Quote from: Spinachcat;1126463Questions for all the GMs!!

1) How do you feel about using human foes vs. monster foes?

Foes are foes, it doesn't matter because it is a game.

Quote from: Spinachcat;11264632) Have you encountered any opposition by players regarding killing human foes?

Never. Then again, I play with people who have a strong grasp of reality or I don't play with them.

Quote from: Spinachcat;11264633) Are any thoughts regarding the above questions game dependent? AKA, are there D&Disms at play that don't show up in other RPGs?

Nope. You either get the difference between the Real World and a game or you don't.

Jeff's answers are accurate from my perspective and the vast majority of players I have encountered.  The potential exceptions have mostly been at conventions, and even then I could not state categorically that the players had a problem, only that I didn't get to know them well enough to say for sure whether some subtle clues would have emerged as a problem later.

Then there are the two exceptions that I know for a fact had serious problems, but those were not game related.  A game was just one of many ways in which the problems manifested themselves, including one guy who was not figuratively but in reality "off his meds"--and not capable of friendly social interaction even when on them.

Quote from: Spinachcat;11264631) How do you feel about using human foes vs. monster foes?

I use them all the time. Wherever it makes sense really. Elves (not drow), dwarves and even gnomes are also fait game. The group even refers to the latter as "gnomicide."

Quote2) Have you encountered any opposition by players regarding killing human foes?

Only when I'm a player, but then I generally regard fighting as a last resort regardless of system and my aversion to killing applies across species and because, as someone with the thinker motivation, live beings are more generally useful for problem-solving than dead ones. Mercy is also a useful bargaining tool and, if things go sideways in a civilized setting (or modern setting in general) battery is a lot easier to justify as self-defense to the authorities than homicide.

Quote3) Are any thoughts regarding the above questions game dependent? AKA, are there D&Disms at play that don't show up in other RPGs?

Slightly, but it's more thematic than specific to a given system. If there's an invasion or war going on then killing of the enemy becomes much more common. I actually find it more common in sci-fi/space opera settings where faceless mooks are part of the setting (ex. Stormtroopers) than fantasy actually. In mecha-focused games blowing up enemy capital ships with crews of thousands without a moment's regret is pretty common whether the opposing side is humans or bug-eyed monsters.

By contrast, lethality goes down to almost zero when I'm running a Star Trek game. "Set phasers to stun" and solving the problem du jour through non-violent means is a huge part of playing as a Starfleet officer. My Mage game set in the modern world also features very low lethality because dead bodies get attention and magic is such a flexible tool that enemies are rarely direct enough to lead to direct combat that often.

Traditional D&D dungeon crawls actually lean more towards the latter in my experience. You try for the positive outcome on the reaction rolls before you start a fight because allies are way more useful than a pile of dead bodies. An exchange between neutral parties is similarly a better outcome than combat most times too.

Killing whoever it is also feels way more justified when they attack first after you tried to negotiate in good faith.

Rape really doesn't have a place in PG-13 material anymore, something I actually agree with. Sexual Violence can be alluded to in such things, but going with it being a very real thing that happens in a setting kicks it up to a hard R in my opinion.

In which case, for standard most ages Appropriate Dungeons and Dragons you're basically left with two choices. Half-Orcs are rare and from voluntary coupling... Much like your Half-Elfs... and with the newer generation version of Orcs being more attractive than their predecessors, makes perfect sense... or just skip it all and make Orcs a playable race. Like Shadowrun and Earthdawn did decades ago.

This all comes back to the inclusion of Half-Orcs in Dungeons and Dragons being a poor choice in the first place. Because when they debuted in the Players Handbook back in 3rd edition... It was clear.. they came from Rape. Because Orcs were a nasty, brutish, and evil species.

Well, times have changed, and as I've stated before, I agree with this particular change... Rape really shouldn't be a front and center thing for a most ages appropriate game. So Half-Orcs can't come from rape. Which means, Orcs can't be a nasty, brutish, inherently evil species anymore...

Which means you've lost a great source of canon fodder baddies to plague PC's with.

Keep your evil half breeds to races people would willingly have sex with... Like, Sexy Drow, or Succubi/Inccubi in the case of Tieflings...

Quote from: Spinachcat;1126463Questions for all the GMs!!

1) How do you feel about using human foes vs. monster foes?

Foes are foes. I don't racially discriminate. Some human foes might be rapists too, though I don't regularly feature that in my games but it might be implied if applicable.

Quote from: Spinachcat;11264632) Have you encountered any opposition by players regarding killing human foes?

With the rare exception of players willing to RP proper good and/or pacifist PCs, they will mercilessly slaughter ANY foes regardless of race. Conversely, "Good RP" players will (in character) refuse to murder helpless foes, even if they're goblinoids.

Quote from: Spinachcat;11264633) Are any thoughts regarding the above questions game dependent? AKA, are there D&Disms at play that don't show up in other RPGs?

Not really, as far as I can tell. Players will behave as previously stated regardless of game system. Even if the system discourages killing.

Quote from: Orphan81;1126491Rape really doesn't have a place in PG-13 material anymore, something I actually agree with. Sexual Violence can be alluded to in such things, but going with it being a very real thing that happens in a setting kicks it up to a hard R in my opinion.

In which case, for standard most ages Appropriate Dungeons and Dragons you're basically left with two choices. Half-Orcs are rare and from voluntary coupling... Much like your Half-Elfs... and with the newer generation version of Orcs being more attractive than their predecessors, makes perfect sense... or just skip it all and make Orcs a playable race. Like Shadowrun and Earthdawn did decades ago.

This all comes back to the inclusion of Half-Orcs in Dungeons and Dragons being a poor choice in the first place. Because when they debuted in the Players Handbook back in 3rd edition... It was clear.. they came from Rape. Because Orcs were a nasty, brutish, and evil species.

Well, times have changed, and as I've stated before, I agree with this particular change... Rape really shouldn't be a front and center thing for a most ages appropriate game. So Half-Orcs can't come from rape. Which means, Orcs can't be a nasty, brutish, inherently evil species anymore...

Which means you've lost a great source of canon fodder baddies to plague PC's with.

Keep your evil half breeds to races people would willingly have sex with... Like, Sexy Drow, or Succubi/Inccubi in the case of Tieflings...

I don't necessarily mind allusions to rape as much, cuz we're dealing with games where PCs and NPCs outright murder people on a regular basis and to me murder will always be worse than rape (cuz it demonstrably is) regardless of social attitudes towards it. But I can see why people might be wary of featuring rape in a game targeting children and I probably wouldn't include it in a session with kids present. Though, I mostly agree, specially about Half-Orc PCs being a bad idea in the first place.

My take has always been that the entire existence of Half-Orcs revolves around giving players a watered down version of orcs, cuz the designers didn't want to allow full orcs as a PCs race despite there being a demand for it. I would much rather allow players play an actual orc than to beat around the bush with watered down races when I know that what players really want to play is an actual orc. If drow can be PCs then so should full blooded orcs.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1126463Questions for all the GMs!!

1) How do you feel about using human foes vs. monster foes?

2) Have you encountered any opposition by players regarding killing human foes?

3) Are any thoughts regarding the above questions game dependent? AKA, are there D&Disms at play that don't show up in other RPGs?

My players regularly encounter human (and other assorted PC races, but generally >75% human) foes. They have no issues killing them when engaged in battle, but they are hesitant about premeditated intrusions into their "lairs" with intent to do wanton slaughter (including of non-combatants). In the latter cases, they are far more likely to try to come up with non-violent solutions than they would be if the foes were of the typically monstrous races.

Quote from: Orphan81;1126491This all comes back to the inclusion of Half-Orcs in Dungeons and Dragons being a poor choice in the first place. Because when they debuted in the Players Handbook back in 3rd edition... It was clear.. they came from Rape. Because Orcs were a nasty, brutish, and evil species.

Half-orc was a race choice at least as far back as AD&D 1e. I never played one until a 2e game (he was a deserter from the Greyhawk Wars), but they were around long before 3e.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1126503Half-orc was a race choice at least as far back as AD&D 1e. I never played one until a 2e game (he was a deserter from the Greyhawk Wars), but they were around long before 3e.

2e actually got rid of half orcs, they came back in 3e.

Quote from: S'mon;11265112e actually got rid of half orcs, they came back in 3e.

They most certainly existed in 2e. While the 2e PHB (1989) doesn't list them as a PC choice, it does mention them a few times. The stats for PC half-orcs that we used came from the Skills & Powers (1995) book, which was a late 2e product. The Complete Book of Humanoids (1993) also had a very similar PC half-orc.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1126514They most certainly existed in 2e. While the 2e PHB (1989) doesn't list them as a PC choice, it does mention them a few times. The stats for PC half-orcs that we used came from the Skills & Powers (1995) book, which was a late 2e product. The Complete Book of Humanoids (1993) also had a very similar PC half-orc.

True, but I think that the point is that they weren't a standard PC race in 2e and you needed special optional supplements (that came out years after the 2e PHB and needed DM permission) to even get stats for them. But they came back as a standard PC race in 3e due to popular demand.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1126516True, but I think that the point is that they weren't a standard PC race in 2e and you needed special optional supplements (that came out years after the 2e PHB and needed DM permission) to even get stats for them. But they came back as a standard PC race in 3e due to popular demand.

The point was that they existed well before 3e. That they existed in 2e is also true regardless of the particular book that their rules appear in.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1126503Half-orc was a race choice at least as far back as AD&D 1e. I never played one until a 2e game (he was a deserter from the Greyhawk Wars), but they were around long before 3e.

Notice I said the Player's Handbook, and not some extra supplement. They weren't in the 2e Player's Handbook, and I don't recall them being in most of the previous ones. But then, I didn't personally own any of the various 1st edition Player's handbooks. But they weren't there in 2e.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1126516True, but I think that the point is that they weren't a standard PC race in 2e and you needed special optional supplements (that came out years after the 2e PHB and needed DM permission) to even get stats for them. But they came back as a standard PC race in 3e due to popular demand.

Yes.

Quote from: Orphan81;1126525Notice I said the Player's Handbook, and not some extra supplement. They weren't in the 2e Player's Handbook, and I don't recall them being in most of the previous ones. But then, I didn't personally own any of the various 1st edition Player's handbooks. But they weren't there in 2e.

So you deliberately skipped AD&D 1e? You probably should have made that omission clear.

One really simple and realistic source for half orcs is a recessive gene.  One in four or one in eight orcs is born just a little more human.  There isn't really any human DNA involved, just a quirk of the genome.