Superheroes Who Kill?

[bubba smith]

Re: Superheroes Who Kill?

 

I'd rather have a player say "not really my type of game" then sit in, be unhappy and probably make everyone else unhappy due to his unwillingness to play the game in progress. Given the choices of:

 

- player plays a character he doesn't like to fit in with the game

- player plays a character that doesn't fit in with the game and wrecks it for everyone else

- player doesn't play

 

The third seems like the best option for everyone.

 

When we're starting another game, let that player know - he's welcome to play in that game if it's more to his liking.

i concur100%

[Tigereye]

Re: Superheroes Who Kill?

 

Our universe is a "killing has consequences" one... this tends to limit the killing, and in fact creates a real divide between the villains (who of course can and do kill) and the heroes (who are allowed to kill but generally do not because of the consequences).

 

The consequences are quite apparent. Our Doctor Destroyer clone created a secret island base (that turned out to be a bit of a "Potemkin Village" but our heroes didn't know that at the time). The heroes actually received permission from the French government to use any weapon they felt appropriate on the island, as it was uninhabited and in French territory. After several medium-yield plasma bombs were detonated with no apparent effect on the base's force field, one of the PCs (the Magnificent Metal Master) set off a vibranium bomb... for which he purposely underestimated the yield so that if the other PCs knew about it they would not spill the beans mentally. It went off with the force of 2.3 megatons (the loudest noise in the world), completely destroying the island (vibranium explosions, fortunately, are completely non-radioactive) but also sinking a French patrol frigate, killing three crew members. The PC went into a funk. He is now regretting his actions, as the killing had unintended consequences. He also is rapidly losing his CVK with his action, but just as rapidly replacing it with a nascent obsession with bringing the Doctor Destroyer- equivalent to justice, and possible lethal justice. (Fortunately, the French have forgiven him, as the menace was still real, if not quite at the world-shaking magnitude everyone had thought it to be.)

 

My character, Deuce, has the opposite problem. He has been a killer most of his adult life, and had a government sanction those killings. Now, however, the government has declared his skills obsolete (in fact, they've declared him obsolete) and removed his Licence To Kill. He can kill, but now is learning to out-think his opponents to bring them to justice, rather than just dispatching them. It helps that his offensive powers are the weakest of the party...

 

And the most unique situation... we have a Predator-type alien PC (Hunting Specter) with the concept of Code Versus Killing Humans, as she is, in effect, Earth's "Park Ranger", preventing her own kind from killing humans unnecessarily or without proper preliminary procedures. (For one thing, killing children, pregnant women or any unarmed human being is a no-no). Even with humanoid aliens, she can be remarkably humane, in her own way... She amputated Herculon's ear instead of killing him after she knocked him out cold. She satisfied her trophy-hunting instinct, "counted coup" against her opponent, and did not kill him. (Of course, now Herculon is hunting his mutilator...if he can just figure out who the heck cut off his ear...)

 

Many of the PCs do not have CVK in name, but are very reluctant to kill because of the fact that killing will have dire consequences. Justice in our universe (at least in the US) has the death penalty, and the world's governments reserve for themselves the right to grant lethal force. There is an effective global legal system against super-criminals, so heroes are encouraged to knock the villains on their tushies and bring them in.

 

Our GMs are not going to be so completely stubborn about enforcing it that under the right conditions, a PC simply is artificially forbidden to kill. Demons, robots and undead villains are mostly fair game, for example, as they are not technically alive to begin with...

 

It's not entirely four-color, but it provides much the same effect. It gives a much more real feel than an artificial CCA limitation - kill someone without state sanctioning, for the wrong reasons, or the wrong people, or at the wrong time, and find yourself in Stronghold with the baddies...not a good place to when you're a hero.

[bubba smith]

Re: Superheroes Who Kill?

 

besides what good hero wants the grief,both emotional and legal for wrongful death?

beter to let the courts deal with them after all you should only have to kill as A LAST RESORT THE VERY LAST RESORT

[Trebuchet]

Re: Superheroes Who Kill?

 

Our campaign is unabashedly four-color, but I resent the implication that playing that way is either a) stupid or unrealistic.

 

a) I play this game for a bit of escapism and to spend time with my friends. I want to escape to a world that's better than the real one we live in. We don't see any need for presenting a lot of deep moral dilemmas; although we don't have any problems with people who want that kind of thing in their own game. That's the whole point of a toolkit: You get to build and play what you want. Play with your guns and leather and leave my bulletproof spandex alone.

 

Unrealistic? In a genre which has flying people firing destructive beams out of their eyes and women's consistently oversized breasts display zero effects of gravity, we're supposed to worry about the reality of the campaign's moral code? What the Hell is wrong with saying heroes don't casually kill? What's wrong with trying to portray the moral high ground even if that high ground is sadly lacking in the real world?

[jtelson]

Re: Superheroes Who Kill?

 

I don't run four color. I've tried and I'm not good at it, greys invariable bleed into the games that I run. It's a bit irritating that I'm unable to control my baser instincts when it comes to gamemastering but my group generally understands and does pretty good with this and as a team we've reached a kind of balance when it comes to the heroes killing their foes. Knowing that they will kill a beloved villian if I push it too far helps keep me in check, knowing that if there will be in game consequences keeps them from doing so casually.

 

That being said my current superhero game is set in Mythic Greece so the heroes do kill people but only in battle after they've been given a chance to surrender. Captured foes are generally given the choice of Remain to Defend Thebes, Exile with the understanding that if they return no quarter will be given, or Execution.

 

And my previous campaign (The Psi-Lords of Metro City) had the players starting as the police so they had firm rules about the use of lethal force.

 

So I have to go back to my long running Sentry campaign for a normal modern example of this. Exactly one villian was intentionally killed in the ~15 year/various interations of that campaign and even I thought he had it coming.

[Vulcan]

Re: Superheroes Who Kill?

 

Our campaign is unabashedly four-color, but I resent the implication that playing that way is either a) stupid or unrealistic.

 

a) I play this game for a bit of escapism and to spend time with my friends. I want to escape to a world that's better than the real one we live in. We don't see any need for presenting a lot of deep moral dilemmas; although we don't have any problems with people who want that kind of thing in their own game. That's the whole point of a toolkit: You get to build and play what you want. Play with your guns and leather and leave my bulletproof spandex alone.

 

Unrealistic? In a genre which has flying people firing destructive beams out of their eyes and women's consistently oversized breasts display zero effects of gravity, we're supposed to worry about the reality of the campaign's moral code? What the Hell is wrong with saying heroes don't casually kill? What's wrong with trying to portray the moral high ground even if that high ground is sadly lacking in the real world?

 

I apologize if I accidentally implied that. Gven that the 4-color superhero is the core of the genre, it would clearly be inappropriate to bash the concept. I was simply pointing out that there are circumstances where even a cop will kill a criminal.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Superheroes Who Kill?

 

I apologize if I accidentally implied that. Gven that the 4-color superhero is the core of the genre' date=' it would clearly be inappropriate to bash the concept. I was simply pointing out that there are circumstances where even a cop will kill a criminal.[/quote']Actually I wasn't addressing you at all. I've found your positions to be quite reasonable; if not quite the same as mine. There have been others in this thread with virtual open contempt for four-color comics genre.

 

Since I support armed citizens shooting criminals when necessary; I have no problems with cops doing it. But that's really a discussion for the NGD.

[Greywind]

Re: Superheroes Who Kill?

 

The killing of the nameless, while it may impact upon the character's reputation (or general lack thereof), tends to be generally overlooked, depending upon time/place/witnesses type of concerns.

 

This primarily means agents. Not innocent bystanders.

 

The killing of named characters is usually frowned upon, depending on the story and usage of the character in question. After all, others can take up the mantle and replace the deader.