D&D General I really LOVE Stomping Goblins

[Thunder Brother]

I'm a big advocate of the Bad Guy Off Button because it is demoralizing and unfair to turn a player's character into a killer against their will.

But doesn't the player (and their character) know that killing is typically a part of the game? Unless the campaign was established as a non-lethal one before hand, death is probably going to be on the table.

Typically you want to make a character appropriate to the adventure.

 

[payn]

But doesn't the player (and their character) know that killing is typically a part of the game? Unless the campaign was established as a non-lethal one before hand, death is probably going to be on the table.

Typically you want to make a character appropriate to the adventure.

Situations change. Sometimes you are facing people, sometimes you are facing demons. It makes the game interesting for some folks if they are not all the same.

 

[Thunder Brother]

And this is all fine and viable paths of issue resolution.

Assuming your table wants to deal with the ramifications, and the DM is on board.

Otherwise? Its a game, they are obstacles, and you are deep in enemy territory, on the enemies turf, or in their lair.

What happens in an MMO if you allow the enemy to run away? Well congrats you just pulled the whole dungeon potentially, and thats a wipe AKA TPK.

Maybe "hate" was a strong word. Mildly annoyed. Primarily because one time when the party decided to capture an enemy it eventually led to me having a "please don't torture the prisoner" talk.

I don't have many red cards, but torture's definitely on the list of things I don't want to narrate. Make an Intimidation check, please don't try to roleplay it out.

I love my players, but sometimes they're dummies.

 

[HammerMan]

I hate this situation when DMing.

The party kills three bugbears during a forest ambush, captures the final one, interrogates it. Okay, what do we do with them? Leave them? Bring them with us? Kill Murder them?

Or, oh we'll knock out these six bandits. And then... ?

At the risk of getting into a moral debate, knocking out an enemy can lead to eviler actions than killing them in combat.

yup this isn't a superhero story.... blackgate prison isn't an option

 

[Scribe]

Now swinging swords at people is dangerous business.

I mean, this kind of encapsulates what needs to be understood here.

Can one play a non-lethal character?

Grappling, Enchanting, Sleeping, Charming, Polymorph....

Sure thing!

But unless clarified real early, I'd argue the default state here is pretty much crystal clear.

We got swords, we got fireballs, we got Devils and Demons, and Evil Gods.

This isn't Debates & Deferral.

This is Dungeons & Dragons.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I hate this situation when DMing.

The party kills three bugbears during a forest ambush, captures the final one, interrogates it. Okay, what do we do with them? Leave them? Bring them with us? Kill Murder them?

Or, oh we'll knock out these six bandits. And then... ?

At the risk of getting into a moral debate, knocking out an enemy can lead to eviler actions than killing them in combat.

I usually tell my players that the bugbear is "defeated" and they can tell it's going to run off and not cause trouble any more.

As long as the players know the DM won't try to screw them over, situations like this can be resolved without killing.

 

[CleverNickName]

It's easy to play the role of a pacifist character in D&D. The trick? Do not tell anyone that you are a pacifist...seriously, don't write it on your character sheet, don't even speak the word aloud. Because as soon as someone (usually the DM) finds out you are playing a pacifist character, they will crack their knuckles and sneer and growl "Oh really. Well. We will just see about that."

Just roll up your cleric, cast your buffs and healing every round, and save your attack rolls and blast magic for constructs, plants, and undead. Five bucks says it will be months before anyone notices.

Me: My character is a pacifist.

Everyone else, apparently:

(Disclaimer: I'm not suggesting folks SHOULD play pacifist characters--only that it's possible to do so. Play the way you want.)

 

[Thunder Brother]

I usually tell my players that the bugbear is "defeated" and they can tell it's going to run off and not cause trouble any more.

As long as the players know the DM won't try to screw them over, situations like this can be resolved without killing.

I try to take that approach nowadays. Intelligent enemies will flee or surrender when things go south, even make oaths never to bother the party ever again.

 

[payn]

The conversation has gone to a strange place. It seems that not wanting to kill a person, means your character wont kill any person. I find at my table the context of the situation drives the decisions to kill or not.

 

[Maxperson]

I usually tell my players that the bugbear is "defeated" and they can tell it's going to run off and not cause trouble any more.

As long as the players know the DM won't try to screw them over, situations like this can be resolved without killing.

My group would hate that. We like things to make more sense and 99% of the time that orc or bugbear would run to warn its fellows. Whether they kill the orc, leave the orc tied up, or let it go depends on what kind of PC group they are playing.