Code VS Killing Poll

[nexus]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Lets see if there is a consenus here.

 

Superheroes (Traditional) do not murder eagerly, nor easily.

 

Can we agree on that much?

[Stray Cat]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Whew, I'm worn out, guys, i kinda tuned out the last couple pages.

 

Anything new happen?

 

Anyway, I'm not sure we're not all talking past eachother now or simply saying the same things in such a way as to violently agree.

 

I second that sentiment! This thread is wearing me out! We've mentioned failing EGO rolls... I must be failing mine, 'cause I keep coming back to this! I'm not getting any work done, hobby-wise or real work-wise!

 

Cat

[Magmarock]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Well, my favourite superhero is a grim and gritty type who's involved in the war against ultimate evil. He regularly encounters supernatural beasties, daemons, Cthuloid nasties, hordes of ninja goons working for an evil Oriental tong, and so on. He's also encountered some more conventional 4-colour supervillains, but that was before the GM really got into his stride and started to enjoy the more horror-oriented stories.

 

From the way you describe your PC, he is more of a monster hunter than a Superhero that kills. Perhaps the only humans he's slain are all ninja-type agents. What you describe is not a traditional Superhero, even if he is your hero... and that your GM allows you to play him in a Superhero genre game is exceptional.

 

I'm glad you enjoy playing your PC so much, but this hardly qualifies as an example for the genre or for this discussion. He's clearly more of a cross genre hero, IMO. Much more fitting for the Dark Champions end of the board.

 

Mags

[Magmarock]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Lets see if there is a consenus here.

 

Superheroes (Traditional) do not murder eagerly, nor easily.

 

Can we agree on that much?

 

More like:

 

Superheroes (Traditional) do not murder at all.

 

or, if you like:

 

Superheroes (Traditional) do not kill eagerly, nor easily.

 

 

Mags

[Dust Raven]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

I'm reading this thread and all I can think is that some of you are confusing vigilantes with heroes, now that we have murder vs. killing defined finally and everyone is on the same page with that.

 

Every example I've seen in this thread of a 'Superhero who kills' has really been a vigilante. Vigilates are not heroes. Their whole MO is killing and revenge, which is not superhero behavior.

 

So for this discussion of 'Superheroes don't murder/ Superheroes shouldn't kill', let's please stick with examples of actual Superheroes, ok guys? It'll make things go easier.

 

Mags

No agruements from me there.

 

Killing should be a last resort for Superheroes; but a last resort is still an option, and a heroic one if need be. Should a superhero that only kills, and does kill, as a last resort become a vigilante? I don't think so, but it would depend upon how he reacted afterward. If he suddenly thinks "that wasn't so bad, and it works so much better than just knocked them out and handing them over to the cops", then you've got a superhero turned vigilante.

 

Most often though, superheroes will regret their actions and constantly question whether there was another way that might have avoided killing. Those superheores, even though they've killed and my kill again in similar situations, they are still superheroes.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

To be fair, it would be best if Wanderer himself stood in his defense. No offense to you or your opinion of him, but come across as more than a little biased.

 

He (Wanderer) has in the past said that a true superhero would do things like sink whaling ships because they are evil, destroy polluting factories, because they are evil, and slaughter wholesale those governments which do things that Wanderer considers evil.

 

(BTW, he's expressly said that the entire US government would then go on the chopping block...)

 

So consider yourself corrected, Raven Sorry about that.

But then again, define "evil."

 

If I found a ship/factory/government that mass murdered and threatened to engulf the entire earth in a shroud if life killing darkness, then any superhero that doesn't sink it (or at least wants to) doesn't deserve the title. But I have no idea what statements of his (if any) you are referencing, nor his thoughts when making them.

 

I'm still catching up on the posts, so if you haven't posted yet, Wandered, please do so.

[assault]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Look at it like this: imagine a game in which your superheroes (you are a player) get sent back to Germany in the 1920's' date=' in which you find yourself to be as powerful, relatively speaking, as the Authority are in their setting. What would you want to do as a player? Defeat some minor villain but leave the status quo as is with the result that the Nazis still take power and WW2 still ensues? Or would you do what it takes to destroy the Nazi leadership and really change history? If I were the GM, the choice would be yours. [/quote']

 

Unfortunately nearly every GM in the world would end up hosing my character in this situation, so I would prefer avoiding it.

 

As a GM, time travel in my universe is "really" inter-dimensional travel, so changing the past is impossible. Kind of.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

If I found a ship/factory/government that mass murdered and threatened to engulf the entire earth in a shroud if life killing darkness' date=' then any superhero that doesn't sink it (or at least wants to) doesn't deserve the title. But I have no idea what statements of his (if any) you are referencing, nor his thoughts when making them.[/quote']

 

He wasn't referring to anything so dramatic. He was talking about a factory that put smoke into the air, or a government that did anything he personally did not agree with.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

READ THIS, PLEASE

 

If you've contributed more than few posts to this thread, and I have not given you positive "reputation" yet, please send me a private message and let me know. I have really enjoyed it (although it seems to be petering out now -- I think I am out of new wrinkles for it, myself), and I think every one of you deserves some credit, even if it's geekily pointless credit.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

The US government bit: I said that I hate and despise Bush and his cronies so much that if I run a "cosmic superhumans at war vs. governments" scenario' date=' I would make sure that it would include a scene of superhumans storming White House, deposing Bush on live TV and executing him (but I would make sure there would be good dramatic justification for the act, such as sending super-assassins against characters and loved ones, or ordering to use WMD in populated areas to eliminate the characters), just as sheer wish fulfillment, and because it would be a really epic and dramatic scene. Hey ID4's director blew up White House, and Mark Millar did the "White House Sotrming" scene twice, why couldn't I?[/quote']

Ah...I begin to understand.

 

While I believe the notion that "superheroes don't kill" (as an asbolute statement) is foolish, narrowminded and childish, assassins are not even heroic, let alone superheroic. Making a public spectical of your actions is also not heroic, let alone superheroic. I won't bother with the issue about democratic voting and the fact that not a single president, despite any of their best efforts, have managed to destroy this country, or even pose a threat to it or the general populout. (and I'm an anti-patriot).

 

On the otherhand, soldiers do all these things, and that's fine for soldiers. Let the soldiers do it. If you need soldiers with superpowers, get them. Just don't call them "heroes." At least as anything other than a political propaganda statement. The Rosenburgs were "heroes" too, remember? At least to the Russains.

[Rene]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

There was a Silver Surfer story by Jim Starlin where a poor guy is transformed into a hideous monster. He wasn't a particularly evil guy at that, just a stooge manipulated by his evil military father. Anyway, the poor guy keeps getting more and more hideous and deformed, by the end he is more like this huge Cthully monstrosity, who can't even control himself.

 

The Silver Surfer manages to transport him to a lifeless moon where he won't threaten anyone. There on the moon, the Surfer discover the monster is sentient and used to be a man. The guy *begs* the Surfer to kill him and end his suffering.

 

Instead the Silver Surfer says "no", and leaps on his board, and leaves the guy behind. The last panel has a close-up shot of the guy's face in the midst of the cthullian blob of flesh he became, screaming in agony. Since his new and hideous body was immortal, it's implied that he is going to spend eternity there, all alone in a lifeless moon, and a monster.

 

Anyone else read this story?

 

I found the Surfer's actions particularly monstrous and shocking. It reminded me that a "Code vs. Killing" isn't necessarily compassionate or even rational. Actually, it can be quite dogmatic for some.

 

Oh yes, I'm mostly a #2 kind of person, myself. I don't consider those who kill *easily* and *effortlessly* such as the Authority, as good examples of superheroes. But I fervently believe that there are special circunstances that warrant killing in a superhero's life, filled with danger and extreme situations.

 

But I can roleplay all kinds. Even though if I were faced with the situation the Silver Surfer was, and I were a #1 kind of hero, I'd spent whatever time it took to find a cure for the guy, and failing that, I'd kill him, even though I'd suffer a major psychological breakdown.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

In response to John T's "question for the 'heroes don't kill' camp", JohnOSpencer replied:

Characters in that type of campaign shouldn't be put in that type of situation. Those kinds of situations should always have a way out in any campaign where anyone was required/encouraged to take a total CVK.

 

John Spencer

Why? What type of campaign are you talking about? The 4-color "heroes can't kill" campaign?

 

As I've said before, CVK only means something if killing is an option. If the GM always presents/provides a way out, then CVK is just free points? Any hero (super or not) that would kill in a situation when killing isn't necessary isn't a hero (and in such campaign take an appropriate PsychLim to represent his lethal nature, assuming it's even permitted by the GM).

[Dust Raven]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Its an exchange of ideas. I find his ideas dangerously insane because despite his protests to the contrary he is using the same precise arguments that the Nazi's used to justify the slaughter of so many "undesirables".

Now that's not true.

 

The Nazi's had no justification to slaughter anyone. They needed an enemy to unify them. There's a BIG difference between the genocide of a people picked cuz there were there, and the elimination of a specific person.

 

Why is it that it seems every other post of yours you find a way to insult Wanderer or twist his words? If the man is indeed "dangerously insane", to you really want to taunt him!!!

 

[zornwil]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

There was a Silver Surfer story by Jim Starlin where a poor guy is transformed into a hideous monster. He wasn't a particularly evil guy at that, just a stooge manipulated by his evil military father. Anyway, the poor guy keeps getting more and more hideous and deformed, by the end he is more like this huge Cthully monstrosity, who can't even control himself.

 

The Silver Surfer manages to transport him to a lifeless moon where he won't threaten anyone. There on the moon, the Surfer discover the monster is sentient and used to be a man. The guy *begs* the Surfer to kill him and end his suffering.

 

Instead the Silver Surfer says "no", and leaps on his board, and leaves the guy behind. The last panel has a close-up shot of the guy's face in the midst of the cthullian blob of flesh he became, screaming in agony. Since his new and hideous body was immortal, it's implied that he is going to spend eternity there, all alone in a lifeless moon, and a monster.

 

Anyone else read this story?

 

I found the Surfer's actions particularly monstrous and shocking. It reminded me that a "Code vs. Killing" isn't necessarily compassionate or even rational. Actually, it can be quite dogmatic for some.

 

Oh yes, I'm mostly a #2 kind of person, myself. I don't consider those who kill *easily* and *effortlessly* such as the Authority, as good examples of superheroes. But I fervently believe that there are special circunstances that warrant killing in a superhero's life, filled with danger and extreme situations.

 

But I can roleplay all kinds. Even though if I were faced with the situation the Silver Surfer was, and I were a #1 kind of hero, I'd spent whatever time it took to find a cure for the guy, and failing that, I'd kill him, even though I'd suffer a major psychological breakdown.

Pretty interesting, thanks.

 

Also points to the shift occurring in comic book morality at that time (increased complexity, exiting from at least what were 4-color easily classifiable responses).

 

So here's a question - what really are the boundaries of "4-color comics"?

[Dust Raven]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Lets see if there is a consenus here.

 

Superheroes (Traditional) do not murder eagerly, nor easily.

 

Can we agree on that much?

You have my vote.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Now that's not true.

 

The Nazi's had no justification to slaughter anyone. They needed an enemy to unify them. There's a BIG difference between the genocide of a people picked cuz there were there, and the elimination of a specific person.

 

You're not familiar, then, with all those propaganda films produced by the Nazi party to convince the German public that the Jew and the Gypsy were subhuman creatures doing irrevocable harm to Germany and its people?

 

Sorry, but "this is for the greater good" is the second-most used justification for atrocity in the history of the earth, right after "God wills it". Wanderer is the latest in a long line of people to use it to excuse opression and murder.

 

 

 

Why is it that it seems every other post of yours you find a way to insult Wanderer or twist his words? If the man is indeed "dangerously insane", to you really want to taunt him!!!

 

Why do you insist on seeing my every post as an attempt to provoke someone rather than reading them for what they are (that is, a statement of my opinion)?

[Dust Raven]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

More like:

 

Superheroes (Traditional) do not murder at all.

 

or, if you like:

 

Superheroes (Traditional) do not kill eagerly, nor easily.

 

 

Mags

Actually, yeah...

 

or rather,

 

Superheroes (traditional or otherwise) do not murder at all, or kill eagerly.

 

A nod goes to war, which is not murder. Killing happens in war, but I have yet to see a superhero go to war and gleefully slaughter the enemy, so it doesn't count as eager either.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

He wasn't referring to anything so dramatic. He was talking about a factory that put smoke into the air' date=' or a government that did anything he personally did not agree with.[/quote']

Did he? Please quote his exact statement, and I'll believe you. Otherwise this is just your belief of what he meant. Better yet, post a link to his post that says these things you say he means this way.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Also points to the shift occurring in comic book morality at that time (increased complexity' date=' exiting from at least what were 4-color easily classifiable responses).[/quote']

 

The Surfer was one of the first of the more introspective superheroes, as far as I know. I am not sure he was the herald of the end of the "4-color" era, but I would say his appearance was at least a signpost along the way.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

wow

 

less than a week of unemployment (and board browsing between customer calls) and this thread has exploded!

 

I have skimmed through most of the pages in this thread and just wanted to put in my 4 yen.

 

I think that any radical stance on killing or code vs. on the part of a 'super-hero' is just a reflection on his belief in the ability of the 'normals' to govern themselves. The 1st Superman movie explored this a little with Jor-El's warnings in the clouds after Lois died (and there were more deleted scenes on the collecter DVD). The comic "Kingdom Come" also explored aspects of this dillema that all suposed "super-heroes" must face. How many government laws are they willing to break in their quest to use their powers for the greater good of humanity? At what point does their philosophy of crime prevention cross the line become in favor of a police state? Not ALL superheroes have thoughts this deep, usually because they don't have powers or resources that force them to consider these types of issues (Spider-man) but both Superman and Batman have the means to affect global politics if they so chose (of course this would violate one comic tradition of having the comic world mirror the real one in as many areas as possible) but they do not. If they did they would just become a typical 'end justifies the means' James Bond villain. Is Bruce Wayne's personality really that much different than that of Victor Von Doom? or Magnetto? Lex Luthor? In just about every case the differences are a result of how much they do not trust others to rule justly. Batman has the most control of his inner megalomaniac out of that bunch. If that were to change he could easily be more dangerous than Lex Luthor.

 

In the case of Superman, he does not wish to rule or be worshiped as a god. It was established early on that his upbringing by the Kents had a lot to do with this attitude on his part and I am sure that more than one Elseworlds story has explored the variations on his upbringing and his resulting moral compass by which he uses his powers.

 

sorry if any of this has already been covered as it IS a rather long thread at this point!

[nexus]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Did he? Please quote his exact statement' date=' and I'll believe you. Otherwise this is just your belief of what he meant. Better yet, post a link to his post that says these things you say he means this way.[/quote']

 

Allot of own prejudice against Wanderer comes more from his thread "Superhumans Pulling an Authority" than this one. I think you can find it if you do a search but I do not have a link. He makes his views pretty clear. And yeah, I'd have to say unless I completely misunderstood him he was talking about "normal" polluting industries and whaling ships not Werewolf:the Apocolypse style evil spawning hellholes. Of course, depending your stance on whales those could be consider machines of mass murder. That may be where Worldmaker is coming from as well. I beleive he participated in that thread.

 

 

Please no one take this as an indication that I beleive pollution is a good thing or that enviornmental concerns are not important.

.

[assault]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Players who find themselves with characters that just don't do anything' date=' get left behind, manipulated, or whatever. This is a game that asks players to "have a reason for your character to be interesting and do stuff" so playing a character like Major Bummer (a great comic I really miss) might be ok for a one-off lark... but wouldn't be accepted for a campaign. If you aren't interested in having your character "do something" in a game... I'm just not going to have you in the game as a player, that's all.[/quote']

 

Of course this misses the "classic bit" of the reluctant hero. The story of how Odysseus feigned madness in an attempt to avoid having to fight at Troy is one of the classic bits of this.

 

It's also a good starting point for a campaign against Authority-type world conquerors.

[Rene]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Pretty interesting, thanks.

 

Also points to the shift occurring in comic book morality at that time (increased complexity, exiting from at least what were 4-color easily classifiable responses).

 

So here's a question - what really are the boundaries of "4-color comics"?

 

Well, the story I mentioned was published in the late-80s/early-90s. That would be late Bronze Age. The Bronze Age was always my favorite period of comics. Not "kill them all", nor "you shall never kill", but a recognition that there are special circunstances.

 

Captain America killed in a Mark Gruenwald story, where some terrorists opened fire against a crowd, and Cap had lost his shield, so Cap was forced to grab a gun from the ground and stop the terrotists before the casualties got even higher. I thought it was a "heroic" action.

 

Superman killed too, in the conclusion of the pocket universe storyline mentioned in another thread, when Superman was the last force for good in a alternate Earth wiped out by three Kryptonian criminals who then threatened to do the same to Superman's Earth. There were no authorities left to turn the criminals to, and they were mass murderers in an unbelievable scale. Supes killed them, I gave Supes a pass for the "special circunstances" clause (later the poor guy had a breakdown for doing it).

 

Marvel Boy/Justice killed his abusive bigoted violent father in a moment of fury and fear. I don't think it was "heroic", but I think it was understandable and, up to a point, self-defense.

 

Hm... on a tangent, I also always found a bit strange that superheroes are supposed to be "excused" when destroying vampires, robots, and computers, for instance. At least to my mind, the defining factor should be sentience. If the creature is sentient and sufficiently self-aware, then I shouldn't treat their existence in a lighter way than I treat human life and should only destroy then if the situations are extreme enough. Well, robots and computers can be rebuilt, at least.

 

Perhaps this hint at the real root of some "CVKs": religious feelings. You can kill a vampire because a vampire has no "soul". Is that it?

[Dust Raven]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

You're not familiar, then, with all those propaganda films produced by the Nazi party to convince the German public that the Jew and the Gypsy were subhuman creatures doing irrevocable harm to Germany and its people?

 

Sorry, but "this is for the greater good" is the second-most used justification for atrocity in the history of the earth, right after "God wills it". Wanderer is the latest in a long line of people to use it to excuse opression and murder.

 

 

Actually, I'm quite familiar with it. Perhaps you don't know the difference between a Nazi, and the people in change of them. Nazi's weren't evil (well, as a people, there were some sadists in there), just the leaders, who convince them the Jews were the enemy and needed to be wiped out/taught a lesson. The Nazi party (at least the leaders) didn't believe a word of the subhuman crap. They just wanted everybody shooting and someone else but them.

 

Why do you insist on seeing my every post as an attempt to provoke someone rather than reading them for what they are (that is, a statement of my opinion)?

I mention this once and I'm insisting? This respose seems to prove that you do blow what other people say out of perportion. I said "every other post", and you apparently read "every post". Maybe the boards deleted that simple, but significent five letter word, "other". Nope, I checked, it's there.

 

Sorry about that. But I take it as a personal insult to myself and my beliefs when I've been misquoted or mis repesented. Since you've (though only slightly) done this to me, I can only assume you've done this to Wanderer.

 

In any case, the least you could do is be less of an ass. I enjoy conversing with you, but only about half of what you type I'd call conversing, and none of what you type concerning Wanderer.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

 

Allot of own prejudice against Wanderer comes more from his thread "Superhumans Pulling an Authority" than this one. I think you can find it if you do a search but I do not have a link. He makes his views pretty clear. And yeah, I'd have to say unless I completely misunderstood him he was talking about "normal" polluting industries and whaling ships not Werewolf:the Apocolypse style evil spawning hellholes. Of course, depending your stance on whales those could be consider machines of mass murder. That may be where Worldmaker is coming from as well. I beleive he participated in that thread.

 

 

Please no one take this as an indication that I beleive pollution is a good thing or that enviornmental concerns are not important.

.

Thanks, I'll have to look for that thread. I'm a glutton for drama and angst and it sounds like a good read.