That One Guy
First Post
That is such an adorably cute concept.What would I do if I was playing a non-killing character and the rogue just aimlessly killed someone I had subdued?
I'd either 1) Smack the rogue's player upside the head for attacking the already subdued opponent instead of one of the STILL DANGEROUS ones, or 2) Smack the rogue's player upside the head for making one of those incredibly irritating "LOL CHAOTIC MEANS I DO WHATEVER I WANT" characters.
If your characters are just aimlessly murdering things for no given reason while not even bothering to talk to the party, the problem runs a lot deeper then the guy who doesn't like to kill.
As for characters that don't kill, I made a giant spider that didn't kill humanoids because he found them cute. And neat. And besides, he didn't NEED to kill them with his attribute-destroying poisons.
On topic, I've seen a pacifist cleric in 3e work fine. I think in 4e 'not killing' is really easily, while 'non-violence' is pretty tough. No physical violence could be okay if it was a wizard w/ the illusionist spells. Or, a person who just intimidated/used diplomacy to get people to give up.
However, nonviolence codes only really work (IMO) with people who are not evil. A person who is evil will say, "Okay, you're not raising your weapon? Do I care? No." And then they will kill you. While I'm not certain I'd refer to a resistance towards murder a mental illness, I would say that refusing the possibility of killing for any reason is something I disagree with. I think life is too precious to favour evil with mercy.
(Naked Empire?)
I agree with MLund. Please try and remove RW religion from discussions of morality/ethics (unless a game's morality/ethics is specifically being modeled after a RW religious structure... I feel like that should go without saying, but...).