Killing Characters

[Agent 537]

This subject has likely come up before, but I bring it to you all anyway.

 

How do you handle killing characters in a superhero setting? Do you make it an OOC priority not to, because making a character and fitting it into the campaign is difficult and/or time-consuming? Do you allow it only if the characters do something REALLY stupid? Do your campaign's characters start to feel invincible because they know they can't die, and thus start to maybe grow bored or take unrealistic chances?

 

I'd appreciate any and all viewpoints you might care to offer.

[Demonsong]

I have a very simple rule in the games I GM.

 

*****I do not kill player characters. I do however let player characters kill themselves.

 

If I think a PC is doing something incredibly dumb I generally try to give them a hint or two that it might not be such a good idea. But there are times when PC's are going to do what they want. And I let them do what they want, they just have to live (or die) with the consequences of there actions.

[Agent 537]

Let me throw a 'for example' your way. What if the big bad villain knocks a hero out, with no other heroes around? Would you have the villain run off, or continue attacking the hero into a fine red paste? Would it depend on the villain, or would you always choose the former, so as to keep the player from being disappointed that his character is now dead?

[Vanguard]

It would depend entirely on the villian as well as what the villian is trying/intending to do.

 

Most of your villians out there would be happy just pasting the Hero and then grabbing what they came for and leaving the poor hero beaten, battered and defeated. A rare few (and these ones should be used extremely rarely) will finish what they've started and smoke the Hero.

[Hugh Neilson]

Most villains follow the "unwritten rule" that you don't kill the hero, mainly because hero killers tend to pick up a lot of new hunteds. In some cases, a comic book type coincidence that rescues the character may well be in order.

[Blue]

Originally posted by Agent 537

Let me throw a 'for example' your way. What if the big bad villain knocks a hero out, with no other heroes around? Would you have the villain run off, or continue attacking the hero into a fine red paste? Would it depend on the villain, or would you always choose the former, so as to keep the player from being disappointed that his character is now dead?

This is all about the villain's psychiatric makeup. A homicidal villain might very well kill him, but I cannot tell you how few homicidal villains I have!

 

More generally, if they KO a hero they either leave him behind and finish what they came to do or they take him captive. Sometimes he's leverage against the rest of the team.

 

I've had only once where a villain has come close to killing a hero in the current campaign and that hero WISELY got his butt out of dodge and around a corner so that the other heroes could take down the villain. But if that hero had fallen, even an enraged villain wouldn't bother to concentrate on someone he saw as unconscious. He'd focus on the other guys, and in cases where the hero is dying and the villain does not have the CVK disad, he'd just leave the guy to bleed to death.

 

I honestly think you have to go out of your way to kill someone on purpose, and you have to be monumentally reckless to get your own character killed in a champions game.

 

Fantasy Hero, I've had deaths before, but never a PC. Unlike some games it's generally pretty easy to justify that person staying alive.

[pinecone]

I have no problem seeing a hero die, but the players know that so it's no suprise....but in Hero death just doesn't happen so it is rare. As far as finishing off a downed character that depends on the villian, in supers it is very seldom that someone would prefer a murder charge to a property crime, and situations like that are why you buy Luck (no way out senarios). I almost exclusivly play champs and in decades of play only a handful of heros have died, but then again that far more than most. In fantasy hero I beleive death should be more likely, but the less powerful and more human scale heros solve that already....

[lemming]

I've seen plenty PCs die and had several die of my own. However, the case where a PC was executed, was very, very rare and usually the player had agreed to it.

[Bengal]

Doesn't anyone use death traps? I mean, if a hero or heroes are utterly defeated and their fates are sealed, isn't it up to the villain to entrap them in some monstrously complicated machine or whatever, give a lengthy retelling of his origin story, reveal all his secret plans, gloat a while, and leave?

 

I actually think villains gain more XP from making death traps and executing them than they do from killing the good guys.

[Blue]

I've got too many heroes to ever fall into the "Death trap" thing. Too bad, I love those. But on average I've got 6 Heroes a game; if one falls AND should be captured (which has only happened once) then the others usually come to the rescue before there's any deathtrap action.

 

And the chances of ALL of the heroes being defeated are very rare.

[Bengal]

I run one game with one PC hero and one NPC hero, so the death trap thing comes up for me sometimes. The other game, I get 4-8 people a session, so you're right about that.

 

 

One of the great things about DNPCs or other credible threats is, you can sometimes coerce a hero into that sort of situation without actually beating him down first.

[BoneDaddy]

Why kill when you can capture, brainwash and release? Nothing quite so much fun as a Manchurian Candidate. "Raymond, how about a nice game of solitaire?"

 

If I kill, things get so awfully dark. If that's appropriate, then so be it, but its head-on-a-pike time, or really-good-death-scene time. Nothing so so or ho-hum. We had a hero go missing and turn up days later in a dumpster - so disappointing. Takes all the fun out of a good revenge scenario.

[Agent 537]

I started this thread because I'm concerned about a sense of complacency I think I'm seeing. Heroes in our campaign alternate between sitting around talking ICly for hours, going in dozens of random directions conversationally and getting nowhere, or they all rush to fight the bad guy when he shows his face. Heroes don't seem motivated to really focus and track down the bad guy BEFORE his big strike. When the bad guy DOES strike, the heroes all wade in, with little regard for teamwork. It's like they're all fighting the bad guy by themselves, and never mind those other heroes who happen to be at the same location. The possibility of dying seems not to be a concern, even against the most horrendous villains.

 

What to do about it? I dunno. I was hoping to get some perspective, which is why I posted. Thanks for all the responses so far. They are helping.

[Dr. Anomaly]

I've twice had the PCs in a position of being helpless before the villains.

 

In the first case, it was Genocide, and all the PCs were unconcious. One actually was a mutant, one was only half human (the other have being Greek divinity) and one -- I don't know if you could call Mark a mutant or not. In any case, Genocide most likely WOULD kill them. Instead I decided to have Genocide capture them and try to learn as much about their real identities as possible, in order to track down any friends or relatives (especially relatives) who might also be 'tainted'. I did this by having the PCs wake up, as college students, and discovering they'd been participating in a virtual reality simulation for credit hours (and a little cash). Of course in actuality Genocide had put the heroes in a VR set-up in order to get them to talk about their 'virtual experiences' as super-heroes, and thus get info on them. Little inconsistancies began to add up, though, and the heroes broke out of the VR set-up and trashed the local Genocide base they were in. They still have a lab coat from one of the Genocide techs hanging in their trophy room.

 

In the second case, this same team found itself helpless after a Viper team had entangled the lot of them using an expanding, hardening foam. I got MAX results from the dice, and they were all buried up to their necks and unable to get out. I really didn't see why the Viper team wouldn't kill them, considering they'd been a pain in Viper's neck for a while now. I was still trying to think of a way that would be both 'believable' (in the context of the campaign history) and not too 'GM ex machina' to save them, when one of my players saved me the trouble. Corona is a daughter of the Greek god Apollo, and an archer extraordinaire, as you'd expect. She also has both a rivalry and a Hunted with/by Eros (because of the archery thing, among other reasons).

 

As the Viper agents are lining up their weapons for the killing shot, Corona calls out in a loud voice, "Looks I won, Eros you bastard! YOU didn't get to kill me -- this bunch of mortal thugs are going to get that privledge!" I had to take my metaphorical hat off to her -- turning a Disad into a life-saving manuever like that! Eros popped in, and shot the Viper agents...who promptly fell in love with each other, dropped their weapons, and went off for an extended romantic idyll. Then Eros turned on the still-trapped PCs, smiled slowly...and did the same thing to them. (After all, he WAS Corona's Hunted, and I couldn't see him passing up the chance for a little sweet revenge.)

 

They were very much in love for quite a while, but were eventually snapped out of it by the Deacon on Sanctuary after their live-in mechanic/base guardian convinced them to take a vacation there (HE could tell how things between them had changed, of course, though THEY believed they'd just finally given in to the emotions that had been there all along.) Afterwards there were some tough times between the team members, considering things they'd said and done while under Eros' influence, but at least they were still alive.

 

That group is a group of superb players, believe me...

[Blue]

Viper agent love. That's just so wrong

[Trebuchet]

I think killing characters should generally be a rare and significant event, but it shouldn't be impossible or you take away much of the excitement and feeling of accomplishment from triunphing over all obstacles. How rare depends on the genre. In Silver Age campaigns it would be virtually unknown; in Iron Age it's going to be more common. In graphic novels, fantasy settings and spy stories it might be fairly common.

 

That having been said, I would never kill a character in a cheap way. Comic book and movie heroes don't die from mooks' guns or villainous booby traps, nor should they. It's also against genre for the villain to just blast the hero until he's a fine red pulp. If they're going to die it should be for a good purpose, and in a way that lets them feel heroic and lets them accomplish something important. Whether it be saving New York from a nuke or a six-year-old from a burning building, the hero's death has to be meaningful and heroic.

[GrimJesta]

I adhere to the old addage from Hackmaster: Let the dice fall where they may.

 

I never, ever fudge the dice. It sorta cheats players of victories they attain through skill, as even if they dont do things right they get to live. If the villain ever smokes someone, then theyre dead. But I tend to run gritty, realistic games, thus why I run Fantasy Hero and Dark Champions.

 

 

-=Grim=-

[lemming]

The other thing is, even if a character is accidently killed, it's true to genre to bring them back somehow.

[KA.]

Okay, I have to weigh in on this.

If your players can only be motivated by the threat of their own death, something is seriously wrong, and they do not understand the genre.

A hero's greatest fear should never be his own death, it should be failure.

I don't mean failure to curb-stomp every mook they meet, I mean failure to protect the innocent.

 

If they rush in headlong and Dr. Destroyer KO's them, they shouldn't be worried about what is going to happen to them, it should be what is he going to do to innocent people while they are unconscious!.

 

If all a person worried about was his personal safety, they would never become a hero, they would just stay home.

 

Don't motivate your heroes by threatening them with death.

Have them "get to know" some DNPC's.

Make them care about them, and by extension, the community they protect.

 

Then when they don't pay attention, and don't care what happens, have the innocent affected by their slack attitude.

 

You don't have to kill them off either.

 

Have it happen in subtle ways:

Mom 'n Pop's Grocery gets burned down by a stray blast from a DEMON Morbane, that no one was keeping an eye on.

 

Every time they go past the location, have them see Pop in there, working like a dog to rebuild it.

 

Have a Mission that helped the homeless forced to close because of damage.

 

Now have the players have to deal with a lot of petty crime committed by homeless people just looking for food and a place to sleep.

Or have the homeless kidnapped and experimented on by some villain, because they lost the safety of the shelter.

 

Others can give you more suggestions, but you get the idea.

 

Have their actions, or lack of them, matter in the game world.

 

Don't crucify them for every little mistake, but make them pay for a total lack of care.

 

KA.

[Trebuchet]

You hit the nail right on the head, KA.

 

That's the whole point of being a hero: Protecting others. When our team was fighting Eurostar back in late August of last year, losing was not an option because the stakes were two nuclear weapons. God only knows how many innocent people would have died if MidGuard had failed to stop Eurostar from escaping with two nukes. It damn sure wouldn't have been pretty.

[PhilFleischmann]

I must echo what KA said.

 

Agent 537 seemed to have two problems with his players:

They don't understand what it means to be a hero.

They don't understand the value of teamwork and strategy.

 

KA addressed the first problem quite well. Allow me to address the second:

 

This will require a little more work on your part. How are you playing the villains? If six 350-point supers can take down Dr. Destroyer or some cosmic-level villain without using teamwork, then I suspect the GM isn't playing the villain right. Go ahead and let the villains be as intelligent as they should be. Let them exploit the heroes' weaknesses. Let them press every advantage.

 

One useful technique is to send the PCs against a team of villains. Let them be well matched to the heroes' weaknesses, but let the PC's Psych lims motivate them to attack each villain that can defeat them. For example, let the villain with the AE Entangle taunt the martial artist hero into fighting. Let the rubber-bodied villain with Physical Damage reduction really get on the hero brick's nerves. The PCs won't be able to just attack whoever they feel like attacking. They'll have to think a little to determine how best to take down the bad guys.

 

Make your players do a little thinking and investigation. Someone is robbing all the local banks in the middle of the night without setting off any alarms or leaving any trace. How? If the players say, "We can't do anything until a bad guy in a costume shows up and loudly announces himself to be the bank robber," then let them watch TV, while you go out and find some players who actually want to play.

 

To teach the lessons of both heroism and tactics, try taking a hostage.

[Arthur]

Originally posted by Demonsong

I have a very simple rule in the games I GM.

 

*****I do not kill player characters. I do however let player characters kill themselves.

 

If I think a PC is doing something incredibly dumb I generally try to give them a hint or two that it might not be such a good idea. But there are times when PC's are going to do what they want. And I let them do what they want, they just have to live (or die) with the consequences of there actions.

 

Nicely put.

 

That has also been my philosophy for decades. It's not my job as GM to kill characters. However, it's also not my job to prevent them from killing themselves.

 

However, I find it distasteful to kill a PC, and will ask for confirmation of really stupid actions ("Are you SURE you want to insult Doctor Doom's mother to his face?"). However, if the player insists, I will sigh and roll the dice.

[KA.]

Trebuchet,

Thanks for the kind words.

 

PhilFleischmann,

I totally agree with your points about teamwork and motivation.

It sounds like these players have seen too many episodes of SuperFriends!

They just wait around for the Troubalert to go off and tell them what to do.

 

KA.

[Trebuchet]

Originally posted by KA.

It sounds like these players have seen too many episodes of SuperFriends!

 

They just wait around for the Troubalert to go off and tell them what to do.

It's any easy trap to get into, and generally indicates player laziness. I used to tell my players in my old D&D campaign "There's no escalator to the adventure. You have to tell me what you're doing, or I'll assume you're doing nothing and just sitting at home. So what are you doing?"

 

My current Champions campaign has a pretty good mix of "Let's investigate that, it sounds interesting" (Helped by a monthly "newspaper" I publish before every month's game), being fortuitously nearby when something unusual happens, being contacted by the authorities for help, and having villains arrange something evil.

[Farkling]

I like the newspaper method. I put columns in it relevant to their previous game actions also. (When I find the time to make one)

 

Occasioanally I have delivered a lst of "hot internet topics"

 

I also didd the "letters from friends and DNPC's" schtick for one game. The ArchAngel was the worst one, I eventually decided on the Vatican sending a leter of inquiry about his "bloodthirsty nature"

 

 

Another motivator is to field a group of knowledgable agents into battle, and have these "mooks" temawork the heroes into helplessness. Haul them all off to a DeathTrap.

 

(Maybe seal them in an adamantium walled crate and drop them in the Marianus Trench)

 

If they get out of it, one or two should be motivated into an ongoing search and destroy of the agent group if nothing else.

 

Imagine Batman or Spidey complacently accepting such treatment and returning to the "waiting for the TroubleAlert"

 

Maybe that's why Batman misses so many Justice League shows? "I'm BUSY!"