Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
[waxing philosophical] senseless violence
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="kitsune9" data-source="post: 1873364" data-attributes="member: 18507"><p><strong>Needless violence</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Hi Die_Kluge!</p><p></p><p>I too had the same dilemma when I was reading a module and saw some artwork that "pricked" my conscience about my player characters who will more than likely just kill an NPC that they could possibly role-play out an encounter with. </p><p></p><p>If you want to run a campaign without a lot of senseless violence, you must define a campaign that avoids it. For example, your villains are power hungry, greedy, but they see their victims as people to manipulate, rob, intimidate, not kill. An example is the tyrannical baron who taxes his populace. If the people fail to pay their taxes, punishment will be harsh, but dead peasants do not pay taxes. Villains should be constructed this way and can be realistic. </p><p></p><p>Another aspect is to make violence an unpalatable choice unless absolutely necessary. Many DM's tolerate their player characters to flaunt the laws of the land that would normally put someone in prison for years and years (thus effectively ending their character's career) for the sake of continuing the adventure. Don't allow that. If the character(s) breaks the law of breaking and entering, looting, pillaging, murder, attempted murder, property distruction, it doesn't take but a few spells to find out who's responsible and the characters are hunted down to be brought to justice, even if it was all the name of doing the greater good. If I was going to implement dire consequences, I would never use this as a Catch-22 situation (the PC is forced to kill vile noble to free the people, but now he's caught and hanged for it--realistic, but not fun at all). This would be a tool to let the players know up front that they should think about their character actions, before they engage in the interests of the greater good.</p><p></p><p>To continue to make violence an unpalatable choice, it must have realistic consequences to the character. D&D uses the abstract system of hp, but a character who has 100 hp being reduced to 1 hp still has the same ability to dish out damage, fight, and not die of exhaustion and shock. While this system is fun for D&D, it does make violence as easy solution to every problem, because the characters begin to the "feel the pinch" when they are in negative hp approaching -10, but there are no debilitating effects during the actual combat itself. Mechanics that deal with critical effects, maiming, and a fairly easy way to get killed could make players think twice about engaging in an all-or-nothing fights every time they run into someone who cops a bad attitude toward them. If you don't want to add such realism, you can take away all the raise dead spells, so that player characters know that if their character gets killed, death is permanent.</p><p></p><p>Another thing is that as a DM, I wouldn't want to subject the player characters to engage in unnecessary confrontations, thus random encounters are gone. Any encounter should be a meaningful encounter. In addition, I wouldn't award XP based on the current system. A DM would award XP on mechanics other than "defeating" or killing monsters.</p><p></p><p>Of course, if your players are the type who get a great deal of enjoyment of hacking every evil monster in sight, then forcing them into an environment where they got to role-play their encounters out wouldn't necessarily be fun for them, so I would only implement these changes if it's something their apt or willing to do. I had a DM once who forced a campaign style of non-violence on us when we are a bunch of players who like to roll dice, dish out damage on monsters, and take their money. After a couple of sessions of not rolling dice, we started to complain about the lack of action and he refused to accommodate us, so we asked him to leave.</p><p></p><p>As a player who wants a more pacifistic game, you would have to see if your DM and other players would agree. </p><p></p><p>Well, good luck with your games!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="kitsune9, post: 1873364, member: 18507"] [b]Needless violence[/b] Hi Die_Kluge! I too had the same dilemma when I was reading a module and saw some artwork that "pricked" my conscience about my player characters who will more than likely just kill an NPC that they could possibly role-play out an encounter with. If you want to run a campaign without a lot of senseless violence, you must define a campaign that avoids it. For example, your villains are power hungry, greedy, but they see their victims as people to manipulate, rob, intimidate, not kill. An example is the tyrannical baron who taxes his populace. If the people fail to pay their taxes, punishment will be harsh, but dead peasants do not pay taxes. Villains should be constructed this way and can be realistic. Another aspect is to make violence an unpalatable choice unless absolutely necessary. Many DM's tolerate their player characters to flaunt the laws of the land that would normally put someone in prison for years and years (thus effectively ending their character's career) for the sake of continuing the adventure. Don't allow that. If the character(s) breaks the law of breaking and entering, looting, pillaging, murder, attempted murder, property distruction, it doesn't take but a few spells to find out who's responsible and the characters are hunted down to be brought to justice, even if it was all the name of doing the greater good. If I was going to implement dire consequences, I would never use this as a Catch-22 situation (the PC is forced to kill vile noble to free the people, but now he's caught and hanged for it--realistic, but not fun at all). This would be a tool to let the players know up front that they should think about their character actions, before they engage in the interests of the greater good. To continue to make violence an unpalatable choice, it must have realistic consequences to the character. D&D uses the abstract system of hp, but a character who has 100 hp being reduced to 1 hp still has the same ability to dish out damage, fight, and not die of exhaustion and shock. While this system is fun for D&D, it does make violence as easy solution to every problem, because the characters begin to the "feel the pinch" when they are in negative hp approaching -10, but there are no debilitating effects during the actual combat itself. Mechanics that deal with critical effects, maiming, and a fairly easy way to get killed could make players think twice about engaging in an all-or-nothing fights every time they run into someone who cops a bad attitude toward them. If you don't want to add such realism, you can take away all the raise dead spells, so that player characters know that if their character gets killed, death is permanent. Another thing is that as a DM, I wouldn't want to subject the player characters to engage in unnecessary confrontations, thus random encounters are gone. Any encounter should be a meaningful encounter. In addition, I wouldn't award XP based on the current system. A DM would award XP on mechanics other than "defeating" or killing monsters. Of course, if your players are the type who get a great deal of enjoyment of hacking every evil monster in sight, then forcing them into an environment where they got to role-play their encounters out wouldn't necessarily be fun for them, so I would only implement these changes if it's something their apt or willing to do. I had a DM once who forced a campaign style of non-violence on us when we are a bunch of players who like to roll dice, dish out damage on monsters, and take their money. After a couple of sessions of not rolling dice, we started to complain about the lack of action and he refused to accommodate us, so we asked him to leave. As a player who wants a more pacifistic game, you would have to see if your DM and other players would agree. Well, good luck with your games! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
[waxing philosophical] senseless violence
Top