>some of the monsters in the dungeon are willing to accept bribes or otherwise be persuaded to let the party pass
>party just keeps killing them
What's the best way to drop a hint to an oblivious party?
Doesn't work most of the time though.
They still get fought a fucking ton
>"Guys, could you please consider the idea that not everything that looks as a monster is an evil things that con only be dealt with the pointy side of a sword? That's make the game more insteresting for you."
It's actually pretty rational.
>Fight the monster
>+potentially get gold
>+permanently eliminate threat
>Bribe the monster
>-Risk them alerting the other monsters and/or potentially laying a trap for you on the way out
Why would they bother bribing or persuading the monsters if they can kill them instead? They get bonuses in the form of more loot and EXP, and they get the relief that they don't have to re-bribe or persuade the monsters if they have to flee through that area again.
Leaving the monsters alive behind you is a good way to get attacked from both sides when the Goblins or Orcs or whatever you're dealing with have you at their mercy.
Unless you're fighting humans or clearly display that these creatures are friendly and don't have an ulterior motive, probably with a tribal bonding scene of some sort, the only thing the Adventurers get by dealing with the monsters if more firmly entrenched in dangerous territory with fewer lines of escape.
It's not irrational to prefer to deal with monsters with violence rather than words. They're considered monsters for a reason. Normal, rational people don't live in dungeons and demand bribes from strangers who wander in.
What would they even do with gold? Is there a store in there? Do they take sundays off to go to the market?
If the group resorts to violence at the drop of the hat while in a city, choosing to brawl it out with the city guard or whatever, then you might have a murderhobo problem.
This just sounds like you are giving them scenarios that sound shady as fuck, and they are resorting to time-tested reliable solutions.
Start putting in encounters that it's blatantly obvious they will be rewarded a lot more heavily for cooperating and would lose said reward if they killed it and throw in some encounters that killing the monster would cause negative consequences like a friendly NPC who is also friends with the monster, slowly tone down the severity of these encounters as they get used to them
>all monsters have suicidal mentalities and have no concept of being outclassed in every regard
Then why are they trying to jew the PCs out of some dosh and wine instead of just letting them pass?
Surely if they're that aware of how outclassed they are, they are aware that they treading on pretty thin ice?
>more loot and EXP
No. no no no nono no no. If we're assuming some D&D-alike as the paradigm: XP is for DEFEATING enemies, overcoming obstacles, and achieving goals. Fighter got an eensy bonus for being the one to specifically kill monsters, but on the whole accepting surrender, bribing them, or deftly dodging past without ever being noticed all constitute defeat. Treasure should also be more generalized. Unless you're pulling it off the corpse of the BBEG, valuables you obtain will likely be treasure found around the lair, not loot per se.
TLDR: stop playing JRPGs with dice.
I would personally tone up, rather than tone down. Otherwise the players will feel punished for not choosing an option they didn't originally know existed if you launch them straight into the deep end.
It's not always obvious what options are available to players when interacting with monsters. You might think 'talk to it' is a pretty obvious option, but depending on the system and game so far, not necessarily.
Also as an aside: a player is unlikely to bribe a monster they can kill without expending permanent resources anyway.
where else are the kobolds going to go when the adventurers kick in the door to their dungeon?
only monsters that would try and jew someone would think thye have a significant advantage. Ones who know they are outclassed wouldnt engage in the first place. unless the adventurers kick in the door to the kobold's cave. then what are they gonna do, run out into the sun? now you COULD slaughter them and get their shitty homemade weapons, trival XP and a handful of hoarded silver OR you can offer them some gold to do your dirty work for you. As a DM I would give way more XP for that than just killing them.
I just straight up tell my players at the start of the game that XP is for overcoming obstacles, not nessesarily from killing things.
then I award more RP XP for overcoming problems non-violently than i would for slaughter. works quite well.
>That's a loss though. I'm not getting the EXP and I'm losing gold.
get a better DM then and stop treating the game like a video game. I award MORE XP for being clever and for killing. fast talk a group of ogres into killing each other and you get way more XP than just killing them yourself. and Hell, maybe Ugmar the Ogre makes another appearance later in the game, having used the gold the party gave him to buy some orc made armor and become a merc. More XP + Ogre NPC.
You make the mistake that a lot of DM's make, you can't write out a finished story and expect the players to go along with it, you have to write a basic idea and let them take it wherever it goes. If you really want them to try and go along with the story as you planned it, then you have to be more creative in how you explain things to them, don't let their minds do all the thinking. For example, you could show them the picture you posted here and THEN say "one of the monsters wants to work something out". Having pictures present to show your party exactly what situation you had in mind helps them see see what you wanted them to see.
One session me and my buddies got wasted while playing and the DM tried to bring a female npc into the party, we had no healer so she was going to be our healer, we ended up trying to rape her instead. Just assume that your party is not going to go along with what you had in mind, and thats half the fun!
Is there a reason why you want the party to not kill them?
In my opinion just say "are you sure" alot, they'll eventually stop doing that or quit your game. Once they actually bribe one, make sure it betrays them in the worst way possible.
Try to make the monsters more related, affable. Make them seem like if the players didn't look like they have murder in their eyes and the monster's best friend's blood on their face, they could have been friends.
>Once they actually bribe one, make sure it betrays them in the worst way possible
Make it the second one. Have the first one go off without a hitch so that they think they could beibe for ez mode
If you are going to take that route then it would be better to have every bribed monster conspire to betray them and allow them to spend money gearing up an elite unit of bribed monsters to kill the party (themselves)
Why would you open that door, they will start screaming about memes if you mention undertale.
As for your second comment, what are you trying to say
Am I the only one who doesn't like using XP at all? I tend to award them a level every time they've pretty much experienced everything about their class at the current level correlating it with some worthy feats they've accomplished.
This way I avoid talking numbers to my players and they say it feels much more natural than grinding.
As >>44924991 said.
If Granny Pleasanton asks those nice adventurers to go find her cat and offer a magic sword in return and the players just kill her and loot her house, that's murderhoboing.
But if the party goes in search of the cat after it wandered off into the dungeons of Castle Spookula and decide to kill the Dweller in the Dark rather than play his bullshit game of riddles so he won't eat them, then that's not murderhoboing.
>I am willing to take some of your money instead of dying and giving you my money and xp
Surely you see the folly of accepting such a deal
Actually, I can't help but think that's totally reasonable for adventurers. Like, most are a group of desperate, bloody-handed looters. What's to stop them from raping the few attractive females found in a dungeon? I assume these men haven't fucked anything for a while now. Putting an attractive woman, or something shaped like a woman, in front of them is like throwing steaks to dogs.
We were very drunk and had been smoking a lot of dope. The situation went exactly like this
DM: you see a girl standing in the clearing, she seems scared as you approach her, but does not run away, when you get up to her she asks "who are you?"
Kurik the ass mangler: "lets rape her"
Lloynis: "roll for initiative"
DM: "the girl is not impressed with your jokes, she pulls out a knife and swiftly puts it to your throat"
Me: "hey now lady calm down we aren't going to hurt you"
DM: "you couldn't if you tried"
me: "well fuck you bitch its on"
*the girl stabs me and round house kicks me in the neck, I fall to the ground*
DM: "anyone else?"
and thats how she joined our merry band of adventurers.
Heroes of Horror Taint rules.
Kill too many things, never sleep again.
Kill a fleeing enemy, your eyes fall out and you see via glowing gots in the sockets.
Kill a baby monster, gain an evil twin.
Not everybody spews memes whenever the chance arrives. Second comment is perhaps faggot GMs who make any attempt to avoid a fight end with inevitable ass fucking by whoever they opted to not kill for fucking once.
>Decide to bribe a monster instead of kill it easily
>Every time we try it comes back to fuck us in the ass in horrifying ways
>GM wonders why we kill everything when given the chance
Get it now?
Not only can your character get increasingly severe PTSD from battle to the point they get flashbacks constantly, they can have lichen grow on their skin while worms crawl beneath the surface for using Smite Evil on Orcish babies.
You can also use your taint to become a god tier villain, weaponize fear, or fight a battle for your soul and the souls of your party everywhere you go.
Oh, when you get resurected you can come back like Pet Cemetary. Magic can mutate you, your god can go insane watching you or your fellow clergy. Fun stuff!
Not a bad idea, a pretty good one even, but if the players start to become afraid of battling monsters, how terrified will they be when the monsters start offering them bargains?
They're always being stalked by unseen things, any monster could be a maiden who's death will damn their soul while any maiden could be an ancient lich who has waited to take revenge on your ancestor since the time of the third generation of mortals.
Adventuring is Blair Witch Project, being in a city is deciding between Texas Chainsaw, 30 Days of Night, or Hostel, and in the end almost everyone but the brightest of souls dies a monster full of regret themselves.
You can cackle in your villainy like the Invisible Man, be a neutral suffering spul like The Mummy, be an innocent unaware of what you do like the Creature From The Black Lagoon, be deluded like a Somnambulist, or suffer like the Wolfman.
Honestly the little things to throw in while travelling, finding teeth in fruit, sound of chewing next to me when i awaken, it all would spook the unholy fuck outa me.
or maybe its just a bunch of prankster skeleton wizards, fuck if I know.
Enjoy not having allies
Who says that ogre is going to fuck you when he makes an appearance again?
You got him out of his shit cave gave him to motivation to get rid of his other neckbearded ogre roommates and gave him enough to invest lucrative merc work.
one dimensional thinking gets you one dimensional rewards.
I did something similar with a drunken Hill Giant. 16 sessions later the party used him to smash down the town gate as they bum rushed the town treasury. They could have had a 500gp bounty for his head, but they ended up with 50K in gold bars instead. enjoy your pleb-tier group
>Well, in MY group...
Stop. Just stop right there. I really don't give a fuck what namby pamby bullshit you made up just so you could win an internet argument to feel good about yourself.
People have fun in different ways. And if you try to punish people for trying to have fun because you think it's wrong, then you're a cunt. Full stop.
I bet you're one of those assholes who have NPCs chew out the players because they dared lay a hand on another sentient creature. That murderous, man-eating ogre was just misunderstood, I'm sure.
>Well, in MY group...
you did literally the exact same thing lol
I reward creativity and outside the box thinking. treating rpgs like video games makes them boring.
Killing everyone you meet isnt "The DM punishing you for behaving wrong" its "everyone you meet you kill so you have no allies". not sure where the punishment come in, only non-standard rewards
You seem like you havent played in a decent game in years. Not sure how turning an ogre into a merc makes it misunderstood and redeemible... its just a cool idea. what isnt to like about having an ogre in full plate you can hire for gp?
are you virtualopium?
>There is no reason to NOT kill monsters.
turning them into an army to further you own goals.
Like like you dont even want to be a noble
>plz mr king i killed them monsters here plz give me some land, i'll even pay for it with this gold i took from them
What are you, Canadian?
>*the girl stabs me and round house kicks me in the neck, I fall to the ground*
That's bullshit if it was not done with rolls
I don't give a fuck, some character should not be able to just fuck me up with no rolls cus' GM wanted to.
Good thing I am a GM and have never done shit like that, in fact I've had cases of PC's killing NPC's absolutely crucial to the plot.
>you did literally the exact same thing lol
You're blind or stupid. I've made zero references to my own group.
I've also never said that you should kill absolutely everyone. I've just said that it's easier, faster, more profitable and more reliable to just off monsters instead of talking/bribing your way past. There's just more advantages to it.
If you murderhobo absolutely everyone, then yeah, no allies seems reasonable. Killing sprees should be punished, I absolutely agree.
But some chucklefuck goblin or some woodland bandit is free game. There is absolutely no way to tell if a, enemy will stab you in the back or come back to aid you later. That's entirely up to the GM, and I don't happen to be a mind reader. Dead is dead, outside of a few circumstances. I'll take a guarantee of safety and profit now than a maybe later any day.
>turning them into an army to further you own goals.
That's what trained mecenaries are for, which will be far better in war than some disorganized group of wretched beasts. Not to mention men won't want to serve in an army with monsters, and they will wreak havoc on public opinion. Hiring a couple merc companies is far more efficient.
>plz mr king i killed them monsters here plz give me some land, i'll even pay for it with this gold i took from them. What are you, Canadian?
No, you assassinate the King during a hunting trip and work to destabilize the entire region, then using gold gathered from sacking and dungeon slaying, walk in with a giant merc army promising stability and order. Then you lock shit the fuck down and establish yourself as regent. Anybody who takes offense gets bribed with cash/more land, or beheaded.
>What if I want to...
>Well this is how I...
>NO FUCK YOU I DONT CARE ABOUT WHAT YOU DO YOU ARE WRONG
>but you just...
>NO YOU ARE SO STUPID!
combat can take hours, conversation minutes, so also wrong
only if you only consider gp profit. information is also a valuable resource
I'll give you this one
OP, what you need to do is challenge your party morally. Because most people are decent enough souls that a fairly obvious moral choice can dissuade them from the choice that is better in a cold, logical sense.
First, put emphasis on the fact that the party can chose to deal with enemies without killing them. Maybe start with just things like stunning instead of murdering, and then move up to talking your way past. Once your players realize that there is an option aside from murder, murder may become less palpable because it's not the only way forward. You should combine this with enemies your party may not necessarily want to kill, like rebellious farmers who can be portrayed as just frightened and angry over the plague sweeping the land.
On top of this, the best way to sweeten the deal is to add some benefits on to not killing enemies. Killing an enemy has the immediate benefit of removing them as an obstacle - but if you don't kill them or bribe them, they'll refuse to fight you, or help you out if you get captured, or even feel obliged to give you directions or tell you about upcoming traps. After the dungeon or mission, maybe they'll pop up at a later date to repay the favor.
>Not to mention men won't want to serve in an army with monsters
so? orcs are cheaper then men
>they will wreak havoc on public opinion.
cuz public opinion matters when usurping thrones...
>hiring a couple merc companies is far more efficient.
Mercs are expensive, and anyone can hire them. likey the king you want to kill already has a bunch of them on retainer. mobs arent, and can provide a good distraction for said assassination, as well as the perfect scapegoats.
>Then you lock shit the fuck down and establish yourself as regent.
cuz the kingdom is going to go to you and not the other 12 guys next in line for the throne. do you even medieval politics?
Its like you dont even want to be a supervillian
>Anybody who takes offense gets bribed with cash/more land
so you agree bribery is a viable strategy?
>so? orcs are cheaper then men
Fuck no they ain't. Orcs are bigger, meaner, and need more calories. An army of Orcs will need more food than men, especially meat, which ain't cheap.
>cuz public opinion matters when usurping thrones...
It kinda does considering that a dynasty lives and dies by public opinion. Or did you forget that Kings only rule with the consent of the vassals?
>cuz the kingdom is going to go to you and not the other 12 guys next in line for the throne. do you even medieval politics?
Not if they're dead. Or you turn yourself into a social hero like William Marshal with tournament victories, coupled by slaying monsters.
>so you agree bribery is a viable strategy?
Of course it is. For humans.
>An army of Orcs will need more food than men,
ya but men expect things like clean water, beds, civil rights. I aint got time for that shit I have a kingdom to topple
>not enforing your laws and authority with the iron fist of an orc army
>Not if they're dead
that is a lot of rich nobles to assassinate usually. if not, your lucky.
>mfw my entire plan hinges on a sentient magic item
>ya but men expect things like clean water, beds, civil rights. I aint got time for that shit I have a kingdom to topple
You really don't know anything about Medieval Warfare, do you? Mercs were considered the ideal military force because they had no issues of loyalty but to you, were completely willing to commit mass slaughter or even genocide, and didn't give a shit about beds or clean water as they were professional soldiers.
>that is a lot of rich nobles to assassinate usually. if not, your lucky.
Only if you literally have to whack every single noble. Just take out all the King's issue (if he even has any) along with any siblings. Claimants to the throne will be dealt with later.
>You really don't know anything about Medieval Warfare
Actually no I dont. I thought my tone was pretty clear that im not taking any of this seriously at all
As a player I actually would want to run a Kingdom. Im only actually only interested in the heros journey,not what comes after
Let them know that "defeating" encounters through other methods other than combat also grants experience.
That plus the bribes, should do it. Also, remember them there's always consequences. They might change in alignment, get a bad reputation for brutally murdering people who were just asking some gold,etc.
Bump into some fellow adventurers, who straight-out tell them that they haven't had to kill a damn thing yet?
Or it might just be that your party just isn't after that kind of game, and just want to wander through killing everything for sweet sweet loot, in which case there's not much you can do.
You're both cunts for trying to get the last word on an anonymous imageboard, but whoever wrote >>44928385 is the more obnoxious one, so meaningless cyber ego points go to whoever didn't write it.
That's a pretty good doujin with a surprisingly nice story, and in this context...an okay example?
If the party is going to be totally murderhobos, they aren't even going to stop and talk to the monster and have it explain how nervous it is, or reluctant to kill humans it is, or whatever. They're just going to keep stabbing it until it stops moving.
And in this case, where it becomes a very useful NPC and a good ally, the monsters in the dungeon would probably stick around for what, one mission? Maybe show up again later as part of a favor? This would work well for a potential PC (minus the sex stuff), but not for an NPC the players have no real reason to care about or stay their hands against.
This gai gets it
I was about to make this post.
Except I agree with the one saying that the players are in the right for killing unknown and dangerous monsters instead of negotiating with an unknown evil that maybe won't fuck them later.
Nor do I fault him for telling the wishy washy troll sympathizer lefty faggot to fuck off.
Make Dungeons Great Again
I sympathise with the guy, but the truth is that there's a time and a place for negotiation, and there's a time and a place for killing.
Assuming that just because you persuaded/bribed someone means they vanish into the ether is simply metagaming. The actual RPers would be genuinely worried about backstabs, looking for a higher bidder, or simply getting cold feet and squealing anyway.
I know for a fact that Grasch Doomebringer didn't get his name by adopting kittens, and I'm fairly sure his minions know that too, just as I'm fairly sure that they know what might happen to someone if they took a bribe.
So no, even in the unlikely event he's not leading me into a trap, I'm not risking him later thinking long and hard about what might happen to him if he fuck up and the boss starts asking questions about how they got past the guard.
Front pages says it's called "Tentacles Training"
I can see the logic of killing the monsters.
That way you don't leave any enemies active to stab you in the back later, or betray you to their monster allies.
You want advice? Don't play with murderhobos, or make it so that killing things isn't the primary source of loot and advancement.
This thread reminds me of my group.
Got them into gaming a year ago, and they're the biggest murderhobos I've ever met.
I once brought up the idea that maybe some problems might be best resolved without violence, and that rewards can be had, without killing everything.
They proceeded to knock out every enemy they came across, instead of murdering them, strictly because they thought they'd get more xp for it.
Really OP just needs to give better context that doesn't result directly in monster murder.
I mean if they're just in a fucking dungeon and suddenly some fucking 9 foot tall Bodak creeps out of the corner holding an Uno set you're not really going to be concerned with his wants or needs.
but if you wander into Monster Town, and it's a quiet, posh little village in hell but theres a Bodak pushing a lawnmower over his grass and his kids are playing and wearing Minions and Star Wars T-shirts and then suddenly Constable Minotaur wanders by and gives them a stern "Hello, don't be causing any trouble".
Then the Bodak kids start bitching about how its racist to assume that all Adventurer's are crazy murderers and etc etc.
What happened to you /tg/? all i see here is 'violance is the best way'. what happened to people originality, curiosity and sense of adventure?
How much gold, exactly, have you made by killing people?
>What happened to you /tg/? all i see here is 'violance is the best way'. what happened to people originality, curiosity and sense of adventure?
fuck off back to tumblr, perhaps MLP/homo universe/retardtale is more your speed
this is /tg/
My character is a constable, obsessed with bringing the BBEG (A Ghast, who used to be a local noble) in, alive(well, undead, but functioning), for trial.
After 100+ murders and turning his victims into sacrifices or ghouls, the rest of the party would just murderhobo their way to a finale here.
Their way gets a kill, some xp, and the admiration of the town.
My way gets a captured BBEG, being able to bring him into town for a trial, letting the actual victims see some justice, an escort to the local prison/sanitarium (I've personally funded the construction of the facility, with thousands of my own gold), and possible story hooks later.
GM promised me a connection later on, in a "Silence of the lambs"-esqe interaction with him later, once he's in prison.
None of that awesomeness is possible by killing him right away.
>/tg/ is /pol/ now
Pity. it was the last bastion of quality in 4chan.
oh right, you stormfags can't get hints, so let me put it in your languege:
'fuck off back to tumblr, perhaps gaiaonline|/pol/|/b/ is more your speed'
(protip: you have a brain, use it.)
>what happened to you /tg/
We love context.
You're one of four men who are exploring a cavern.
Each of you has a specialty that makes you an asset to the group.
You only have the resources a cave offers to you and what you brought on your back.
Suddenly some monsters come out to bully you and your three friends.
Your three friends who you rely on and who rely on you to survive out here in this horrible place.
"Give us your food!"
"Give us your gold!"
Is it creative to surrender?
Is it creative to give away your resources simply because they're demanded of you?
These are bandits here to take away your supplies, to take away your reward for risking your life.
To possibly injure or kill the people you rely on.
You have a right to defend yourself.
These monsters aren't your friends, they're dangerous beings who wish you harm and don't care about you.
They don't care about where you're from, what music you like, what your character backstory is.
They just want your food and your gold.
>What happened to you /tg/? all i see here is 'violance is the best way'. what happened to people originality, curiosity and sense of adventure?
There's nothing creative about what the OP is asking. It's a idea that isn't realized beyond "what if X" and fails to realize the implications of what X might imply.
Bribing a monster in a dungeon is A Dumb Idea all around that just shows that the party is weak. That's it. If the monster was scared for its life or anything at all besides "I am going to kill you" it wouldn't ask for a bribe. It would be bribing the adventurers to let it live.
There's nothing to be gained from bribing a monster because a bribe explicitly says that the monster is more powerful than the adventurers, and they would rather give up some of their gold than risk a fight with it. It's not going to make the monster more amicable towards the adventurers nor will it make it a potential ally, and if anything it will most likely incur further harassment down the line from said monster, because it knows it can prey upon the adventurers.
What happened is that you put /tg/ on a pedestal, then compounded the issue by advocating things needlessly because you think you're being creative, while in fact you're over complicating a simple issue.
you know, when exploring someones den you need to take into account the possibility of the resident being around. and making connections is more intersting in the long run than simply hammering nails everywhere.
its creative to nagotiatie. perhaps you can gain something more than just staying clear of violance.
they have a right to ave a home, more than you have to intrude upon it.
you just want loot and fame.
a dungeon have many forms, and having connections on the inside can prove usefull for whatever goal you had when entering it. whoever lives inside knows the dangers, layout, places of interest... plenty of reasons to use that diplomacy skill.
Go tell that to all the Muslim "Refugees" libtard
He means you're the one baiting you libcuck
>put /tg/ on a padastrel
>you're over complicating a simple issue.
yeah, thats the fun in playing with humans dms. if i wanted simple, id play final fantasy.
I know what he meant and i spun it around you beta neanderthal.
Great comment. I like how you replied to the point rather than going around with stuff like 'you are wrong because i say so'.
thats you chum. i didn't imply he implied the post i replied to (thats >>44936589 if you lost me) was the trolling, i simply said 'call me troll but he started'.
people in the right are very simple minded, but i'd appreciate if they stop blaming everyone else for trying to fool them when they aren't trying to use their brain in the first place.
You avoided his point first.
I'd like to see you even try making an honest rebuttal to any of the people who bothered replying to you:
I'd like to hear you explain how: >>44936589
Is a troll post or a lie in any fashion.
You can't because you're the troll. You even just lied, admitted to it, and then tried to blame someone else for lying.
more than adequate comments. your turn pal.
>how was it a troll?
the same way >>44936644
was a troll, obviously.
I didn't lie, you just lack reading comprehension.
Your post wasn't trolling, it was just stupid.
Your reaction and attitude to criticism is a childish one.
Calling you a troll is simply proof of the generosity of the people on /tg/. There they give credit to intelligence and rusery that may not even be there.
The only way to do it would be to set the appropriate tone from the get go
the door kicking murdertrain ride don't end once it starts
But if you must, hint subtly and with increasing heavy handedness until someone tells you to stop
then keep going
If you think it requires a degree of intelligence to be a troll, that basically marks you as one.
Only a troll would be stupid enough to believe that acting like a moron requires a level of intelligence higher than a moron's.
I'm not saying it requires a level of intelligence, thats why accusing you of being one is
you have yet to give a solid argument to how I am wrong. You got nice burning skills, but that alone isn't enough to let you play with the big ones.
Still waiting for an argument kid. you do have one right?
I'm not even the person you were replying to, I'm just a person helping mark you for what you are, so that no one bothers replying to you anymore.
Consider this my last response to you. You're free to have the Last Word you trolls so desperately crave.
Use some intelligent monsters that aren't aggressive. Leave them something that can initiate conversation with them that is human enough that they might try talking to. Something that just outright behaves amicably, maybe even just happens to live in the dungeon's environment without having any allegiances.
Fuck off, you sanctimonious twat.
You're the one smugly proclaiming to be the only one playing it right just because you do so in a different way.
I know you're going to bitch and moan about being misrepresented, using revoltingly transparent weasel words to get around what you quote obviously meant, quote related
>yeah, thats the fun in playing with humans dms. if i wanted simple, id play final fantasy.
but I hope that fucking pathetic delusion of warming you up and keeping you from killing yourself burns out soon, so you can do the world a favour.
Throw Toriel at the party. Like, moment of vulnerability, Goat Mom shows up to offer aid in a Motherly way.
Yeah. Toriel. Have her assist and help the party with a few puzzles or encounters. One turn of combat and then Toriel just *DISAPPROVES* the monsters into submission.
And then they shuffle off, and the party is fine, nobody had to be hurt.
Most importantly, she *shows* the party that things can be done peacefully. She brings a bottle of ale with her to bribe the hobgoblin at the watch station. She introduces you to the Kobold sentry and they talk about how their third egg was "mere hours away" from hatching, but kids were wonderful and changed your life. She believes you can always strike up a friendly conversation.
And then she leaves the players alone while she goes off to do things, but she promises she'll be right back.
Oh, and what do you like better, Butterscotch or Cinnamon?
Now you get to watch a group of very dangerous, blood soaked, murderhobos, with empathy for *a few* monsters.
The key at this point is to NOT ABUSE THIS EMPATHY. As long as you don't put any psycho-bandit orcs in the game, as long as the monsters are people - like enough. As long ad there is another option, then you've got the party open to new ideas and experiences.
Or they could just kill Toriel and keep playing Diabolo, where the monsters are just mobs and you should exterminate them all. After all, 90% of the character sheet is dedicated to how to kill things in entertaining ways.
I don't think you know how murderhobos work.
>"She's being nice to us."
>"It's a trick. I roll for initiative."
It works in the context of vidya because scripted events keep you from going off the rails and killing her the moment she comes into view.
Last paragraph dude.
"Or they could just kill Toriel"
I anticipated it. I expect murder hobos to murder hobo. Er. Well. If a hobo had some loot I suppose.
The best way to make players think outside of the framework of "kill kill loot kill sodomise kill" is probably to provide them with a scenario (or a series of scenarios) where killing the monster is not the correct thing to do, either socially or financially.
For example: in town, everyone is excited for the upcoming (fantasy sport) - match between the (local boys) and (neighboring folk). It's a time honored tradition! You can even attend, but tickets are pricey! Seven silver at the door. The barman ordered his three weeks ago for just four (he will proudly tell you).
So, the party goes and, oh, an Orc is collecting the tickets. Not half orc, full blooded. But, he's there to do business. Nothing so bad.
So they get to their seats, the bleachers are old and have seen many years of games like this. Their seats are well worn from the backsides of many across the ages... But after the party sits down, a group of goblins (with ticket stubs) slide in nearby. And when the game starts, the two teams are a mixture of various humanoids, ordinary and monstrous. Apparently the sport recruits from the local pool of talent, without caring about species. After a Gnoll - Human combo pull off the play of the game (with an assisting Bullywug), they are probably going to leave with some different ideas about monsters.
1. Fuck your Undertale bullshit.
2. Any adventurer worth his salt would see this as an obvious trap. You're asking players to basically unlearn habits that have reliably kept their characters, and sometimes entire parties, alive and well.
Yep. That's exactly what the GM (OP) wants the party to do as well. Try and keep up with the concept of the thread.
If you want the players to change the way they play, you have to change the setting yourself, demonstrate the change through NPC interaction, teach the differences to them, and maintain that difference as a part of your design philosophy going forward.
>change the setting
see this thing can generally only be done before a game starts, not during it
if generally speaking in a setting orcs settling anywhere close to a human village means massacre within 6 to 12 months its downright cheating to suddenly go "BUT THESE ORCS WERE KIND AND FRIENDLY"
especially because a typical dungeon is NOT a place where a functional society can actually live.
You want people to see something as more than a monster, actually put more attention in it other than a monster. Have players encounter farms, villages, anything that would prove they are capable of having a functional society rather than just putting them in a dungeon and expecting someone to guess that just because it acts, looks and could only reasonably and logically survive as a bandit it suddenly aint a bandit
Thing with Undertale is it very clearly sets out what it wants you to do. It starts with a series of confined events that act as set-up for you to 'get' what kind of game it is, basically it begins with a tutorial sequence. It doesn't just give you the controls or introduces game mechanics it sets the tone of the game, and shows you what it expects of you.
It isn't subtle, or somehow clever about doing this. It just sets you up with e theme to encourage you for playing the 'right way', and whatever, it's a video game telling a story so that's fine. There are expected ways to handle encounters, but it's not much deeper in it's routes than a VN, it is however a well written VN with interesting game mechanics.
The better way to do this without including a video game character sequence where the PCs are expected to just sit and watch is literally just to say "Ok, so for this setting" and then list how monsters aren't monsters, they're the Kobold Peoples and the Goblinoids who live alongside humanity, the dwarves and the Elves in separate settlements.
TTRPGs suck when you lose control, so never put in a cutscene the PCs can't take part in. You have the benefit of being there in the flesh (or at least directly connected over a monitor) and being able to explain things before a game starts. So first you do that, then later you ease the players in mechanically by easily differentiating the first few 'enemies' from 'npcs'. (A great ravenous wolf, a horrible giant boar) you clearly make the first few non-sapient, then start adding things that are more complex.
But don't just include a shitty cross-over because a recent video game 'did a thing'.
>How much gold, exactly, have you made by killing people?
Well, I've not killed a man in texas or elsewhere, but i'd reasonably expect to get at least the contents of their wallet plus whatever else they had on them.
I'm not exactly sure what kind of point you're trying to make here, since you'd almost certainly be able to get some dosh out of a dead man, whereas paying the danegeld will never get you a danish friend.