Why is it so popular to kill innocent NPCs?
- Thread starter Tinker Gnome
- Start date
Herpes Cineplex
First Post
The only time I ever killed a nearly innocent NPC was when for apparently no reason the spineless, toadying loser my tough-guy character was intimidating suddenly decided to grow a pair.
The conversation between me and the GM went something like:
Me: You know, my character is absolutely serious about killing this guy if he doesn't obey.
GM: He's not obeying.
Me: ...so, wait; he's being given a choice between doing something that doesn't harm him or anyone he cares about, or dying messily at the hands of the guy who just intimidated him into the floor and who is, in fact, completely truthful when he says that he will gladly murder him if he doesn't get his way, and he's going with getting killed rather than cooperating?
GM: ...he's not obeying.
Me: Fine, I f-cking kill him.
GM: Are you sure?
Me: Yeah. I told him to do it or I'd kill him, and he's not doing it. He had his chance.
It was disappointing on almost every possible level. I don't enjoy killing harmless NPCs anyway, but if it had been over something important, or if the NPC had legitimately blown his chance to correctly recognize the threat as really being a promise, or if it had been remotely believable that the NPC would have had enough backbone to stand up to anyone, or...you get the point. I would've understood it, and it wouldn't have nearly ruined the game for me. But no, the GM admitted (much, much later) that it was just an arbitrary whim of his and it didn't actually make any sense in the game.
But by that point, I'd already learned not to make intimidating characters who try to push people around in his games (because no matter how intimidating you might be, no NPC will ever take a threat seriously, no matter how obviously serious that threat is), to never waste time interrogating prisoners (because all captured enemies become iron-willed torture-impervious smug little bastards who know everything but divulge nothing), and to never bother trying to negotiate peacefully with any semi-hostile group (because they will never compromise on any point and won't honor any agreement anyway). :\
Kind of a shame, because that GM did learn after a while that it was okay for some NPCs to not be in total command of every situation at all times, and he stopped pulling that kind of crap. It came too late for me, though; I was thoroughly conditioned before he reformed. Now I save my intimidating character concepts for games run by other GMs.
--
i'm no good at playing genuinely evil characters anyway
ryan
The conversation between me and the GM went something like:
Me: You know, my character is absolutely serious about killing this guy if he doesn't obey.
GM: He's not obeying.
Me: ...so, wait; he's being given a choice between doing something that doesn't harm him or anyone he cares about, or dying messily at the hands of the guy who just intimidated him into the floor and who is, in fact, completely truthful when he says that he will gladly murder him if he doesn't get his way, and he's going with getting killed rather than cooperating?
GM: ...he's not obeying.
Me: Fine, I f-cking kill him.
GM: Are you sure?
Me: Yeah. I told him to do it or I'd kill him, and he's not doing it. He had his chance.
It was disappointing on almost every possible level. I don't enjoy killing harmless NPCs anyway, but if it had been over something important, or if the NPC had legitimately blown his chance to correctly recognize the threat as really being a promise, or if it had been remotely believable that the NPC would have had enough backbone to stand up to anyone, or...you get the point. I would've understood it, and it wouldn't have nearly ruined the game for me. But no, the GM admitted (much, much later) that it was just an arbitrary whim of his and it didn't actually make any sense in the game.
But by that point, I'd already learned not to make intimidating characters who try to push people around in his games (because no matter how intimidating you might be, no NPC will ever take a threat seriously, no matter how obviously serious that threat is), to never waste time interrogating prisoners (because all captured enemies become iron-willed torture-impervious smug little bastards who know everything but divulge nothing), and to never bother trying to negotiate peacefully with any semi-hostile group (because they will never compromise on any point and won't honor any agreement anyway). :\
Kind of a shame, because that GM did learn after a while that it was okay for some NPCs to not be in total command of every situation at all times, and he stopped pulling that kind of crap. It came too late for me, though; I was thoroughly conditioned before he reformed. Now I save my intimidating character concepts for games run by other GMs.
--
i'm no good at playing genuinely evil characters anyway
ryan
Mark said:
In a 3rd Ed game I played, one PC killed a city guard when they were scouting a place, the guard was innoccent, just doing his job, there were some things going on behind scenes. The other players knew he did it, but the players characters did not. So I deicided to make life interesting for the rogue. Turns out the guard was the favorite nephew of the prince. The Prince had a big reward out fow whoever did it.
Ulorian - Agent of Chaos
Legend
No, I wasn't attacked.. I guess a lot of people agree with me! I haven't played with many people like this, but the ones I have run across seem to feel they have no strength/power/influence in the real world, so they live out their control fantasies in the game. It's a little sad and a little scary.Gnimish88 said:
To be fair, I haven't played any RPGs in over a dozen years (since my early twenties), and the people I'm remembering were quite young (13-14 years old), so maybe there aren't many adult players who do this. Maybe they were just expressing the anger a lot of people feel during their awkward teenage years (in this case, VERY awkward) and they eventually outgrew it and turned into sane adults. I certainly hope so.
This isn't to say that I think anyone who goes on the occasional killing spree to blow off some steam after a hard day at school, work, etc. is a raving maniac/sociopath. These kids were a special case.. slaughtering innocents, cheating on their die rolls, and other power fantasy activities were stock-in-trade at every game session.
Baron Opal
First Post
My solution
I was running a game where the characters were middling-high level, 12 or so. A new player introduced the others to the concept of inter-party strife and less than "good" behavior. His actions had some unfortunate consequences.
He brought in a wizard with a healthy passel of items, appropriate for the group. For some reason the party needed something from the village and the villagers weren't cooperative. The magician proceded, to my shock, eliminate the village. I think they were gnomes or halflings, some race that wasn't represented in the party. Gnomes. The other wizard's was shocked, the priest's player was inscrutable (as always), and the fighter's and ranger's players were amused, but didn't assist. So, after the carnage, they were able to recover what they needed and they had about an hour long in-character discussion about what happened. Which, acutally, was rather cool.
There was a lot of disscussion of morals, noting that if they were orcs that they would have done the same without hesitation. The gnomes were uncooperative and the mission was vitally important. The Duke who commissioned them gave them broad lattitude in executing their mission. The wizard pointed out that it was these precise actions that cause the party to hunt down people in the first place. The ranger's player, who was into chaos more than what was conveinent, bought into the "ends justifies the means" philosophy that the first wizard was selling.
(Actually, the longer this goes the more details I remember. Nifty, that.)
So we have, Kimerod the human wizard proposing the moral validity of erasing a village, Fubar the human (mutant) ranger thinking that's acceptible, Trevyn the human wizard arguing that it is wrong, Brendan the human fighter being murmuring support for Kimerod, and Leshif the elven cleric being inscrutable.
Further on in the quest, the party is challenged by a party of six characters. They decry the PCs as villans and attack. The PCs respond in kind, although with some hesitation on the part of Trevyn and Leshif. The other party is exterminated as they were 6-7th level. What follows is more arguing (and now its arguing) about what happened at the village. Kimerod and Fubar ransack the bodies, but the others are starting to feel icky about taking anything. Brendan's conscience is starting to bother him.
A couple weeks later (game time, next week real time) the party is navigating through a mountain pass when they are scried and then ambushed by a party of equivalent level. In a balls-to-the-wall fight the party is barely victorious. As they are healing themselves they notice that the enemy priest was to Osiris (Leshif's patron) and was lead by a paladin of Horus. Trevyn is a worshipper of Isis. (Horus is the divine son of Isis and Osiris). Well. Trevyn is horrified, and now there is major arguing. Brendan is now on Trevyn's side. Fubar has very little to say. Kimerod is still arguing that "its their fault for attacking us". Leshif's player speaks. This is a bit of a surprise in of itself. He goes on for a good ten minutes on why what they were doing is wrong, in character, and that the party was well and good to go back to the major city, confess their crimes, and make what resitution they could. Kimerod refused. Leshif Flame Striked him. Trevyn weighed in with a Fireball. Brendan's and Fubar's players were surprised. Leshif's player stood up and pointed to the two of them and said "Good or Evil. Choose now!" No one, including myself, had ever seen Leshif's player take charge before. It was pretty cool, actually. Brendan drew his sword and laid into Kimerod and Fubar holed up inside his Cube of Force to watch Kimerod implode.
Next week, Kimerod's player made a new PC, the party Teleported to the major city, and much Atonement was done. I gave them some nasty task to do as well as pay for both of the previous parties' Ressurections. While Fubar didn't help in the takedown of Kimerod, he did participate in the atonement so Leshif let him stick around.
It was really cool to see the dynamic of the party shift one way than the other. Particularly when Kimerod's player didn't realize how major it was to see Leshif's player, who was majorly shy, take a stand.
Baron Opal
I was running a game where the characters were middling-high level, 12 or so. A new player introduced the others to the concept of inter-party strife and less than "good" behavior. His actions had some unfortunate consequences.
He brought in a wizard with a healthy passel of items, appropriate for the group. For some reason the party needed something from the village and the villagers weren't cooperative. The magician proceded, to my shock, eliminate the village. I think they were gnomes or halflings, some race that wasn't represented in the party. Gnomes. The other wizard's was shocked, the priest's player was inscrutable (as always), and the fighter's and ranger's players were amused, but didn't assist. So, after the carnage, they were able to recover what they needed and they had about an hour long in-character discussion about what happened. Which, acutally, was rather cool.
There was a lot of disscussion of morals, noting that if they were orcs that they would have done the same without hesitation. The gnomes were uncooperative and the mission was vitally important. The Duke who commissioned them gave them broad lattitude in executing their mission. The wizard pointed out that it was these precise actions that cause the party to hunt down people in the first place. The ranger's player, who was into chaos more than what was conveinent, bought into the "ends justifies the means" philosophy that the first wizard was selling.
(Actually, the longer this goes the more details I remember. Nifty, that.)
So we have, Kimerod the human wizard proposing the moral validity of erasing a village, Fubar the human (mutant) ranger thinking that's acceptible, Trevyn the human wizard arguing that it is wrong, Brendan the human fighter being murmuring support for Kimerod, and Leshif the elven cleric being inscrutable.
Further on in the quest, the party is challenged by a party of six characters. They decry the PCs as villans and attack. The PCs respond in kind, although with some hesitation on the part of Trevyn and Leshif. The other party is exterminated as they were 6-7th level. What follows is more arguing (and now its arguing) about what happened at the village. Kimerod and Fubar ransack the bodies, but the others are starting to feel icky about taking anything. Brendan's conscience is starting to bother him.
A couple weeks later (game time, next week real time) the party is navigating through a mountain pass when they are scried and then ambushed by a party of equivalent level. In a balls-to-the-wall fight the party is barely victorious. As they are healing themselves they notice that the enemy priest was to Osiris (Leshif's patron) and was lead by a paladin of Horus. Trevyn is a worshipper of Isis. (Horus is the divine son of Isis and Osiris). Well. Trevyn is horrified, and now there is major arguing. Brendan is now on Trevyn's side. Fubar has very little to say. Kimerod is still arguing that "its their fault for attacking us". Leshif's player speaks. This is a bit of a surprise in of itself. He goes on for a good ten minutes on why what they were doing is wrong, in character, and that the party was well and good to go back to the major city, confess their crimes, and make what resitution they could. Kimerod refused. Leshif Flame Striked him. Trevyn weighed in with a Fireball. Brendan's and Fubar's players were surprised. Leshif's player stood up and pointed to the two of them and said "Good or Evil. Choose now!" No one, including myself, had ever seen Leshif's player take charge before. It was pretty cool, actually. Brendan drew his sword and laid into Kimerod and Fubar holed up inside his Cube of Force to watch Kimerod implode.
Next week, Kimerod's player made a new PC, the party Teleported to the major city, and much Atonement was done. I gave them some nasty task to do as well as pay for both of the previous parties' Ressurections. While Fubar didn't help in the takedown of Kimerod, he did participate in the atonement so Leshif let him stick around.
It was really cool to see the dynamic of the party shift one way than the other. Particularly when Kimerod's player didn't realize how major it was to see Leshif's player, who was majorly shy, take a stand.
Baron Opal
Abraxas
Explorer
Coming at this from another direction - sometimes its because the DM's NPCs are complete jerks. actually we don't kill innocent NPCs, but man sometimes I just wanna .....
The person who normally DMs for me and my friends has developed a bad habit. In response to 1 or 2 players (who no longer game with us) who did treat all NPCs very badly, he has made NPCs often less than friendly and/or very difficult to deal with. Now, even though these problem players are gone, he sometimes slips into this mode when our characters are trying to flex their muscles (so to speak) and manipulate an NPC (its gotten better with 3.0/3.5 and the intimidate skill). In fact it happens even when were not trying to intimidate NPCs.
These are NPCs who aren't followers of the BBG - so they don't have something worse than us to fear and this isn't a tactic we use very often - but after you've just let the archer take out the attacking warband of orcs single handedly before they could even get to the gate - you would expect some cooperation.
Actually - NPC actions ended two campaigns a while back. In one, we couldn't get any help from the local authorities after my character and a paladin cohort had been ambushed and killed cause it was a "religious" matter. After being raised, I told the DM my Cleric of Grumbar was now going to kill every follower of Akadi that he met, because priests of Akadi had killed him, and it was a religious matter (end of campaign one). In a second, after saving the town, the local merchants were still charging us triple prices for everything and the local constabulary wasn't interested in helping us deal with a group hell bent on killing the 2 mages in the party. We were ambushed and suffered a near TPK. The paladin, my cleric, the ranger and the rogue (the cleric, ranger and rogue had to be raised) all decided that the locals had hung us out to dry and us religious types decided that our deity had failed us. So we said screw the church, screw the town and began plotting the demise of the town sherrif who had been a real prick (end of campaign two).
The person who normally DMs for me and my friends has developed a bad habit. In response to 1 or 2 players (who no longer game with us) who did treat all NPCs very badly, he has made NPCs often less than friendly and/or very difficult to deal with. Now, even though these problem players are gone, he sometimes slips into this mode when our characters are trying to flex their muscles (so to speak) and manipulate an NPC (its gotten better with 3.0/3.5 and the intimidate skill). In fact it happens even when were not trying to intimidate NPCs.
These are NPCs who aren't followers of the BBG - so they don't have something worse than us to fear and this isn't a tactic we use very often - but after you've just let the archer take out the attacking warband of orcs single handedly before they could even get to the gate - you would expect some cooperation.
Actually - NPC actions ended two campaigns a while back. In one, we couldn't get any help from the local authorities after my character and a paladin cohort had been ambushed and killed cause it was a "religious" matter. After being raised, I told the DM my Cleric of Grumbar was now going to kill every follower of Akadi that he met, because priests of Akadi had killed him, and it was a religious matter (end of campaign one). In a second, after saving the town, the local merchants were still charging us triple prices for everything and the local constabulary wasn't interested in helping us deal with a group hell bent on killing the 2 mages in the party. We were ambushed and suffered a near TPK. The paladin, my cleric, the ranger and the rogue (the cleric, ranger and rogue had to be raised) all decided that the locals had hung us out to dry and us religious types decided that our deity had failed us. So we said screw the church, screw the town and began plotting the demise of the town sherrif who had been a real prick (end of campaign two).
Having your Character kill an NPC says nothing more about the player than an actor playing a serial killer says about that actor. Also I do belive, and have for a long time, that it is in every human's base nature to kill, steal, or otherwise get what they want. At least some of the time. I have yet to meet a person, whether it was in Psychology class, or talking with someone in-depth, or just sitting and listing to the people around me. Who doesn't still have that cave-man desire to have their way in every situation they encounter. And it is usaually the most selfish action they can take. Ever since the age of the Enligtened Despots it has become popular to deny those feelings, and even the fact that we have them. I do belive that denying these feeling is a good thing. You should not go around killing, raping,and stealing, and the vast majority of the people who admit that they have these instinctive urges never act on the (i myself once stole a candy bar). But, RPGs are just games, and you should not do in real life what you have your character do in a game. And games are just games, I have been playing RPGs for over 12 years now, and never have I ever done anything Chaotic Evil Even though I have played CE characters. What I and my friends do while "acting" as though we live Faerun has no bearing on my real life.
Djeta Thernadier
First Post
dinggle said:
I don't know. I actually rather enjoy being nice to people and I feel good when I know I've made someone else's day. Some people truly enjoy helping others (that's why people work in shelters, hospitals, schools).
I have never had the urge to kill an innocent (whether it be human or animal). I also have never had the urge to steal anything. Yeah sure there's stuff I'd like, but I like to earn what I get , not just take it.
Henry
Autoexreginated
Calico_Jack73 said:In a fantasy setting I could see the commoners praying to their patron deity to be delivered from the evils of the high-level PC party. A Planatar or Solar or some sort of assembled Celestial "SEAL Team" should be able to deal with your commoner-slaying PCs.
A really neat image just popped into my head...
Calico_Jack73
First Post
Henry... I see you and I think very much alike. Then again I like the image of the Solar taking dead aim with his Arrow of Kill Anything at the evil villager-slaying PC. ![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
This is an Arrow of Slay Anything produced by my Solar's Quiver... the most powerful arrow in all the planes. With it one could slay anything from a kobold to a god. There's one pointed at you now and my bow has a hair trigger. So, you have to ask yourself...
Do you feel lucky? Well, do ya... Punk?
This is an Arrow of Slay Anything produced by my Solar's Quiver... the most powerful arrow in all the planes. With it one could slay anything from a kobold to a god. There's one pointed at you now and my bow has a hair trigger. So, you have to ask yourself...
Do you feel lucky? Well, do ya... Punk?
Last edited:
Similar Threads
