How casually are children and other innocents killed in your games /tg/?
Rather casually, if they prove to be an obstacle.
In today's wrap-up of our AW campaign, I attempted to kill the daughter of our resident psycho killer's nemesis twice.
She was trying to keep us from severing part of the Psychic Maelstrom, but said psycho killer had taken a liking to her and thus protected her.
Watch out for the street orphans.
In my games they die like anything else if the dice come against them, but I generally don't put them in harms way. The players see to that.
Once had a party almost murder a kid in cold blood while taking an initiation test for an order of Paladins and another tine talked a PC down from creating a time paradox by killing a little girl he had already met as an adiult in the future.
As a general rule, I only kill random NPC's or background people when it has a purpose (as either a player or DM). If it doesn't have a purpose, then the story gains nothing and it's just stupid.
Only one time has this gotten to the point where multiple villages have been slaughtered and burned in front of the players when I was DM.
Nah, just an NPC. And the Hocus, who sacrificed himself for the ritual, used his last improvement to take over her father as a PC.
Incidentally, my Angel used his last improvement to change his type to Hocus so he could take over for his deceased friend.
This marks the first time I have actually played a campaign to its conclusion and it was simply satisfying.
Oh come now,
"every"-body is guilty of some-thing.
Dramatically. If done properly, the death of innocents can be an indictment of player failure. Also, there's nothing more erotic than the death of a young woman. See the Fatal Frame II ending and the 'most beautiful suicide' to get what I mean.
On my phone, but Youtube the Shadow Festival and Puppet endings. Especially the Puppet ending. There's a reason certain forms of death are highly eroticized, though technically strangulation should leave an ugly corpse.
Its become a running joke with my my players that street urchins are an organized criminal menace and sending anyone to an "ophanage" is an euphemism for murdering them in a back alley.
Barbarian might kill someone if they annoy us enough, and if a child's actively hostile and trying to murder us, and we can't afford to try nonlethal, them's the breaks.
Barbarian is pretty unfazed by killing people in cold blood though, (at least ones she considers scum). In her own words, "If I kill something, I'd like to be able to brag about it."
Thief will also kill people who annoy/irritate her severely, but is a bit more motherly; She also probably wouldn't kill children unless presented with no other choice.
Beyond that, both are for one reason or another, tried killers. They probably won't kill you for looking at them funny, but it's unlikely they'd lose sleep over a little collateral damage unless they knew the guy.
I once read something in one of the d6 Star Wars that stuck with me for some reason. Kill someone with a blaster, that's personal. Kill a planet, that's news. So when I kill innocents, it's in mass amounts. Makes it less personal, more a spector then a child taking an arrow in the eye.
Our games usually don't take place in happy places so the idea of innocent children doesn't really exist. Maybe the wealthy nobles could shelter kids like how it is for most people in first world countries but the majority of the kids were hardened to life very early and died accordingly.
As collateral damage, while the straight man screams, them wizard may or may not object heavily (depending on if he threw the fireball, or the weather), the tank tanks and the psychopath probably responsible.