D&D General A History of Violence: Killing in D&D

[Guest 85555]

I think the ratio of RP to combat will always have more to do with player types, character builds, any current situation and how much Mountain Dew has been consumed vs. moral quandaries.

Really if we want to make gaming culture more healthy, the amount of mountain dew and unhealthy food consumed at the table is probably a better place to start than imaginary violence

 

[payn]

Im starting to see why I dont fit in with a lot of players and groups. I dont view the party as an army or even a swat team. I view them as specialists that have the experience and means to investigate and impact the setting on a political level. The threats they face are not entire villages of beings, but crime syndicates or resistance/terror groups that operate in the shadows of society and places of criminal opportunity. Of course, its up to players which side of this they choose which is not black and white. Though, violence in its application will have meaning and consequence.

Most of fantasy society is civilized, but there are wilds still that contain monsters. Monsters like lions, tigers, and bears but also unassuming dangers like rattlesnakes and black widow spiders in our own world. When the adventure takes the party into the wilds these things become threats that one should be prepared for them. Though, the PCs are not extermination squads looking to tame those lands (unless thats what you want you campaign to be anyway).

So, violence will happen, but if its wanton directionless "kill things; get their stuff" im out.

 

[payn]

Wait do groups not offer XP for getting past encounters peacefully?

When our group tried XP that's how we did it. (We still ended up going back to milestone as less book keeping.)

I have heard the refrain of, "if we talk to them then we dont get their magic stuff".

 

[TiQuinn]

Wait do groups not offer XP for getting past encounters peacefully?

When our group tried XP that's how we did it. (We still ended up going back to milestone as less book keeping.)

You know…they should. It’s always been in the rules for D&D as long as I’ve played and yet, I feel like those rules have always been fuzzier than the ones where you kill them outright.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Really if we want to make gaming culture more healthy, the amount of mountain dew and unhealthy food consumed at the table is probably a better place to start than imaginary violence

but it's not like those are mutually excluse issues to be able to tackle, and honestly i think framing the snacks people eat as the 'real issue in tabletops' is just a deflection.

 

[KYRON45]

Really if we want to make gaming culture more healthy, the amount of mountain dew and unhealthy food consumed at the table is probably a better place to start than imaginary violence

Healthy gamer is kind of an oxymoron in my experience.

 

[Guest 85555]

but it's not like those are mutually excluse issues to be able to tackle, and honestly i think framing the snacks people eat as the 'real issue in tabletops' is just a deflection.

No it is just the bigger issue. And in game violence isn't a real problem, it is one people have talked themselves into (which taken to its logical conclusion leads to "I guess we just shouldn't even be playing D&D in the first place"). More gamers are going to die every year because of the food culture in the hobby than are going to be harmed by imaginary violence in the game. I am not saying people have to change their diet. If you like mountain dew you liek mountain dew. But that is at least an issue where I know for a fact I have lost good friends who died way before they should have, and it is extremely common in the hobby, yet never something we discuss (instead we talk about the wrongness of in game violence). It is also something we could actually change if we talked about it (whereas talking about in game violence is going to have zero impact on real world violence)

 

[TiQuinn]

I have heard the refrain of, "if we talk to them then we dont get their magic stuff".

It’s a good point though. The game rewards the objectives it encourages. You want players to resolve problems without combat - give them the full reward for solving that problem without combat.

 

[Scribe]

That doesn't make it a war game.

No, its just based on war gaming, and could easily pass as a squad based war game.

 

[CreamCloud0]

No it is just the bigger issue. And in game violence isn't a real problem, it is one people have talked themselves into (which taken to its logical conclusion leads to "I guess we just shouldn't even be playing D&D in the first place"). More gamers are going to die every year because of the food culture in the hobby than are going to be harmed by imaginary violence in the game. I am not saying people have to change their diet. If you like mountain dew you liek mountain dew. But that is at least an issue where I know for a fact I have lost good friends who died way before they should have, and it is extremely common in the hobby, yet never something we discuss (instead we talk about the wrongness of in game violence). It is also something we could actually change if we talked about it (whereas talking about in game violence is going to have zero impact on real world violence)

the food people eat isn't even a part of the game though, it's like saying the real issue of sports is the sunburn you got while playing.