PDA

View Full Version : Even Evil Has Standards



ReaderAt2046
2015-02-14, 10:08 PM
So I was looking at the post where the Giant gives "Combat Stats" for baby dragons (or baby anythings)



Here are the stats you actually need for a hatchling dragon:

Movement: Gets away if you let it.
Saving Throws: Miraculously survives all accidents.
Armor Class: You hit.
Hit Points: Congratulations, Baby-Killer.
Special Qualities: I hope you can live with yourself.
Alignment: TBD

Coincidentally, these are the same exact stats for every other species of baby.

But it occurred to me that I could imagine campaigns and characters where you'd actually use those stats in combat: characters who really were evil enough to slaughter infants, or characters "Mikoish" enough to actually believe it their sacred duty to butcher dragon hatchlings or torch goblin babies.

So that brought the following question to mind: Are there limits you won't cross (or as a DM, you won't let your players cross), even in an evil campaign? Are there things that are off-limits even when playing characters who will be taking the express route to the Lower Planes on death? Are there things that not even the most depraved character you could ever imagine yourself playing will stoop to?

Solaris
2015-02-14, 10:12 PM
I generally draw the line at rape and sexual assault, but that's a pretty common one from what I've read on these forums.

Strangely, I don't mind players killing baby things as a DM. It's an evil act, but it's not moral event horizon for me (at least, not in a game where killing things is part of the game). I'd try to take it and raise it for a pet if I were a player, but then again I was the kid who had a collection of bugs and am presently sitting in a room with a dozen aquariums and a paludarium (with designs on converting one or two of the fish tanks over into swamp tanks for more amphibian goodness).

Kid Jake
2015-02-14, 10:16 PM
It never really occurred to me before, but I don't actually think I have a line I won't cross. In fact, I'm pretty sure my very presence somehow encourages creative debauchery.

goto124
2015-02-14, 10:25 PM
I thought you meant the in-universe kind of Evil having Standards. As well as 'how do I make a fleshed-out evil PC that's enjoyable for everyone at the table'?

JNAProductions
2015-02-14, 10:39 PM
Where does "organs in places you don't expect" fall under EEHS?

Like, let's say someone just cobbles their floor with childern's hearts. Or wears a cloak with still-breathing lungs on it. Or sews kidneys into someone's mouth so they have to process their own waste through it.

Stuff like that.

Kid Jake
2015-02-14, 10:47 PM
Probably falls on the more unsanitary side of torture. Unpleasant and kind of gross, but not really any worse than burning someone to death or vivisection...except for all the flies it attracts. That's much worse.

Darth Ultron
2015-02-14, 10:59 PM
I personally have no line. Anything goes in my game.

Solaris
2015-02-14, 11:04 PM
Call me jaded, but people's insides strewn about the outsides really just doesn't cut it for something that's gone too far for me. Even the smell would be pretty meh. Revolting, but not in the moral offense sort of revulsion.

If done well, that kind of thing can be creepy, but it'd need to be part of an atmosphere and not just thrown in at the start as a shocker.

Gritmonger
2015-02-15, 12:35 AM
It depends on the campaign. If you're playing in a campaign that is mostly "we're peasants trying to make good" then no, many of the acts you mention are off limits, if the players are really intent on that goal.

In a game of Nobilis, where the genre practically screams for bizarre conflagrations of morality and propriety, sure. In fact, mere slaughter and torture would be looked on as mundane and gauche.

There was once a debate in-game over how anything could be turned to evil, or it seemed everything that was being auctioned at a venue was cursed or somehow could be used for nefarious purposes.

The GM pointed out that there was a cauldron that only boiled meat for the courageous; how could that be turned to evil?

There was a pause before I quietly replied: "Put somebody's family in it..."

oxybe
2015-02-15, 12:44 AM
Find out what the group's tolerance level is. If I'm a player, try my darnest to not push that limit if I can help it. If I'm the GM, I'll ONLY break the limit to stress that things have gotten super-real.

Either way, even if I were to go past the tolerance level, I would try to keep it classy at least.

Since our main group plays pathfinder modules and they tend to have themes like incest, murder, rape, etc... those things aren't off the table for us, but we don't go into detail. These horrible acts took place, but we don't describe them. Usually it's either made blatantly clear by how someone acts (male NPC is acting like a major creep towards his own sister, up to and including kidnapping her with intentions to [OH GOD NO]. Note that the GM did the same thing I just did, he left it to our imaginations but made clear that it wasn't going to be pleasant) or a bit more subtle in their actions (a while back we fought an NPC and his dominated Naga, who was, at the time, shapechanged into a sexy lady. In his bedroom.).

Things like body horror and general grossness also doesn't faze us much. My own current character is capable of becoming a horrific tiefling-centipede hybrid at will via merging with her familiar and has on a few occasions decided to become (or make her familiar become) swarms of thousands of insects akin to what is basically her flesh melting off and becoming wasps, spiders, centipedes, etc... Many monsters or villainous NPCs we met had deformities, disfigurations, etc... either done willingly or had done to them. Again though, we don't focus on describing these actions, but rather making it clear they are happening or have happened (or will happen). "Nisha touches her centipede familiar and in seconds thousands and thousands of spiders and centipedes begin emerging from it's body/Nisha sits down and thousands of insects begin crawling out of her skin as she wastes away to a skeleton" Nothing horrifying in itself, but if you start imagining it you can get the gibblies.

As for characters, their personalities and interacting with others, here's a post I wrote about my Chaotic Evil Witch (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?396873-The-D-amp-D-alignment-story&p=18775248#post18775248) in our regular pathfinder game. She is not a nice person by any stretch of the words, but you know what? Do right by her and she'll treat you to a beer, heal your wounds (physical, magical, mental, cursed or otherwise) and lend you her couch if you need a place to crash. Just don't go in the basement. Or pick the mandragoras. Or play in the centipede pit. Or lick the cauldron. You know what? Just ask if you can touch something, it'll be much appreciated by all parties involved.

Evil people are still people.

Ravens_cry
2015-02-15, 12:51 AM
I think it's important to have an evil character have some standards, no matter how arbitrary. That does not mean they won't step over them at some point, but it means that is a moment for the character, developing them, if not for the better.

Mr. Mask
2015-02-15, 02:44 AM
I sometimes draw a line at rape and torture. I don't really understand how the two can be separated.

veti
2015-02-15, 05:57 AM
Arbitrary standards are important. Like the soldier who'll do absolutely anything to the enemy, combatant or otherwise, but will willingly lay down his life to protect the most inconsequential peasant on his own side. Or the ruler who will send thousands of her people to their deaths in a futile and hopeless war, in order to consolidate her own kingdom and make it a safe and peaceful place. History gives plenty of examples of both these types, and they're far more interesting than mere Sith-wannabes.

The Second
2015-02-15, 07:19 AM
Everyone's standards are mutable.

Even the most innocent, gods fearing, flag waving person can become a advocate for pushing pins through peoples eyes after a traumatic experience. Such as finding one's significant other smeared across three corners of the room. Then they'll generally go back to having some standards again - at least until the next time there's eyeballs that need pins pushed through them.

Or, say the mother who swaps her stillborn infant for another mother's living child. Any other time, she'd be a decent, honest person.

So, for my characters and or games, so long as there is some reasoning behind it, standards can be tossed out the window.

goto124
2015-02-15, 07:39 AM
Except they did have standards. The man didn't stick pins in the other guy's eyes until you smashed up his boyfriend*. He didn't do the pin-in-the-eyes because the other guy called him unmanly, or stole his wallet. The mother didn't steal the child until her own child was dead. She didn't steal other people's babies to sell, or to eat.

*Sure, why not?

Mr. Mask
2015-02-15, 07:56 AM
Well, that'd be the standard of only doing violent stuff when someone really annoys you.

goto124
2015-02-15, 08:17 AM
Where 'really annoys you' means 'when you're at the despair of losing family members'.

Mr. Mask
2015-02-15, 08:23 AM
Yes, it was an amusing misuse of words. If you feel you have the right to torture people hen they cause you great harm, that becomes your standard.

Toilet Cobra
2015-02-15, 10:14 AM
I let people do whatever they want and I don't punish them for it. Sometimes my npc's do these things, too.

But I always gloss over it. Some players do that kind of thing because it's funny, and it takes the wind out of their sails if you don't allow them to go into a lot of gory detail. And I'm pretty quick to do the same to my evil npc's, I don't sit there describing every nuance of a nursery massacre. Just enough to make them want that guy's head. Similarly, they'd never stumble on such a thing in progress- it's either already over or about to happen and they can do something about it.

I guess the line that I won't cross is, I won't hold court while a real-life sociopath lovingly describes the actions of an in-game psychopath.

Seto
2015-02-15, 10:32 AM
I won't play things that make me sick to hear or think about, and I'll ask the GM/other players not to play them. This includes rape (graphic or otherwise), torture of the graphic kind, or even, if the game is particularly serious and immersive, killing innocent people without a reason (which I'll do without batting an eye if the game is relaxed/second degree).

I don't think any event is, in itself, Evil enough that it should never be part of a game, but the enjoyment and comfort of all people sitting around the table comes first and each person has their own sensitive issues.

NichG
2015-02-15, 12:48 PM
For in-character standards of evil PCs that I'd play, I guess the line my characters wouldn't cross would be 'for the evulz!'.

Doing horrible things to people because you hate them, sure. Doing horrible things to people to make an example to the rest of the world to bring them in line, sure. But doing horrible things to people because its what villains do in stories is just pathetic, and undermines the soul of true ruthlessness. There must be a purpose behind it, some kind of goal either rational or emotional, or its meaningless.

OOC though, I'll limit it more strictly, and avoid emotional goals which would cause the game to fall apart (either because they'd go too far outside the comfort zones of other players and drive them away, or because the goals would be incompatible with there actually being an extended campaign).

Coidzor
2015-02-15, 07:35 PM
But it occurred to me that I could imagine campaigns and characters where you'd actually use those stats in combat: characters who really were evil enough to slaughter infants, or characters "Mikoish" enough to actually believe it their sacred duty to butcher dragon hatchlings or torch goblin babies.

Awful lot of money to be made in baby dragons before they become wyrmlings, more's the pity.


So that brought the following question to mind: Are there limits you won't cross (or as a DM, you won't let your players cross), even in an evil campaign? Are there things that are off-limits even when playing characters who will be taking the express route to the Lower Planes on death? Are there things that not even the most depraved character you could ever imagine yourself playing will stoop to?

Rape. Sexual assault. Stalking for purposes of sexual intimidation or however you want to term it where it's because a dudebro is hung up on a woman and may eventually work himself up into enough of a lather to assault/murder/kidnap her. Torture porn.

Sacrificing babies and eating baby stew are both right out. Most forms of child abuse and child murder beyond the level of abstraction that's destroying entire villages and putting them to the sword and the like. Hell, I'm against the PCs encountering any children below the equivalent of the age of 14-16 for their species that aren't necromantic or fiendish abominations if I don't know for sure the players won't try to eat or kill them out of hand. If I don't trust them there'll be a conspicuous absence of any children, like they're Europeans playing Fallout 1 or 2.


Everyone's standards are mutable.

And you're choosing how their standards are mutable and in what ways that'll be expressed, so just saying that is a bit of a copout.


So, for my characters and or games, so long as there is some reasoning behind it, standards can be tossed out the window.

So what counts as reasoning, then? :smalltongue:


I sometimes draw a line at rape and torture. I don't really understand how the two can be separated.

Well, for starters there's torture that isn't sexual torture and there's rape which is a form of assault rather than a form of prolonged torture as well as forms of rape that are abuse or where the damage is done after the fact when the victim is processing rather than intentionally part of the process in order to break someone for whatever purpose. :smallconfused:

Fair bit of difference between using a combination of intimidation and violence to get information from a hireling about who they're working for and what they were hired to do after catching them with poison in one's character's pantry and stalking young women to rape and murder as part of one's character's serial killer shtick.

Vknight
2015-02-15, 08:05 PM
I was playing a elf who football tossed a baby out of a window where it arced and landed in front of the child's, father and mother walking from the gardens too the tower the baby was kept in for safe keeping.

Said game was an Iron Kingdoms game where we were mercenaries, and our boss was known too take ladies from towns we raided/assaulted. You know standardized nasty bad guy boss stuff too establish us as neutral working for a bad man.

Also NPC's kept bringing up this baby throw for the next 3 sessions talking about a Lord who fainted after his baby slammed into the ground skipping along it into his chest.

Amazing but awful

goto124
2015-02-15, 08:07 PM
How did the players (not characters) react to it? Did they find it awful as in, did it dampen their experience or improve it? Did they think it was a good idea to include it in the game, or did the regret it?

Red Fel
2015-02-15, 08:36 PM
So that brought the following question to mind: Are there limits you won't cross (or as a DM, you won't let your players cross), even in an evil campaign? Are there things that are off-limits even when playing characters who will be taking the express route to the Lower Planes on death? Are there things that not even the most depraved character you could ever imagine yourself playing will stoop to?

As a DM, I won't stop my players from crossing lines. That's their prerogative; the PCs are their characters. There are, however, two things I will do. First, if they cross lines, they can expect consequences. In-game consequences for in-game actions. Commit genocide? You're now an infamous criminal wanted worldwide for war crimes. Rape or murder? You're wanted by law enforcement; if this is a magical campaign, there are probably religious orders tracking you down. Murder babies? Again, if a magical campaign, you're pinging Evil so hard you'll give half the pantheon a headache. Second, if you get graphic about it, or if your conduct is disturbing to anyone at the table, myself included, I will draw a curtain on it and move along with the rest of the scene. As much as it turns my stomach, if you decide to dismember villagers, it's your prerogative, but I will not sit here while you describe spreading the debris on the floor, laying in it, and making gore angels. That's a bit much for me after the third time, thank you.

As a player... It's complicated. On the one hand, my characters tend to be organic; as long as they're not disruptive to the table, I do what they would do. And if that means that my character would do somewhat disturbing things, even if it makes me uneasy, I'll allow it. (If it really turns my stomach, though, I'll probably stop myself.) On the other hand, I don't tend to play characters who, at the start, are that disturbed.

I may have a slight reputation on these boards for my comprehensive (and frankly unsettling) understanding and appreciation for the multifaceted nuances of Evil. I acknowledge that. But I absolutely agree with the thread title: Even Evil Has Standards. I've played many kinds of Evil. Grinning psycho slashers, charming corrupt executives, aspiring cult leaders, presidential candidates, perfectly ordinary greengrocers, and the average "heroic" murderhobo. But very few come out of the gate as child-murdering rapists. None, in fact. I don't think I've ever written a character who goes there. Now, if one were to evolve into that over the course of the campaign, I'd be deeply disturbed, but that's where it goes. (I'd expect the character to be killed off by anything with a sense of decency before it became an issue, of course.) But none of my characters start with a desire to commit those particular kinds of atrocities. Most of my baddies have a sense of style and purpose; random acts of horrific cruelty and barbarism just aren't my thing.

Psyren
2015-02-15, 08:58 PM
I think his quote was less about "people shouldn't be allowed to play vile characters that do this sort of thing" and more about "if you really want to kill a baby of most species, the stats are irrelevant since babies are practically defenseless, so the monster manuals don't need to implicitly encourage their slaughter by including stats for them." In other words, the groups that do want to have Baby-Killing PCs are not stopped from doing so, but they don't need the designers' help/tacit approval by being able to simply flip to a page to get baby stats either.


Having said that... I do think that in a fantastic environment/setting, it's quite possible for the larval form of certain species to be a legitimate threat and/or meaningful challenge to an adult PC - even a Good-aligned one - and that in those cases, stats for the "baby" would be warranted, as the adult would need to adequately defend himself/herself. One well-known example comes from science fiction:

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/aliens/images/9/94/Alien_facehugger.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20080210191233

Mr. Mask
2015-02-15, 11:54 PM
Coidzor: Well, that's comparing two different severities. Roughing up a hireling who steps out of line is normally a bit different from torturing someone as punishment, or when you really want information. Some don't consider that torture, thinking the word only applies to some of the most gruesome techniques (years ago, some said waterboarding didn't count). I don't see how someone can separate harsh and extreme forms of torture from rape.

goto124
2015-02-16, 12:06 AM
*points at a certain Tvtropes page (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PragmaticVillainy). If you don't want to visit that page, I'll pick out a few sentences:

"Oftentimes, their course of action is determined solely by discerning which would best serve their purposes. Being evil, to them, just keeps their options open when it comes to illegal and immoral acts, and doesn't stop them from using 'legitimate' (or at least socially respectable) strategies and tactics."

Seto
2015-02-16, 09:23 AM
Coidzor: Well, that's comparing two different severities. Roughing up a hireling who steps out of line is normally a bit different from torturing someone as punishment, or when you really want information. Some don't consider that torture, thinking the word only applies to some of the most gruesome techniques (years ago, some said waterboarding didn't count). I don't see how someone can separate harsh and extreme forms of torture from rape.

Because torture isn't necessarily sexual. It's reasonable to say that rape counts as torture, but the reverse isn't true. Unless I understand you wrong, you're kinda saying "I don't see how someone can separate white from snow". Sure, snow is necessarily white, but there are plenty of things that are white and are not snow. And you can have a phobia about snow but have no problem with white shirts ; similarly, I can conceive that someone (because of personal history, for example) could be especially disturbed when it comes to sexual assault and rape, and be fine, or at least not as disturbed, while talking about or hearing descriptions of other kinds of torture, extreme as they may be.

EDIT : yay, I've just turned from Dwarf into Orc in the Playground !

Solaris
2015-02-16, 10:16 AM
EDIT : yay, I've just turned from Dwarf into Orc in the Playground !

... How much XP are ya worth?

Seto
2015-02-16, 10:30 AM
... How much XP are ya worth?

Hmm, let's see... What's the CR for an Orc Expert 5 and his Dire Elephant avatar mount ? :P

hifidelity2
2015-02-16, 10:45 AM
I sometimes draw a line at rape and torture. I don't really understand how the two can be separated.
The Group I play with ( both as DM’s and Players ) as never imposed a limit on what PC’s can do

I have had a PC who has thrown a young child into a trap as he could not disarm it and used another as a Shield
I have also slowly dismembered a NPC for info

Never raped anyone nor has any of my PC’s wanted to (they would rather pay or in one case take over a whole brothel by killing off the owners)

Frozen_Feet
2015-02-16, 11:52 AM
Murdering other people for fun and profit pretty close to nadir of morality as far as I'm concerned, and that's what player characters often end up doing even when they're nominally "the heroes" or "the good guys". As such, I don't have any real pre-set lines as a player I won't cross. If murder's fine, anything goes, basically. Hence, when I play the trope, the standards vary wildly, and it's always a joke on either arbitrary or hypocritical nature of the character involved. In some cases when I know other people might consider something the character has done as a slighter offense than something they won't do (murder versus rape that doesn't lead to death is a common one), I hang a lampshade on the arbitrary morals of those people as well.

Solaris
2015-02-16, 01:57 PM
Murder is a brief suffering that ends with the sweet release of death.

Rape is a violation that scours their very soul for the rest of their days, leaving them forever scarred. It's so thoroughly cruel that some rape victims have opted for death to ease their suffering.

That's how rape can exceed murder. When you murder someone, their suffering necessarily ends. When you rape someone, you've scarred them in manifold ways which torment them until the end of their days. Even if they recover somewhat, the scar is still there.

Kid Jake
2015-02-16, 02:15 PM
When you murder somebody you take away all they are and all they ever will be. Ask the rape victims that DIDN'T kill themselves if they'd rather have been murdered and I'm imagining most would say no.

Coidzor
2015-02-16, 02:30 PM
Murder is a brief suffering that ends with the sweet release of death.

Rape is a violation that scours their very soul for the rest of their days, leaving them forever scarred. It's so thoroughly cruel that some rape victims have opted for death to ease their suffering.

That's how rape can exceed murder. When you murder someone, their suffering necessarily ends. When you rape someone, you've scarred them in manifold ways which torment them until the end of their days. Even if they recover somewhat, the scar is still there.

Also it simply seems more likely to have a player or DM get really creepy and descriptive, like they'd be fondling themselves if they were alone with sexual misconduct and torture porn than mere, even banal, murder.

And that's most of what I object to, I don't want to play a game that's fueling someone's deviant and taboo fetishes. Especially if I'm not getting tit-for-tat.

Jormengand
2015-02-16, 02:43 PM
See, quite a lot of the time, even neutral doesn't have particular standards. If raping someone is somehow, through an excessively spurious and unlikely set of conditions, advantageous to humanity as a whole, neutral (or possibly even good, but not D&D Own Brand Secret Recipe Good made with 11 clerics and paladins) might consider it. The same goes for murder and, slightly less controversially, things like assault or theft.

That said, it's not a thing that I would include at my table, because even thinking about it isn't really fun for most people.

Vknight
2015-02-16, 04:58 PM
How did the players (not characters) react to it? Did they find it awful as in, did it dampen their experience or improve it? Did they think it was a good idea to include it in the game, or did the regret it?

One player still complains about this action, because killing a baby and on he will go and will not listen too any reason it could be acceptable
One player was accepting because it fit with our characters though he would have done the baby in a different way

Just so it is noted the original plan/goal was too kidnap the baby so as too give it too an orphanage after the other two players did not want too go through with the boss's idea of killing it.
Our cover then got blown and this lead us up the tower with 20 guards following so it was toss the baby and run or fail our job.
Our general mission layout was make this lord lose his child so he has no heir as too lose the title


See, quite a lot of the time, even neutral doesn't have particular standards. If raping someone is somehow, through an excessively spurious and unlikely set of conditions, advantageous to humanity as a whole, neutral (or possibly even good, but not D&D Own Brand Secret Recipe Good made with 11 clerics and paladins) might consider it. The same goes for murder and, slightly less controversially, things like assault or theft.

That said, it's not a thing that I would include at my table, because even thinking about it isn't really fun for most people.

This thread has gone too a strange place... I'm ok with it but strange none the less

Mr. Mask
2015-02-16, 07:12 PM
Murder is a brief suffering that ends with the sweet release of death.

Rape is a violation that scours their very soul for the rest of their days, leaving them forever scarred. It's so thoroughly cruel that some rape victims have opted for death to ease their suffering.

That's how rape can exceed murder. When you murder someone, their suffering necessarily ends. When you rape someone, you've scarred them in manifold ways which torment them until the end of their days. Even if they recover somewhat, the scar is still there. Well, to give that some perspective... Of the people I've known who have had a murder in their family, none of them agree with that. To them, murder seems as bad or worse.

Solaris
2015-02-16, 08:01 PM
When you murder somebody you take away all they are and all they ever will be. Ask the rape victims that DIDN'T kill themselves if they'd rather have been murdered and I'm imagining most would say no.

And I know some people who'd rather be murdered than raped, including a rape victim who's contemplated suicide. What's your point?


Also it simply seems more likely to have a player or DM get really creepy and descriptive, like they'd be fondling themselves if they were alone with sexual misconduct and torture porn than mere, even banal, murder.

And that's most of what I object to, I don't want to play a game that's fueling someone's deviant and taboo fetishes. Especially if I'm not getting tit-for-tat.

There's also the fact that your odds of having a rape victim at your table are somewhat better than having a murder victim at your table.


Well, to give that some perspective... Of the people I've known who have had a murder in their family, none of them agree with that. To them, murder seems as bad or worse.

Family =/= Victim.
To the family, the rape victim is still there. They may be damaged, but they're still there. That's why murder impacts them more. It's entirely (for lack of a better non-pejorative word) selfish. Same with a death in the family; people aren't sorry they're dead, they're sorry the dead are gone.

Kid Jake
2015-02-16, 08:17 PM
And I know some people who'd rather be murdered than raped, including a rape victim who's contemplated suicide. What's your point?

There's also the fact that your odds of having a rape victim at your table are somewhat better than having a murder victim at your table.

Family =/= Victim.
To the family, the rape victim is still there. They may be damaged, but they're still there. That's why murder impacts them more. It's entirely (for lack of a better non-pejorative word) selfish. Same with a death in the family; people aren't sorry they're dead, they're sorry the dead are gone.



My mother was murdered, left to slowly bleed to death in a ditch because somebody disagreed with her POV. Knowing my mother, I can pretty safely say she would have rather had something unfortunate but survivable happen to her than to miss watching her children and grandchildren grow up. If a rape victim wants to die, then that's their prerogative; but that's a choice that's left to them. When your life is taken away by another there are NO choices left. You don't GET to suffer, you don't GET to recover; all you get to do is be dead.

Rape is a terrible thing, but it's BS of the highest degree to declare that it's worse than murder because as bad as it is, it still leaves you capable of deciding whether it's worth living with.

Mr. Mask
2015-02-16, 08:23 PM
I'm sorry I brought this up, Jake. May she rest in peace.

goto124
2015-02-16, 08:23 PM
Guys... this is getting really bad. Can we get back on topic before the thread gets locked?

Kid Jake
2015-02-16, 08:28 PM
I'm sorry I brought this up, Jake. May she rest in peace.

No worries, it's been a decade; I just hate hearing the argument that 'well nobody knows what it's like to be murdered so it's not as bad as rape' because it's rarely 'oh, look: I'm murdered' and more several hours of useless bloody screaming while the world ignores you.

But Goto's right and I'm gonna try not to derail any further.

goto124
2015-02-16, 08:29 PM
Thank you.

In Tabletops, murder is easier to pull off in a non-squicky way. Heck, there tends to be a lot of killing in Tabletops. Sexual things, not so much, as evidenced by the Sex and Love in DnD thread (and any further concerns is veering into board-unfriendliness, so please don't). It is possible to describe murder in a highly unpleasant way, but that's more of a matter of being a jerk OoCly.

Back on topic, the villians should have reasons for their evil acts. Revenge, believing it will somehow improve the world, etc. Grey areas.

Mr. Mask
2015-02-16, 08:35 PM
Mm, I agree.



Back on topic, I feel the level of detail makes a big difference. You can say, "I kill all the goblins," and it is a lot less gruesome than killing all the goblins. Hunting, butchering, combat, these things are all a lot more gruesome than in games. But if you render it simply to the words, "You fell the goblin," it doesn't seem gruesome at all, but like an abstract concept of a victory condition being fulfilled. As you add more graphic details and words, it can get more immersive... and being too immersive in that is about as enjoyable as slaughtering a pig.

Kitten Champion
2015-02-16, 08:40 PM
I would be fine with my players doing just about anything. For my group however, well, roleplaying a character doing truly despicable things would make them squirm with guilt and consternation when even relatively mild misdeeds are greeted with discomfort. While I generally work with a grey-and-grey moral outlook for our games, a flat-out evil campaign would probably be shot down.

Suffice to say I'm quite possibly the least squeamish and most vile of us, and those humane society ads about helping abused animals make me cry.

Mr. Mask
2015-02-16, 08:45 PM
Goto: Well, the villain's motives might boil down to seeing other people as bugs... and most children have had fun playing with ants, crushing beetles with a rock ("Thmash the beetle! Thmash 'em!"). One thing that is rarely covered in DnD is someone who is evil only in a certain aspect. Someone who is reasonable to most people, even kind or generous, but is terribly racist against monsters and slaughters them without a moment's notice... wait.

Sexual things do get harder to describe without it escalating very quickly. The basest words to describe sexual assault have more serious implications in some of modern society (some places and groups aren't as offended by the subject).


Kitten: I can relate to the player. I generally play my evil characters with a polite, friendly air OOCly, purposely contrasting with the character's rude or evil actions, joking at them. I feel it helps to get the group to accept the roleplaying without associating player with character too strongly.

Kid Jake
2015-02-16, 08:59 PM
Goto: Well, the villain's motives might boil down to seeing other people as bugs... and most children have had fun playing with ants, crushing beetles with a rock ("Thmash the beetle! Thmash 'em!")

I've always considered toddlers Chaotic Evil by default for this very reason. Plus they grow murderously enraged with almost no provocation; hell when I was a kid I heard about two of my younger cousins (2 and 3) stomping a guinea pig just to see what would happen. A villain that's basically just a baby with the powers of a god would be TERRIFYING beyond belief.

Mr. Mask
2015-02-16, 09:32 PM
That's a good summary of child morality. Some children do seem to have some empathy. I've seen babies feel empathy for piñatas... that was an awkward day.

Solaris
2015-02-16, 10:57 PM
My mother was murdered, left to slowly bleed to death in a ditch because somebody disagreed with her POV. Knowing my mother, I can pretty safely say she would have rather had something unfortunate but survivable happen to her than to miss watching her children and grandchildren grow up. If a rape victim wants to die, then that's their prerogative; but that's a choice that's left to them. When your life is taken away by another there are NO choices left. You don't GET to suffer, you don't GET to recover; all you get to do is be dead.

Rape is a terrible thing, but it's BS of the highest degree to declare that it's worse than murder because as bad as it is, it still leaves you capable of deciding whether it's worth living with.

I, too, speak from experience rather more practical than theoretical. My mother was raped a few last month by someone she met on Craigslist. My fiancee was raped by her first boyfriend some years ago. The suffering, the emotional scars from that will last them a lifetime. I don't use the scar metaphor loosely; they are not the same people they were before they were brutalized, nor will they ever be. In the metaphorical sense, the person they were is dead - but what remains is tortured by the act done to them.
My best friend when I was a small child was beaten to death by his parents. Odds are pretty good I'm the only person on Earth who remembers him or even cared that he existed.

So, you see, I have intimate acquaintanceship with the victims of both sorts of crimes.
The murder victim's suffering only lasts until their death. The victim's family suffers, of course (or in Andy's case, his friend; though the state of Ohio saw to it his parents suffered), and I'm not downplaying it at all (it was the better part of a decade before I dealt with Andy's death), but after the murder the victim is beyond mortal suffering. The victim's family goes through a grieving process which the human mind is equipped to deal with. Maybe not very well, and certainly not prettily, but it's equipped to deal with it. Very few are equipped to deal with being raped.

Discussions like this do better without trundling out personal experience, especially considering we're talking about actions in a game. It not only completely unnecessarily discomfits the other posters, it makes the discussion excessively emotionally charged. It browbeats others into either agreeing with your point of view or remaining silent lest they offend you. For instance, if I had led off with "Rape is worse because my mother was raped," that likely would have inhibited most of the other posters who'd disagreed from airing their dissenting opinions out of common decency. That serves no purpose and does nothing for the discussion; that's why I didn't post it before now. It's one thing to employ reason and logic; it's another thing to bully someone into either agreement or silence by emotional manipulation.

Kid Jake
2015-02-16, 11:18 PM
I, too, speak from experience rather more practical than theoretical. My mother was raped a few last month by someone she met on Craigslist. My fiancee was raped by her first boyfriend some years ago. The suffering, the emotional scars from that will last them a lifetime. I don't use the scar metaphor loosely; they are not the same people they were before they were brutalized, nor will they ever be. In the metaphorical sense, the person they were is dead - but what remains is tortured by the act done to them.
My best friend when I was a small child was beaten to death by his parents. Odds are pretty good I'm the only person on Earth who remembers him or even cared that he existed.

So, you see, I have intimate acquaintanceship with the victims of both sorts of crimes.
The murder victim's suffering only lasts until their death. The victim's family suffers, of course (or in Andy's case, his friend; though the state of Ohio saw to it his parents suffered), and I'm not downplaying it at all (it was the better part of a decade before I dealt with Andy's death), but after the murder the victim is beyond mortal suffering. The victim's family goes through a grieving process which the human mind is equipped to deal with. Maybe not very well, and certainly not prettily, but it's equipped to deal with it. Very few are equipped to deal with being raped.

Discussions like this do better without trundling out personal experience, especially considering we're talking about actions in a game. It not only completely unnecessarily discomfits the other posters, it makes the discussion excessively emotionally charged. It browbeats others into either agreeing with your point of view or remaining silent lest they offend you. For instance, if I had led off with "Rape is worse because my mother was raped," that likely would have inhibited most of the other posters who'd disagreed from airing their dissenting opinions out of common decency. That serves no purpose and does nothing for the discussion; that's why I didn't post it before now. It's one thing to employ reason and logic; it's another thing to bully someone into either agreement or silence by emotional manipulation.

I'm not trying to manipulate or browbeat anyone, just pointing out that it's ridiculous to call one horrendous crime (that you live through) worse than another(which you don't). If your mother or fiance want to eat a bullet then that's a choice that's open to them, however traumatic their experiences were their lives went on and are theirs to live out or end as they see fit. Obviously since they're still alive they value their lives more than they suffer from their encounter so saying that, for example, it would have been better for your mother to have been shot by a man on craigslist than to have been raped by a man on craigslist is absolutely absurd.

For the sake of the thread I'm going to wander off and find a different elf games discussion rather than beating this dead horse any further.

Erik Vale
2015-02-17, 01:02 AM
I'll go none, but I'll limit how descriptive you can be to varying degrees of harshness based on what you're doing.

A particularly lucky crit, you can describe it in all it's gruesome glory.
You want to describe a particularly vile torture? Tone it down a little.
Describe a rape? I'll stop you immediately and say 'It happened.'. Going on is liable to get you removed from the game [or me to leave it].

Psyren
2015-02-17, 02:33 PM
Oh for...

The Giant's quote was specifically about statting and killing babies. Specifically how unnecessary the former was if you wanted to do the latter.
Horrible things can be roleplayed in roleplaying games, but those should be left up to individual tables to decide on after assessing the limits and triggers of that particular audience. They should not be placed in general materials with a very wide audience, such as sourcebooks, where the designer cannot predict how far afield they will go.

Now I'm getting the hell out of this thread.

Angel Bob
2015-02-17, 03:10 PM
I've played comedic Evil campaigns where the PCs murdered and spread pain and suffering like confetti -- one of the PCs was a blood mage with the exclusive goal of spreading disease for the hell of it -- but I always found them vaguely dissatisfying. What was really the point of being a horrible, terrible person to complete strangers?

When I roleplay Evil characters -- really, truly Evil characters -- I don't practice wanton cruelty to every passerby. There wouldn't be any gain to that. My Evil characters will hurt people who get in their way, or whose pain somehow benefits them. But the most viscerally satisfying victim is someone the PC knows personally. Someone whom the PC despises, and spends weeks or months plotting and orchestrating their downfall. When the penny finally drops, and that person is utterly destroyed... There's something that's just so delicious about that.

...Of course, I condemn all such actions and people in real life, that goes without saying. But playing it -- telling a really good story that really makes you hate the villain -- that's very satisfying to me.

And people wonder why I like playing the villain.