Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

[Orion]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

orion sound like a DARK CHAMPIONS player

 

I was Dark Champions way before they ever considered making it a separate ruleset/setting/genre for Hero. My campaign style was always much closer to Dark Champions and Shadowrun than 4-color. Never Punisher/Executioner stuff, more like violent action movies. Villains killed, especially the Genocide agents, drug cartels, and terrorists. Characters were expected to have a police or military mentality, not social worker, fireman, or do-gooder. They have powers, costumes, code names, and a secret base, and most of the characters were considered heroes by the public, but killing was always an option, and even expected in certain circumstances. If Doc Destroyer or some other bad guy ever nuked Detroit, they characters would have gotten as much grief for not killing him outright as they would have for executing him after capture. In general, I prefer to not have different rules and expectations for each genre. Common equipment is always bought with cash, not points. All equipment is real - none of this indestructible stuff. No difference in superhero vs normal equipment and damage. By default, all weapons do killing damage. If killing a terrorist is acceptable, and maybe even heroic in a James Bond game, then it is okay, and maybe heroic in a game where people fly and shoot lasers from their eyes.

 

People saying or inferring that it isn't heroic to kill, and that players shouldn't be allowed to do it, really push a hot button of mine. What they usually mean is that it isn't the convention of the genre they prefer, or how they run their games, but they often forget to specify that. Too many times, they assume that everyone else is talking about the same thing as they are, and that isn't always the case. There is silver age, and rust age, and a whole lot of room for different styles of play in between.

 

As long as players and GM's know the game style there is no problem.

 

So very, very true. Any campaign that doesn't start off with a long discussion on expectations, playing style, accepted conventions, etc., is a fundamentally broken campaign in my opinion. It may work out, but the chances are not good in my experience.

[Orion]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

A question for the GMs here: how often do villains in your games actually escape from prison?

 

I've never played in a prison escape scenario, and never designed a scenario in which a villain had done so. However, I also don't have any Stonghold-type prisons in existence, as the tech level isn't quite there yet. It's not a question of will they ever escape, but of how to even hold them long enough to convene a grand jury. It can be assumed that any not dependent on foci will escape sooner or later. Whether I ever reuse villains or not depends on whether the players want reoccurring opponents. I like the idea as a GM and a reader of good stories, but it drives me nuts as a player.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

If it's part of the ground rules/premise of the campaign, I don't see a problem with it. Where it could become a problem is if it starts out somewhere short of all-out lethal warfare between "good guys" and "bad guys". If the good guys then start to escalate the frequency of killing, well, bad guys aren't stupid, nor are they reluctant to meet force with force. Then you have bad guys sacrificing their own mooks to set lethal traps for the good guys, doing horrible things to the good guys' DNPCs and contacts, doing horrible things to the good guys' hometown(s), etc. It's essentially impossible for the good guys to outdo the bad guys at the "escalation game", and still remain "good", in even a post-modern sense of the word. If you wipe out Dr. Madman's whole family, including his newborn child, in retaliation for whatever horrible thing he did, are you still a "hero"?

[Greywind]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

Every time I see this thread title it keeps bring to mind when Faith bodyswitched with Buffy and kept saying "Because it's wrong."

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

People saying or inferring that it isn't heroic to kill' date=' and that players shouldn't be allowed to do it, really push a hot button of mine. What they usually mean is that it isn't the convention of the genre they prefer, or how they run their games, but they often forget to specify that. Too many times, they assume that everyone else is talking about the same thing as they are, and that isn't always the case. There is silver age, and rust age, and a whole lot of room for different styles of play in between.[/quote']

 

There are indeed lots of genres. The superhero comic has broadened out but only by questioning what it is that makes a hero. I personally think that as you move away from the absolute idea of a superhero (typified by Superman) then you begin to risk the fact that you are a hero. I think we have also, in our society, devalued the word hero. It now seems to mean someone brave, or willing to stand up against The Man. To me a Hero is someone that has an ethos that would challenge others to live up to, not facing physical danger as that is a given for anyone in the genre. I am not sure too many of the iron age heroes have that ethos. To me, they may make interesting protagonists and fascinating reading but I am under no illusion that the protagonist is a hero.

 

 

Doc

[assault]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

Just how many hours a week do you work?

 

No offense here, but I work 60-70 hours a week.

 

Whatever. You seem to have enough time to write stuff. And invent rules for your world that I would never consider applying.

 

What I was saying, of course, was that there are zillions of published characters that could be literally used for years without you having to reuse them.

 

And for the record, I design characters on a template system, and happily raid any available source, so I have access to pretty much every supervillain ever published by anyone anywhere.

 

This is why USPD and Gadgets and Gear were published. Plug and play.

 

Writing intelligent scenarios is more difficult, of course, but then most of us have massive comic collections, and collections of other stuff, to "borrow" plots from. If all else fails, rob a bank/museum/laboratory, or use a scenario from Villainy Amok.

 

It ain't rocket science.

[Tasha]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

Whatever. You seem to have enough time to write stuff. And invent rules for your world that I would never consider applying.

 

What I was saying, of course, was that there are zillions of published characters that could be literally used for years without you having to reuse them.

 

And for the record, I design characters on a template system, and happily raid any available source, so I have access to pretty much every supervillain ever published by anyone anywhere.

 

This is why USPD and Gadgets and Gear were published. Plug and play.

 

Writing intelligent scenarios is more difficult, of course, but then most of us have massive comic collections, and collections of other stuff, to "borrow" plots from. If all else fails, rob a bank/museum/laboratory, or use a scenario from Villainy Amok.

 

It ain't rocket science.

 

Organizations make for the best recurring Villains. That way your Heroes can merrily stomp the Badguys into oblivion, send them to prison. Then never have to see the same individuals again.

 

Also one thing that seems to have been missed in this thread. Not all Villains are Murderous. Many of them are just thieves and don't want to kill anyone, same as the Heroes. They will fight to defend their right to escape ,but most will stop at seriously hurting bystanders. So perhaps recurring badguys could also be this type of Villain.

 

It chills my heart to hear that people would actually be ok with some random vigilante kill a suspect, just because the suspect escaped detention more than once. Heck, there are have always been inmates that have had a talent for escape. Thank goodness law enforcement doesn't go after them with the mentality that some of you have for the heroes in your game. I can understand if an escapee dies while escaping or while resisting rearrest. That stuff happens and it's a tragedy for everyone hurt in such actions. Having someone who is working in a Law Enforcement capacity just kill a suspect (remember that Innocent before proven guilty thing?) in cold blood after rendering the person helpless is just a criminal themselves. This has nothing to do with Genre, this is about right and wrong and following the Law. Remember the Law that generations of people went to war and fought for, and that others lost their lives trying to get others to treat them equally under it.

[Balabanto]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

Whatever. You seem to have enough time to write stuff. And invent rules for your world that I would never consider applying.

 

What I was saying, of course, was that there are zillions of published characters that could be literally used for years without you having to reuse them.

 

And for the record, I design characters on a template system, and happily raid any available source, so I have access to pretty much every supervillain ever published by anyone anywhere.

 

This is why USPD and Gadgets and Gear were published. Plug and play.

 

Writing intelligent scenarios is more difficult, of course, but then most of us have massive comic collections, and collections of other stuff, to "borrow" plots from. If all else fails, rob a bank/museum/laboratory, or use a scenario from Villainy Amok.

 

It ain't rocket science.

 

It may not be rocket science. But I will confess to having an hour commute both ways each day to think about what it is that I'm going to write at the end of the day right now. Still. You can't write anything down and my hours are pretty tough if I want to be able to eat.

 

The last thing a lot of people who work those kinds of hours want to do is have to build new NPC's every few weeks. That's what I'm getting at. Templating is nice, but if your world is character driven, that doesn't always work.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

It chills my heart to hear that people would actually be ok with some random vigilante kill a suspect' date=' just because the suspect escaped detention more than once. Heck, there are have always been inmates that have had a talent for escape. Thank goodness law enforcement doesn't go after them with the mentality that some of you have for the heroes in your game. I can understand if an escapee dies while escaping or while resisting rearrest. That stuff happens and it's a tragedy for everyone hurt in such actions. Having someone who is working in a Law Enforcement capacity just kill a suspect (remember that Innocent before proven guilty thing?) in cold blood after rendering the person helpless is just a criminal themselves. This has nothing to do with Genre, this is about right and wrong and following the Law. Remember the Law that generations of people went to war and fought for, and that others lost their lives trying to get others to treat them equally under it.[/quote']

 

Adding to those excellent points, let's look to the genre. How often are the heroes made to look like the villains in one form or another? If the standard is "shoot the defeated villains in the head; repeat until we're sure", better get a new character sheet out if the heroes are suspected of a crime.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

There's also, as alluded to above, the question of "what type of villains tend to escape from Stronghold?" If it's mass murderers, perhaps it's understandable that the heroes decide to take the law into their own hands. If it tends to be villains of the non-murderous variety, though, that tends to cast the heroes in a different light. Killing a non-violent felon because you're sick of them escaping? That might be a bit more of a hard sell to both the authorities and to other heroes.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

There's also' date=' as alluded to above, the question of "what type of villains tend to escape from Stronghold?" If it's mass murderers, perhaps it's understandable that the heroes decide to take the law into their own hands. If it tends to be villains of the non-murderous variety, though, that tends to cast the heroes in a different light. Killing a non-violent felon because you're sick of them escaping? That might be a bit more of a hard sell to both the authorities and to other heroes.[/quote']

 

Sorta like a cop shooting the Super in the head because he's tired of the fellow interfering with police investigations?

[megaplayboy]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

Sorta like a cop shooting the Super in the head because he's tired of the fellow interfering with police investigations?

 

Well, there you go.

[death tribble]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

Just a point but most police forces don't run a shoot to kill policy so why should heroes kill ?

And as most of us game heroes in the Western world our heroes per se will not kill. Spiderman and Batman are the norm and closer to what a police officer might do, apprehend and bring in a suspect as opposed to the Wolverine and Punisher schools where they can and do kill.

[Orion]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

Just a point but most police forces don't run a shoot to kill policy so why should heroes kill ?

And as most of us game heroes in the Western world our heroes per se will not kill. Spiderman and Batman are the norm and closer to what a police officer might do, apprehend and bring in a suspect as opposed to the Wolverine and Punisher schools where they can and do kill.

 

Most police officers are busy giving traffic tickets and answering domestic dispute and noisy neighbor complaints. If they answer a call and someone starts shooting at them, there is a very good chance that someone will shoot back. But, this happens rarely enough that most go their entire career without shooting their gun, and many never even have to draw it out of the holster. Now look at many comics, and every single superhero scenario I've ever played in. In these, if the characters respond, they will be shot at. Pistols, lasers, blasters, thrown cars - something deadly will come their way every single time. And using normal reaction rules, this means they will respond with equivalent force every single time.

 

A cop may shoot at a suspect once in a career. A super does something as deadly every week.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

Most police officers are busy giving traffic tickets and answering domestic dispute and noisy neighbor complaints. If they answer a call and someone starts shooting at them' date=' there is a very good chance that someone will shoot back. But, this happens rarely enough that most go their entire career without shooting their gun, and many never even have to draw it out of the holster. Now look at many comics, and every single superhero scenario I've ever played in. In these, if the characters respond, they will be shot at. Pistols, lasers, blasters, thrown cars - something deadly will come their way every single time. And using normal reaction rules, this means they will respond with equivalent force every single time.[/quote']

 

There's a big difference with responding in proportion to the threat, and killing an unconscious target. A Super with a Total code vs killing will want to be certain that the power he uses will not be lethal, and may well respond with less force than is levied against him until confident the target can survive a full power attack. That may place him at greater risk - that's why he got complication/disadvantage points.

 

A Super with no killing-related complications will likely respond with force in kind. He will likely react to the results much as a police officer would. If he kills the opponent in self-defense, there's no reason he should not be able to live with that, with various levels of regret. Right on down to "I regret his death, but I do not regret defending myself, my teammates or anyone else he may have threatened."

 

When the suspect has surrendered, is unconscious, is fleeing or is otherwise no longer an immediate threat, shooting the suspect a few more times so he won't trouble us again is not heroic. It is, to me, the mark of a psychological issue in the other direction - this person lacks the normal human empathy that makes killing a choice of last resort. Such characters are seldom heroic, particularly in a Supers setting, although they may well have other admirable traits and/or be protagonists.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

From:

Why Men Fight Wars, and What You Can Do About It!

By Larry Niven

 

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=lO_L4a9xKz8C&pg=PA562&lpg=PA562&dq=surrender+reflex&source=bl&ots=rZzBRtZw5D&sig=I0RnaifmznKaDUlRxNm6BQEYWyY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=KJ8RUPOJIouY8gTm3oCgAg&ved=0CEwQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=surrender%20reflex&f=false

[phoenix240]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

I don't think executing downed opponents is the preferable way to act but I do think there may be situations and motivations where's reasonable even understandable or for the greater good if not "heroic" in the traditional or Four Color sense. In any case its going to have powerful repercussion legally and emotionally that can make some great fodder for drama.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

I would expect the player to be OK with villains taking the same approach. After all, this guy has killed downed opponents before, so taking him out before he gets the drop on me is common sense. Surrender? No way - this guy (this team?) kills prisoners. Better to take a hostage and try to get out of here.

 

If surrender or defeat means death (in the mind of the villain), that's going to change his approach, IMO.

[phoenix240]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

I would expect the player to be OK with villains taking the same approach. After all, this guy has killed downed opponents before, so taking him out before he gets the drop on me is common sense. Surrender? No way - this guy (this team?) kills prisoners. Better to take a hostage and try to get out of here.

 

If surrender or defeat means death (in the mind of the villain), that's going to change his approach, IMO.

 

This would be some of the possible repercussions, IMO and could lead to some intense (and hopefully enjoyable) situations over the course of campaign.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

This would be some of the possible repercussions' date=' IMO and could lead to some intense (and hopefully enjoyable) situations over the course of campaign.[/quote']

 

My experience (especially in high investment character creation games like HERO) is that unplanned and unnegotiated character death is rarely enjoyable...

 

Doc

[phoenix240]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

My experience (especially in high investment character creation games like HERO) is that unplanned and unnegotiated character death is rarely enjoyable...

 

Doc

 

My experiences and preferences differ a great deal. I don't want to negotiate and plan things like death and consequences. I want them to flow as naturally as possible from the actions of the characters, the nature of their world and in some cases, the genre assumptions they are operating under. That's the preference for most people I've game with over the years in Champions and other systems. I don't I or you or anyone else is wrong to have their preferences. It is important to communicate these things when setting up a game.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

Consequences I am fine with and in some games death is just another consequence. In HERO I have never killed a PC in the general run of the game. I have taken a PC to the ointment of death and then, out of game, discussed with the player what should be done, I have talked to players in advance of a 'difficult' session and asked what they thought of fatal consequences and flagged those moments that might result in fatalities (thus allowing them to make those choices), but I have never killed a HERO character in the general run of play.

 

Doc

[phoenix240]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

Consequences I am fine with and in some games death is just another consequence. In HERO I have never killed a PC in the general run of the game. I have taken a PC to the ointment of death and then, out of game, discussed with the player what should be done, I have talked to players in advance of a 'difficult' session and asked what they thought of fatal consequences and flagged those moments that might result in fatalities (thus allowing them to make those choices), but I have never killed a HERO character in the general run of play.

 

Doc

 

Its different from how we like to play but if you're all having fun that's all matters.

[Altheus]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

I think it's a matter of different strokes for different folks. Take Binder for instance, has a glue gun, has issues (He has a giant gun that spits out globs of sticky white stuff, do I have to draw a picture?) and steals things - there is no reason to kill him, even if he does regularly break out of prison to commit more crimes.

 

On the other hand there is Black Paladin a thoroughly evil individual who regularly kills people and consistently breaks out of prison to do it some more, why should heroes not take him down hard? The heroes have the power to end his reign of terror permanently (Unless he is some sort of undead, but there's a plan for that) do they not have the responsibility to do so? Or should it be left to the system to innefectually lock him up for a while so that he can break out and do it all over again?

 

Doing the necessary bad thing for a good reason, even if the hero has trouble living with themselves afterwards, sounds infinitely better than letting your conscience have sway and allowing more people to die in the future.

 

"With great power comes great responsibility." And that could include the responsibility do do the necessary things that the law can't. (UK Based, no death penalty).

 

That's what I think.

 

Martin

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill

 

Doing the necessary bad thing for a good reason, even if the hero has trouble living with themselves afterwards, sounds infinitely better than letting your conscience have sway and allowing more people to die in the future.

 

"With great power comes great responsibility." And that could include the responsibility do do the necessary things that the law can't. (UK Based, no death penalty).

 

What do you think the authorities in the UK would think of a superhuman that killed other superhumans. I don't think that even The Sun would give him good headlines....

 

 

Doc