Forum > General Discussion
adventuring with a pacifist
foilfodder:
Rolemaster, Middle-Earth RPG, and H.A.R.P. systems always struck me as great opportunities for G.M.s reward players for activities other than mass slayings of enemies. Most RPGs are combat focused, particularly those written in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. Character types are combat-oriented and character advancement only happens through slaying of monsters/opponents. Epic fantasy fiction like The Lord of the Rings, Conan the Barbarian, etc are certainly strong influences and glorify combat and war. But some fantasy fiction works, such as The Hobbit or many books in the Narnia series are not dominated by combat.
When I purchased M.E.R.P. and read through character advancement and experience rewards it was something new to see rewards for skill checks/manuevers, not just combat. I have played several characters that have had pacifistic tendencies (willing to fight as last resort), but I have never had another player under a game I am running or participating as a fellow player do so. Even in a Shadowworld campaign under RMSS I participated in for two years, the party healer, a Sister of Eissa, left mounds of corpses despite the tenants of the Church of Orhan.
Has anyone had a character flourish in their gaming group like Mr. Baggins who, "valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold"?
Any true pacifist characters who have managed to stay alive in a world full of hostility without spilling the blood of even those who would do them harm?
nash:
The problem with pacifists in most RPGs is that even if you are clean, it's a very fine line line to the fact you are helping the rest of the party commit murder.
Even healing someone leads to this sort of problem.
FWIW however; "Wild beyond the Witchlight" (not published by ICE) module is designed so you can complete the whole adventure without combat if you wish. The results are not always the best however.
MisterK:
I've never GMed a campaign in which no combat occurred.
But in most cases, combat was not seen as the first option, if only because it tends to leave many people dead, and
- most of the time, you miss opportunities to ask questions
- sometimes, the dead people are on your side
At the very least, characters tend to make sure they come out on top, and refrain from entering fight they can't control that way. Of course, sometimes, they don't have much of a choice.
Spectre771:
--- Quote from: MisterK on February 05, 2024, 01:26:33 PM ---I've never GMed a campaign in which no combat occurred.
But in most cases, combat was not seen as the first option, if only because it tends to leave many people dead, and
- most of the time, you miss opportunities to ask questions
- sometimes, the dead people are on your side
At the very least, characters tend to make sure they come out on top, and refrain from entering fight they can't control that way. Of course, sometimes, they don't have much of a choice.
--- End quote ---
I have GM'd sessions with no combat; thieves guild challenge, spying/surveillance, B&E/recovery. But I can't say a did a full campaign without some sort of combat. However, I do have one player who is technically a fighting class, but he always manages to stay out of combat and he's constantly doing support roles (much to the aggravation of his fellow teammates and sometimes me).
A bard and a healer could easily be pacifists. Scholar, Sailor, Sleuth. I'm basing all of this on RM2 professions. I made a Burglar who did everything possible to avoid combat. My weapon skill was poor.
Barner Cobblewood:
BC has always avoided combat whenever possible, sticking to sneaking and light fingers as his way of supporting the good life.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page