Code VS Killing Poll

[Just A Guy Name]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Wasn't Namor an anti-hero in the beginning? Nit-pick' date=' perhaps, but wanted to raise the point.[/quote']Absolutely, and actually remained one throughout the war (though he fought against the Nazis, he was not really considered friendly towards the Allies. He still had his general dislike for all surface-dwellers).

[Colossus]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

An interesting question. Back in the old Marvel RPG remember you lost all your Karma if you killed someone?

 

I remember several issues of the X-Men when "Code vs. Killing" is dealt with. Cyclops, who has been happly blasting aliens for issues, refuseds to kill the Prof. X Brood with "we fight to keep people alive." Colossus is upset that he is driven to kill or watch someone else die (Moria by Protos, about 128).

 

I like 1 or 2. A Character can skill kill, they just avoid it. My rule of thumb is if killing is the only way to save someone elses life it is a little different than just the PC own.

[Wanderer]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Do you prefer to play Superheroes that:

 

1. Will not Kill (Code vs Killing Ver Com, Total)

 

2. Will kill under extreme duress (Com, Stro)

 

3. Seek to avoid it, but will if the situation demands it (Com,mod)

 

4. Feel its a war and if there are casualties that is the nature of war (No CAK)

 

5. Justice sometimes demands death (Vigilante Mentality)

 

A combination of #4 and #5. Superheroes should above all try to protect the innocents and strive for the common good, so the baseline should be "Do Not Harm the Innocent". Redeemeable enemies should be given another chance if possible, but there are truly evil scum out there that deserve death, and heroes should be prepared to administer it, or to kill for a greater good if the situation demands it. Killing in cold blood is acceptable for really evil opponents, and killing in battle is usually acceptable if the opponent is a willing combatant.

 

I've never found CvK acceptable as the defining superhero psych lim. IMO, a superhero is much better defined by some combination of:

 

Protect the Good/Innocent

 

Protect the World/Humanity

 

Make the World a Better Place

 

Honorable

 

Redress Injustice

[nexus]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

An interesting question. Back in the old Marvel RPG remember you lost all your Karma if you killed someone?

 

Yep, every point of it. Made we wonder how the Punisher ever advanced.

 

Personally, I think Superheroes should avoid killing. For the most part they are not soliders, nor are they cops (there are exceptions of course and I'm sure someone will list them). They don't have a social mandate to decide who lives or who dies anymore than I, as a private citizen can go out and adminster the death penalty to those I think deserve it. I can but that makes me a muderer.

 

Now there are some situations where lethal force is mandated. To save an innocent life, even your own (but Super rarely get into that last situation). And I think Superheroes should be ready for that eventuality but strive to avoid it.

 

On a personal level, the problem with being judge, jury and executioner as I see it is that everyone has a different idea what's a killing offense. Is a man beating his wife once worthy of death? Yes, if you ask some militant feminists. How about littering? Being gay? Having numerous super powered being flying enforcing their own moral code with lethal intensity. There isn't one monolithic code of Justice that all human beings believe in and there wouldn't be one for superhumans. I mean, who would enforce it?

[Wanderer]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

You know, IMO one of the less plausible justifications one could give for superheroic CvK is "superheroes don't kill because it's against the law". Please. On one hand, not all superheroes have the Law-Abiding Psych Lim (vigilantes don't; most Iron Age characters don't). On the other, superheroes are the kind of people who have a mandate from their own conscience for their actvities. Generally they do not seek nor feel the need for a social mandate. They don't enroll in the police or special forces. They don a mask and go out in the night to protect the innocent and the world.

[nexus]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Wanderer, I'm not going to deal with you until learn to tone down the sheer arrogance in your posting style. One of my major peeves is being talked down to.

 

In any event, along the topic of the thread. Is CVK really worth many points in a truly four color game where death or the occasional need to use lethal force is going to strongly down played? Or should it be an assumped moral stance for characters in such a setting?

[GestaltBennie]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

It depends on the character. I've played them all, and I'm comfortable with everyone except Number 5. And I have no problem playing someone without a CaK who still gets freaked out when it happens.

 

Scott Bennie

[Magmarock]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

I take either #1 or #2 and then I usually add on another Disad, Psych: Honorable. Once the villain is down, I don't continue pounding them.

 

Resisting arrest is another thing: In our latest session, my PC Tiger-Eye had the villain Cyclone in a STR 50 jointlock, while her teammate Shard kept Cyclone's flight surpressed and our speedster Autobahn kept up his autofire punches until the villain was out. We had to knock Cyclone out because he was resisting arrest/capture even after it was clear we had him (well it wasn't exactly clear... none of us could fly and he would not surrender).

 

Even so, I agree that Heroes should not kill. And when it happens accidently (as it sometimes does) the hero should react appropriately, or he is not really a hero, IMO.

 

Mags

[Doug McCrae]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Wanderer' date=' I'm not going to deal with you until learn to tone down the sheer arrogance in your posting style.[/quote']I didn't detect any. Maybe I failed my roll.

[Stray Cat]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

You know' date=' IMO one of the less plausible justifications one could give for superheroic CvK is "superheroes don't kill because it's against the law". Please. On one hand, not all superheroes have the Law-Abiding Psych Lim (vigilantes don't; most Iron Age characters don't). On the other, superheroes are the kind of people who have a mandate from their own conscience for their actvities. Generally they do not seek nor feel the need for a social mandate. They don't enroll in the police or special forces. They don a mask and go out in the night to protect the innocent and the world.[/quote']

 

Obviously this is going to vary from comic-age to comic-age, just as it varies from subgenre to subgenre. That being said, IMO it's an extremely plausible justification for superheroic CVK that it's against the law to murder in most superheroic games. Many superheroes do not have the law-abiding psych lim, that is true. However, many superheroes have many psych lims for which they don't get points. Also, most of the law-breaking super"heroes" are wanted criminals that the law-abiding superheroes are hunting. If I must appeal to comics (which the game is supposed to model), I'd have to say that the vast majority of superheroes are indeed law-abiding.

 

Nor can you speak for all super-powered beings when you claim this conscience-mandate. I think that the vast majority of superheroes' actions in comics and in Champions are heavily influenced by society's mores and their formalized laws. Can you say that Superman is following his conscience more than society's rules? Wouldn't his conscience tell him to act differently than he does?

 

And if he acted differently, would he be heroic? If he decided on his own to kill one, ten, a thousand, or a million people to make the world a better place, would that be heroic?

 

Is there no higher authority he can appeal to than his own conscience? Does super ability grant one the ability to supercede another's lawful autonomy?

 

As to their enlistment in military or security forces.. Many superheroes have at least a good relationship with their governments. The Avengers, the Justice League, don't they have government sanction?

 

Cat

[megaplayboy]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

I played one vigilante PC whose attitude toward killing was smack in the middle between Batman and the Punisher. He'd try to gather evidence against the criminal, to put them in prison first. If they seemed to find a way to "get out of jail free", he'd give them a warning. If they ignored the warning and re-offended, he'd do greivous bodily harm in the process of bringing them in. If they still found a loophole after that, he'd give them a "final warning". One more offense, and it'd be their last. Generally he was dealing with big-time drug dealers, hitmen, crime lords, etc.

He'd only play the JJE(judge/jury/executioner) role as a last resort. Otherwise the context for his use of lethal force would be last resort self-defense and last resort defense of innocents.

 

I'm not sure that approach(principled vigilantism) is covered in the choices above.

[nexus]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

I didn't detect any. Maybe I failed my roll.

 

Call it a long standing impression. In my interactions with Wanderer, I've alway felt there was a pattern of condescension and quite a bit of attitude. I don't appreciate it and even if it is just me, the wise course seems to be avoid the situation.

[Pegasus]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Superheroes don't kill.

 

That's funny. I thought Superman, Batman, Captain America and Colossus were all superheroes, among others.

 

Guess we'll have to revise the nomenclature.

[zornwil]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

That's funny. I thought Superman, Batman, Captain America and Colossus were all superheroes, among others.

 

Guess we'll have to revise the nomenclature.

Madstone, did you really intend that response as I read it? Seems a little...barbed. Although I think there's a broader swath of superheroism that allows for limited killing, I don't think WM was ignoring the rare/tortured killings that have occurred in the "cllassic" genre.

[zornwil]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Wanderer, I'm not going to deal with you until learn to tone down the sheer arrogance in your posting style. One of my major peeves is being talked down to.

 

In any event, along the topic of the thread. Is CVK really worth many points in a truly four color game where death or the occasional need to use lethal force is going to strongly down played? Or should it be an assumped moral stance for characters in such a setting?

 

I've avoided the other thread with Wanderer, but without reference to that, I'm not sure I'd see a problem with his post as stated.

 

As to your main point, no, I'd agree CVK is not worth anything in a game as you describe, or at least it's not worth the stated values, that's for sure.

[nexus]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Maybe a better way to put it is "Superheroes don't enjoy killing or do so as a first option." That's what throws me about some of the Iron Age stuff, not so much that kill but they seem to do so a first and only option, without even trying something else. Some of the characters seem to enjoy killing people.

 

Jenny Sparks could stun people as easily a fry their brains. The doctor doesn't have to use his magic to turn people's bones into liquid or sink continents. Surely someone with vast cosmic powers can come up with a means to subdue lesser opponents.

[zornwil]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Maybe a better way to put it is "Superheroes don't enjoy killing or do so as a first option." That's what throws me about some of the Iron Age stuff, not so much that kill but they seem to do so a first and only option, without even trying something else. Some of the characters seem to enjoy killing people.

 

Jenny Sparks could stun people as easily a fry their brains. The doctor doesn't have to use his magic to turn people's bones into liquid or sink continents. Surely someone with vast cosmic powers can come up with a means to subdue lesser opponents.

Agreed, it's not heroic.

[Pegasus]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Madstone' date=' did you really intend that response as I read it? Seems a little...barbed. Although I think there's a broader swath of superheroism that allows for limited killing, I don't think WM was ignoring the rare/tortured killings that have occurred in the "cllassic" genre.[/quote']

 

Perhaps not, but I find the original statement simplistic and dismissive, which, even when it's not directed at me, gets my ire up.

 

Besides, with the followup line "Somehow I am unsurprised that you are unable to understand a fairly simple sentiment as this" (again not directed at me, I know) it sounds as though WM may very well be ignoring these killings.

 

Even the world of fiction isn't black and white.

[freakboy6117]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Personally I vote for 2 or 3

Heroes should never undertake killing lightly. Killing should be the last choice always but shouldn’t be excluded just because its not something heroes do heroes kill there should always be a reason for it and a reason not too.

 

Batman and superman will probably never kill but there are reasons why are different in superman’s case its he's so powerful there should almost never be a situation when he needs to {and the few times it does come up he’s normally been able to find another way} on the other hand batman has the opposite problem he's addicted to violence if he surrendered to the impulse to kill how would he stop him self from doing it again or for that matter how would he live with himself.

 

There are justifiable reasons to kill in times of war in selfdefense or defense of another but realsiticly if there is another way to soplve the problem it should be the first choice.

 

I recall an intreasting issue of Punisher or was it Daredevil in which the punisher is going to kill a gangster with a sniper rifle inhells kitchen obviously he expects Daredevil to show so he lays a trap an using high powered sonics disables him and ties him up.

 

The Punisher gives the trussed up Daredevil a gun one shot to stop punisher but only a fatal shot will work. In the end daredevil takes the shot but the gun does not fire and punisher explaisn that this si the choice he must make everyday to kill to save more lives.

?

[zornwil]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Perhaps not, but I find the original statement simplistic and dismissive, which, even when it's not directed at me, gets my ire up.

 

Besides, with the followup line "Somehow I am unsurprised that you are unable to understand a fairly simple sentiment as this" (again not directed at me, I know) it sounds as though WM may very well be ignoring these killings.

 

Even the world of fiction isn't black and white.

Well, the follow-up was snide, yeah.

[Stray Cat]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

In any event' date=' along the topic of the thread. Is CVK really worth many points in a truly four color game where death or the occasional need to use lethal force is going to strongly down played? Or should it be an assumped moral stance for characters in such a setting?[/quote']

 

Hmmm, CVK would be worth less in such a situation. On the other hand, it could also reflect a need to hold back from using full power with an attack normally thought nonlethal. For instance, a 12dc 60ap energy blast is going to usually do 12 BODY, and the average noteworthy normal (FReD p. 224) has 2 ED and 10 BODY. So the average noteworthy normal would be reduced to 0 BODY by such a blast and is dying (FReD p. 275). Without assistance, he's going to die within two minutes. To me that certainly sounds at least as lethal as stabbing someone with a knife. Such an attack power would not be out of place in many standard superhero-level campaigns. To use such an attack on an NPC whose level of defense was unknown would IMO violate a CVK.

 

How could this be a problem for the character? How can he or she determine whether Robot Ninja is a spirit-possessed Transformer toy with mystic strength and death beams or a kid-genius in nifty-looking tin foil? Cutting down on the dice could save this kid's life or set ya up on the receivin end of one heckuva retributive strike.

 

Cat

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Question for the "Heroes NEVER Kill" camp: What happens when a villain with a known murderous streak threatens an innocent with certain and instantaneous death' date=' unless you comply with "X" immediately?[/quote']

 

The hero, if he's really a hero and not a serial killer whose favorite victim is criminals, will find a way to both free the hostage and capture the villain. And if the GM is worthy of the title, he'll have already thought of a way that the hero can do so without 1) blowing whatever internal realism exists in his gameworld and making it so easy that its not worth the time or effort.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Besides, with the followup line "Somehow I am unsurprised that you are unable to understand a fairly simple sentiment as this" (again not directed at me, I know) it sounds as though WM may very well be ignoring these killings.

 

Even the world of fiction isn't black and white.

 

No, I'm not ignoring them. I classify them for the most part as "acts of desparation taken as last resorts when there truly is no other course of action".

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Well' date=' the follow-up was snide, yeah.[/quote']

 

The follow up was to Wanderer, who occupies the seat next to Seenar on the Why Am I Bothering To Treat This Mook With Respect bus.

[fbdaury]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

"Heroes don't kill" is a matter of opinion.

Cops are forced to kill criminals, does that make them any less heroes?

I think what it really comes down to is the power differential. Superman should rarely need ot kill- he clarly outpowwers most others to the point that he cannot be put into a situation where killing is his only option. That was the point of the execution of three other-dimensional Kryptonians by him- they were each more powerful and together they killed everyone on that dimension's earth. Superman reaized they might get free and do it again on his earth, so he killed them. Batman not killing the Joker, while heroic, is also arrogant and nearly a form of madness IMHO- "Sorry the Joker killed your family Jenny, but when I had the chance to kill him I decided I was too noble for that." Sometimes, IMHO, killing someone is the most heroic thing- sacrificing something dear to you to protect others.