Torture in a magical world (Rated R)

[Kahuna Burger]

Actually, I agree with the above point. When you make a PC, you include HP. That means you accept the chance your character will get killed. It sucks. You may have a well developed PC with a great history, should/could become the main character of a book, and is light hearted enough that death is too cruel a fate. But with HP on your character sheet, that indicates a chance for death. Torture is short of death, but more then reasonable.

Torture is not short of death, its a completely different situation, and I don't find it more reasonable - less so, because it directly screws with the part of the game which is the players domain - the behaviour and personality of the character. But thats just my side of the discussion on whether to include it. My core point has been that you have to have that discussion in the first place, not throw it in mid-game.

It is in the BoVD (so rules DO exist that cover it).

optional rules. Which I expect to know about the inclusion of before they show up. And not very good rules either, since they include almost no talk of defenses. Though I believe Cook did discuss preaproval of the 'rating' of a game and the themes that would be involved by both DM and players. Which puts that suplement on my side, not the other.

If you really can not deal with torture, ask the DM to have your PC die during torture. Roll a new PC up. Being captured and tortured is a chance to role play and plan escapes rather then being the target of a coup de grace. What is the problem?

You don't get it, but thats ok. If I do not want to deal with torture in a game ('can not deal'? do you really think I'm some insecure punk who will roll over and accept something as good because my (non existant) masculinity is threatened? geesh...) I play in a game that does not include mechanics for torture. That is the majority of RPGs, including D&D. If someone else wants to include torture in a game, I expect them to introduce the story element and the mechanics at the outset. And if those mechanics are reasonable, and if the plot element is one I know about when designing my character, guess what? its OK. I am not objecting to any game which includes that story element, I explicitly said that it was inappropriate to throw it into an ongoing standard game with no discussion. Which, IIRC, was what Monte Cook said in his discussion of using the optional rules in the BoVD.

If you do not want to deal with torture - play in a game that does not include that in its genre. As to dnd not having torture in the game - uh, dungeons is in the name. Not just the S&M type either. Grind.

Clever, but clever has little to do with correct. The game does not include a lot of elements of reality, or a lot of elements of genre fiction. One of the elements that is not included in the game is torture. To include it is a rules change. A rules change compatible with some parts of the base genre? Who gives a flying you know what in a rolling donut? I am playing in a game, not a random selection from a broad genre. I play a game which does not include torture in the rules. And that is all I reasonably need to do to not randomly encounter torture involving my character. If you want to play in a game that includes the possibility of torture, you have the upfront discussion at the start of the campaign. Simple, really.

Kahuna Burger

 

[Ozmar]

I agree with many of Kahuna Burger's points. And it seems clear (as many have pointed out) that the players in question are not concerned with role-playing consequences of undergoing torture. On the other hand, it doesn't sound like they are squeamish, as they asked for more description when the DM tried to skip over the lurid details.

That being said, I thought I'd offer some suggestions based on the mechanics of the game. Here's some ideas about how to torture players through their characters:

Bestow Curse - use this on them 8 times (-6 to all abilities, -4 to checks, and 50% chance of acting each round) and then let them loose at the bottom of a nasty dungeon.

Binding - use the minimus containment or metamorphosis features and put them into a bottle to live for eternity.

Blindness/Deafness is permanent.

Clones are great b/c when the clone is grown, if they die, they go back to the clone. Put the clone in an unfriendly place. You could also modify the clone so its less than ideal. Maybe you could damage it so it has significantly reduced physical stats, or you could modify it so it has an undesirable template, or is a modified race or creature.

Baleful Polymorph - turn them into small animals and set them free in the wild.

Dominate Person/Monster could be used to make them do things they don't want. Such as talk. So they tell all their secrets, and then dominate them to go clean out a rival's dungeon - but they have to fight naked or something like that. Make sure the BBEG monitors them and uses the domination to make sure they don't ask anyone to dispel the effect until he's bored and done with them.

Enervation/Energy Drain - drain them repeatedly until they are all level 1.

Feeblemind is permanent. Leave them in the local insane asylum for 30 years...

Flesh to Stone is permanent. Next campaign can begin with the dedication ceremony of new statuary commemorating the lost heros of the city.

Use a magic jar-like effect to move their souls to new, weak bodies, and then have their old bodies destroyed, or given to minions to use in various schemes.

You might rule that repeated use of modify memory can remove knowledge of feats, skills or even spells.

Geas can make them go do something they don't want to do, such as fight dragons naked. BBEG always have some enemies. Maybe two villains have an ongoing game of sending crippled (multiple curses) and dominated heroes to attack each other?

Reduce (or Enlarge) Person can be made permanent with permanancy.

Polymorph Any Object can permanently make them into unfortunate shapes. Think of some things that are brutish and uncomfortable, such as kobolds, otyugh, skunks or pigs.

Arcane Mark and Instant Summons is a mean trick to use on their equipment: Mark all their stuff invisibly, and if they ever escape and recover it, then use the instant summons to steal their equipment back later.

Torture can bring them down to low hit points, and then they are susceptable to power words, such as PW Blind.

Destroying their equipment is also mean. Mord's Disjunction works well, as does simply giving it away to minions who scatter across the world on various missions.

Insanity is permanent. Force them to struggle through a dungeon under the effects of this spell.

Raise Dead - this gives them a choice. If they are unwilling, then they're dead: make a new character. If they are willing, then they lose a level. The PC doesn't know who is trying to raise them. First, torture them to death. Then say that after an eternity in a timeless limbo of afterlife, they feel drawn to return. Ask them if they are unwilling? If they are, then they can't return and make new characters. If they are willing, then they are raised and find that they are still captives! They lose a level! Repeat.

Reincarnation - this is just as good as raise dead, plus more cost effective for the bad guy, and has a bonus that they come back in a new form, which may not be pleasing. The PC shouldn't know whether they are being targeted by reincarnation or raise dead before deciding if they are unwilling.

Animate Dead - after killing them, turn their bodies into zombies and have them go clean the latrines.

Hope this helps!
Ozmar the Evil DM

 

[jessemock]

So I have to go shock-value. It's the only way that I believe I can engrave deep feelings of hatred into the players, as well as add to the atmosphere to the world. I'm a fan of Japanese films, which glorify violence like no other (these guys have NO taboos ). I want to make their skin crawl. Then make them laugh nervously. Then make them try to supress their gag reflex.

It's almost pointless to make suggestions, because torture is so prevalent. Making someone gag is as easy as reading any report on human rights abuses. Or the newspaper.

Look up what's going on in Congo or Uzbekistan right now--that should take care of business for a while.

On the other hand, one of the most effective means of torture involves almost no physical harm whatsoever: sensory deprivation. From what I understand, no one has ever been able to resist this method.


As to game-mechanical reinforcement of torture (though I'm not sure you're asking for this), what's wrong with establishing the PCs as psychologically 'broken' with regard to their torturers? The PCs didn't take the opportunity to go after those who tortured them? Interpret it differently: they don't dare. Impose serious penalties whenever they face these people; they've become owned in a way.

 

[Ozmar]

Mark of Justice. Lots and lots of Marks of Justice. Marks for attacking people, marks for defending people, marks for being nice, marks for being happy, marks for squishing small bugs, marks for huggling tiny kittens. Marks for every possible way marks can be removed, lots and lots of them...

Oooh! I missed that one.

If I was the player, I'd just suck up the effects and seek to get the curses removed. How would the BBEG prevent this? Maybe a geas to avoid seeking a cure?

Just wanted to add that most of the ideas I suggested can be repaired, healed or removed through the use of other spells in the game. The point, I am thinking, is to make sure the players are uncomfortable enough that they learn to hate the BBEG and seek revenge (while still having fun, of course).

Ozmar the Kinder, Gentler DM

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I think you'll find that several of the suggestions, mine included, were discussing how to use the currently existing core rules to simulate torture. I can see your point regarding DMs that suddenly pull an 'oh, and there are pain rules now', but there were plenty of suggestions about other forms of torture that require no additional mechanics.

several? perhaps, but not the majority. And aside from stat drains, and roleplaying issues, the after effects suggested (phobias, disfigurement, Cha damage from scarring, reset bones at odd angles) are largely alternate rules. More importanly, the suggestion that any of this have a psychological effect on the character ('breaking them' as it were) is completely outside the rules. A short and possibly sincere subthread on actually inflicting discomfort on the player as part of the dynamic was just out there. Even your suggestion that the DM make sense motive rolls for the players to introduce mistrust is a house rule - interactions between players are handled via roleplaying, and if the interaction is a LACK of a lie, there is no justification for the DM trying to artificially create a lack of trust.

Don't forget that the 'problem' was that the players didn't care that their characters had been tortured. But why is that a problem? They roleplay their characters, they decided that they didn't want to roleplay a psychological reaction to torture. A multipage thread on how to force players into an unpleasant aspect of roleplaying seems a little odd to me.

I've been in some great campaigns that boiled down to a 'bait and switch' - the players went in expecting one thing and got something completely other.

Sadly, I've never had one of those work out well, and my play style makes them even more annoying. But depending on how complete a switch you mean, it may have nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

Anyway, this side conversation really isn't going anywhere, so I'll stop dragging it off topic from torture methods and into the game dynamic aspects of using them at all.

A druid PC of mine who came from a primative village situation really hated another PC and used to fantasize about using judicious healing to cut off his arms and legs and hanging him up in the square for all the little kids to practice archery on... From a storytelling standpoint, if you're going to have magic or super tech, the Prometheus theme is my favorite.

In terms of sexual stuff, here's from the West Wing:

Spoiler

in an episode about genocide, the word spread through the staff that in the country in question people were "sleeping in each other's houses". It was said a few times and treated with disgust and the same growing self loathing (at their lack of interference) that the casualty figures were generating. At the very end, one character finally expressed the audience's lack of understadning of the euphimism, and was told that what they were discussing was people in the same household being forced to rape each other - their daughters, sisters or mothers - in exchange for a promise of safety. The idea was so fundementally degrading that I found it hit harder than the constant casualty figures. :\

kahuna Burger

 

[Kesh]

Physical torture is the slowest, most inefficient method of getting compliance from someone in a magical world. Spells of various types provide better methods. Sure, Book of Vile Darkness is good for some of the physical tortures. However, you probably want to look at the Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge online. Yes, it's a sex supplement, but it makes a few good observations on the uses of spells for coercion.

Illusions: So many opportunities here. Force them to experience horrific things, or simply to watch terrible things happen. Use an illusion to force them into full sensory-deprivation. A simple ghost sound made permanent can be used for sleep deprivation. They can experience a full range of physical sensations without taking a lick of real damage. And it doesn't all have to be bad... treat it like an abusive spouse situation. The prisoner is "punished" for misbehaving in some way, and rewarded with pleasurable illusions when they obey, leading to a cycle of dependence.

Charms: Again, lots of possibilities. A simple suggestion to one PC to torture his companions can cause horrible pain for all involved. Charm person and dominate person simply gives you better fine control over their actions. And modify memory can be horrific: implanting memories of betrayal from other PCs, or a memory that changes their opinion of a loved one; even memories of torture, or obedience to the enemy. ("Don't you remember? You work for me... you always have.")

Others: There are lots of inventive ways to use other spells, too. Use polymorph other to turn them into something that can experience terrible misuse. You can make them feel quite helpless... especially if turned into a mouse and left in a locked room with a cat. A combination of charms, illusions and other spells can be effective in brainwashing a subject.

Keep in mind that pleasure can be used just as effectively as pain. Addiction is a powerful thing, and can be brought about through spells, drugs or simple sexual manipulation. Remember, the idea is to gain the subject's acquiescence, whether it's for information or obedience. And there needs to be a reward for doing so, even if it's simply to make the torture stop.

The real horror is finding out what would break the PCs into obeying their torturer. In your case, it sounds like the torture didn't go to completion. So, you need to just figure out what the individual PCs would find horrible enough they never want to experience, and show how their captor was digging into that for torture.

Of course, it's possible they don't have enough character development for that. In which case, pop in a copy of the Hellraiser and Nightmare on Elm Street movie series, and take inspiration from there. When all else fails, go for the gross-out.

 

[Ghostwind]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned using Atlas Games' Crime and Punishment. It's got a very good section on rules for torture (both physical and psychological).

 

[Beholder Bob]

Torture is not short of death, its a completely different situation...because it directly screws with the part of the game which is the players domain - the behaviour and personality of the character...My core point has been that you have to have that discussion in the first place, not throw it in mid-game.

Well, many things are not included in core. PC pregnancy (or impregnating others). Can it happen? It isn’t in the rules, so unless discussed before hand everyone functions as if Ken/Barbie dolls? Certainly not something I'm planning on in my game, do not have mechanics set-aside for it, but if it comes up, I will find or make the mechanics I need. Same with torture. I may have a very light hearted campaign that takes a dark turn - since I never even imagined it happening in the game, no mechanics set aside for it - does that mean it can not be implemented? You believe so. I'd find or make the rules to apply to situations as they occur. Situations I think likely, I'll plan ahead and inform the players. Then again, I started with 1st edition, so I do not think in terms of 'it ain't a listed rule, so it can not/should not happen'. I try to let my players know the general style I'll use, keep them updated on the rules variants I use - but some situations are surprises - both to me and the players. i.e. geez, I didn't think the bad guys would win - uh, rather then kill you all, they put you in chains and torture you. This is reasonable and preferable to 'You all die' or 'Ha, I taught you guys a lesson. Next time we kill you.'

As to the behavior and personality of the PC - it remains your choice. I dislike the BoVD intimidate rules and prefer the player to choose his response. See my posting on torture (I think in rules). If a player chooses to be heroic - great! I feel it is up to the player to chose his responses and role-play them - staying in character while under a terrible circumstance.

optional rules. Which I expect to know about the inclusion of before they show up.

You need optional rules. Core dnd does not take every possible situation into consideration. They want to publish to a wide audience - is it any wonder they skipped deviant behavior, insanity, pain, torture, etc.? They want a nice low age for the range of users. Does that mean these things do not exist? Or the DM must plan for all contingencies? Uh - no. Do the best you can, cover the most likely, make rules as needed.

And not very good rules either, since they include almost no talk of defenses.

I dislike the rules myself and use my own. The talk of 'no defense' is silly. Do not get captured. 'Ha, I cast immunity to embarrassment, steel cap against castration, and Novocain before I entered the castle! You must wait at least a month before you can break me! What, dispel magic?!?!?!' This is certainly not heroic (prepping for regularly defeat and torture). The best defense is a good will and fortitude save.

...I believe Cook did discuss pre-aproval of the 'rating' of a game and the themes that would be involved by both DM and players. Which puts that suplement on my side, not the other.

Which means what to me? Cook can approve, suggest, and publish anything he likes. My game moves to its own drum. The beat must be one my players and I enjoy. He can dance to it, ignore it, or do his own groove. It does not matter if you feel this fellow is on your side. The question is, if the logical development for an encounter in your game should be torture, are you going to A) fade to black B) solve the situation in another (less logical way) C) ask the player if its ok to hurt his PC (oh, here is the hand out for how I'm going to do it)

You don't get it, but that’s ok. If I do not want to deal with torture in a game ('can not deal'? do you really think I'm some insecure punk who will roll over and accept something as good because my (non existant) masculinity is threatened? geesh...) I play in a game that does not include mechanics for torture. That is the majority of RPGs, including D&D. If someone else wants to include torture in a game, I expect them to introduce the story element and the mechanics at the outset. And if those mechanics are reasonable, and if the plot element is one I know about when designing my character, guess what? its OK. I am not objecting to any game which includes that story element, I explicitly said that it was inappropriate to throw it into an ongoing standard game with no discussion. Which, IIRC, was what Monte Cook said in his discussion of using the optional rules in the BoVD.

1) I was not aiming to insult your masculinity. I assumed a Kahuna Burger was male. It is the Khuneta Burger that is female.
2) The reason torture is not in core is due to the audience target including rather young folks.
3) I do not need you to play or DM a game with torture. I go years w/out torture raising its head in my game (well, months - but it's the players doing it to my poor kobalds!) If, in the development of a game, it should be the logical progression - then it should happen. Fade to black, skip details, what have you. Simply covering your eyes/ears/what ever and saying 'not in the contract!' is juvenile. Things can happen in game that are rather revolting. An attack that severs an arm. Having your eyes gouged out. Being audited. Now, if this is going to be a grim, gritty, gruesome game - I want to know before I start (my bard sir Stuart does not go there) - but if it is an accident of events, let it be.

Clever, but clever has little to do with correct.

Damn!

The game does not include a lot of elements of reality, or a lot of elements of genre fiction. One of the elements that is not included in the game is torture. To include it is a rules change....If you want to play in a game that includes the possibility of torture, you have the upfront discussion at the start of the campaign. Simple, really.

Sure, the game skips a lot of reality. If it included it all, I would need a LOT more books! I certainly agree about genre determining what is to be expected - if I play in a super hero game - I expect the world to operate as such. I need to know if its: 4 color, darknight grim, crack streets, or BELM environment. Also - death is very rare in most hero environs. If the GM is going to range far from the standard hero game (insanity, high death rates, disease,....) I WANT TO KNOW - before my feet get wet. But in a fantasy game (generic) - torture is (to me) and accepted but highly unlikely event. 99% of my encounters with it will be in freeing victims of it from the BBEG, not being on the rack myself. I expect to fight the guy with the black hood and the comic relief sized axe, not watch him heat coals for me. But the distant chance of it happening to me is there. The only time it will happen to me is if my PC gets caught. That means defeated. That usually means killed - so I can live with the chance to escape and the torture. Being put in a cell and having occasional torture is a 2nd chance from the DM (beats the hell out of 'they kill you, burn your body, scatter the ashes. Oh, I need to know what magic items you had, the main bad guy is going to take first pick'). I might escape. I may be rescued.

Hey - my best character developments have come from dealing with situations beyond my initial plans for development - my light hearted rogue bard finding bad guys operating a concentration camp made me change him a bit - hardened him, saddened his soul. The PC is still my PC, I decided what his reaction was, but it wasn't the base genre I had anticipated. Of that I'm glad.

I understand your complaint/view on torture - I disagree with the degree you take it, but I empathize. I had a brand new superhero in champions captured and raped in the 1st hour of the first time I played him. Major uncool. I still didn't even have a good feel for his personality when that occurred. Now - if I'd played him long enough to know him and his persona better - and was expecting a non-4 color game, it would have been ok (not great, but ok) as an event in a game. Same thing in dnd. I can see torture messing with/ruining a character's development before you have a chance to develop it - but if the game you play in is dark enough to allow the possibility of torture and you have a handle on the PC's personality - you should roll with the punches and deal with it.

BB

 

[drnuncheon]

More importanly, the suggestion that any of this have a psychological effect on the character ('breaking them' as it were) is completely outside the rules.

Right. The idea is to 'break' (well, not really...to scare? To worry? To affect?) the players.

Even your suggestion that the DM make sense motive rolls for the players to introduce mistrust is a house rule - interactions between players are handled via roleplaying

IIRC, that's Charisma/Diplomacy/Intimidate checks, that specifically affect NPC reactions, and are denoted as such in the rules. Using an opposed Bluff vs. Sense Motive for one PC to tell if the other one is lying is much the same as using d20+BAB+modifiers to see if one PC hits another.

J

 

[Kaodi]

West Wing

That comment about West Wing was very close to what I was thinking but unwilling to post, Kahuna Burger. Pure evil.