D&D General I really LOVE Stomping Goblins

[MGibster]

My goddaughter I just referenced was 13 when I taught her, by the way, and having enemies "defeated" and no longer an issue was fine.

If the DM is frequently contriving reasons for taking prisoners to bite the PCs in the bum then they'll be incentivized not to take prisoners. Good on you for not doing that.

Media aimed at younger folks doesn't include graphic death very often. Back in the 80s, in G.I. Joe cartoons, Cobra soldiers always had parachutes when their aircraft got shot down, and with tons of laser blasts around, few people clearly got shot, much less died.

Larry Hama, principle author of Marvel's GI Joe series throughout most of its run in the 80s and 90s, referred to the cartoon as morally bankrupt because of its lack of consequences resulting from all the fighting. I haven't given it much thought before, but just having an evil race you can stomp with impunity with no remorse might also be morally bankrupt.

 

[The Lizard Wizard]

Just on non-lethal play…

I’ve been playing a Tortle monk recently that uses a staff and mostly knocks enemies out. At level 10 now and he has only ever killed 3 humanoids across the whole campaign (and 2 of those were in the last session). One memorable encounter involved knocking out an assassin that had made an attempt on my characters life.

It’s been a really fun way to (role)play, this and his ability to save peoples lives has made him one the most heroic characters I’ve had the pleasure of playing.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Just on non-lethal play…

I’ve been playing a Tortle monk recently that uses a staff and mostly knocks enemies out. At level 10 now and he has only ever killed 3 humanoids across the whole campaign (and 2 of those were in the last session). One memorable encounter involved knocking out an assassin that had made an attempt on my characters life.

It’s been a really fun way to (role)play, this and his ability to save peoples lives has made him one the most heroic characters I’ve had the pleasure of playing.

Love it.

And, of course, Tortle Monks are just so much flavorful awesomeness in one shell.

 

[Reynard]

Larry Hama, principle author of Marvel's GI Joe series throughout most of its run in the 80s and 90s, referred to the cartoon as morally bankrupt because of its lack of consequences resulting from all the fighting. I haven't given it much thought before, but just having an evil race you can stomp with impunity with no remorse might also be morally bankrupt.

There is enough of this sort of thing going around in this thread that I thought I might point out to all the other people that like pretending to be elves and grave robbers that making moral judgements against other people based on their preferences in same is not just the height of absurdity, it is the epitome of hypocrisy. People in this thread strongly implying other people in this thread are racists for liking stock enemies, and others blatantly calling other people morally bankrupt hardly seems like the sort of discourse meant to engender good faith discussion or a sense of community.

 

[Scribe]

There is enough of this sort of thing going around in this thread that I thought I might point out to all the other people that like pretending to be elves and grave robbers that making moral judgements against other people based on their preferences in same is not just the height of absurdity, it is the epitome of hypocrisy. People in this thread strongly implying other people in this thread are racists for liking stock enemies, and others blatantly calling other people morally bankrupt hardly seems like the sort of discourse meant to engender good faith discussion or a sense of community.

If you dont proclaim other's to be such, they may assume the same of you. Judge first, lest you be judged.

 

[MGibster]

There is enough of this sort of thing going around in this thread that I thought I might point out to all the other people that like pretending to be elves and grave robbers that making moral judgements against other people based on their preferences in same is not just the height of absurdity, it is the epitome of hypocrisy.

I've certainly ROLFstomped many orcs and goblins in my day and I don't think it says anything negative about me or you as a person. I'm not a fan of children's entertainment that contains a lot of violence without at least showing at times the consequences of said violence. I don't think there needs to be a gore fest, but when the Ewoks are fighting the empire I think you really need to show one of the little buggers die.

 

[Reynard]

I've certainly ROLFstomped many orcs and goblins in my day and I don't think it says anything negative about me or you as a person. I'm not a fan of children's entertainment that contains a lot of violence without at least showing at times the consequences of said violence. I don't think there needs to be a gore fest, but when the Ewoks are fighting the empire I think you really need to show one of the little buggers die.

but just having an evil race you can stomp with impunity with no remorse might also be morally bankrupt.

 

[MGibster]

I didn't say you were morally bankrupt.

 

[Reynard]

I didn't say you were morally bankrupt.

I am going to assume you are being forthright so I am going to put that as advice rather than as a rebuke:

When I started a thread about loving having an evil race I can stomp with impunity, and some others have expressed their agreement with that sentiment, you saying that such a thing "might also be morally bankrupt" it feel very directed. Maybe that is not what you meant but that is very much how it comes off.

 

[Hexmage-EN]

Near the start of my current campaign I briefly had the players assisting a pacifist priestess when she got stuck during a monster attack.

While she did use spells like calm emotions to convince some enemies not to fight, when she was grappled and almost certainly about to die to an assassin she refused to fight back, preferring to die than compromise her moral code.

The sorcerer blasted the assassin's head off with twinned firebolts to save her.

 

[Vaalingrade]

My goddaughter I just referenced was 13 when I taught her, by the way, and having enemies "defeated" and no longer an issue was fine.

10, 13. As long as it's a young age so as to imply not doing that is inherently more mature. As if worrying about how mature you are is mature at all.

 

[MGibster]

When I started a thread about loving having an evil race I can stomp with impunity, and some others have expressed their agreement with that sentiment, you saying that such a thing "might also be morally bankrupt" it feel very directed. Maybe that is not what you meant but that is very much how it comes off.

I appreciate you bringing that up. I apologize. It was never my intention to suggest that you were morally bankrupt.

 

[Krachek]

Stomping goblins and like it should be a fundamental right! At least in DnD universe.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Stomping goblins and like it should be a fundamental right! At least in DnD universe.

People keep talking about stomping, but have you actually seen the unarmed fighting rules? You will not be the victor if you try stomping people.

 

[Reynard]

People keep talking about stomping, but have you actually seen the unarmed fighting rules? You will not be the victor if you try stomping people.

Especially if they are the 2nd Edition unarmed rules. Woo boy.

 

[Krachek]

People keep talking about stomping, but have you actually seen the unarmed fighting rules? You will not be the victor if you try stomping people.

Use the wizard, and get polymorph into a t-Rex, can be a good start for stomping goblins.

 

[Oofta]

Use the wizard, and get polymorph into a t-Rex, can be a good start stomping goblins.

T-Rexes are all about the chomping. Wooly mammoth is better, they have a trampling charge.

 

[Charlaquin]

Your truly evil villain can also be nuanced and complicated and still be totally ok to kill. I don't understand why you are equating nuance with "can't be inherently evil."

There’s no nuance in inherent evil.

 

[Umbran]

When I started a thread about loving having an evil race I can stomp with impunity, and some others have expressed their agreement with that sentiment, you saying that such a thing "might also be morally bankrupt" it feel very directed.

It is, perhaps, poor wording.

But consider - if you just paint some figures as Evil and Stompable... how much moral content is there going to be in the resulting play?

We were told upthread that much of the point was to distance the players from the heavy needs of everyday moral decisions, to stop thinking about that stuff for a while! So, yeah, while we can note that "bankrupt" was a colorful term that might push buttons, in honestly we should not expect the resulting play to have a whole lot of moral value.

This is not saying that the players are morally bankrupt overall. The instances of play are a small part of their overall lives. But those instances of play aren't going to be fodder for Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood either, now are they?

 

[Charlaquin]

There is enough of this sort of thing going around in this thread that I thought I might point out to all the other people that like pretending to be elves and grave robbers that making moral judgements against other people based on their preferences in same is not just the height of absurdity, it is the epitome of hypocrisy. People in this thread strongly implying other people in this thread are racists for liking stock enemies, and others blatantly calling other people morally bankrupt hardly seems like the sort of discourse meant to engender good faith discussion or a sense of community.

1. No one has called anyone racist.
2. Come on, what did you expect the response to this thread to be?