Lately I have had a few questions on killing in-game, what is considered right and wrong, the insult murderhobo and what makes one a murderhobo. I would like to see what you think and how your party/friends approach this because I think the answers will be pretty diverse. There is a stream of murderhobo beliefs beneath us.
Here are my questions, answer any however you wish:
1) What are your party (and its members if they differ) comfortable with killing?
2) What do they not like killing?
3) What does the DM (or you if you are the DM) really not like being killed, what will they come down upon?
4) What makes a murderhobo for you?
5) Does ruthlessly killing the villains/bad folk without negotiating make one a murderhobo in your opinion?
6) Do you think the violent escapism in pathfinder/dnd is a bad thing, i.e. finding almost any excuse to fight and kill, roll those attack and damage die and see your enemies driven before you?
My groups won't kill children. The profoundly handicapped (to the point of physical helplessness) are also difficult.
Basically, anything that is incapable of defending itself.
|
For the members of my group, it depends on the characters they are playing at the time.
In our Skulls and Shackles campaign, they've gotten pretty ruthless, but they admittedly haven't targeted innocents. However, anyone who fired on their ship (even in self defense) is no longer considered innocent.
When we were playing the Age of Worms Adventure Path, they mistook the Kenku (tengu) in the Vecna Maze for brainwashed children kidnapped from Diamond Lake. They killed them, anyway, but were relieved to find that they had NOT, in fact, killed children.
As a DM, I hate when PCs break the law of a town, and the constabulary shows up, and the players kill them. I haven't had this happen with my current group, but back in middle and high school, players did it all the time just to show how badass they were. It creates an escalation of hostilities that inevitably derails the campaign storyline, as the "heroes" can't go on a mission to save the town when the local militia is hunting them down.
1) varies on group and characters a lot (i play in multiple groups)
2) see 1
3) see 1
3a) When I DM I try not to hold my personal beliefs, but rather use the world as my judge for the reaction. In a medieval society incarceration is rare and typically short. They don't have prisons, they have jails. Long term incarceration is only for valuable prisoners and likely has little to do with "justice". Medieval society tends to dish out swift punishments. 90% of those punishments are financial though, so it only the worst of the worst (or the poor) that get physical punishments.
4) someone who doesn't have a home and commits murder (not all killing is murder)
5) See 3A. If I don't have the means to imprison the villain, that means that they have to die. Rarely do I have the means of imprisonment.
6) If I want a pure combat game, I'll go play miniatures or a video game.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
1) What are your party (and its members if they differ) comfortable with killing? Goblins. They're pretty okay with killing goblins. Giants too. Lot of the PCs in our group don't like giants much. Then there's drow. I'm pretty much a kill drow on sight kind of player. If they have a large cat and a scimitar, dead on sight.
2) What do they not like killing? Humans, elves, half-elves. Doesn't mean we won't, but we've actually taken prisoners that were human or half-elven. Everybody was willing to take human prisoners; but half the party was hell bent on executing the one goblin prisoner that was captured.
3) What does the DM (or you if you are the DM) really not like being killed, what will they come down upon? Our GM fudged an AP so that there were no goblin children. Even when it's goblins the idea of killing children was too much for him.
4) What makes a murderhobo for you? Indiscriminately killing everything in a module or AP when you can find an excuse to do so; and not owning a home. Being homeless is pretty much a requirement.
5) Does ruthlessly killing the villains/bad folk without negotiating make one a murderhobo in your opinion? Depends. Was there an actual opportunity to negotiate? If so, then yeah. You're murder hoboing.
6) Do you think the violent escapism in pathfinder/dnd is a bad thing, i.e. finding almost any excuse to fight and kill, roll those attack and damage die and see your enemies driven before you? An interesting study showed that people that play violent video games are less likely to be violent outside the game. The escapism often lets people work out frustration in a non-violent manner. SO no, I don't think it's bad.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here are my questions, answer any however you wish:
1) What are your party (and its members if they differ) comfortable with killing?
Anything if its in self defense. Typically our parties dont make a habit out of looking for fights. However, sometimes we play characters a little more comfortable with killing than others. Most of the time we do our homework and save killing for those who deserve it.
2) What do they not like killing?
Interesting NPCs, children, innocent beings......
3) What does the DM (or you if you are the DM) really not like being killed, what will they come down upon?
Probably children and graphic torture but we never seem to push that envelop.
4) What makes a murderhobo for you?
A merc or opportunist that will kill whatever stands in their way for profit or petty reasons and not feel the slightest put put about it.
5) Does ruthlessly killing the villains/bad folk without negotiating make one a murderhobo in your opinion?
No. Typically I think a murderhobo kills indiscriminately without any remorse or pause of both villains and innocents.
6) Do you think the violent escapism in pathfinder/dnd is a bad thing, i.e. finding almost any excuse to fight and kill, roll those attack and damage die and see your enemies driven before you?
I do not.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hold on! being a Murderhobo is bad? my god! what have i been doing with my life! well Pepe its never too late to change, time to go kill someone for a new job
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, to be honest i don't see what the big deal is, so i burned a few villages (6) the important thing is i completely, mostly, kind of, probably got rid of that unsubstantiated gremlin infestation (that i may or may not have made up), but most importantly *i got paid upfront*
|
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Come sit, and listen awhile
One evening as the moons came up and the temple fire was burning
Down the path came a murderhobo hiking and he said boys I'm not turning
I'm headin for a realm that's far away beside the crystal fountains
so join the party and we'll go and see the Big Rock Candy Mountains
In the Big Rock Candy Mountains there's a land that's fair and bright
Where the XP grows on bushes and you sleep out every night
Where the laws are all empty and you would kill the sheriff anyway
On the swords and the boards and the barmaid hoards
Where hostages get saved after we been paid
In the Big Rock Candy Mountains
In the Big Rock Candy Mountains all the guards have wooden legs
And the monsters all have rubber teeth and the barkeeps handover their kegs
The farmer's barns are full of loot, if they say no feel free to slay
Oh, I'm not bound to go where there ain't no gold
where those townsfolk should have killed us the truth be told
In the Big Rock Candy Mountains
In the Big Rock Candy Mountains you never worry about locks
and if folks are home you just run them through
there’s no time for talks
the paladins have to tip their helms and all the lawful good are blind
If the party knew I’d kill them too
bury the dead without their gear is the thing to do
In the Big Rock Candy Mountains
In the Big Rock Candy Mountains, dungeons are made of tin
And you can walk right out again as soon as you are in
so I'm a goin to stay where you flay all day
Where they hung the jerk that invented role-play
In the Big Rock Candy Mountains
I'll see you all next Monty Haul in the Big Rock Candy Mountains
Most things, surprisingly. The PCs work for the government, and get dispatched to deal with particularly dangerous monsters or spellcasters. The general assumption is that if the situation could have been handled without bloodshed, that would have been attempted before deploying the PCs. So, lethal force is the norm, because the PCs are basically the agents charged with applying deadly solutions to dangerous problems. At the same time, being a government agent comes with never being able to harm the innocent, not being able to conduct summary executions (severely wounded creatures with fast healing are an exception, because they'll get back up and keep fighting if you don't), and not being able to fight the local constabulary (Not that this is an issue, considering the PCs themselves have law enforcement powers [outranking most local constables, in fact] and clearance to use force, and therefore have little reason to end up in a violent conflict with the local law.). Also, the PCs can't attack anything without cause or engage in raiding or looting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here are my questions, answer any however you wish:1) What are your party (and its members if they differ) comfortable with killing?
Anything that attacks us, unless we need a prisoner. Where many of my party members (across various parties) differ with some of my characters is that oftentimes mine will have no qualms about killing the things and people we've captured after they've spilled the goods.
My LN Slayer and the Kordian almost came to blows over that early on, so from now on he defers to the rest of teh group on that to avoid conflict. Though he's slowly shifting to TN or NG, so not a thing any more.
Amusingly my LE Monk will generally want to let captured creatures go once they've served their usefulness, but when I did so my party went "But you're evil! You should kill him!" and when that bogged the game down for 5 minutes with me tryng to explain Evil =/= willy nilly murder I had to roll my eyes and shove my fist through the guy's chest to keep the game moving.
In hindsight, my first PF group was terrible.
2) What do they not like killing?
Generally, anything that isn't overtly hostile, or a genuine threat. If violence ensues nonlethal is the order of the day, and only as a last resort.
3) What does the DM (or you if you are the DM) really not like being killed, what will they come down upon?
Never run into this problem.
4) What makes a murderhobo for you?
Basically any character with no real motivation beyond "Kill shit, get loot". The aforementioned Slayer would be a "murderhobo" by that definition, which I don't mind.
It led to an amusing scenario where a group of doppelgangers described him in their intel as "mercenary" and a "brutal fighter" (and someone to avoid at all costs if he couldn't be turned) which is a fun reputation to have.
5) Does ruthlessly killing the villains/bad folk without negotiating make one a murderhobo in your opinion?
No. The "bad folk" have already earned what's coming to them by their actions. Intentions of surrender may be honored if in good faith, but stopping to negotiate when you're storming the castle as it were just negates your combat advantage of the element fo surprise, giving him time to escape or attack while our guards are down.
Not sart, not necessary.
6) Do you think the violent escapism in pathfinder/dnd is a bad thing, i.e. finding almost any excuse to fight and kill, roll those attack and damage die and see your enemies driven before you?
No.
Games, to me, are about doing things you can't do in real life. Foremost among those is violence, which is rare to nonexistent in the average person's life. Just as big of a thrill is being the hero in an uncomplicated world, knowing that what you're doing is right. Kill the evil Wizard, kill the Drow, they deserve it and you don't need to feel bad.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
1) I love to murder evil people.
2) Anything that is not an evil person.
3) My superiors, in spite of sending me to many locations with evil people, seem to dislike it when I murder evil people.
4) A desire to improve the world through murder, and only ever murder.
5) Only if done in as unlawful a manner as possible.
6) I don't understand the questions, so I'll just blame the schools today.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You murderhobos are cracking me up!
|
|
1) non humanoids. Humanoids that attack us first are usually also ok, but often somewhat troublesome.
2) anything that doesn't fight back.
3) kids. Anyone killed via rape or otherwise super brutal (this also fits in category 2)
4) lack of a story to go with the killing
5) depens on whether negotiation would be possible, like I wouldn't negotiate with goblins or mindless creatures
6) nope, it has it's place, and it isn't even all of the game that is like this, much of it is a wonderful collaborative storytelling piece.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whoa Fred you're never going anywhere as a Murderhobo using numbers!
remember your lessons, a Wizard cant control a mind that isnt used
1) What are your party (and its members if they differ) comfortable with killing? Creatures that are evil, corrupt, or can't control their urge to kill. Goblins too.
2) What do they not like killing? Creatures unable to defend themselves. Most animals. Everything else is fair game if it falls into the categories in question 1.
3) What does the DM (or you if you are the DM) really not like being killed, what will they come down upon? I don't like when the PCs kill off a good character for petty reasons, like refusing to share a poetry book.
4) What makes a murderhobo for you? A player who tries to win D&D by themselves.
5) Does ruthlessly killing the villains/bad folk without negotiating make one a murderhobo in your opinion? No. Some people can't be negotiated or bargained with, and they won't stop until everyone acquiesces to their demands. There are villains that negotiation works on but those villains are usually smart enough not to trust anyone.
6) Do you think the violent escapism in pathfinder/dnd is a bad thing, i.e. finding almost any excuse to fight and kill, roll those attack and damage die and see your enemies driven before you? Not necessarily. Players who are fans of kick-in-the-door adventures can play those. I prefer to drive developed characters through situations they aren't prepared for. Social encounters. Ones where their success/failure depends on how well they can talk their way out of a dangerous situation.
1) What are your party comfortable with killing?
Monsters, what ever is set before us by the GM. Sometimes we will question what he is trying to do even then.
2) What do they(you) not like killing?
Innocents. We left goblins alive because they didn't try to kill us and we used Diplomacy with a crime lord when we saw there was a better way to deal with the situation.
3) What does the DM (or you if you are the DM) really not like being killed, what will they come down upon?
Don't know. I suppose we have been good players so he hasn't run into this situation.
4) What makes a murderhobo for you?
Anyone who kills "just because". They burn down the town "just because". The monster NPCs that helped in the last adventure get killed by the characters "just because"
5) Does ruthlessly killing the villains/bad folk without negotiating make one a murderhobo in your opinion?
In every BBEG situation, we got attacked first. It was a part of the game. We were never in a position to negotiate. Therefore we were not ruthless killers.
6) Do you think the violent escapism in pathfinder/dnd is a bad thing, i.e. finding almost any excuse to fight and kill, roll those attack and damage die and see your enemies driven before you?
D&D is a fantasy in your mind. Some people can't keep it there. Those people get to be on TV or in the Tabloids. Like I have always said, D&D is like the game "Let's Pretend", but with rules. If you can keep it that way, everything will be fine.
1) So far I've figured out the players seem unified in being "OK" with killing anyone/thing that attacks or attempts to attack any of them, or advances to help those attacking the players. I HAVE noticed that if they witness someone attacking an innocent, they will SUBDUE & turn in to authorities. But let that person attack THEM = he dies (this could be a serious problem later in the AP for them unless they adjust their play style in that regard.)
2) Hmmm, have not ran across anything YET, but I suppose the typical, "kids, disabled, innocents," would be logical for them.
3) Basically, I come down on unprovoked assault of any kind. Only one PC has done that, and I let him retcon after I described what he did from a third person/witness perspective and he "got it."
4) Skip.
5) Nah.
6) Do not see the players or myself projecting this attitude or play style, so, "Not Applicable."
1) Parties are generally comfy killing those that clearly represent a threat to themselves or others. Armed people that attack unarmed people, armed people that threaten to use force on the group, predators that attack the group or unarmed people. Oozes, vermin, mindless undead, or anything harmful that lacks sentience are open game.
2) The group does not attack humanoids that have no history of attacking others without provocation. Townsfolk are generally safe unless they are proven to conspire in violence against the group or the public at large (hiring others to kill, etc.).
3) I'm just thankful that the PCs do not harm or kill their patrons / superiors, or jump to rash actions.
4) Murderhobo is defined in degrees. The first, new player degree is killing monstrous humanoids just because they aren't a core race and have a reputation for being a monstrous race (kobolds, goblins, orcs). The next degree of murderhobo just kill solely to gain XP or any thin excuse to gain items (even just socks). They have no problem with wandering the wilderness or skipping town if the consequences catch up to them. The last degree of murderhobo are just troublemakers that want to be the big bad - burning orphanages and such just for fun.
5) No, depending on the circumstance. If the PCs are ambushed, intent is usually clear in that instance. If the PCs have a lot of information beforehand painting a grim picture of the protagonist, and they have no reason to distrust the information, such actions may be considered neutral in nature (kill or be killed, soldier mentality). Soldiers are not murderhobos, they work in a hierarchy and with authority within certain rules. If the BBEG waves a flag of surrender or demands parley, then it becomes a different issue.
6) Action adventure roleplaying is an entertainment tool. Any form of entertainment can be used for a good purpose, or can be misused. I would suggest not encouraging RPG games to learn real life criminal behavior, though. If you feel a player has problems with their moral compass, or even their sanity, I would suggest encouraging professional assistance for such a player.
|
Obviously this differentiates from group to group and character to character, but as a general rule:
1) What are your party (and its members if they differ) comfortable with killing?
Things that are either incapable of reason or evil by nature. So demons, devils, undead and so on, as well as destructive animals and magical beasts like bulettes. Constructs, of course.
2) What do they not like killing?
Anything sentient. I, and most of the other DM's, don't typically do 'Always Chaotic Evil' races like orcs, drow, and goblins. If it's something that can be reasoned with, they'll usually reason with it. The only exception are evil spellcasters - necromancers, in particular.
3) What does the DM (or you if you are the DM) really not like being killed, what will they come down upon?
I'm usually pretty loose, but I don't like when they kill lackeys who aren't an immediate threat. Town guards in a corrupt city and the like.
4) What makes a murderhobo for you?
Go here, kill that, rinse, repeat. Doesn't care about motivation or story; just provides XP and loot. That was actually something that really bothered me about a module I played recently where the PC's are tasked with clearing out some orcs about two days' travel from a town. The orcs haven't actually done anything, but it's expected the PC's just go and kill them. There's no major NPC's or interaction written into it. Just there's this many warriors, they have an ogre, kill them all and get money from the mayor.
5) Does ruthlessly killing the villains/bad folk without negotiating make one a murderhobo in your opinion?
Depends on the villains/bad folk and the circumstances. A demon trying to invade the material plane? There's nothing that could possibly be gained by a negotiation. A warlord trying to expand his conquest? Depends.
6) Do you think the violent escapism in pathfinder/dnd is a bad thing, i.e. finding almost any excuse to fight and kill, roll those attack and damage die and see your enemies driven before you?
The great thing about TTRPGs is they are what you make them. That is not necessarily what DnD/PF provides if that's not how you decide to play it. That being said, I don't think playing that way has a deleterious effect, but it may say something about the philosophy of the person playing if that's the only way they ever want to do it.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Speaking for Samiel and me.
1) What are your party (and its members if they differ) comfortable with killing? Samiel: I prefer negotiation to combat. Even slavery, which I personally find distasteful, can be dealt with as businessmen. People who cross the family, though I'm perfectly comfortable with sending a message. Murder is just not good business
2) What do they not like killing? Samiel: See above. I dislike my ocmpanions' bloodlust.
3) What does the DM (or you if you are the DM) really not like being killed, what will they come down upon? Me: As a non-PFS GM, I dislike friendly fire (killing innocents to get to the BBEG) and when they screw up and kill the plot related NPCs. As a PFS GM, I don't worry much about who they kill. The later scenarios especially, don't reward murder hobos.
4) What makes a murderhobo for you? Me: Ususally, and Alchemists. Since they rely on short term buffs, they're more prone to shoot first, shoot again, and hope someone has speak with dead prepped.
5) Does ruthlessly killing the villains/bad folk without negotiating make one a murderhobo in your opinion? Samiel: Yes! If you indiscriminately kill the 'bad guy' you alienate his family, his friends, and can start a cycle of violence that is a downward spiral.
6) Do you think the violent escapism in pathfinder/dnd is a bad thing, i.e. finding almost any excuse to fight and kill, roll those attack and damage die and see your enemies driven before you? No more than playing Doom is going to get me to go take a shotgun and a chainsaw to the local Starbucks. The emphasis on "you get XP for bypassing the encounter as well as killing it." in 3.x and Pathfinder rewards that.
Really liking the responses people, and the different answers.
Tiers of murderhobo was also an amusing concept.
Any other groups have restrictions, chains upon the murderhobos?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Chains! no one said we were getting Chained!
Looking at homebrew;
1) The suspicious, guilty and criminal.
2) Innocent folk, cats (the LE monk likes cats)
3) NPCs with even a minor scripted backstory.
4) Kill on sight. If it looks off, kill it, if it rubs you the wrong way, kill it. All humanoids within a dungeon are fair game.
5) Yes & no, no for the thought it's logical to beat the bad guys. Yes, because the villains (or socially hostile NPCs who are not in fact villains) might be redeemed or questioned and even could potentially reasoned with to some degree prior to fighting them.
I for one had one make a con check to stabilize and was happy the monk didn't have the bleed attack at that time.
6) Better in pathfinder against some ogres or zombies than against people irl, though keeping it within certain boundaries seems reasonable to me.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) What are your party (and its members if they differ) comfortable with killing?
Speaking from behind the screen.
Killing out of hand?
Fiends. Non-sentient undead.
My guys had a forty minute argument one time because a medusa stumbled from behind a column and the party mage shivved it.
"It might have been the one good medusa!" and its variations such as 'It might have been the one good evil life-devouring atrocity from beyond time' have become an in-party meme.
Everything else needs to at least somewhat demonstrate that it deserves the buttkicking being visited upon it. If the party detects the slightest lack of surety, or miscommunication coming from their enemy, they tend to switch to non lethal options or attempt communication, even when its to their detriment. The party rogue dislikes people who are too casual with other people's lives (like Inevitables).
2) What do they not like killing?
Things that demonstrate personality, or things that show they have doubts about their actions but not the strength of character to go against it. Also Animals, but mostly the cute ones (for certain definitions of cute), the party had no issue with taking down giant roaches or dire crocodiles.
The paladin's sometimes has to do 'battlefield court' to determine if they should keep certain enemies they've taken prisoner in situations where they're too far from civilization or under a clock. In one case the paladin deemed that the hobgoblins they captured who were assisting the bad guy for pay and didn't know the extent of what he was up to could go (he had no way of holding them) but when he came across the unrepentantly man-eating ogre captive they had, he heard his case and slew him without a blink.
3) What does the DM (or you if you are the DM) really not like being killed, what will they come down upon?
Dunno. My guys tend to be pretty moral actors.
4) What makes a murderhobo for you?
The protagonists of Knights of the Dinner Table. The mindset that says: The only people who matter are PCs. Everyone else is treated like a video game asset as opposed to a person.
5) Does ruthlessly killing the villains/bad folk without negotiating make one a murderhobo in your opinion?
Some people need killin'. Usually my guys will attempt at least one 'turn from your path' or 'you're going to die here, you should surrender!' before the gribbly implements come out.
6) Do you think the violent escapism in pathfinder/dnd is a bad thing, i.e. finding almost any excuse to fight and kill, roll those attack and damage die and see your enemies driven before you?
People need to blow off steam sometime. When its crunching numbers and being happy about taking down the evil demon king, thats one thing. When its gleefully chortling about the hideous acts you're doing to a captive opponent, its another.
As a DM, I hate when PCs break the law of a town, and the constabulary shows up, and the players kill them. I haven't had this happen with my current group, but back in middle and high school, players did it all the time just to show how badass they were. It creates an escalation of hostilities that inevitably derails the campaign storyline, as the "heroes" can't go on a mission to save the town when the local militia is hunting them down.
Putting a stop to this helps the Murderhobo problem tremendously.
The best way to put a stop to it is to have a system in place to correct it. Unfortunately, that doesn't work in plain Golarion.The way I have it, there are two kinds of people. Heroes, and everyone else. Being a Hero (having PC levels) makes you different, and the laws are different too. Almost like a made man in the Mafia. But part of those rules is 'not killing the non-Heroes unless told to or they were actively trying to kill you'.
Militias and constables and whatnot simply won't attempt to fight the PC's. They'll try and get them to comply quietly, and if that fails (or they are attacked), a signal will be sent up and the person in charge of that area will deploy other Heroes, who are on retainer for this very purpose, to deal with the problem. Having a system of teleportation circle stones throughout most nations doesn't hurt, either, so the response time can be anywhere from minutes to an hour, tops. Alternatively, if it's in their HOME nation, the Heroes themselves may get recalled (thanks to the tokens they carry which allow them to use the teleportation circles to begin with) and ambushed on the other end after arrival.
---
Now for the original questions...
1) A lot of things. And yet, they're pretty good at trying to talk, though generally the latter happens only when they are facing a serious, dangerous threat. But that last part is as it should be. ("He spent almost a whole minute describing this guy, and he sounds badass. Maybe we're not meant to fight this one?"<--metagaming I approve of...)
2) Children, obvious innocents, helpless things. Mostly.
3) See the above section in response to Cu. If you start offing random NPC's in civilized territories cause you think you're special, you'll soon find out you're not the only one.
4) See above. I don't care if players want to be random, wandering mercenaries who kill things and blow stuff up for fun. If that's what they like, the game will cater to that, and they'll either hook up with a Merc company or be 'sorted' as assassins/monster slayers and given jobs that go along with their preferences. But I've found if you want them to settle down, the best way to do it is to make them fight for some cool place and let them keep it afterward.
5) Nope, not if that's their job. But in many cases, it's better to at least try to extract some information from them first, unless they're obviously the non-talking variety.
6) Nope. It's a game, you play it for fun. If they want to play a game about killing things and blowing stuff up with friends, there's a nigh-endless amount of computer games and the like they can do that with. But Pen and Paper ones are meant to be done with everyone at a table together, and if they still want to do that, cool. I don't think it makes them bad people nor does it lead to 'evil habits in real life'.
One way to correct the murderhobo problem is an oldie but a goodie. They pick a fight or start a fight near the old Dwarven barkeep.
He is waaaay higher level, and they are turned into diced sausages in short order.
Then give them a cautionary message about the problems of fighting everyone and they roll up new characters.
|
|
1) What are your party (and its members if they differ) comfortable with killing?
2 Fighters, 1 Ranger and 1 Monk.
They prefer killing strong looking NPC, just to test their power. Normally they lose.
2) What do they not like killing?
Any kind of monster, whenever there is a chance of fighting prepared random encounters, they avoid it. Dont know why.
3) What does the DM (or you if you are the DM) really not like being killed, what will they come down upon?
Nothing, if its killable and has done something to piss them off then it has a chance to die.
4) What makes a murderhobo for you?
When they go like "ok i will not make any skill check upon that NPC that you said was a tough lookin guy/girl".
5) Does ruthlessly killing the villains/bad folk without negotiating make one a murderhobo in your opinion?
No, bad guys wouldt think it twice. Good is as relentless as bad.
6) Do you think the violent escapism in pathfinder/dnd is a bad thing, i.e. finding almost any excuse to fight and kill, roll those attack and damage die and see your enemies driven before you?
No, i think there is more freedom than before.
Had a 'murderhobo lost in the land of the decent' moment last game I played in. Players were trapped in a VR game setting, but no one, not a single one apart from me was eager to engage in player killing. Not for loot, not to test our abilities on non-monster thinking and feeling opponents, not for the lols, not for the xp.
Didn't matter if other parties were insulting us, none wanted to kill an npc human (that may die in real life if it did the SAO thing of frying their brain). Twas most frustrating!