|
That bolded (by me) one is debatable. Some humanoids definitely qualify.
The angst I sometimes (not always) receive over stabalizing humans, elves, half elves. We're not talking evil outsiders, dangerous monsters, oozes, elementals, etc.
You dont have to bring them in conscious. The constabulary may summary execute them, or (as in some PFS encounters - you have specific orders to kill (wo pay sorry assassin class), but were talking a majority not debating all the corner cases.
1. Echoing the add diverse XP awards.
2. Research and look into adding an old-school Morale check. There are different systems out there. Adding a Morale system changes combat amazingly. Suddenly, it can be about intimidating or breaking the enemy's will to continue, instead of hit points v hit points.
It makes undead more terrifying.
The other players still get their thrill, but you get more of the dynamics you are looking for. If an enemy routes--the fun is in making then route say. ...unless they really, really want a chase scene.
If there's no local governmental punishment for vigilante justice, then there's nothing bad about killing guys instead of taking them hostage and letting the local government kill them. Because if there's not some sort of judicial court evaluation system to determine punishment and a jail/prison option that often used to house the kinds of people captured, the likely situation would be for the guards to kill on sight, perhaps leaving one alive to question if they feel like it, just like the party is doing.
The game world would need a large fairly militaristic "police force" to require them be the authority on handling "bad guys". But if they have such a system in place, then there's nothing for random thrill seekers to do. An attempt to "help" could get them in trouble for interfering with this "police". And the police would have the man-power and structure to quickly take care of any localized threats.
If you have a common village with 1 "townguard" as their "police" then their influence usually only extends to the edge of the village and they don't have any particular authority to judge the bandits that are in the mountain pass. Thus in this situation there's no one really to hand the bandits over to.
|
My shorthand:
-If it's attacking us, it's *usually* ok to kill unless circumstances imply there's a misunderstanding of some sort.
I actually played a samurai who made a big deal out of this. He had a backstory where his dad was screwed over by being enchanted and dishonored the clan etc. (my character was a ronin for said reason) so he used the above mentioned Blade of Mercy & Enforcer combo.
He had no problem with killing though. He'd get the party casters to make sure that the unconscious foes weren't under enchantment, and if they weren't then he'd be more than happy to slit the throats of anyone who attacked the party unprovoked. (as painlessly as possible)
We need more information really...
Who, or what, were the things you wanted to bring in alive? Humans? Monsters? Does your GM generally throw in non-standard aligned monsters?
So, for example let's use a Goblin. In the world of Golarion, Goblins are racially majority evil and eat humans. They hunt and kill and eat humans and feel no remorse.
Do they get taken alive by your character's logic? If so, then yes, some characters may see you as insane.
Right. I mean do they kill random villagers? Peasants working in the field? Travelers on the road? Shopkeepers? If so, you have a problem. They are being immature and playing CE. Sit down and talk with them OOC. Discuss the issue like adults.
But let us say it is a goblin. So, you get your way and spare it. What are you gonna do with it next? Let it go to kill more peasants and maybe even your party? Take it prisoner back to civilization? If so, then your character concept doesnt mesh with FRPG "reality". Doesnt mean it's wrong, but it causes problems. I think you should play a different character in that case- for THIS group of characters/players.
To the OP: Is this surprising?
The game rules actively reward murder-hobo behavior.
No, no they dont. They dont reward killing helpless peasants, shopkeepers, random travelers and the lot. Trust me, there are players who will do that.
They do reward killing monsters.
The game is not set in the 21st century with police, prisons and the like. The game is set in the medieval period where Knights and such like had the right of High, Middle and Low Justice, where crusaders and such were expected to kill the bandits that had been preying on the locals.
Playing the game as designed is not being a "murderhobo". Adventurers do not "murder".
|
|
Personally, I think whenever you're in the minority your the one who has the responsibility to change. My CN Half-Orc (super original I know) barbarian very much is a murder hobo. Do I walk around town slaughtering civilians, no, of course not. Let me give a few examples specifically from that character. Spoilered for length.
Example 1
When out investigating the docks of Absalom we were tasked with discovering the shady black markets going on below. We discovered a young girl next to a body of a person of interest, we will call him Jim. Now she claimed to be Jim's daughter and some big scary assassins killed him and she was so afraid that she needed us to protect her and had to stay with us while we rested. Now many people would play stupid and uncharismatic as easily influenced. I, however, play him as "you can't fix stupid." So I start my character as, more or less, openly hostile towards most people and must be convinced that they are not secretly two goblins in a trenchcoat. Well, I was overruled in the argument that this little girl was secretly a shadow dragon pretending to be a little girl, but threw a big enough temper tantrum explained rationally that we should at least tie her up. Well, in the middle of the night she made an impossibly high escape artist check and attempted to coup-de-grace. She proceeded to almost assassinate me, as I wake up and crit the crap out of her, doing over double her total hit points. Now the rest of the part, in character, of course, were appalled, as I must have waited for them to fall asleep and then executed the small girl. Now out of character we all knew what had happened but IC it caused many issues and my barbarian to be super untrusting of people.
Example 2
Now while I have many encounters like the one above, that isn't to say that handling all situations with violence has never bit me in the ass. The same barbarian and party stumbled across a group of men beating a small child. For backstory reasons, my Barb was super not ok with that. I ran up to confront one of them and, thug boss #1 smacked me with his sap. Well, of course, I needed to retaliate, so *whap* smacked him over the head with the flat of my sword. Thugs 2,3, and 4 didn't like that their boss was beaten so they rushed me and all took an AO. *insert 3 more Whaps* and they are all on the ground. Now the rest of the part finally walks up as I proceed to cut the rope down *my GM made me roll damage with an adamatine greatsword and of course I roll a 20* and most of the tree with it. The child cowers and wets himself in fear of me and starts to babble incoherently as the rest of my party points out that I killed all of the thugs. We get no useful information out of the boy because he is too afraid to speak and is most likely traumatized for life. I also find out that the thugs were just villagers, albeit racists, that were afraid of the boy as he was "different" (assimar or maybe a teifling) We failed the secondary success condition and I had to bribe a bartender 1000 gold pieces to give us the normally freely given quest info that would have been told to us for free had I not acted in that way.
Characters and people are different and have different views. No one should ever have the right to tell you that you are having #BadWrongFun. But you also are only one person and you don't have the right to make the table play how you want. You can talk to your GM and see if you can compromise. But it isn't their responsibility to do so. You're the odd man out here, and you'll have to accept that people are different than you.
Why is someone playing a game differently than how you prefer to do so a 'disease'?It may be "normal", unfortunately, but it certainly isn't at all new. I remember that a lot of 1st Edition AD&D (and presumably Basic/Expert/etc. D&D) players were like that back in the late 1970s through the late 1980s. The monster descriptions as well as the XP award system encouraged this. This was WAY before Grand Theft Auto. Grand Theft Auto is just a symptom, not the underlying disease.
I didn't make up the concept of disease, but somebody was blaming the popularity of murderhobo games on Grand Theft Auto, as if it had started some kind of infection, and I was just pointing out that this is factually incorrect.
Not disagreeing with you but "monsters" has a rather fuzzy definition in game terms. Particularly with how virtually any race can be a PC.Can you seriously state that murderhobo is not a legit pursuit in the 3.PF game? What with all the PC classes/prestige/options and expanded spell options with the evil-tag, etc., it is quite clear that a career as a rat-bastard is not simply allowed but actively facilitated by official rules.
.
Rats? Oozes? Undead? Demons? Giant scorpions? In fact , per the Advanced race guide only a few humanoids are available for PC- unless the DM allows certain optional rules.
Yes, i can. In fact, the one time I ran with a group of "murderhoboes" it was 5th ed, and i quit the game.
I dont consider killer kobolds "murder". Murderhobues kill everyone they can- peasants, farmers, travelers on the road, beggars, and the like. Not just the monsters et up to be foes in the GAME. The game makes them foes and monsters.
Sure, it can be fun to play the one renegade kobold that has given up his anthropagy and murder ways and wants to reform.
Personally, I think whenever you're in the minority your the one who has the responsibility to change. My CN Half-Orc (super original I know) barbarian very much is a murder hobo. Do I walk around town slaughtering civilians, no, of course not. Let me give a few examples specifically from that character. Spoilered for length.
Example 1
** spoiler omitted **Example 2
** spoiler omitted **...
Neither of those were "murderhobo". Perhaps overreactions, but you dont kill people "just because'. Did you walk by a beggar and kill him for his coppers? Kill a peasant as he objected to you killing his milkcow for food?
I was playing a half Orc myself, a new worshipper of Shelyn, who learned that the True beauty is inner beauty. He grew up in the slums of Riddleport where indeed, he killed goblins- to keep his family fed. But now he's reformed.
Yeah id like to hear what the DM and other players are thinking. Why the behavior is being actively discouraged. I play with close friends so we talk out issues like this.
It's not fair to them to have you shoving characters and ruining there fun with YOUR moral dilemma.To be fair, I was shoved up against a wall first. :)
And I'm not understanding the "MY moral dilemma" part. I'm assuming in your real life that you would oppose senseless killing as well.
Senseless killing sure. But these aren't innocents they're enemies.
Mercy to one's enemy is harm to himself.
Pardon, I slightly botched the proverb [proverb in the general sense not a quote from a specific religious text]
Mercy to one's enemy is Cruelty to oneself
I hope not to meet anyone who lives by that in real life.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
True I've had people I've strongly not liked can't think of to many true enemies. Of course I have a tendency of letting grudges go.
Maybe when I become a superhero I can get some arch-nemesis action.
For RP? Yes. As a character class in 3.PF? Not so much. The game mechanics simply make all "playable" races into humans. They get nerfed when they are OP and buffed when they are UP
What do nerfs/buffs have to do with it?
and it's done rules-wise in such a way as to make them more an oddball human than truly another race.
What exactly makes something 'truly another race' then? The argument here doesn't really seem to make much sense.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm with you. I don't like playing in parties that are always consistently murder hobos, and it gets dry. And if your DM is actively judging you for making choices that are not optimized for murdering things, I think they're honestly being a really bad DM. If it were me, I'd consider the option of leaving the group, because it sounds like the entire group is actively oppressing and ignoring your own choices. And that's being a bad player and an even worse person.
|
|
Personally, I think whenever you're in the minority your the one who has the responsibility to change. My CN Half-Orc (super original I know) barbarian very much is a murder hobo. Do I walk around town slaughtering civilians, no, of course not. Let me give a few examples specifically from that character. Spoilered for length.
Example 1
** spoiler omitted **Example 2
** spoiler omitted **...Neither of those were "murderhobo". Perhaps overreactions, but you dont kill people "just because'. Did you walk by a beggar and kill him for his coppers? Kill a peasant as he objected to you killing his milkcow for food?
I was playing a half Orc myself, a new worshipper of Shelyn, who learned that the True beauty is inner beauty. He grew up in the slums of Riddleport where indeed, he killed goblins- to keep his family fed. But now he's reformed.
I think you have taken on your own tangent here. The OP never said his party was killing random civilians, babies, and the occasional stray dog. They were killing enemies that they could have instead captured alive. My response was, while I personally feel that making a point to capture alive all your enemies puts you square in the LG category, not everyone has to or should play that way. He being the odd man out either can compromise or leave in the same way as if he was trying to play a wantonly evil PC in a party of paladins. If you want to play a game where you kill randomly and without reason, play an evil campaign and be CE.
Also, I have found that typically your term is more commonly defined as.Murderhobo: A character with little to no defined backstory or motive, simply made to fight combats and optimised to be as lethal as possible
Next thing you know there will be a TTRPG where the PCs eat people! When does that get fun?
Running a Pathfinder game were the PC's are in fact a band of killer cannibals (and most other moral crimes which would offend you). It's fun
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think you have taken on your own tangent here. The OP never said his party was killing random civilians, babies, and the occasional stray dog. They were killing enemies that they could have instead captured alive. My response was, while I personally feel that making a point to capture alive all your enemies puts you square in the LG category, not everyone has to or should play that way. He being the odd man out either can compromise or leave in the same way as if he was trying to play a wantonly evil PC in a party of paladins. If you want to play a game where you kill randomly and without reason, play an evil campaign and be CE.
Also, I have found that typically your term is more commonly defined as.Murderhobo: A character with little to no defined backstory or motive, simply made to fight combats and optimised to be as lethal as possible
Yes, I know he didnt and his party arnt murderhoboes, nor did he say they were. It isnt until post 14 or so that someone bring sit up.
Here's another definition:In more nuanced settings, "Murderhobo(s)" is used especially to refer to characters (or entire parties) of looser morals who tend to regard massive collateral damage as an inevitable and unremarkable consequence of their actions, or who are quite happy to slaughter otherwise friendly NPCs at slight provocation or the prospect of financial gain (basically, munchkins).
However, do note why the term "murderhobo" is used- it's a dig, a insult at D&D type games. It's a sly way to infer that their gaming system, their games are SOOOO much better than the "murderhobos" who play D&D.