PDA

View Full Version : Why is being a murderhobo bad?



roko10
2014-09-29, 11:05 AM
Honestly, I hear this term often, and most of the time, it says that something(most often the playstyle) is bad. Why exactly is it used as some kind of slur?

Scowling Dragon
2014-09-29, 11:10 AM
Its used as a derogatory of kinda simple but stupid play.

Its fun, but often does not involve a more complex plot and everybody devolves to CE and just slaughters everything in sight.

Spore
2014-09-29, 11:15 AM
Because the solution "kill it and take its stuff" is better suited for Diablo 2/3 than actual roleplaying.

roko10
2014-09-29, 11:17 AM
Because the solution "kill it and take its stuff" is better suited for Diablo 2/3 than actual roleplaying.


Its used as a derogatory of kinda simple but stupid play.

Its fun, but often does not involve a more complex plot and everybody devolves to CE and just slaughters everything in sight.

Yes, I get that, but my actual question is: why do some people use it as some kind of weird slur for adventurers?

Knaight
2014-09-29, 11:22 AM
Yes, I get that, but my actual question is: why do some people use it as some kind of weird slur for adventurers?

It's not adventurers in general. It's used to describe a particular type, and each word gets brought in individually.
1) Murder. This particular term was selected for the propensity of the adventurers to kill and kill easily. It connotes violence being the primary if not the only tactic of the group, when it being further down the list is somewhat more preferable. This gets particularly true when the adventure is just killing someone for their stuff, as that particular behavior is obviously problematic.
2) Hobo. This was selected more for catchiness than accuracy, but the point is that the adventurers are often disconnected from the world. It's not just that they don't have permanent homes, it's that they don't seem to have much in the way of contacts, knowledge of the world, associations, or really anything else consistent with them actually having lived in the world for however long rather than just appearing on it fully grown, fully trained, and fully ready to commence murder.

So, in combination murderhobo refers to a shallow character with next to no connection to the setting and a disturbing propensity for violence. This describes a lot of RPG characters, particularly in more adventuring focused games.

Eldan
2014-09-29, 11:23 AM
Because that's what a lot of peoeple think of when they hear "D&D adventurers". Hobo because you spend all your money on magical gear, instead of clothing, hygiene or a home, because you track through the wilderness and dank underground tunnels, instead of having a house and a job. Murder because, well, as we all know, D&D adventures consist of going into dungeons, killing anything you meet that isn't one of the six core races and then taking its stuff.

Storm_Of_Snow
2014-09-29, 11:35 AM
Because that's what a lot of peoeple think of when they hear "D&D adventurers". Hobo because you spend all your money on magical gear, instead of clothing, hygiene or a home, because you track through the wilderness and dank underground tunnels, instead of having a house and a job. Murder because, well, as we all know, D&D adventures consist of going into dungeons, killing anything you meet that isn't one of the six core races and then taking its stuff.
Or is one of the six core races and is trying to kill you, or you think they'll try and kill you, or seriously injure you, or, well, I think Jayne Cobb's opinions about Reavers cover the murderhobo-style of play from pretty much all aspects:



I just don't get it. How's a man get so wrong? Cuttin' on his own face, rapin' and murdering — Hell, I'll kill a man in a fair fight... or if I think he's gonna start a fair fight. Or if he bothers me. Or if there's a woman. Or if I'm gettin' paid. Mostly only when I'm gettin' paid. But these Reavers... last ten years they show up like the bogeyman from stories. Eating people alive? Where's that get fun?

Slipperychicken
2014-09-29, 11:45 AM
Because murderhobo roleplay can often lead to less-satisfying games, as many PCs act like unsophisticated versions of Homo Economicus, caring only for the numbers on their character sheets. In D&D and many other systems, improving your character's game statistics at any cost often involves behaviors* which, when taken to extremes, are often at-odds with a satisfying and immersive roleplay experience.

*(such as kleptomania-like theft to gain gold, living in squalor to avoid spending money, backstab NPCs for any benefit whatsoever, committing indiscriminate slaughter for XP, display apathy toward any character or information which is not relevant to game statistics, argue tirelessly to leverage anything said by the DM to benefit game-statistics)



"Murderhobo" is often slang for adventurers because many PCs display murderhobo behaviors, whether opportunistically or for their entire careers. It is often despised, partly because it occurs to the point that it has seems trite, and some gamers are sick of seeing many PCs roleplayed exactly the same. The term is a quick description of this collection of traits and behaviors, often used to convey the assumption that PCs will generally display these traits instead of acting like "real" characters.

Vitruviansquid
2014-09-29, 12:03 PM
What people derisively label murderhoboism is part of a long and glorious tradition in history and literature, though. Odysseus was basically a murderhobo, the Beowulf was a murderhobo, the Fellowship of the Ring were murderhobos, Vikings were murderhobos, conquistadors were murderhobos, ronin were murderhobos, and the list goes on and on. It's really only the imposition of a cocktail of modern norms of how war, justice, and day-to-day living should be done that makes murderhoboism a non-legitimate thing in fantasy settings.

Red Fel
2014-09-29, 12:29 PM
What people derisively label murderhoboism is part of a long and glorious tradition in history and literature, though. Odysseus was basically a murderhobo, the Beowulf was a murderhobo, the Fellowship of the Ring were murderhobos, Vikings were murderhobos, conquistadors were murderhobos, ronin were murderhobos, and the list goes on and on. It's really only the imposition of a cocktail of modern norms of how war, justice, and day-to-day living should be done that makes murderhoboism a non-legitimate thing in fantasy settings.

I like the cut of your literary jib, but all humor aside, I must disagree.

Odysseus was a soldier. He went off to fight in a war he didn't want to be in, for a cause he only somewhat believed in, and then spent the equivalent of a lifetime struggling against impossible odds and literal divine will to make his way home. Beowulf was a warrior, a man of his people who slew a monster to protect them. The members of the Fellowship were crusaders, on a quest to save their homes and the world from an all-consuming darkness. Vikings... were not hobos. They had homes, and families, and lives. You've got me on the murder bit, though.

The point is that each of these figures had a reason - a reason for adventuring, a reason for killing - and something to which they wanted to return. Odysseus wanted a homecoming. Beowulf wanted his people to be safe from Grendel. The Fellowship wanted peace for Middle Earth. The Vikings wanted to bring their loot home and sleep with their wives, repeatedly and with gusto.

What makes adventurers "murderhobos" isn't just the fact that they kill. Nor that they do so with remarkable comfort and ease. Honestly it's a little horrifying some of them keep the G in their alignment entries. It's the fact that, as others have mentioned, so many of them do so with seemingly minimal overarching purpose.

Some people write a backstory. Goodness knows I do. But of those, how many use their backstory for more than plot hooks? How many characters want, throughout the campaign, to get back to the farm, to find that lost love, to finish their theses? For some characters, backstory becomes window dressing. What the character actually does is kill. Tell them what to kill and they'll do it. Point them in the right direction and they'll do it. Reward them and they'll do it faster, and with style. They have no actual connection to the world, or even to their own stories.

I'm not saying all PCs are like this, or even most. But there are many PCs who are essentially inserted into the game world for the sole purpose of moving from place to place and facilitating face-to-face meetings between myriad creatures and their patron deities. These are the murderhobos. And these are their stories (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8lDYrvTILc).

SaintRidley
2014-09-29, 12:49 PM
What Fel said, and the addition that Beowulf was a big gloryhound who sought fame and story through battle. He very well might have been something close to a murderhobo, since he showed up at Hrothgar's door and was like "I hear you have a monster problem. Mind if I take a crack at it?", but it is by no means clear that it's presented as a good thing in the poem. Dude dies an old man fighting a dragon for one more shot of glory, and he has no heir because he always put himself above his people. There's plenty of room to read Beowulf as being exactly the opposite of an admirable guy to the Anglo-Saxons, someone who took the "glory in battle" part of the warrior ethos way too far at the expense of the "care for your kin and kingdom" part.

BRC
2014-09-29, 01:00 PM
The term "Murderhobo" is used in two ways, at least in my experience.

1: To point out the absurdity of the standard DnD Adventuring Party. They wander from place to place with no real attachments, killing things, and getting money so they can kill things better. Their livelihood revolves around the casual murder of other sentient beings. In real life, such people would be considered at best morally bankrupt, and at worst monsters. But within the context of the game they're hailed as heroes. Calling them "Murderhobos" rather than Adventurers points out the absurdity that we take for granted in these situations. Adventurers makes them sound heroic, Murderhobo makes them sound like deranged, blood-soaked maniacs.

2: It's also used to describe a certain playstyle. Players with no interest in establishing connections for their characters, or pursuing a plot beyond wandering to the next town, finding what needs to be killed, and killing it, are said to be "Interested only in playing Murderhobos". Here it can indicate that the players have no interest in moving beyond the "Default" campaign format. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, plenty of groups have lots of fun without deviating from the Murderhobo playstyle, but it can be frustrating, especially if part of the group wants a deeper roleplaying experience, while others just want to find the nearest thing that needs killing.

Telok
2014-09-29, 01:07 PM
Things murder hobo's say:

"The king is useless, he doesn't have any magic items to give us." Said in front of one of the king's councillors.

"The old wizard insulted us, we must kill him." Said after they told the wizard that they had discarded part of an artifact in a demon portal because it 'wasn't useful'.

"Let's not stop the arch-demon from taking over the country. Let's go murder an emperor instead."

"Let's stop and rest here for the night. We don't need to regain spells or anything, but let's stop anyways. If the lizard man raid destroys the fort we'll just mop up the survivors and take all the loot from everybody."

Mike_G
2014-09-29, 02:05 PM
Histoy aside, since this isn;t a history RPG but a fantasy one, Conan is pretty much a murder hobo. He's a homeless mercenary/thief/adventurer. he becomes a king, but in the most murderous hobo-y way possible. Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser are proudly admitted thieves and sellswords.

It's a trope of fantasy literature.

And real world adventurers, like the Conquistadors and, yes, the Vikings, may have had a home base, but acted pretty much like murder hobos. And ask a Native American if the Europeans from Leif Erikson through Columbus to Custer and company acted a bit murder-hobo-y.

Travel the world. See exotic sights. Meet interesting people. And kill them and take their stuff.

It's a time honored tradition.

cobaltstarfire
2014-09-29, 02:36 PM
It's not bad, but it can sure be boring.

It also makes me mildly uncomfortable, I know it's just a game but I don't much like slaughtering and looting things unless they've at least attacked me first, it just feels wrong. (well also against character since I just about always play good characters)

I do enjoy combat and doing well at it, but I also enjoy having role play opportunities, and working together with others. It's really annoying to not get to do any of that because Thiefhands Mcstabbers and Jerkass Elf Man are constantly yelling about how they want to loot/kill/sneak their way into glory, even if that happens to include turnin on party members, or the civilians we are trying to save.

Morty
2014-09-29, 02:40 PM
I think it's one of those cases where people take a tongue-in-cheek label far too seriously.

Sartharina
2014-09-29, 03:27 PM
What people derisively label murderhoboism is part of a long and glorious tradition in history and literature, though. Odysseus was basically a murderhobo, the Beowulf was a murderhobo, the Fellowship of the Ring were murderhobos, Vikings were murderhobos, conquistadors were murderhobos, ronin were murderhobos, and the list goes on and on. It's really only the imposition of a cocktail of modern norms of how war, justice, and day-to-day living should be done that makes murderhoboism a non-legitimate thing in fantasy settings.The fellowship of the Ring were not Murderhobos, because they usually ran from their problems, and only fought when they were attacked - and then, it was usually military action. Odysseus wasn't a murderhobo - he had a home that he lived in and family he lived with (And spent his life trying to return to). During the war, he didn't have an extraordinary Personal Killcount, and after the war, on his voyage home...
Lets see -
He simply leaves the Lotus-Eaters to their drug-induced oblivion after reclaiming the crew that tried to stay with them, instead of murdering the bunch before hitting the sea.
Instead of killing Polyphemus the Cyclops in a battle (Before or after stabbing his eye out), he leaves the one-eyed giant in his misery, but still able to go on with life.
Instead of avenging his destroyed fleet against the Laestrygonians and killing them all, he simply sailed away again.

In fact, the only people Odysseus actually killed, instead of just desperately ran from, were his wife's 'suitors'.

The Vikings were not Murderhobos, even though they were marauders. They had homes, and moved in large numbers. Also - they were only a small fraction of their actual culture, which was full of 'normal' people. The average Level 3 adventurer has killed more people than all but the most accomplished historic vikings.
The Conquistators are historically reviled because of their senseless slaughters - but even then, they still usually settled down or at least moved in large groups with a persistent camp they could call their own.

You grossly overestimate the frequency, social acceptance, and accomplishment of history's closest answer to D&D adventurers.

I like how BRC put it.
1: To point out the absurdity of the standard DnD Adventuring Party. They wander from place to place with no real attachments, killing things, and getting money so they can kill things better. Their livelihood revolves around the casual murder of other sentient beings. In real life, such people would be considered at best morally bankrupt, and at worst monsters. But within the context of the game they're hailed as heroes. Calling them "Murderhobos" rather than Adventurers points out the absurdity that we take for granted in these situations. Adventurers makes them sound heroic, Murderhobo makes them sound like deranged, blood-soaked maniacs.

If you've killed more people than you've lived years, and have no persistent address that you live at more than 30 days a year over the past 2 years, you're a murderhobo.

Vitruviansquid
2014-09-29, 04:23 PM
Dudes have stints as murderhobos. You can't be a temporary murderhobo?

Sartharina
2014-09-29, 04:55 PM
Dudes have stints as murderhobos. You can't be a temporary murderhobo?You can be. But if murderhoboing dominates your living, you're a Murderhobo, just as a guy who writes for a living is an author.

Raine_Sage
2014-09-29, 05:41 PM
There's also that some players don't seem to know what it means. I had one guy in our group constantly refer to the PCs as murderhobos despite the fact that they all:

A. Actually owned land just outside of town (a tower they all shared) and had several strong connections to NPCs in town.
B. Almost never initiated a fight. Not even when the GM made explicitly clear that an npc was probably working for the enemy. They even tried to take goblins alive as prisoners.

As far as I can tell the guy just liked the way the word "murderhobo" sounded and/or just thought it was a cute way to refer to adventurers. But I always rankled a little when he said it. Like, excuse you but can you not?

VoxRationis
2014-09-29, 05:51 PM
I think that's a poor definition, Sartharina. You can have well-established connections to the world and the people in it while wandering around, particularly in a setting without quick means of transportation: that two years of not spending time at home could simply be a long journey from point A to point B all for a very good in-character reason like "I heard my father is being held at X place" or "Yonder lies my love, who journeyed abroad before I could confess my feelings."
Not to mention that making a D&D character who does not have a higher kill count than their age is extremely difficult above low levels, even for an elf, and that is not relevant to their role-playing at all.
I find that people use the term to power the following cycle:
1) Point out frequency of poorly-roleplayed, kill-and-loot behavior among PCs.
2) Use this to accuse [system; particularly D&D] of being intrinsically focused on this behavior.
3) Use the above to justify their poorly-roleplayed, kill-and-loot behavior.
4) Repeat from step 1.
The key issue of being a "murderhobo" is not actually frequency of killing or even frequency of killing and looting. The issue is what those acts look like in context (I know, a hackneyed line, but true). RPG characters as a matter of course are forced into survival situations where killing their enemies is the best way to continue, for both the characters and their respective societies. Even in situations where the characters are not personally attacked, they are often in scenarios where by virtue of their personal power, they have a duty to protect a group of people under attack. These characters are usually, furthermore, possessed of abilities which make lethal combat feasible on a repeated basis. They are also in situations where their enemies frequently are accompanied by valuable and useful items that would be rather silly to just leave lying there (if you were fighting your way through a battle with a knife and a dead enemy had a sword—or even a gun—wouldn't you take it?). Therefore, in most RPG scenarios, killing your enemies and taking the more valuable of their possessions is a reasonable affair. True "murderhobo" behavior comes from:
-Killing without provocation (what constitutes "provocation" depends on the setting, particularly when it intersects with "Always Chaotic Evil" sorts of creatures—in some settings, that band of orcs might be peaceful nomads, while in others, that they have or are planning to rape, loot, and burn is an empirical fact)
-Acting without concern for what makes sense as citizens of the setting
-Killing expressly for the acquisition of loot without good in-universe reasons besides financial gain

Sartharina
2014-09-29, 06:15 PM
I think that's a poor definition, Sartharina. You can have well-established connections to the world and the people in it while wandering around, particularly in a setting without quick means of transportation: that two years of not spending time at home could simply be a long journey from point A to point B all for a very good in-character reason like "I heard my father is being held at X place" or "Yonder lies my love, who journeyed abroad before I could confess my feelings."
Not to mention that making a D&D character who does not have a higher kill count than their age is extremely difficult above low levels, even for an elf, and that is not relevant to their role-playing at all.
I find that people use the term to power the following cycle:
1) Point out frequency of poorly-roleplayed, kill-and-loot behavior among PCs.
2) Use this to accuse [system; particularly D&D] of being intrinsically focused on this behavior.
3) Use the above to justify their poorly-roleplayed, kill-and-loot behavior.
4) Repeat from step 1.
The key issue of being a "murderhobo" is not actually frequency of killing or even frequency of killing and looting. The issue is what those acts look like in context (I know, a hackneyed line, but true). RPG characters as a matter of course are forced into survival situations where killing their enemies is the best way to continue, for both the characters and their respective societies. Even in situations where the characters are not personally attacked, they are often in scenarios where by virtue of their personal power, they have a duty to protect a group of people under attack. These characters are usually, furthermore, possessed of abilities which make lethal combat feasible on a repeated basis. They are also in situations where their enemies frequently are accompanied by valuable and useful items that would be rather silly to just leave lying there (if you were fighting your way through a battle with a knife and a dead enemy had a sword—or even a gun—wouldn't you take it?). Therefore, in most RPG scenarios, killing your enemies and taking the more valuable of their possessions is a reasonable affair.You're still a murderhobo. Murderhobos are not inherently evil, as the term has been twisted to refer only to those who play a certain way because people don't like the idea of their murderhobos being called murderhobos even though they are.

As far as being 2 years away from home - you probably have had that home for more than two years. I should have been clear that's a lifelong average-
Over the course of your adult life, you've owned a home for more than 2 years. (Maybe it should be lifelong average duration of address being 1 year)
AND
You spend an average of at least 30 days per year (If you spend 360 days one year in that home, you're good for the next 12 years)

What murderhobos do for a living is weird and absurd, and incredibly violent. Why the hell are they putting themselves in those situations in the first place? Normal people DON'T DO that sort of thing.

How to tell if you're a Murderhobo:
1. Your hometown was raided and destroyed when you were a child. How did you react?
a) Struggled to come to terms with your loss, moved in with a relative from another town and moved on with your life.
b) Struggled through the trauma, but stayed where you were, building your life back up from the ruins, and banding together with the survivors to ensure the raiders don't come back.
c) Either stay and rebuild or move in with a relative to move on with your life, swearing vengeance on the orcs and enlisting or forming a militia or enlisting in the army to eventually be able to hunt down and destroy the bandits and make your town and others safe.
Murderhobo) Find your father's sword in the wreckage, swear vengeance on the bandits, and immediately grab a few friends or swords-for-hire to destroy the bandits almost single-handedly, then go off hunting down more bandits and threats to the world.

2. You find yourself jumped by three thugs in a back alley demanding your money. How do you react?
A) Comply with the threats, reasoning your money's not worth your life.
B) Run from the thugs to escape with your life and money, fighting only as much as necessary as to discourage pursuit.
C) Fight them to incapacitation/death, then either run before the authorities show up, or wait and hand the case over to the authorities.
Murderhobo) Kill all three thugs in a fight, take their weapons, ammo, and pocket change, cufflinks, fancy jewelry, and any other valuable belongings they might have on their person. Then, find out who their gang is, and take your new weapons and anything that passes for armor and go in guns blazing, any gang members you come across. Full Murderhobo Bonus - Sell your home and quit your job to use your new money and free time to hunt down every gangster, mobster, thug, and crook in your entire city, then county, then state, then country, leaving a trail of bloody justice.

Coidzor
2014-09-29, 06:19 PM
Honestly, I hear this term often, and most of the time, it says that something(most often the playstyle) is bad. Why exactly is it used as some kind of slur?

Mostly because it's doing stuff suited for a beer-and-pretzels dungeon crawl in games where beer-and-pretzels dungeon crawling isn't appropriate.

Murdering everything in the dungeon is just fine, y'know, as long as you're in the dungeon.

Sartharina
2014-09-29, 06:22 PM
Mostly because it's doing stuff suited for a beer-and-pretzels dungeon crawl in games where beer-and-pretzels dungeon crawling isn't appropriate.

Murdering everything in the dungeon is just fine, y'know, as long as you're in the dungeon.

But why are you in the dungeon in the first place?

Raine_Sage
2014-09-29, 06:30 PM
But why are you in the dungeon in the first place?

Well presumably because the DM put you there. If the DM did not direct you to the dungeon but rather your character sought out the dungeon specifically so you could kill all the things in the dungeon, while the DM was trying to...I don't know direct the party to an apple orchard or something, that would also be murderhoboing.

huttj509
2014-09-29, 06:35 PM
But why are you in the dungeon in the first place?

Because funding an archaeological expidition is more expensive than going to a pub and offering a share of the loot.

Hey, it'll end up in a museum or something eventually.

Coidzor
2014-09-29, 06:46 PM
But why are you in the dungeon in the first place?

Beer *and* pretzels. Very important. If you just try to have pretzels, the atmosphere's not nearly relaxed enough, and if you just try to have beer, well, the wick burns down too quickly and you can't even make it through the dungeon.

Plus, y'know, sometimes it's fun to just switch off the higher-order reasoning and engage in some mindless self-indulgence with some friends.

Aedilred
2014-09-29, 07:14 PM
While killing people and taking their stuff is a well-established historical and fictional tradition, I think what distinguishes true murderhobos from (most of) those people is the ultimate objective.

The Vikings and Conquistadors killed and looted because they wanted to acquire more power and riches to make their lives and those of their families (contemporary or potential) more comfortable. Murderhobo adventurers kill and loot because they want to get better at killing and looting, and for no other real reason.

Real people (and most credible fictional characters) want to kill and loot as a means to an end. They envisage a time when they'll have killed and looted enough and all their killing and looting has earned them a position where they won't have to kill and loot any more, or at least where the killing and looting can be scaled back. The product is more important than the process. For murderhobo adventurers, the process is all there is. If a murderhobo reaches the position where he doesn't have to kill and loot any more, then that's either game over, or he'll go looking for more stuff to kill and loot anyway, because that's all that gives him purpose.

In that respect, murderhobos are less like historical raiders and barbarians, and more like pyschologically disturbed mass murderers and serial killers.

Amaril
2014-09-29, 08:03 PM
What murderhobos do for a living is weird and absurd, and incredibly violent. Why the hell are they putting themselves in those situations in the first place? Normal people DON'T DO that sort of thing.

So, because I'm intrigued, what kinds of games do you play and/or run instead? I fully agree that the frequency with which most adventurers willingly rush into dungeon-crawling murder-fests is pretty implausible, but a certain amount of that stuff is deeply built into many types of games.

VoxRationis
2014-09-29, 08:16 PM
Consider that your average player character is, by themselves or in a small group, much more capable of handling most threats and obstacles than the populace they are nearby. This is particularly true in "small village threatened by orcs" scenarios, but true in a large number generally. These characters also tend to be capable of pre-emptively engaging threats to that populace in a fashion which spares the community from harm, while having a surprisingly low chance of death (high, but low considering the task) from the process. That the party elects, under such circumstances, is to be considered laudable, Lawful Good in fact, for they put the needs of their community over their personal safety—that they usually take all the valuable things in the area is a side venture. (I mean, really: who in their right mind, after defeating a band of enemies and noticing a convenient pile of liquid assets nearby, would not take them? There's little question of returning the assets to their original owners in most cases; they're either dead by your hand or by the hands of your slain enemies generally. Unless people have specifically mentioned to you that they have been missing a particular item, not taking the coin for yourself simply means leaving it to gather dust.
The player character could elect to band together with the town militia—and I've done such a thing in my time as a player, when the threat appears too great to attack a la dungeon, so to speak—but the average militia member is delicate in comparison to the threat; many would likely die if they actually engaged to a measurable degree. You could spearhead the attack, and leave the militia to follow up, but that wouldn't be significantly different from just clearing the dungeon out yourself. So the dungeon crawl is a reasonable means of serving a community.

Slipperychicken
2014-09-29, 08:20 PM
So, because I'm intrigued, what kinds of games do you play and/or run instead? I fully agree that the frequency with which most adventurers willingly rush into dungeon-crawling murder-fests is pretty implausible, but a certain amount of that stuff is deeply built into many types of games.

It's not about the characters engaging in "dungeon-crawling murder-fests", it's about such activities being the beginning and end of the character. As in: no family, no goals (beside loot, murder, and sometimes power for their own sake), no life, no interests, no hobbies or even preferences beside those which improve game-statistics, will not even consider any activity perceived to be detrimental to murdering (drinking the cheapest ale possible is a common exception to justify these characters hanging around bars for quests). The murderhobo is simply an angry statblock, given the bare minimum of fluff or backstory which his player can get away with.

Amaril
2014-09-29, 08:23 PM
It's not about the characters engaging in "dungeon-crawling murder-fests", it's about such activities being the beginning and end of the character. As in: no family, no goals (besides, loot, murder, and sometimes power for their own sake), no life, no interests, no hobbies or even preferences beside those which improve game-statistics, will not even consider any activity perceived to be detrimental to murdering (drinking the cheapest ale possible is a common exception to justify these characters hanging around bars for quests). The murderhobo is simply an angry statblock, given the bare minimum of fluff or backstory which his player can get away with.

I know, and I think your definition, or something very like it, is more appropriate. As long as your character has a well-considered reason to put themselves through hell the way they do, and is sufficiently believable and complex, I don't think they can reasonably be called a murderhobo. Sartharina, on the other hand, seems to disagree, and I'm curious about how her definition influences her gaming.

YossarianLives
2014-09-29, 08:44 PM
My entire party are murderhobos. The party started off as one CG character, (myself) one TN, one LG, and one CN. We started off traveling through a forest to get to a town. We encountered a huge tree with gnomes living in it. The rest of the party decided asked if they had any money. When the gnomes said that all they had were "Magic Mushrooms" the party brutally murdered the entire village and got high on mushrooms.

Meanwhile my character ran off into the forest screaming.

Sartharina
2014-09-29, 08:44 PM
So, because I'm intrigued, what kinds of games do you play and/or run instead? I fully agree that the frequency with which most adventurers willingly rush into dungeon-crawling murder-fests is pretty implausible, but a certain amount of that stuff is deeply built into many types of games.Murderhobo games. There are actually a few systems that allow Not Resorting To Violence be plausible (FATE comes to mind, and it's possible to get away with it in Star Wars if you stick to the feel of the movies. Ironically, 4e's Skill Challenges allow players to not be murderhobos, but that ignores 90% of the system) - but really, not being a Murderhobo tends to be boring in most game systems. But that doesn't make it any less absurd.


It's not about the characters engaging in "dungeon-crawling murder-fests", it's about such activities being the beginning and end of the character. As in: no family, no goals (beside loot, murder, and sometimes power for their own sake), no life, no interests, no hobbies or even preferences beside those which improve game-statistics, will not even consider any activity perceived to be detrimental to murdering (drinking the cheapest ale possible is a common exception to justify these characters hanging around bars for quests). The murderhobo is simply an angry statblock, given the bare minimum of fluff or backstory which his player can get away with.We're arguing two different definitions of Murderhobo.

Beleriphon
2014-09-29, 08:46 PM
2. You find yourself jumped by three thugs in a back alley demanding your money. How do you react?
A) Comply with the threats, reasoning your money's not worth your life.
B) Run from the thugs to escape with your life and money, fighting only as much as necessary as to discourage pursuit.
C) Fight them to incapacitation/death, then either run before the authorities show up, or wait and hand the case over to the authorities.
Murderhobo) Kill all three thugs in a fight, take their weapons, ammo, and pocket change, cufflinks, fancy jewelry, and any other valuable belongings they might have on their person. Then, find out who their gang is, and take your new weapons and anything that passes for armor and go in guns blazing, any gang members you come across. Full Murderhobo Bonus - Sell your home and quit your job to use your new money and free time to hunt down every gangster, mobster, thug, and crook in your entire city, then county, then state, then country, leaving a trail of bloody justice.

Ah, I see. You turn into The Punisher.

Telok
2014-09-29, 09:41 PM
My entire party are murderhobos.... the party brutally murdered the entire village and got high on mushrooms.

Meanwhile my character ran off into the forest screaming.

Classic, absolutely classic. I still like my guys though, the entire reason they weren't going to stop the demonic invasion and were going to kill the emperor instead was because they didn't like the tax laws. Stopping the world from being overrun by demons was less important than destroying a government that asked them to pay taxes.

In the game I'm currently playing in my character is the only one with any backstory (this is normal for this group), and we're staying the night in a dwarven fortress that controls one of the access points between the safe and civilized lands to the west and the monster/undead infested lands to the east. Anyways some drow showed up, we offed the ones that attacked our sleeping chambers and we can hear the rest of the fort fighting. Everyone else wants to either loot and leave, or loot and go back to sleep. I'm apparently the only person who thinks that having drow control one of the passes between cities full of commoners and hordes of city wrecking monsters might be a bad thing. And two of the other characters are elves.

I'm simply going to kill a couple of drow, grab something shiney, return to the party and say "Hey, these guys have loot!" Which is the only thing that will motivate them to actually keep all the NPCs from getting slaughtered. Luckily none of them are nasty enough (except the guy playing the sorcerer, and he's not competent enough) to kill everything, animate the bodies, and extort the local barony with the threat of opening the pass to spawning undead.

My party is full of murder hobos.

Red Fel
2014-09-29, 10:23 PM
Stopping the world from being overrun by demons was less important than destroying a government that asked them to pay taxes.

Objection! Murderhobos are tax-exempt! By definition - they have no home residence, no citizenship, and no lawful income. They have no fixed assets to be seized other than the gear they carry around, most of which is extremely pointy and hazardous to the health of if you touch my sword one more time you will pull back a stump, do you hear me? They are the most tax-exempt beings imaginable. Even the Undead are more subject to taxation than they are. (And seriously, once you're up and walking around again, you're looking at centuries of back taxes owed... I hope you've got a job lined up, because you're going to need some serious income to pay that off.)

There are two primary reasons to become an adventurer: See more wealth than most people see in ten lifetimes. Pay no taxes on it.Possibly saving the world or destroying ancient evil is a distant third.

EvilAnagram
2014-09-29, 10:49 PM
What Fel said, and the addition that Beowulf was a big gloryhound who sought fame and story through battle. He very well might have been something close to a murderhobo, since he showed up at Hrothgar's door and was like "I hear you have a monster problem. Mind if I take a crack at it?", but it is by no means clear that it's presented as a good thing in the poem. Dude dies an old man fighting a dragon for one more shot of glory, and he has no heir because he always put himself above his people. There's plenty of room to read Beowulf as being exactly the opposite of an admirable guy to the Anglo-Saxons, someone who took the "glory in battle" part of the warrior ethos way too far at the expense of the "care for your kin and kingdom" part.

There's room for that, but I don't think the text supports it very well. There's multiple instances in the story in which it glorifies the compact between a man and his thane: receiving gifts in exchange for pledging loyalty and defending your thane. The poem repeatedly emphasizes this as a good thing with both Beowulf and Hrothgar, and Wiglaf's chastising of his comrades for failing in their duty elevates him in the reader's eyes, and when he backs up his speech with action he attains the status of hero.

There's room to read him as vainglorious and fame-hungry to the detriment of his people, but that's more of a modern reading. Seeking fame was largely celebrated, as was the embracing of your wyrd. Both cultural conceits continued on despite the Christianizing of the Island, and this story reflects this. I think a stronger case can be made for Beowulf's attacking the culture of vengeance and blood-debt that plagued Anglo-Saxon society.

SaintRidley
2014-09-29, 11:28 PM
True. I think you could make a good case for Wiglaf's improved esteem at the end being directly bound up in the fact that he was holding up his end of the thane-lord bargain, for the good of his kin and the kingdom, though. One of my friends has an article she's revising on this exact question and we've had some conversations - it's definitely a nontraditional and iconoclastic reading of the poem. That's for sure.

magwaaf
2014-09-29, 11:30 PM
i love my murderhobos!

Sidmen
2014-09-30, 02:03 AM
Objection! Murderhobos are tax-exempt! By definition - they have no home residence, no citizenship, and no lawful income. They have no fixed assets to be seized other than the gear they carry around, most of which is extremely pointy and hazardous to the health of if you touch my sword one more time you will pull back a stump, do you hear me? They are the most tax-exempt beings imaginable. Even the Undead are more subject to taxation than they are. (And seriously, once you're up and walking around again, you're looking at centuries of back taxes owed... I hope you've got a job lined up, because you're going to need some serious income to pay that off.)

There are two primary reasons to become an adventurer: See more wealth than most people see in ten lifetimes. Pay no taxes on it.Possibly saving the world or destroying ancient evil is a distant third.

Luckily, my current group are very much not murderhobos. They pay taxes whenever they are asked (there is a toll on the city gates that they keep going in and out of - to pay for the upkeep of the city walls).

In my previous group, consisting of a paladin, cleric (of the paladin goddess), and alchemist - there was open combat between the group and a squad of royal guardsmen who tried to tax the group using the highway. Of course, we suspected they were being shady - but we only thought that because they were trying to charge us a toll.

Arbane
2014-09-30, 04:06 AM
There is a subtle distinction between murderhoboes and more directed adventurers, as explained here by Belkar (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0013.html).

DM Nate
2014-09-30, 06:25 AM
I did not realize the term "murderhobo" had such rich and complex nuances.

Joe the Rat
2014-09-30, 08:55 AM
I did not realize the term "murderhobo" had such rich and complex nuances.Almost as rich as the smell...

It's a style of play, with emphasis on killing and looting and little connection to a larger storyline. You don't need deep motivations when you're playing Small Armies: Post-Tolkien edition. This can be light and fun (Beer & Pretzels) or Serious Business (murderhobo style is heavy-optimization friendly). You can describe it as video-gamey, but at the heart the hobby origins starts with battle, so no blaming it all on GTA or e-cigarettes whatever it is that people blame everything on these days.

It's looking at it in the context of a living, breathing world and realizing "holy crap, these guys are nuts! And smell!" that brings the negative aspects.

I was originally going to suggest that the MH party face would likely invest in some sort of Masterwork Soap for that +2 circumstance bonus to Diplomacy, but then I remembered that "party face" isn't a typical murderhobo focus. (If you're the party face because you have the least negative social modifier... you might be a murderhobo).

Sartharina
2014-09-30, 10:05 AM
Almost as rich as the smell...

It's a style of play, with emphasis on killing and looting and little connection to a larger storyline. You don't need deep motivations when you're playing Small Armies: Post-Tolkien edition. This can be light and fun (Beer & Pretzels) or Serious Business (murderhobo style is heavy-optimization friendly). You can describe it as video-gamey, but at the heart the hobby origins starts with battle, so no blaming it all on GTA or e-cigarettes whatever it is that people blame everything on these days.It's a dominant style of play, even in groups that think otherwise. Any game that has the heroes consistently killing absurdly large numbers of people (Disproportionate to their group size) outside of Military Action, and having the party spend most of its time wandering the world with little connection to any home they might have (Many don't have a home at all) is Murderhobo style of play.

Also - you can blame GTA and most video games on D&D, not the other way around.

Mike_G
2014-09-30, 10:35 AM
It's apples and oranges to look at adventurers like you look at normal people. Most of the human race manages to not murder anybody in the course of their careers.

But this is a game. Nobody wants to play Lawyers and Ledgers. People want to play at violence because we find fake violence fun. Why are there no First Person Hugger games? We want to blast aliens and terrorists and Nazis and Orcs and Zombies.

So, fantasy RPGs just build a world of fluff around a war game. That's why the concept of the adventuring party kicking in doors and slaying monsters and looting treasure hordes is central to the game.

You can play a more story based, political game where the party has to protect the city, or negotiate a peace treaty or diffuse tensions and avert a war. That's great if the players and DM want that. But that's the deviant playstyle, not the murderous dungeon crawl.

DM Nate
2014-09-30, 10:49 AM
but this is a game. Nobody wants to play lawyers and ledgers.

objection!!!

Red Fel
2014-09-30, 10:54 AM
(If you're the party face because you have the least negative social modifier... you might be a murderhobo).

Point of order! If this (You Might Be a Murderhobo) isn't a thread, it needs to be one imminently!

Sartharina
2014-09-30, 10:55 AM
It's apples and oranges to look at adventurers like you look at normal people. Most of the human race manages to not murder anybody in the course of their careers.

But this is a game. Nobody wants to play Lawyers and Ledgers. People want to play at violence because we find fake violence fun. Why are there no First Person Hugger games? We want to blast aliens and terrorists and Nazis and Orcs and Zombies.Still Murderhobos, though! But some people don't like being called Murderhobos even though they are.

Telok
2014-09-30, 10:57 AM
...then I remembered that "party face" isn't a typical murderhobo focus. (If you're the party face because you have the least negative social modifier... you might be a murderhobo).

If your character has the most negative social modifier and is the party face then your friends are murder hobos.

VoxRationis
2014-09-30, 11:05 AM
Technically, having the highest positive value is also the "least negative" one.

hamishspence
2014-09-30, 11:11 AM
D&D Basic sets generally gave the party a home base to operate out of (Freedale, back in 2e, was an example). It came across as less "hobos" and more "town's troubleshooters" - the local wizard asks the party to investigate a Problem (ogre chieftain hunting for an Orb of Dragonkind) and that's how the game starts.

Same generally applies as the party continues to level up - NPCs give them "Quests" to deal with some problematic issue, usually involving aggressive types threatening the NPCs and their town or towns.

"Pure murderhoboing" generally wouldn't involve these kinds of justifications.

blacklight101
2014-09-30, 04:28 PM
Given the term here, I have altered it just a bit for the group im in, Domesticated Murderhobos. We still wander and kill for xp and the loot, but we do actually use our abilities to avoid a fight once in a while or get our way truly diplomatically. That and attempting to use the Stronghold Builders Guide to make a big 'ol castle.


I use 'murderhobo' as a joke, as opposed to a form of derision, and the Domesticated bit if only because we're building our own home.

Jay R
2014-09-30, 05:07 PM
What people derisively label murderhoboism is part of a long and glorious tradition in history and literature, though. Odysseus was basically a murderhobo, the Beowulf was a murderhobo, the Fellowship of the Ring were murderhobos, Vikings were murderhobos, conquistadors were murderhobos, ronin were murderhobos, and the list goes on and on. It's really only the imposition of a cocktail of modern norms of how war, justice, and day-to-day living should be done that makes murderhoboism a non-legitimate thing in fantasy settings.

A hobo is somebody with no fixed home, who is not trying to build a new one.

Oddysseus had a home, and was focused entirely on getting there.
Beowulf had a home in Götaland, and came to Denmark just long enough to save the Dames from Grendel and his mother.
Frodo, Sam, Pippin and Merry had a home in the Shire; Legolas in Mirkwood, Gimli under the Mountain, Aragorn in Rivendell, and Boromir in Minas Tirith. Gandalf was, of course, an angel.
Vikings were raiders who took the stuff home.
The conquistadors were trying to build a new home in New Spain. (The word comes from conquest).
Ronin are in fact hobos, but they are looking for a home and a master.

In original D&D, upper-level characters were expected to clear some land, build a fortress, and settle down. D&D characters whose goal isn't to save the country from the raiding orcs, or rescue the princes from the dragon and eventually settle down, but to just find creatures, kill them, and take their stuff are called murderhobos.

I try to let all my characters have some kind of home, and some hopes of retiring to it.

Gustav is trying to defend his northern forests from the frost giants.
Pteppic is trying to prove worthy to inherit the Egyptian throne.
Ornrandir was trying to provide a place for homeless outcasts (like he once was) to settle down and prosper.
Gwydion was a bard. He actually wanted to wander. But the goal was to go from castle to castle earning fame; the monsters were in the way.


Yes, I get that, but my actual question is: why do some people use it as some kind of weird slur for adventurers?

Because the D&D characters who are not murderhobos have backgrounds and goals beyond killing people and taking their stuff, and the D&D characters who are murderhobos do not.

For instance, my Ranger has a masterwork axe. This isn't his weapon, it's a tool. I do not expect the fact that it's masterwork to ever effect the game, but the two people I've known who actually lived alone in the woods were both proud of the quality of their axe, so it seemed in character. He also has a skill point in playing the harp, just because people who live alone often make music.

Murderhobo characters have no characteristics that aren't specifically aimed at killing folks and taking their stuff.

Vitruviansquid
2014-09-30, 05:46 PM
Are you sure people are sitting around gaming tables complaining about players not having homes in their backstories?

Jay R
2014-09-30, 06:03 PM
Are you sure people are sitting around gaming tables complaining about players not having homes in their backstories?

No. I think that's a grossly simplistic revision.

Telok
2014-09-30, 06:38 PM
No. I think that's a grossly simplistic revision.

I don't. It's what I do sometimes.

Point of data: In my current d&d 3.5 game the druid with the 7 charisma is the party face and the only character with any backstory. This is because he's the only one concerned with more than the basic kill-loot-repeat and the only one who does not talk to the NPCs like they were nameless mmo quest mobs.

Now that 7 charisma means that the druid has elven tourett's syndrome and constantly insults everyone. But apparently that's better than the rest of the party who won't even remember the names of anyone and only ask for quests or buying and selling magic items.

jguy
2014-09-30, 08:02 PM
Well this is my take. Murder; Adventurers kill enough sentient and non-sentient beings that they would be considered more like natural disasters than serial killers. In one story, my party and I just wanted to fast forward time a week so my dog could have some barding to wear. The DM didn't allow it due to plot reasons and in that one weeks time we killed 30 people. They were cultists of an evil god bent on controlling the world, but still, 30 people in a week. We counted. A normal person would be traumatized by this, have some PTSD, but in DnD the LG paladin wouldn't bat an eye at the number of people they killed.

Hobo: Now PF made a good rule that you can spent X amount of gold a month to have a reasonable level of life. 10 gold is average, 100g is really good, and 1000 gold has you living in castles and mansion on a daily basis. Here is the thing though, why spend that (outside of purely RP reasons) when most high level adventures sleep in Rope Tricks (or Magnificent Mansions) or are off in the wilderness somewhere far from civilization? Also, a lot of times the DM's story doesn't allow for staying in one place for any significant amount of time. The party is hoping from city to city, dungeon to dungeon, trying to prevent some world ending disaster. It is hard to get connected to NPC#54 in city #9 when the party knows they will only be there for a few game sessions tops.

Arbane
2014-09-30, 09:07 PM
A normal person would be traumatized by this, have some PTSD, but in DnD the LG paladin wouldn't bat an eye at the number of people they killed.

I shudder to think what sort of PTSD your average D&D character would have by level 5, let alone 20.


Because the D&D characters who are not murderhobos have backgrounds and goals beyond killing people and taking their stuff, and the D&D characters who are murderhobos do not.

For instance, my Ranger has a masterwork axe. This isn't his weapon, it's a tool. I do not expect the fact that it's masterwork to ever effect the game, but the two people I've known who actually lived alone in the woods were both proud of the quality of their axe, so it seemed in character. He also has a skill point in playing the harp, just because people who live alone often make music.

Murderhobo characters have no characteristics that aren't specifically aimed at killing folks and taking their stuff.

I think this might be getting to the meat of the matter - a Real Roleplayer(tm) tries to make things more complicated for their character, with social entaglements and hobbies and such. A Murderhobo tries to simplify it, so there's nothing to get in the way of the killing and taking of stuff.

Coidzor
2014-09-30, 09:28 PM
I shudder to think what sort of PTSD your average D&D character would have by level 5, let alone 20.

Muderhobo's PTSD. :smallcool:

Slipperychicken
2014-09-30, 10:06 PM
I shudder to think what sort of PTSD your average D&D character would have by level 5, let alone 20.


The kind which can be suppressed with regular doses of XP and gold.

Remmirath
2014-10-01, 12:36 AM
Why would it not be bad?

It implies that the characters in the game have no point to them besides rampaging around and killing things, and no depth. It implies a lack of roleplaying, and perhaps also a lack of subtlety or variation in the campaigns they are in as well, assuming that they actually fit into the campaign. It's more about the lack of any motivation or character development than it is strictly about the behaviour, although there is certainly a behavioural element (killing and looting everything in sight requires some very specific character choices and motivations to actually be in character, or special circumstances).

Looking at what the PCs will do if you leave them alone with no pressing plot motivation for a while can be quite revealing. Most well-developed PCs will be able to find something reasonable to do in that circumstance, that does not involve killing or stealing (well, it may involve stealing in the case of thieves). They'll be able to carry on a conversation in character, and so forth.


I shudder to think what sort of PTSD your average D&D character would have by level 5, let alone 20.


There's a reason that most adventuring parties become increasingly quirky as time goes on.

Anonymouswizard
2014-10-01, 06:42 AM
Also, presence of backstory does not mean a character isn't a murderhobo. One of my friends once had a character (I wasn't in the game, so this is second hand) who's backstory consisted of:
"1) I am barbarian from northern tribe, so I is trained warrior.
2) party save me from chaos cultists, so I now stay with party."
In addition he considered the fact his character had 80 Weapon Skill to be the most important part, and was the only PC not to own property that couldn't be picked up if they needed to run (they slept in another character's factory).

I've also seen non-murderhobo PCs who aren't murderhobos, because they have a place in the world (one of my characters was a scientist who wanted to understand what was happening in a wider context, and another player's character was basically an inspiration for the area).

Long story short, a murderhobo is a character who's only ongoing connection to the world involves killing and looting. Which can be good, but most players I've met prefer something more complex.

Also, it turns out that if the game includes you getting attacked by homeless people, murderhobo is a confusing term to bring up.

Coidzor
2014-10-01, 03:17 PM
Why would it not be bad?

You only want a short game which is just frying up some kobolds and goblins for the night while unwinding?

Sartharina
2014-10-02, 02:51 PM
You only want a short game which is just frying up some kobolds and goblins for the night while unwinding?

No. He wants to play a game where the world doesn't condemn him as a psychopath because he happens to rack up a kill count on par with a Natural Disaster over the course of an entire campaign (If not single adventure), nor want to have to deal with owning any more property than perhaps a cart/wagon he can crash in any time he wants while wandering the world (Instead of having to own a home and have a family that requires him to spend a great deal of time with), nor find an employer/start a job to keep his character occupied 8-16 hours per day.

Jay R
2014-10-02, 07:17 PM
You only want a short game which is just frying up some kobolds and goblins for the night while unwinding?

I agree that if all you want to do is play at murder, then there's nothing wrong with murderhobos.

But if you might be willing to talk to the kobolds and goblins, and there might be a non-murder-focused solution, and the kobolds and goblins might just be waiting to buy tickets to see the Iron Golems, and the right solution might be to talk to them and work things out, then murderhobos are not acceptable.

And since some of us run games in which the murder solution is the red herring, there are some games in which murderhobos will fairly quickly be condemned to death or running from the law.

But yes - if all you want to do is play at murder, then there's nothing wrong with murderhobos.

Psyren
2014-10-02, 08:49 PM
Well presumably because the DM put you there. If the DM did not direct you to the dungeon but rather your character sought out the dungeon specifically so you could kill all the things in the dungeon, while the DM was trying to...I don't know direct the party to an apple orchard or something, that would also be murderhoboing.

In my group's campaigns the apple orchard IS the dungeon :smallbiggrin:



And since some of us run games in which the murder solution is the red herring, there are some games in which murderhobos will fairly quickly be condemned to death or running from the law.


Or better yet, furthering the Big Bad's plans by picking fights with everything.

Honestly though - I think it's rather easy to tell if you're in the sort of campaign where slaughter is encouraged or frowned upon. Presumably we all play with friends, including the DM - friends should be able to tell friends when they are not happy with the way a campaign is going, from either side of the DM screen.

Arbane
2014-10-03, 12:40 AM
No. He wants to play a game where the world doesn't condemn him as a psychopath because he happens to rack up a kill count on par with a Natural Disaster over the course of an entire campaign (If not single adventure), nor want to have to deal with owning any more property than perhaps a cart/wagon he can crash in any time he wants while wandering the world (Instead of having to own a home and have a family that requires him to spend a great deal of time with), nor find an employer/start a job to keep his character occupied 8-16 hours per day.

You just reminded me - a guy over on RPG.net came up with a rather nifty idea: Doomed Slayers: Justifying the tropes of Adventurers (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?571602-Doomed-Slayers-Justifying-the-tropes-of-Adventurers). Basically, a setting where 'murderhobo' is an actual legal status. Slayers can't be taxed or have the things they take from monsters they kill confiscated, but they're not allowed to have any titles or own anything they can't carry with them, and they have to keep moving to new trouble spots. They're also not supposed to kill people, just monsters.

So, if you WANT a murderhobo campaign, here's a setting where it makes some sense.

Coidzor
2014-10-03, 01:59 AM
I agree that if all you want to do is play at murder, then there's nothing wrong with murderhobos.

But if you might be willing to talk to the kobolds and goblins, and there might be a non-murder-focused solution, and the kobolds and goblins might just be waiting to buy tickets to see the Iron Golems, and the right solution might be to talk to them and work things out, then murderhobos are not acceptable.

And since some of us run games in which the murder solution is the red herring, there are some games in which murderhobos will fairly quickly be condemned to death or running from the law.

But yes - if all you want to do is play at murder, then there's nothing wrong with murderhobos.

Or you're testing out tactics across a number of standalone scenarios. Or...

Not sure where you got the idea I was either arguing that beer&pretzels was for everyone or that it was appropriate to all situations. Especially given that I was pointing out cases where combat or dungeon-crawl only scenarios would appear. :smallconfused:

TheCountAlucard
2014-10-03, 10:21 AM
In my group's campaigns the apple orchard IS the dungeonIt worked for Heracles. :smallamused:

Jay R
2014-10-03, 01:41 PM
Or you're testing out tactics across a number of standalone scenarios. Or...

This is off-topic, unless the only tactic you would ever test is murder. We were talking about murderhobos, not general tactical thinking.


Not sure where you got the idea I was either arguing that beer&pretzels was for everyone or that it was appropriate to all situations. Especially given that I was pointing out cases where combat or dungeon-crawl only scenarios would appear. :smallconfused:

I didn't claim either of those. I specifically said, "I agree that if all you want to do is play at murder, then there's nothing wrong with murderhobos."

But I don't confuse beer-and-pretzels role-playing with playing murderhobos. There's no particular relationship between them, since you can have long, detailed campaigns as murderhobos or short beer-and pretzel games in which you pretend to be something other than a murderer. In fact, it's easier to play something more real in a short game, since the PCs can be assumed to go back home after the battle.

Neither switching off the higher-order reasoning nor engaging in mindless self-indulgence requires pretending to be a murderer.

I consider long, detailed campaigns about murderhobos to be far less interesting than long, detailed campaigns about people invested in their world, and I consider short, beer-and-pretzel games about murderhobos to be far less interesting than short, beer-and-pretzel games about people invested in their world.

And I still agree that if all you want to do is play at murder, then there's nothing wrong with murderhobos. But after my first year-and-a-half of role-playing, that's never been all I want to do.