Fights! How casually violent can/should adventurers be?

Well, if the adventurers in question routinely interact with people with their weapons drawn, while having no legal backing or official standing, they’ll probably be regarded as dangerous bandits.

I have not seen many PCs do this, however. In modern settings, PCs who go armed have CCW in states which require it. Some are retired LEO with rights to carry derived from that. Others may be Reserve Sheriff’s Deputies, with departmentally issued or approved weapons. And they don’t draw their weapons unless the situation justifies it, legally and sensibly.

In campaigns set in historical eras or fantasy settings, PCs tend to act similarly. If they go armed, they have a legal right to do so, and will wear evidence of that fact. If knights or nobles, their arms will bear the heraldry of their station. If they are mercenaries, their band will be licensed and they wear surcoats, even uniforms, proclaiming their status as members.

As mercenaries, privateers, men-at-arms or whatever other form of intrepid adventurers they are, they will have the right to bear arms. Drawing those arms, let alone bringing them close to anyone, is something which they don’t necessarily do lightly, as that can cause people around them to flee, assuming that they are some kind of bandit or spree killer. It can also cause swordsmen with official standing to draw on them.

There was an incident when the PCs were visiting a foreign port and had not made any arrangements with local authorities or nobles. Bravos in the street at night, coming out of a wine shop, tried to threaten and bully them. When an NPC ally of the PCs reacted to crude sexual taunts with derision and a firm knee to the testicles, there might have been some hope of avoiding escalation, but swords were drawn.

In seconds, three wine-shop bravos were down and bleeding, because the PCs and their allies made their living fighting boarding actions against desperate pirates. They reacted with deadly violence, not showy performative fencing displays of young men pretending being dangerous. Two of the young men could be saved in the aftermath. One could not, he bled out. And happened to be the son of a local noble, doing what privileged young men often do.

The resulting court case required bribery to avoid the death penalty. They managed to get it down to exile and a hefty fine, restitution to the noble family. There is still some danger that the father or a brother will demand blood vengeance, but as the PCs now command a mercenary army and fleet of former pirates, now sworn to them as privateers, it is difficult for a foreign noble to lose a credible threat.

3 Likes

My modern games gravitate towards being something law-enforcement-adjacent, and generally towards solving situations without violence if at all possible. (Yeah, traditional British law enforcement, and even then more folkloric than real.) This isn’t an explicit decision, it’s something players and GM together have arrived at that works well for us.
(And then there’s Ruersaegn, who’s entirely happy to stick his gauss close assault weapon up someone’s nose if they’re being stroppy, and plays into the Vargr stereotype of being wild and unpredictable, but is actually a Mad Thinker by nature…)

5 Likes

I think there is often a game mechanics thing here too. If you’re playing a Three Musketeers or Errol Flynn’s Robin Hood type of game, you’d expect hitting a bad guy over the head with a flagon of beer would take him out of the fight. But quite often the game systems don’t support that kind of action. To make an NPC stop participating in the bar brawl, you have to hit him 12 times with the flagon doing 1 point of damage every time… or 3 times with your sword doing 4 damage.

I have one player who tried fisticuffs in a system once, realised how little damage it does, and also how much she was taking from NPCs who hadn’t put all their points in archery. So now she goes straight to firing arrows at people, no matter what the situation.

6 Likes

This opens up a whole can of game theory worms that I’d be happy to have a discussion about (perfect for Ever & Anon), but not for this thread.

5 Likes

Only if the game system assumes the characters are robots. Most people stop fighting for reasons that are best modelled by them being Intimidated, failing a Fright Check or otherwise lacking the Will to pursue a dangerous and painful course of action merely to show off or assert dominance. Characters should stop fighting when they realise the risks outweigh the rewards, not when their structural integrity is compromised.

In the specific instance to which I referred, the protagonists, a PC and his NPC adventuring-friend-with-benefits, both had some Disadvantages. They were young, rash, hard-drinking, proud and reckless. As it happened, the PC tried to show restraint and scare off their woefully out-of-their-depth foes without killing them. His friend, however, treated the men with swords as real threats and for her, it meant instinctively going for lethal cuts and thrusts, with muscle-memory which has no room for mercy or restraint.

And, frankly, the PC has his own struggles with his temper, so even his non-lethal attacks were brutal destroyed joints, broken jaws and concussions which may lead to permanent brain injury. Healing magic is available in that campaign, but two of the players are doctors, so injury rules are always determined in coordination with their expertise. Just because magic healing exists, it does not mean that even a rich man will know healers who can cure all illnesses or crippling wounds.

Even though the PC reached for healing potions as soon as his anger faded, twin sword thrusts to the heart and aortic region, one passing through the axillary artery and another through the subclavian artery, meant that it would have taken magic far beyond such minor herbal potions to stop that man bleeding out. Functionally, he was dead as soon as the swords were withdrawn from the wounds, one last arterial blood spray, and then the heart would probably have stopped in seconds.

The rest of the bravos did not require any wounds of their own to flee and/or panic. They were pampered, soft boys acting the part of bullies, but though many common folk had no recourse against their humiliation and persecution, there were more dangerous men than they around the docks. Men who’d been pirates in their youth and maybe still contemplated a corsair cruise to better their lot. They just feared social consequences from the noble families behind them, which the teenage bravos misinterpreted as fear of their swords.

If the protagonists had better self-discipline, they could have easily humiliated the bravos without killing anyone. Which is one reason for why the PC has continued to buy off the Disadvantages of his rash youth and replace them with more mature, self-imposed code of ethics.

And why his murderous fellow protagonist now has a different narrative arc, as she now has a dragonbone galley and a crew of her own picked privateers, nearly all of them former pirates, and her crossed-blades banner terrifies her enemies over three seas and one freshwater lake.

Edit: This might fit better in another thread, in which case I don’t know how to move it, but endorse doing so.

3 Likes

I think I’ll argue for a weak Sapir-Whorf interpretation. In AD&D (what I played most, which was the original edition) the only reliable way of taking someone out of a fight is to kill them (or, technically, put them in imminent danger of death). “Subduing” was just for certain sorts of monster.

And while obviously the players were not incapable of thinking about knocking people out non-lethally*, and I read house rules which tried to make this possible, the default assumption was that every fight was a fight to the death. You fought at full capacity until you fell over. Retreating generally meant they got in a free attack (I don’t remember whether this was a house rule and I’ve looked at Gygaxian prose once already today), and they could probably catch you anyway. Getting knocked out meant you were probably dead by the time the fight ended anyway. And the published adventures, which were what I at least tended to use as a source for “what this game is suppose to be like” in those days, were all about fights to the death.

By contrast - and I’ve definitely said this in Ever & Anon recently - in GURPS it is generally the case that you will become a less effective fighter as you lose hit points, and there’s a broad status (from 0 HP to -1 × your original HP total) in which doing anything other than sitting quietly may cause you to lose consciousness, but you’re not in danger of death. Smart opposition at that point will stop attacking you and concentrate on the guys who are still fighting. And so it’s not unlikely that the winners will be confronted, without particularly trying to, with a bunch of unconscious enemies. And in turn - though of course I’m (mumble) years older and I hope sometimes more mature too - my experience with GURPS is that fights swing much towards the capture and interrogate rather than the kill.

(There’s an exception if you’re dealing with powerful modern or futuristic weapons which may simply be a one-shot kill, but we hope everyone going into that sort of fight knows what they’re doing.)

* which is a genre switch of course, are you Sam Spade or someone in the real world?

2 Likes

This is an insane level of detail for a fight in an RPG…

Is that mechanical or flavour?

2 Likes

The most detailed damage system I have ever used is in the Advanced Damage Tables supplement for Phoenix Command which will track the path of a bullet through the body, including the possibility of deflecting off a bone. Here is just one of the 64 locational damage tables:


(“H” is ×100, “K” is ×1000, etc.)
“EPEN” is the effective penetration of the round, a proxy for its energy after it’s got through any armour. DC is Damage Class, a rough measure of how efficient the round is at transferring that energy into a soft target (similar to GURPS piercing size). Cross-reference the two and that tells you how much damage is done, as well as where the bullet stops - or indeed whether it travels on.

2 Likes

More modern terminology in D&D , I believe, is that until you’re down to 0 points, the HP don’t necessarily represent open wounds and stuff but bruises, exhaustion, minor wounds etc. that adrenaline can carry you through, and it’s only the ‘final blow’ (the one that takes you to 0 or below) that is an actual proper serious wound that puts you out of commission. You’re then either incapacitated or unconscious (however you want to play it) but with the potential to bleed out (hence the death saves etc). So I suppose healing magic before getting to 0 is no more than a really strong coffee and a few paracetamol! :slight_smile:

2 Likes

I’d say it is not just the game mechanics for the fight… it’s the game mechanics for the healing.

In our current Star Wars game (using 5e D&D), hit points go up and down like a yo-yo. One combat I was reduced to zero… then a PC healed me and a special ability kicked in, so now I had about 40 hit points… and got up and fought again and went down to about 2 hp… and then some more magical bollocks put me back to 20ish. Within 8 hours of the fight, everyone who wasn’t dead was back up to full hit points (which is ANOTHER reason you kill your head honcho enemies dead, dead, dead in D&D, unless you want to repeat the same fight again and again and again).

Meanwhile in Blue Planet Recontact they warn that combat is lethal… but more to the point, if you take a Mortal Wound and don’t die, your healing time is measured in MONTHS. And you’ll be at dice penalties all that time.

2 Likes

I used to have a house rule that anyone who’d gone to death saves at any stage carried at least one level of exhaustion with them for d4 days to represent it being more than just a wee scratch!

And with the BBEG, I always killed them anyway once they reached 0HP (unless they had minions that could heal them) so no need to apply the coup de grace!

1 Like

But on the topic at hand…

I think it completely depends on the environment (and perhaps the system).

In WFRP, if people started causing fights in the streets then, depending on who was involved, they’d have problems with the watch, bystanders etc. A pub brawl with no drawn weapons might attract the watch in an upper class area (but most people would be dragged to the cells overnight, fined and let go with a warning - unless a particularly snotty high-class NPC pressed for further action…) but in the docks, it would probably be allowed to finish and maybe just mop up any survivors etc IF they bothered to investigate at all. Once weapons are drawn, the repercussions get a lot more serious, especially if the more prosperous people get hurt rather than just low class riff raff (what can one expect from them?) etc. Just drawing weapons in a high class area would be investigated and you better have a good reason!

In D&D, it seems that most places are pretty ok with fights happening left right and centre! I always played that there were consequences in places like Baldurs Gate and Waterdeep but most towns would just ignore it and mop up whats left!

1 Like

Yeah, even original AD&D says that - it’s clearly ridiculous to say that a tough (but non-magical) fighter can take literally ten times the wounds of a normal fighter. But once you hit zero, the clock started and you would soon be dead unless someone could take time out of the fight to fix you up

Similarly Call of Cthulhu. In @JGD 's Laundry campaign (before the official RPG) we had the extra twist: yes, healing magic does theoretically exist. You are literally better off dead than being affected by it.

I do generally like fights that are short and fateful. Violence feels to me like something that should be a last resort if you’re doing investigation right.

Of course a lot of the unexamined assumptions of D&D come from the Western (pulp novels and films especially), in which the fight in the bar is practically a genre element because there’s basically one police so the most he can do is sweep up afterwards. Combine that with adventurers being mechanically much tougher than townsfolk and you can get a situation where the PCs are the baddies, the people who come into town and take what they want because nobody can stop them.

2 Likes

The injuries (some permanent) in WFRP could be quite debilitating. I don’t think I had a party free of at least one broken limb (and one had no nose) for the entire campaign

3 Likes

I think this is the other piece of the saphir-worfiness of the situation

In the pulps a dead opponent means the story moves on with less friction to the next event, particularly western and swords and sorcery because there’s not a modern society or police force to consider

2 Likes

Indeed.
IMG_0287

5 Likes

I played a campaign where the PCs were being pursued by some bounty hunters that were hired by a bunch of towns and villages that had clubbed together to hunt down these dangerous people who just kept starting fights everywhere. FAAFO

4 Likes

Well, the Arteries and Vitals are actual hit locations and targeting them through the armpit and neck takes advantage of how few warriors will armour those locations (because it compromises comfort and mobility if you do) and even if they do, armour over joints which move a lot tends to be flexible and less effective than thicker plates.

Now, the bravos were not armoured, but she didn’t rely on her vision in flickering torchlight to confirm that. Surcoats might be brigandine armour for all she knew, the outer colourful cloth concealing overlapping metal plates between layers of cloth. So, she went for the targets she knows and favours, to the point of having developed muscle memory of making those killing thrusts without any conscious thought, with the Targeted Attack technique.

I do have some house rules on bleeding from arteries, based on GURPS 3e optional rules and adjusted in collaboration with those of my players with a license to practice medicine. In this case, they were irrelevant, because it wasn’t one artery bleeding and needing emergency medicine to fix. The thrusts had damaged the heart and aorta in addition to the two arteries, so the cardiovascular system could not possibly continue to function.

In GURPS terms, the NPC failed the HT check which determined his continued survival, and even if he didn’t, suffered so much damage that his HP were deeply negative, and bleeding would have taken him into automatic death levels of negative HP soon.

1 Like

Don’t tempt me, I used to play Rolemaster. :slight_smile:

3 Likes

Yes in short, yes it was mechanical…

I repeat - for me, that is a level of detail waaaaaay over what I’m interested in. Which is probably why i only played GURPS a few times before deciding it wasn’t for me!!

1 Like