. But I kind of fall into the Hama camp that depicting violence without consequences is morally bankrupt. And I want to be clear that I'm not calling you out on this. I run a lot of games where the effects of violence aren't really explored. My bad guys might as well be knocked out for the lack of attention I give to them once they're defeated. Plus, you know, you're not selling a bunch of toys revolving around war to a bunch of children while deliberately hiding the consequences from them. I notice little things like that.

And while I, as an adult, have no issue with folks who want a game in which life is cheap, I, as a GM, was not going to set that precedent for 13 year olds. So, I made it very clear when bad guys were really bad, by making their actions clear, not relying on labels. And even then, the default was that humanoid opponents were "down, out of the fight" and not explicitly dead.

I tend to tread very lightly where children are concerned. I don't always know what they or their parents are comfortable with. But I haven't gamed with any 13 year old kids in, oh, about 32 years now.

 

[Victor Spieles]

I see it as no different that killing things in video games or reading about killing things in novels or watching things get killed on TV or in movies. It's all fiction. None of the dead things are real.

Personal growth is always good, even if it's sometimes hard.

That seems like an immature overreaction to character death on the player's part.

It really is kind of incredibly to experience these kinds of things vicariously through RPGs. That's probably why D&D is experiencing such a boom and players tend to stick with the hobby so long. We get to say and do and experience things that are not only unwanted in broader society, but things that are impossible in the real world. That's thrilling and amazing.

Older editions of D&D were laser focused on exploration and out thinking adversaries rather than simply murdering everything in your path. XP for gold and no XP for killing monsters goes a long way to solve that problem. As does using unbalanced encounters. If all the DM presents is level-appropriate monsters that the PCs can easily slaughter, then that's makes combat the easiest path forward.

I wouldn't say so. Just find games and groups that want to do the same things you want to do in the hobby. It might take some doing, but it's not impossible.

Absolutely. But you have to work at it. Not giving XP for murder is a start. Not using balanced encounters is another. Using rules like parley and morale checks help a lot, too. Using alternate win conditions for combats is also a great help. Setting 0 hp as defeated rather than dead might help.

Most RPGs are about action-adventure stories, so violence is a large part of a large swathe of RPGs, but there are some. Call of Cthulhu was mentioned. It's investigation heavy and shies away from most combat. Doctor Who RPG is also light on combat, but it's still there. Similar advice (alternate win conditions, XP for exploration, no XP for murder, etc) will apply to any game you run. Most will have combat.

Some other games: Chuubo's Marvelous Wish-Granting Engine. Do Flying Temple. Golden Sky Stories. Mouse Guard. Most horror games. Generic systems that can do anything, such as Fate, Risus, Cortex Prime, Cypher, etc. Most Powered by the Apocalypse games are not focused on combat. The Extraordinary Adventures Of Baron Munchausen...is a game of competitive lying. Blades in the Dark is a game about heists. Blue Rose is a romantic fantasy game in the vein of Mercedes Lackey books. Bubblegumeshoe is a kids investigation game. The new Dune RPG is about...well, Dune and byzantine politics. Star Trek RPGs tend to include combat but certainly aren't focused on combat. Faery's Tale Deluxe is a game about playing fairfolk on adventures. Misspent Youth is a rebellious punk game in a near-future dystopia. Numenera is a science fantasy game about exploration and discovery. Once Upon a Time is a fairy tale storytelling card game. Over the Edge is a weird conspiracy game. Unknown Armies is much the same. As is Conspiracy X. Shock is an amazing social science fiction game, think Philip K Dick sci-fi. Tales from the Loop is a science fiction RPG. The One Ring is a Lord of the Rings RPG that's more about fellowship and journeys than fighting. Toon: The Cartoon RPG has combat and fighting but no one dies.

Thanks overgeeked for all the comments, advice and recommendations.

I will take a good look at all your RPG suggestions.

I'm a huge fan of Numenera and the Cyper System. I was a player in a long running campaign and had a blast.

My problem has been finding and keeping players interested in other RPGs. Most of the time I can only find enough new players, or convince current players, to play 2-4 game sessions of anything outside of D&D. Then real life issues come up, or players get tired of the RPG. D&D is most player's entry point to RPGs so games that don't follow those mechanics and ecstatic are hard to attract and keep players interested in.

Old reliable player friends always say after game session 3 or 4 let's just play D&D again. You're really good at running that and we all know the rules for that.

The other struggle I have been having is finding rules lite RPGs where it's not a 100+ page rulebook myself and the players have to read to play.

 

[overgeeked]

My problem has been finding and keeping players interested in other RPGs. Most of the time I can only find enough new players, or convince current players, to play 2-4 game sessions of anything outside of D&D. Then real life issues come up, or players get tired of the RPG. D&D is most player's entry point to RPGs so games that don't follow those mechanics and ecstatic are hard to attract and keep players interested in.

You and me both.

Old reliable player friends always say after game session 3 or 4 let's just play D&D again. You're really good at running that and we all know the rules for that.

The other struggle I have been having is finding rules lite RPGs where it's not a 100+ page rulebook myself and the players have to read to play.

Try looking as some OSR games or go back to earlier editions of D&D. They’re similar enough to be familiar, but also less focused on killing and more focused on exploration. OD&D, AD&D, B/X, BECMI, the RC, and most of their clones are way more about exploration than killing. There’s also a lot of wild stuff in the OSR for exploration, hexcrawls, and sandbox play.