Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JonnyP71" data-source="post: 6931146" data-attributes="member: 6788862">I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this yet, but is this really a morality issue, or is it simply down to the game system and the gaming approach of all concerned?In any system where a general aim is to gain experience points to become more powerful, and where the main method of gaining experience is via killing enemies, then the group will generally be looking to kill most things they meet!!&nbsp; This has been ingrained into the current generation of gamers.&nbsp; Basic/1E D&amp;D gave 80-90% of experience points for treasure - the idea was to get the loot and avoid combat where possible.&nbsp; 2E shifted that a little towards class actions - spellcasting and successful use of class abilities.&nbsp; Since 3E it has been pretty much 'xp for kills', with a hint towards a bit of xp for quest goals.So change it.&nbsp; Use milestone xp?&nbsp; Or simply say '3000xp for completion of this quest - irrespective of how many enemies are killed'.&nbsp; Or maybe give MORE xp for encounters avoided/diffused using clever non-violent tactics, and less for brute force.It's not just that though, there's a laxness and general disdain towards alignment systems nowadays - 5E has no mechanical penalties/benefits for acting outside/within alignment.Change that too.&nbsp; Withhold spells/class powers from classes who don't stick strictly to the tenets of their alignment/religion/order. Find ways to reward those who do.Finally, build consequences into the game fiction.&nbsp; Maybe they meet an orphaned girl - soon after the party slaughtered her father?&nbsp; The local authorities could declare them outlaws and put a bounty on their heads?&nbsp; You could have arrest/trial sequences?&nbsp; Shopkeepers may shun them.In short:&nbsp; the game mechanics encourage killing - but the DM is in charge of the table and is free to tweak in order to try to install a different mentality within his players.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="JonnyP71, post: 6931146, member: 6788862"] I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this yet, but is this really a morality issue, or is it simply down to the game system and the gaming approach of all concerned? In any system where a general aim is to gain experience points to become more powerful, and where the main method of gaining experience is via killing enemies, then the group will generally be looking to kill most things they meet!! This has been ingrained into the current generation of gamers. Basic/1E D&D gave 80-90% of experience points for treasure - the idea was to get the loot and avoid combat where possible. 2E shifted that a little towards class actions - spellcasting and successful use of class abilities. Since 3E it has been pretty much 'xp for kills', with a hint towards a bit of xp for quest goals. So change it. Use milestone xp? Or simply say '3000xp for completion of this quest - irrespective of how many enemies are killed'. Or maybe give MORE xp for encounters avoided/diffused using clever non-violent tactics, and less for brute force. It's not just that though, there's a laxness and general disdain towards alignment systems nowadays - 5E has no mechanical penalties/benefits for acting outside/within alignment. Change that too. Withhold spells/class powers from classes who don't stick strictly to the tenets of their alignment/religion/order. Find ways to reward those who do. Finally, build consequences into the game fiction. Maybe they meet an orphaned girl - soon after the party slaughtered her father? The local authorities could declare them outlaws and put a bounty on their heads? You could have arrest/trial sequences? Shopkeepers may shun them. In short: the game mechanics encourage killing - but the DM is in charge of the table and is free to tweak in order to try to install a different mentality within his players. [/QUOTE]

Verification