|
alansmithee posted:Like I think most people who play DnD understand it's a game and a lot of things that are allowed there would not be good in reality. I'm genuinely trying to understand the mindstate where this is an issue for people, because I don't think I've ever encountered anything similar in any of the games I've ran/participated in. Have you ever played with a skeezelord at the table? I have. I've had the misfortune to encounter "this game is now about me and the cop I just killed" guy, who deliberately provoked attacks by the authorities just to demonstrate how overpowered his character was. No, gently caress the GM, this is now a game about killing people and torturing them with my PC's superpowers. Have you encountered a player who is very very clearly acting out private torture fantasies at the table? Who describes encyclopedic knowledge of real-world techniques and stuff he's thought up himself, and asks the GM to assign pluses and minuses for e.g. castrating the victim? Or cutting body parts off? Or raping them? Using the social contract of the game to force players to sit through his bullshit by abusing a game concept as basic as the system requires you to describe the actions on your turn. Perhaps you have and you were lucky enough to apply ostracism and a swift right hook, but...well, I wasn't, and I haven't even started on the sexual violence I've seen players suddenly uncork. Even worse when it's aimed at a female player and is very clearly more sexual fantasies which the player holds about their target. So I assure you, after you have been trapped in such a session or witnessed it happen to someone else, you want to be sure it doesn't happen again. And that's even outside the realm of players with genuine psychological triggers, e.g historic abuse or PTSD issues (of which geekdom sadly has a higher than average number).
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 07:35 |
|
|
I've played characters who were, shall we say, enthusiastic about violence as a means of conflict resolution, but what I absolutely don't do is engage in gleeful, overly-elaborate descriptions of suffering and dismemberment. There's a meaningful distinction to be drawn, I think, between something like launching a fireball at a gaggle of evil cultists and reenacting scenes from Hostel. Maybe this is a hypocritical stance to take and I doubt that in real life I would be very comfortable incinerating people with my phenomenal cosmic powers, but I think the underlying fundamental issue to be had with regards to stuff like torture, rape, grotesque and heinous poo poo, etc. showing up at the table is that it's almost always something that the group, as a whole, is not comfortable with and issues arise when someone doesn't read the fuckin' room and decides to wedge it in there anyway or spring it on people as a surprise. If someone at the table is genuinely uncomfortable or just plain tired of games where violence is a regular occurrence there's nothing wrong with that, and there are games out there which eschew fireballs and swords in favor of other means of conflict resolution, but most people I have been fortunate enough to play with don't feel the need to play one-upsmanship games of torture and gore-porn each time they kill a kobold. There are absolutely people like that out there though, and they will absolutely drag a game down if left unchecked. It's not a thing you deal with by banning certain spells because it's never an issue with the game, it's a thing you deal with by having a talk with and/or kicking out the problem player because it's an issue with them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 19:36
|
|
|
tl;dr it's not about adhering to the fantasy Geneva Convention, saying "no torture in my games you rear end in a top hat" is primarily a way of making it clear that you are not going to tolerate lovely behavior at your gaming table, and if that's enough to cause someone to walk then you've just dodged a bullet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
I have vague memories of there being something questionable about Fred Hicks, but I don't remember exactly what. Am I confusing him with someone else?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 20:03
|
|
|
I played in a long running Pathfinder campaigns and one of the characters was a really zealous paladin who was expressly a monster hunter style of adventurer. While certainly he fit in just fine for the most part, there was one memorable session where he wiped out a goblin village to a man. One thing we didn't do was frame this as an especially brave and noble thing, and it ultimately lead to an interesting crisis of faith. We also didn't go into more detail that just the broadest strokes, so while it played fine at that particular table if it had been dealt with in a really gleeful way where slaughtering unarmed goblin civilians was overly descriptive it would have been stopped cold. Knowing your table is a huge thing when you are approaching serious issues, so the idea of con games with total strangers going into Hostel territory is unthinkable. Besides, the idea of torture is totally laughable in D&D Just killing your prisoners and casting Speak with Dead is more efficient.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 20:32
|
|
|
paradoxGentleman posted:I have vague memories of there being something questionable about Fred Hicks, but I don't remember exactly what. Am I confusing him with someone else? Rapist and shitlord Zak S really hates him as does Tarnowski/Pundit who's full fash. Ohh and Zak claimed him hiring Ettin 'one of the most toxic people in gaming' as one of the reasons he was bad. The only 'real' issue is the stuff beteween and Contessa/Stacy Dellaforno and/or his comments on kingdom death which you can read about in both the below: https://www.deadlyfredly.com/2018/11/contessa/ http://www.contessa.rocks/blog/founders-forum-bundle-of-holding-statement tl'dr Hicks criticised Kingdom Death's sexualised minis, he got accused of slut shaming, as a result he later blocked Contessa from being the charity benefiting from a Fate-related bundle of holding, there;s been bad blood between them ever since. Edit: Ohh there might have been some 'both sides' comments along the way as I dimly remember something about that, but nothing I personally recall to be significant, not that i'm an authority on this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 20:43
|
|
|
alansmithee posted:I'm wondering, do people also ban certain spells? Like fireball, cloudkill, phantasmal killer/weird, incendiary cloud, etc? Are PCs made to always use non-lethal violence? I mean the central conceit of DnD (which the article was about) is running around murdering stuff to increase in power while looting whatever your enemies had. Like I understand if you're gaming with Ted Bundy or something and he's going into loving detail about how he captures someone/something and starts slicing pieces off, but I guess I'm not seeing the big controversy of "someone drop a zone of truth, I'll make an intimidate roll". Like I think most people who play DnD understand it's a game and a lot of things that are allowed there would not be good in reality. I'm genuinely trying to understand the mindstate where this is an issue for people, because I don't think I've ever encountered anything similar in any of the games I've ran/participated in. Contextually torture is also, like, a thing you do to someone who you have already captured. By the time you have a guy in a position to be tortured, you could also just hit that guy with a coup de grace and they would be dead. This feels morally different to me than firing a fireball at a platoon of bandits. Even if you have a grotesque power disparity the other party is not "in your power" already.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 22:22
|
|
|
Loomer posted:Do it well and they come out having told you a lot more than they expected, without anyone having tortured anyone and with weird friendships forming. There was a USMC interrogator in WW2 who went on to be a pen pal for several of his prisoners after the War because they found they genuinely quite liked each other beyond their uniforms, which is pretty remarkable! When I was over in Saudi Arabia with the USMC for the 1st Gulf War I frequently had to go to our Battalion HQ for briefings, orders, etc. One of the people assigned to the HQ had the chilling job title "Interrogator/Translator." He spoke Arabic and it was his job to get information from POWs. He was quite happy to talk about his job, and was, despite his title, a friendly, outgoing guy - which is exactly what he was supposed to be. As he put it, he was the "good cop" to the average jarhead's "bad cop." Approach the POWs, talk to them. Make sure they're being treated right. Make sure they're getting food and water. Ask them if they're okay. Be a friendly face. He was also very good at reading people. Oil stains on their uniform? Maybe they're Motor-T, or an armor crewman, etc. The logic was that they're already in a very stressful situation as it is, and if they have someone they can talk to the information will flow naturally. Even jarheads could figure this out. Cessna fucked around with this message at 01:38 on Jun 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 01:05
|
|
|
Cessna posted:When I was over in Saudi Arabia with the USMC for the 1st Gulf War I frequently had to go to our Battalion HQ for briefings, orders, etc. One of the people assigned to the HQ had the chilling job title "Interrogator/Translator." He spoke Arabic and it was his job to get information from POWs. And it's exactly what was done by the British in WW2. They set up an area that was basically a small town, and put all the German prisoners who were anybody there. Along with a pile of German refugees, who then reported any juicy details to the British. They got tons of info out of them just by getting their guard down and listening when the Germans didn't think they could.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 01:56
|
|
|
alansmithee posted:I'm wondering, do people also ban certain spells? Like fireball, cloudkill, phantasmal killer/weird, incendiary cloud, etc? Are PCs made to always use non-lethal violence? I mean the central conceit of DnD (which the article was about) is running around murdering stuff to increase in power while looting whatever your enemies had. Like I understand if you're gaming with Ted Bundy or something and he's going into loving detail about how he captures someone/something and starts slicing pieces off, but I guess I'm not seeing the big controversy of "someone drop a zone of truth, I'll make an intimidate roll". Like I think most people who play DnD understand it's a game and a lot of things that are allowed there would not be good in reality. I'm genuinely trying to understand the mindstate where this is an issue for people, because I don't think I've ever encountered anything similar in any of the games I've ran/participated in. This is all down to you as the gaming group as a whole. Right off the bat my current campaign has the players working for a place run by what would be traditionally punchbag monsters, with a rival establishment run by different monsters in a human trade state. I did kind of spring this on them, but I treated the monsters just like people with different cultural backgrounds. Now I have players that wait to see what's up with fish men who ambush them on a bridge crossing instead of just going to town with sword and spell, because they wonder what's making them act like this. Hell, they even watched a pack of wolves acting like a pack of wolves instead of jumping on them. This is coming off the back of a campaign where players were tasked with murdering a goodly priest and displaying his corpse as a warning for a crime lord. They can drop that Cloudkill or Fireball, but when you established that what they'll be killing may infact have potential personality, history and the like... It made my players far more hesitant to just start bodying encounters because well, they're people. Who look like fish or lizards, but still people. Can be alot of work though, but I've found it worth it and quite rewarding.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
I generally tell my players that if it talks, it's a person, and needs to be treated as such. You might still need to fight and kill them, but not just because they're orcs or whatever. In return, in a combat-heavy game like D&D, I generally don't throw a lot of "But to your surprise, the baby orcs were actually polymorphed bandits!" or "Maybe these are bad guys... but maybe they're not!" type traps. Every now and again throw a curveball, but generally, I don't want them to 1) feel like they aren't getting to play the game, or 2) feel like it's a mistake to err on the side of diplomacy and mercy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 02:57
|
|
|
alansmithee posted:I'm wondering, do people also ban certain spells? Like fireball, cloudkill, phantasmal killer/weird, incendiary cloud, etc? Are PCs made to always use non-lethal violence? I mean the central conceit of DnD (which the article was about) is running around murdering stuff to increase in power while looting whatever your enemies had Like I understand if you're gaming with Ted Bundy or something and he's going into loving detail about how he captures someone/something and starts slicing pieces off, but I guess I'm not seeing the big controversy of "someone drop a zone of truth, I'll make an intimidate roll". Like I think most people who play DnD understand it's a game and a lot of things that are allowed there would not be good in reality. I'm genuinely trying to understand the mindstate where this is an issue for people, because I don't think I've ever encountered anything similar in any of the games I've ran/participated in. Short version: D&D is saturday morning cartoon violence, not "depictions of murder". It might as well say so on the box, it's that obvious. Everyone who's gonna play D&D understands the basic conceit of "sword fights and fireballs" and is already comfortable with that or they wouldn't be playing. Most of those people will still be uncomfortable with things like descriptions of torture, sexual violence, or even things like lasting physical or psychological consequences of violence because those sorts of things are not obviously part of the game and do not have saturday morning cartoon equivalents. I can do a giant effortpost if you really want but I feel like this should be pretty obvious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 04:09
|
|
|
I feel like if the concept of tone and genre is foreign to you, it’d take more than an effort post to get that across.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 05:00
|
|
|
In fairness, there are DnD games where the tone is much darker. I've been running one for several years in a Fantasy 30 Years War equivalent. It's not edgelordy or grimdark, but it's definitely built on a desire to stop and re-examine the way the group usually plays (we've been at it together for, oh, eighteen years now - we've done the whole gamut from murderhobos for justice through to evil games and parody pastiches) and to ask questions about the legitimacy of the use of violence to pursue political ends. So it's not as though DnD has an innate tone or genre aspect that says 'fireball a village = good, torture = bad'. Part of combating fascism is also being willing to confront and question these underlying ideas. We actually should be willing to explore the issue of 'well, aren't fireball spells a horrifying way to die?' because the romanticization of violence, war, and the legitimacy of inflicting horrific deaths on subhumans and de-humanized Others - like, say, Orcs - is one of the lynchpins of fascism. Unpacking and analyzing the ways we reproduce discourses of violence, oppression, and otherization in our games is kind of the whole point of the thread when it isn't actively calling out fascists in the community. We should be able to either articulate why these reproductions are fine - even if it is just as a genre conceit - or why it isn't, rather than just going 'genre!'
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 05:46
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I've played characters who were, shall we say, enthusiastic about violence as a means of conflict resolution, but what I absolutely don't do is engage in gleeful, overly-elaborate descriptions of suffering and dismemberment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 07:32
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:Give their characters mechanical penalties based on the psychological damage their own actions have done to them. That'll stop your moron players right quick. That calls for adapting Patrol as an anti-murderhobo game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 08:10
|
|
|
I'm getting back into my hobbies and have been seeking out miniature painting videos for tutorials to start upping my paint skills. It's been an incredibly mixed bag of high/low painting skill as well as high/low production value. At some point while painting with these on autoplay in the background, youtube gave me the following video about "The BEST Beginner Paint Set?!" from a channel called Miniac. The MAGA hat appearance in the first 10 seconds of the video comes across as a joke, but the guy and his tone just feel off to me in general. While I don't think I'd pass final judgement on somebody for wearing a MAGA hat for parody's sake, it begs the question of why he had one on hand to begin with and felt it would be a great idea to use it in a paint review video. Am I overreacting to poorly executed edginess? With a sizable view and like count, I'm wondering if there's anything known about Miniac and his guests in the wider community.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 08:44
|
|
|
Tadhg posted:I'm getting back into my hobbies and have been seeking out miniature painting videos for tutorials to start upping my paint skills. It's been an incredibly mixed bag of high/low painting skill as well as high/low production value. At some point while painting with these on autoplay in the background, youtube gave me the following video about "The BEST Beginner Paint Set?!" from a channel called Miniac. I've watched a fair few of his videos and he can come off as a smarmy poo poo and loads of people into metal are fash but I haven't seen anything political in his videos. I get South Park edge lord vibes though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 09:10
|
|
|
I like his videos, but he's for sure an edgy lib. Maybe a soft c conservative. His videos are alright though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 09:20
|
|
|
LatwPIAT posted:There are a number of cases of people being tortured and as a result revealing information to their captors. The case against torture is not that this never happens, but that it is on average so unreliable and inefficient at accomplishing this that torture ends up having no or even negative practical value in addition to the negative moral value.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 10:03
|
|
|
moths posted:The idea is that a "ticking time bomb situation" absolves one of moral obligations, allowing you to do the wrong thing because the alternative is impractical or worse. Heck, you can keep your captors' wheels spinning indefinitely if you are able to give them a location for the bomb which will be difficult and onerous for them to check, but which simultaneously is a plausible place for the bomb to be. A really smart cell would provide its members with an agreed dummy location for the bomb. ("We buried the nuke under several feet of concrete here - we figured that that'd be enough to make it difficult for you to find it, but wouldn't reduce the damage it does when it goes off by that much. Happy digging.")
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 10:12
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:Give their characters mechanical penalties based on the psychological damage their own actions have done to them. That'll stop your moron players right quick. Hey, did you finish reading the QCS thread about Beer yet or is that just being swept under the rug too?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 11:51
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Hey, did you finish reading the QCS thread about Beer yet or is that just being swept under the rug too? For gently caress's sake Arivia, go check it yourself rather than trying to stir poo poo up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 11:56
|
|
|
Loomer posted:For gently caress's sake Arivia, go check it yourself rather than trying to stir poo poo up. The last post was by FAU saying he was still reading the thread through a week ago.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 12:01
|
|
|
Loomer posted:In fairness, there are DnD games where the tone is much darker. I've been running one for several years in a Fantasy 30 Years War equivalent. It's not edgelordy or grimdark, but it's definitely built on a desire to stop and re-examine the way the group usually plays (we've been at it together for, oh, eighteen years now - we've done the whole gamut from murderhobos for justice through to evil games and parody pastiches) and to ask questions about the legitimacy of the use of violence to pursue political ends. So it's not as though DnD has an innate tone or genre aspect that says 'fireball a village = good, torture = bad'. D&D does have an innate tone to its violence though, and that tone is that no lasting damage is done unless you somehow die, which is nearly impossible for heroes and is mostly bloodless or at least glossed-over for opponents. It's the old TMNT cartoon but the foot soldiers aren't robots. It's '80s GI Joe without the "I see their parachutes!" voiceovers. Yeah, the bad guys die when you sword fight them. They go "Aauuuugh!" and fall down when their hit points reach zero and that's pretty much it. It's like... Oh poo poo, I dunno, I'm perfectly fine with with my character taking lethal damage or another character "bleeding out" or whatever and failing death saves and even with me failing the roll that would prevent them dying, but I'm pretty sure I'd get real fuckin' twitchy if the GM started a detailed description of a CPR attempt that wasn't working, mostly because that's way way off tone for D&D to the point where you'd never expect it to come up. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 13:24 on Jun 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 13:21
|
|
|
Fun fact: I brought up this thread (broadly; the question of torture as antagonist threat in the context of fiction) with my dad, who went into exile for the ANC in '79. He immediately brought up the idea that a captured agent knows they just need to hold out for a few days, as the network rolls itself up to avoid capture; so the 48 hours rule etc was definitely present even though he, thankfully, never had firsthand experience with the apartheid torturers. Just thought the thread might like to know that (as you might imagine, this family history is part of why I'm so enthused to run Spire, and why I want to present the fight against elfpartheid well).
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 13:49
|
|
|
Are we going to have to be compulsively F5-ing the recruitment thread for your post ?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 14:08
|
|
|
Arivia posted:The last post was by FAU saying he was still reading the thread through a week ago. Fair enough, my bad. Elector_Nerdlingen posted:D&D does have an innate tone to its violence though, and that tone is that no lasting damage is done unless you somehow die, which is nearly impossible for heroes and is mostly bloodless or at least glossed-over for opponents. It's the old TMNT cartoon but the foot soldiers aren't robots. It's '80s GI Joe without the "I see their parachutes!" voiceovers. Yeah, the bad guys die when you sword fight them. They go "Aauuuugh!" and fall down when their hit points reach zero and that's pretty much it. It's possible my groups or just the regional tastes are oddities, but my experience has not been that level of light-touch on the violence in any of them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 14:12
|
|
|
Loomer posted:It's possible my groups or just the regional tastes are oddities, but my experience has not been that level of light-touch on the violence in any of them. Last time I attempted to be the light-touch guy in my D&D party, I got ripped apart by a room full of Vampire Spawn, while my party ran away screaming. The system definitely seems to favor the “burn this whole room full of people, and sort through the ashes later” approach over the, “they look spooky, but let’s try a diplomacy check, first” one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 15:06
|
|
|
mllaneza posted:Are we going to have to be compulsively F5-ing the recruitment thread for your post ? If this is addressed to me, I appreciate the interest, but I don't really have any practice running PbP and I have an ongoing in-person gaming group I'll probably pitch it to - sorry! Maybe once I have some experience running the system I might try to adapt it for PbP and pitch it here, but I don't think I'm prepared for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 15:38
|
|
|
I tried using the Warhammer 40K Amino. I ended up deleting my account after spending a couple weeks wrestling with trying to get the community on track by reporting and messaging moderators about really gross stuff getting posted. Like lots of jokes about gunning down gay people on pride month, really exploitive and gross discussions and depictions of women. People not understanding satire. Me bringing up that people talking about their white nationalism was actually just Fascism and getting absolutely dog piled. I messaged the most active moderator and they were saying that they don't have time to monitor because of personal problems, but honestly it seems like the were sympathizing with them more than anything and were kind of being dragged along because of amino policy. I know it's some dumb corner of the internet but it seems like a very significant part of the user base are very young teens or even preteens, and it kind of breaks my heart :-(
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 17:53
|
|
|
If someone is trying to distinguish ‘I am a white nationalist’ as acceptable and not fascist, you already have community problems because that did I say a loving Nazi
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 23:34
|
|
|
Loomer posted:It's possible my groups or just the regional tastes are oddities, but my experience has not been that level of light-touch on the violence in any of them. OK, I'll give you that for sure, but I think you've missed half of my point. A D&D character (or npc) can by default, by the rules, be burned, splashed with acid, shot 3 times, thrown off the 5th floor, and stabbed in the gut with a sword and not be affected except in that their hit points are low. They can then be healed in a second or two or simply rest overnight to be fine again with no lasting disfigurement, disability, pain, mental trauma, etc. They can be hurt to the point of death being seconds away and then be completely fine again seconds later. Never mind how weird I think it is, if it's normal for your group or region to lovingly describe the texture and smell of a gut wound, the terrified expression on the victim's face as they try to hold their intestines in (and so on) instead of "he's slashed in the guts, dying" every time someone loses a sword fight, inherent to D&D is the idea that someone can walk over to that guy and go "ok you're healed" and there's no lasting trauma.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 00:24
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:OK, I'll give you that for sure, but I think you've missed half of my point. To add to all that, Inherent in DnD is the abstraction of just about every level of combat, to the point where HP doesn't even necessarily represent damage. It could be representative of your character's ability to resist or otherwise avoid fatal or debilitating harm, just like AC doesn't necessarily represent how well you can take a hit, but how well you avoid damage by any means. It's like the health system in Uncharted - the red flashes and splatters don't necessarily represent a bullet taken, but how many times you can have a close call before you run out of luck. So it's entirely on the players and DM when it comes to setting tone or interpreting the rules for their particular game. An acid attack could permanently scar a character, or the damage could just be abstracted in the moment and represent that your character is just that much closer to 0, without being a strict "your take x2 inches of acid damage to this particular part of your body". An unlucky critical from an enemy could have narrative weight if it causes an effect that persists beyond the immediate scope of combat, but that relies on the DM and players being on the same page about what combat means in the game. That's the great, and occasionally frustrating aspect of DnD, is that almost everything can be interpreted differently. It can work to set a great mood and put real stakes in an environment when all the players and the DM are on the same page, but it can be awful and offputting when someone wants to wax poetic about gut wounds and third degree burns. Fundamentally, violence is inextricable from DnD and most fantasy games, but the extent to which you want to realize the more persistent, real-world consequences of it are up the the people involved. That's the dichotomy - if you go the Saturday Morning Cartoon route, you minimize the impact of your actions. If you take a more in-depth look at the effects of the violence, it has more narrative weight and perhaps your players would be more reluctant to rely on it, but you also run the risk of fetishizing it, and have to hope that your players treat it with an appropriate level of gravity. McKilligan fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Jun 11, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
D&D can be as visceral as the GM or group wants. It's just a numbers system. How you use it depends on what you want from your story. At it's base it can definitely be exactly what you describe, but it's very easy to limit spell materials and facilities for healing and ressurection to make thing more impactful as it is to ignore those mechanics entirely. It can be as blood, guts and facism as you want it to be, just as it can not be that. Kokoro Wish fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Jun 11, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 02:55
|
|
|
So is that maya wearing hat guy worthy of the OP or not?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 03:20
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Hey, did you finish reading the QCS thread about Beer yet or is that just being swept under the rug too? edit: Don't let this discourage you or anyone from future QCS threads. Starting a thread there was exactly the right thing to do, and if I hadn't already been watching this thread and talking with Beer when it was posted, that would have been the thread that made me aware there were issues in here at all, so thank you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 03:36
|
|
|
McKilligan posted:That's the dichotomy - if you go the Saturday Morning Cartoon route, you minimize the impact of your actions. If you take a more in-depth look at the effects of the violence, it has more narrative weight and perhaps your players would be more reluctant to rely on it, but you also run the risk of fetishizing it, and have to hope that your players treat it with an appropriate level of gravity. Yeah, I think if the goal is to encourage players to think seriously about the consequences of violence, going into gory detail is unnecessary and sometimes counterproductive. My experience is that what works best is simply to consistently play NPCs as people with goals and a sense of self-preservation instead of mindless killbots; most players won't go out of their way to murder fleeing or surrendering enemies unless they think you'll punish them for letting them live. (Which is definitely an area where system considerations can come into play; if you're running a game where resource acquisition is a major element and you've set things up so that the main way for PCs to acquire resources is off the corpses of their enemies, well, they've got an incentive to create more corpses.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 10:07
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Now, to create the People's Glorious Revolutionary Gloomhaven Campaign. I would be so here for this. Theres one city event in particular that really made me think about this in the context of gloomhaven and its striking workers and depending on which choice you pick you side wit hthe workers or the bosses - it was pretty self aware and I'm very glad to hear the gloomhaven feedback iit - now I can go back to it, attempting to brighten up the gloom somewhat. RPG violence chat: I've never run my own game, though I've been threatening to do so for a long time. I'm taking some encouragement from this thread because if I was running a game I would like to see violence have a certain amount of gravity outside of the odd dungeon crawl or whatever, I've been mulling over doing a murder mystery in a pre-revolutionary elven ethnostate. I might give structuring it a go over the weekend. Southpaugh fucked around with this message at 15:24 on Jun 11, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 15:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 07:35 |
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Now, to create the People's Glorious Revolutionary Gloomhaven Campaign. Finally, the perfect campaign for:   
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 00:39
|
|