Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

[TheQuestionMan]

Greetings HEROphiles, I have a question to add to the debate about Violent Superheroes. Now Batman breaks cartilage, bones, and god know what else when fighting evil doers, but what about Interrogation and gaining their cooperation.

 

Riot (fka; Nemesis) caused quite a few winces from the GM and other Players (and not a few myself). Dislocating joints was a popular choice, breaking/crippling bones, and threatening to tear them apart too.

 

He has a 10 point Disadvantage Code vs Killing titled Kill Only to Protect Innocents, but what about Kneecaps?

 

 

Inquiring HEROphile wants to know?

 

 

QM

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

I would say it has less to do with a CvK than the overall tone of the game.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

I was under the impression Batman had simply 'Will Not Kill', 15pts, which doesn't have any actual implications against minor inflicting of Body damage.

 

I'm reasonably certain Batman is opposed to torture (if not, he certainly doesn't deserve to be called a hero), however if your character's psych lim is what you say it is, I suppose it isn't a violation of said Psych Lims.

 

As far as teammates go, that depends on their psych lims as to whether or not they keep you around. Whether or not it fits with the tone of the game is up to the GM.

 

I'm rambling, but I suppose what I'm getting at is ... Inquiring HEROes want to know ... what? What exactly is the question you're asking?

[Nagisawa Takumi]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

Greetings HEROphiles, I have a question to add to the debate about Violent Superheroes. Now Batman breaks cartilage, bones, and god know what else when fighting evil doers, but what about Interrogation and gaining their cooperation.

 

Riot (fka; Nemesis) caused quite a few winces from the GM and other Players (and not a few myself). Dislocating joints was a popular choice, breaking/crippling bones, and threatening to tear them apart too.

 

He has a 10 point Disadvantage Code vs Killing titled Kill Only to Protect Innocents, but what about Kneecaps?

 

 

Inquiring HEROphile wants to know?

 

 

QM

 

Kneecaps are fair game, in my book.

 

Here's the thing. Depending on which version of the Bat you're reading about he's either afraid of guns, refuses to use or train with them, or he IS a champion gunfighter, BUT refuses to use guns because of the law.

 

The latter came up in one of the Robin issues. Robin mentioned that the reason the Batman didn't use guns was because he already is breaking enough laws, but none of them are considered 'bad' enough for the Cops to focus on him, but murder would be.

 

In this case his CvK/CaK is more 'pragmatic' rather than 'emotional'. It could be a total 20 pointer, but it doesn't mean he won't be brutal.

 

One thing I'm noticing on this board is that people assume that a CaK is the entirety of the concept, which it's not. Batman would have a 20 CaK, but he would also have other Psych. Lims. like No Mercy to Criminals and the archetypical Devoted to Justice.

 

Again, that would mean that kneecaps are fair game.

[Nagisawa Takumi]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

I was under the impression Batman had simply 'Will Not Kill', 15pts, which doesn't have any actual implications against minor inflicting of Body damage.

 

I'm reasonably certain Batman is opposed to torture (if not, he certainly doesn't deserve to be called a hero), however if your character's psych lim is what you say it is, I suppose it isn't a violation of said Psych Lims.

 

As far as teammates go, that depends on their psych lims as to whether or not they keep you around. Whether or not it fits with the tone of the game is up to the GM.

 

I'm rambling, but I suppose what I'm getting at is ... Inquiring HEROes want to know ... what? What exactly is the question you're asking?

 

Batman uses force to get secrets and information out of criminals. That's torture. Threatening bodily harm (Which a lot of the older superheroes, like in the 50 to 70s did) to get information, and that includes dangling over a high place, that's coercion. Sometimes you have to back it up, which is also torture.

 

So are you saying that all Superheroes (Because all of them have done something similar in their careers) are not heroes?

 

Superman, Batman, Wonderwoman, the X-Men, the Fantastc Four, the Hulk, Spiderman... All of them have used force or implied the use of, in some fashion to get what they need to save MORE lives.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

Batman uses force to get secrets and information out of criminals. That's torture. Threatening bodily harm (Which a lot of the older superheroes, like in the 50 to 70s did) to get information, and that includes dangling over a high place, that's coercion. Sometimes you have to back it up, which is also torture.

 

So are you saying that all Superheroes (Because all of them have done something similar in their careers) are not heroes?

 

Superman, Batman, Wonderwoman, the X-Men, the Fantastc Four, the Hulk, Spiderman... All of them have used force or implied the use of, in some fashion to get what they need to save MORE lives.

 

Implied is one thing. Coercion is one thing. Torture is quite another. If you actually torture someone, physically or emotionally, then no, you ain't a hero in my book. Torture isn't even useful; the target will just tell you whatever he thinks you want to hear, to get you to stop. It's not a method of gaining information; it's just a way to rationalize brutalizing and inflicting pain on another human being. No hero resorts to something so thoroughly and despicably evil. There's ALWAYS another way.

 

The ends do not, and never have, justified the means.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

Implied is one thing. Coercion is one thing. Torture is quite another. If you actually torture someone, physically or emotionally, then no, you ain't a hero in my book. Torture isn't even useful; the target will just tell you whatever he thinks you want to hear, to get you to stop. It's not a method of gaining information; it's just a way to rationalize brutalizing and inflicting pain on another human being. No hero resorts to something so thoroughly and despicably evil. There's ALWAYS another way.

 

The ends do not, and never have, justified the means.

 

sounds like the topic hits one of your own Psych Lims, there CC

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

There are several types of torture. Dangling a person with a phobia of heights is certainly a mental torture.

 

I'd look to disad levels - a character with an absolute code vs killing will avoid the risk of killing his targets. The GM should be very clear exactly how much the writer's fiat in the comics will transfer to the game to reduce the likelihood of a target being killed. If it's practically impossible, and virtually always undesirable, to kill anyone in the game, I suggest that the frequency of CvK should be reduced for this campaign fact.

[Utech]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

If you find this player's tactics disruptive (or otherwise undesirable for your group), it's best to take him aside and discuss the issue. If you're interested in roleplaying through this, you could certainly have one of his kneecapping incidents end up causing a great deal of internal bleeding -- enough to require immediate medical care. The character could then explore the results of his actions.

 

This could be a great deal of fun.

[Hermit]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

This is one where the player(s) and the GM need to communicate , preferably before the campaign even starts. It's a matter of how dark and gritty the character concept and the game setting are expected to be, and get, and while some might scream "meta gaming", I think establishing the guidelines and expectations openly before hand helps everyone for the better

[Houston GM]

Handling torture

 

He has a 10 point Disadvantage Code vs Killing titled Kill Only to Protect Innocents' date=' but what about Kneecaps?[/quote']

I would say that he's not violating that PsychLim.

 

On the other hand, I might try to discourage that behavior (as a GM or player) in other ways.

 

As a GM:

I would use realistic consequences. People lie under torture and the threat of torture. They'll tell you whatever they think you want to hear in order to make the torture stop ... even if they can only stop it temporarily.

 

As a GM, I would supply Riot with a minion who doesn't know the information Riot is after. Initially, the minion (truthfully) denies having any knowledge. After Riot starts twisting the screws (literally or figuratively), the minion "caves" and tells Riot what the minion thinks Riot wants to hear.

 

Another minion might provide Riot with the information he wanted to know, but then would later file a lawsuit (and go public to the press). The lawsuit would be entirely true. If one of the other heroes has a reputation for honesty, the minion's lawyer would subpoena him in order to support the case.

 

If evidence of the torture began to surface, I would have groups start to protest Riot's misdeeds. I might up the ante by having a PC's DNPC join the protest and encourage the PC to join as well.

 

As a player:

Does my PC have any PsychLims against torture? Even if I don't have a specific PsychLim against torture, the average person believes it's wrong.

 

My PC might confront Riot, even to the point of attempting to physically restrain him. He would also appeal to the consciences of other teammates (particularly the ones who wince the most). In my debates with Riot, I would point out how likely it is that people will lie under torture, just to make it stop. (This would allow me to put the idea into the GM's head.)

 

When Riot switches to torturing minions in private, my PC might feel obligated to let the District Attorney and/or the minion's lawyer know certain information was coerced out of the minion. Entire cases might end up being tossed as "the fruit of the poisonous tree."

[Vulcan]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

sounds like the topic hits one of your own Psych Lims' date=' there CC [/quote']

 

CC's always pretty rabid when it comes to CvK discussions.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

sounds like the topic hits one of your own Psych Lims' date=' there CC [/quote']

 

Why yes, yes it does.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

I would say that he's not violating that PsychLim.

 

On the other hand, I might try to discourage that behavior (as a GM or player) in other ways.

 

As a GM:

I would use realistic consequences. People lie under torture and the threat of torture. They'll tell you whatever they think you want to hear in order to make the torture stop ... even if they can only stop it temporarily.

 

As a GM, I would supply Riot with a minion who doesn't know the information Riot is after. Initially, the minion (truthfully) denies having any knowledge. After Riot starts twisting the screws (literally or figuratively), the minion "caves" and tells Riot what the minion thinks Riot wants to hear.

 

Another minion might provide Riot with the information he wanted to know, but then would later file a lawsuit (and go public to the press). The lawsuit would be entirely true. If one of the other heroes has a reputation for honesty, the minion's lawyer would subpoena him in order to support the case.

 

If evidence of the torture began to surface, I would have groups start to protest Riot's misdeeds. I might up the ante by having a PC's DNPC join the protest and encourage the PC to join as well.

 

Further realism - this person has been severely, perhaps permanently, injured. And what of his mental health? That's some lawsuit, and probably a criminal case. Will Riot shoot a cop trying to bring him in? Remember, the cop is innocent.

 

How does he react to protests by, say, war veterans subjected to physical or psychological torture, whether in prior wars or in current foreign countries? How does he like charities like Amnesty International putting pressure on the city police (state authorities; federal gov't) to put a stop to these vigilante actions? Any Law Abiding characters in the group?

 

What happens when the guy he is questioning turns out not only to know nothing, but to be 100% innocent - just in the wrong place at the wrong time?

 

And let's not forget the Riot Revenge Squad - victims, their friends and families. And/or a group of more moral heroes who aren't prepared to allow this kind of activity to go unchallenged.

 

As a player:

Does my PC have any PsychLims against torture? Even if I don't have a specific PsychLim against torture, the average person believes it's wrong.

 

My PC might confront Riot, even to the point of attempting to physically restrain him. He would also appeal to the consciences of other teammates (particularly the ones who wince the most). In my debates with Riot, I would point out how likely it is that people will lie under torture, just to make it stop. (This would allow me to put the idea into the GM's head.)

 

When Riot switches to torturing minions in private, my PC might feel obligated to let the District Attorney and/or the minion's lawyer know certain information was coerced out of the minion. Entire cases might end up being tossed as "the fruit of the poisonous tree."

 

What are the other PC's doing? Always a good question. Riot does not/should not have "PC" glowing from his forehead and enjoy special treatment by the other characters. How would they react if an NPC took these kind of actions? How will they react to being considered part of Riot's band of thugs and torturers? They are working with him - clearly, they are condoning his methods.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

One further issue: how is this disadvantage limiting the character in play? If it provides no disadvantage, it isn't really a Disadvantage.

 

"Code versus killing anyone unless he thinks they really deserve it" isn't a disadvantage.

[Greywind]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

Yes. It is. That's the cheapest CvK you can have. After that you head into the Murderous/Casual Killer Rep area...

[Nagisawa Takumi]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

Implied is one thing. Coercion is one thing. Torture is quite another. If you actually torture someone, physically or emotionally, then no, you ain't a hero in my book. Torture isn't even useful; the target will just tell you whatever he thinks you want to hear, to get you to stop. It's not a method of gaining information; it's just a way to rationalize brutalizing and inflicting pain on another human being. No hero resorts to something so thoroughly and despicably evil. There's ALWAYS another way.

 

The ends do not, and never have, justified the means.

 

Well, if this is your criteria, then no superhero since their creation back in the late 30s has ever been a 'hero' to you. Not Golden, Silver, Iron or Bronze, or any variation of themes in between.

 

And no, torture is effective, sadly, because people still use it. Whether or not it provides the 'truth' is a matter of debate, either way, every world organization has used it in some fashion.

 

Also, personally, I believe that implied torture is just as bad as torture itself because even though you are lying about your intent (No matter what the ends you are going for, after all lying is a BAD THING to do) the other person may believe you intend on going through with it.

 

YMMV.

[Nagisawa Takumi]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

One further issue: how is this disadvantage limiting the character in play? If it provides no disadvantage, it isn't really a Disadvantage.

 

"Code versus killing anyone unless he thinks they really deserve it" isn't a disadvantage.

 

Actually, you could call that a "Twisted Vigilante" Psyche lim. Or just the Vigilante one, but as a GM I'd ask what are the criteria for the player to make this call, and I'd ask him/her if I had permission to make them stick with it. I'd need a list of types that he/she would put on the safe and not-so-safe lists in their minds.

[TheQuestionMan]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

I am not as concerned about exceeding my Psychological Limitation so much as sliding down the slippery slope.

 

ex; A Supervillain/Agent/Criminal threatens to unleash hidden explosives if he is not released and the Hero surrender.

 

Is the Hero justified in using extraordinary means to discover the truth?

 

 

ex; A Supervillain/Agent/Criminal threatens an NPC/DNPC/Victim if his demands are not met.

 

Is the Hero justified in using extraordinary means to stop them. ("The enemy can push the button if you disable his hand... MEDIC!")

 

 

ex; A Supervillain/Agent/Criminal holds information that is time sensitive and a horrible fate awaits the NPC/DNPC/Victim.

 

Is the Hero justified in using extraordinary means to obtain said information?

 

 

Cheers

 

 

QM

[Nagisawa Takumi]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

The problem is that you're looking at just one Psyche. Limitation, when all it does is define how far you'll go, not HOW you'll go about it. You need to consider the other ones you may or may not have.

 

That's my issue here.

 

If all you have is a CaK and no other, then as long as it doesn't lead to death, anything goes.

[Greywind]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

The problem is that you're looking at just one Psyche. Limitation, when all it does is define how far you'll go, not HOW you'll go about it. You need to consider the other ones you may or may not have.

 

That's my issue here.

 

If all you have is a CaK and no other, then as long as it doesn't lead to death, anything goes.

Wrong. Depending on the level the CvK won't allow him to take any potentially lethal actions.

[Nagisawa Takumi]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

That's exactly what I said. The brutality of his actions are dictated by his other psych lims if he has any.

 

He can break kneecaps, or limbs, but he won't leave him in the middle of traffic afterwards.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

That's exactly what I said. The brutality of his actions are dictated by his other psych lims if he has any.

 

He can break kneecaps, or limbs, but he won't leave him in the middle of traffic afterwards.

 

Does the brutality involved in breaking kneecaps or limbs not carry the risk of death for the target?

 

The problem comes down to interpretation. The GM and the player need to be on the same page as to the impact of the limitation. In my view, the player sets the terms of the disad, and the GM assesses the frequency and severity accordingly. "I won't try to kill him, but I'll hit unknown targets full power and break legs to get answers" is a very different disadvantage than "Killing is abhorrent. I will not attack anyone with an attack until I am certain he can survive it, nor would I risk causing injury or death by harming a helpless prisoner".

[Nagisawa Takumi]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

Does the brutality involved in breaking kneecaps or limbs not carry the risk of death for the target?

 

The problem comes down to interpretation. The GM and the player need to be on the same page as to the impact of the limitation. In my view, the player sets the terms of the disad, and the GM assesses the frequency and severity accordingly. "I won't try to kill him, but I'll hit unknown targets full power and break legs to get answers" is a very different disadvantage than "Killing is abhorrent. I will not attack anyone with an attack until I am certain he can survive it, nor would I risk causing injury or death by harming a helpless prisoner".

 

But both of which can be 20 pts. CaKs. It's the OTHER limitations he may or may not have that CAN dictate how much force he'll use normally.

 

Someone with a "Protects all Life" won't likely use bone breaking force if he/she can help it. While those with "No mercy to Criminals" are more likely to do so. However, their CaK, being full, means that they BOTH will NOT kill on purpose.

 

Accidents, however, can happen and CAN lead to great pathos and angst, and which can be character defining and fun.

 

And isn't that why we play? To have fun?

[Greywind]

Re: Code vs Killing, but Gods a little fuzzy about kneecaps.

 

"The Badger maims. He doesn't kill."