Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jfdlsjfd" data-source="post: 9735061" data-attributes="member: 42856">I'd say it is. Sometimes, we just want to kill people. If I play Medal of Honor where I am gunning down German soldiers, I may not want to have to reflect on the endoctrination of young men in a fascist society, leading them to be in the place where I gun them down. In real life, of course, I would be beholden by the Geneva convention to take prisonners, and be under the obligation to ensure their safety after surrending. In a FPS, I except them to fight until they die. Not all RPGs are FPS of course, but sometimes, you want to, yes, be able to apply lethal force without having moral qualm about it. You can rationalize it in a fight in self defence, but often in adventure, it's not self defence. If you're assaulting the Evil Citadel of Doom, it's not self-defence. It's you entering the place through the loo's evacuation pipe and getting inside, and then you meet the janitor. It is, sometime, fun to say "OK, he's not just a janitor. He's not just an endoctrinated member of a mass-slaughtering cult who was born into it and never had the opportunity to rationally compare several religion in order to join the best one (or none), he's not just an employee of the enemy, who happens to be the legitimate authority over him and his family, he's not just a criminal that deserve to be brought to justice but not killed, he's... a foe to be killed. That we heroically overcome before he could yell alarm and wake the whole Citadel of Doom".While I am all for having nuance in my game, which rarely involve indiscriminate slaughters, I am guilty of the simple pleasure of sometime liking to have enemies that I can kill without qualm in a cathartic fantasy. If I roleplay an evil character, of course I'd kill the janitor, he's accomplice of a band of marauding looters and I'd be dealing justice in a Judge Dredd way. But sometimes I roleplay good characters and they'd not be OK with wanton slaughters. So, having foes that are "killable" is a plus. Not everyone, not all the time, but their presence is good.And it's also good to have variety, because unintelligent zombies tends to become a chore and automata feels to sci-fi.Sure. But all the time? Most of the time, you don't get enough background on the enemy characters to assess the situation. Sure. But I think there is a place for both: you can have some enemies that you kill (look, he's cursed, the only way to end his curse is to kill him, that's not fun but hey, there is no way to remove this curse and he'll always drink baby blood on the full moon because of it...), enemies that you kill with qualms (remember janitor Bob? He was wiping the floor for the Dark Lord and we needed his uniform... he had to die, there was no other choice, but I feel guilty about him) and enemies you don't kill (because you fail to justifiy any reason to do so). Like an enemy who have surrended, like most sentient would rationnaly do when facing overpowering heroes (and a behaviour very few published adventure comments on).</blockquote>

Verification