[Basic] Disadvantage of the Week: Pacifism

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by ericthered

Yeah, that would read better as "Cannot Harm Holy", and then include some explanation as to the meaning of "Holy". The point value of [5] is probably correct.

People with that level of holiness are probably so rare that I'd make this a quirk version of CHI.

I do think there is room for a version that allows lethal force on "wrong doers" but not "innocents". Which is at least by strict RAW not what CHI is, regardless of what it should be. the current version seems a little too rooted in an old style of the superhero genre. That version is arguably [5] points. And arguably something OTHER than pacifism.

Really, anything other than "cannot harm any living thing" (presumably this actually means "any animal," as otherwise you'd starve to death) isn't pacifism. Though I'd allow "cannot harm any sapient being" or "cannot harm any human" to be called that. The GURPS versions are mostly not pacifism as the word is used by people who call themselves pacifists.

But the usage is long established in GURPS, so I don't feel inclined to argue over WHICH things are or are not similar enough to be called "Pacifism." It's not the only case where GURPS uses a word eccentrically.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by ericthered

I do think there is room for a version that allows lethal force on "wrong doers" but not "innocents". Which is at least by strict RAW not what CHI is, regardless of what it should be. the current version seems a little too rooted in an old style of the superhero genre. That version is arguably [5] points. And arguably something OTHER than pacifism.

I believe that route would be Sense of Duty... as saving [GROUP] is often just as important as not harming [GROUP] to those with such a limited version of pacifism.

[khorboth]

Reluctant Killer and Cannot Harm Innocents are quite common among my group. Outside of DF, these make lots of sense.

When playing an average-folk kind of game, I look for an explanation for people to NOT have Reluctant Killer as I feel it's a very common real-life disadvantage. I'm generally amiable to letting people buy it off after some stressful combat, though.

In supers games, Cannot Harm Innocents is really common with Cannot Kill having been played a couple of times.

I couldn't find the "Beyond the grip of realism" set quickly, but it was a fan-made set of advantages for action-movie tropes. There was one advantage which, if memory serves, was called "pacifist weapons master" and I had someone take it once. It was basically a "pacifist" who specialized in disarming and capturing folk and was a pretty substantial advantage. Perhaps someone with better google-fu can find it.

[Toptomcat]

Originally Posted by whswhs

People with that level of holiness are probably so rare that I'd make this a quirk version of CHI.

It would be a quirk if such people were not widely known to be demon-resistant, if they did not often make it their life mission to seek them out and thwart their works, and if others did not seek them out when demonic involvement was expected. As it is in most games of that genre, demons easily get enough pain and aggravation from that disadvantage for it to be more than a quirk.

[Daigoro]

Originally Posted by khorboth

I couldn't find the "Beyond the grip of realism" set quickly, but it was a fan-made set of advantages for action-movie tropes. There was one advantage which, if memory serves, was called "pacifist weapons master" and I had someone take it once. It was basically a "pacifist" who specialized in disarming and capturing folk and was a pretty substantial advantage. Perhaps someone with better google-fu can find it.

Lo, it be here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110114...sjohn/grip.htm

[khorboth]

Originally Posted by Daigoro

Lo, it be here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110114...sjohn/grip.htm

The very one. Thanks. Not suitable for games remotely realistic, but it worked great in-genre. I believe they were written for 3e, but we used it in 4e with no problem.

[Pursuivant]

Another pacifist trope is the "Pacifist bomber crewman" - the character who has very strong moral strictures against using up-close and personal violence against foes who are obviously people, but has no problem with helping his buddies kill people, or using a vehicle or ultra-long-ranged weapon to zap nameless foes at a distance.

Related to that is the villain who never does the dirty work himself, but has no problems with ordering his flunkies to do violence.

In either case, "Cannot Kill Directly" is a Quirk.

[WingedKagouti]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

Another pacifist trope is the "Pacifist bomber crewman" - the character who has very strong moral strictures against using up-close and personal violence against foes who are obviously people, but has no problem with helping his buddies kill people, or using a vehicle or ultra-long-ranged weapon to zap nameless foes at a distance.

You may want to reread Reluctant Killer, because it's exactly what you're describing here:

You can attack monsters or vehicles, launch missiles against targets on a screen and the like without problems, and you can assist or encourage allies happily.

[Phil Masters]

Originally Posted by whswhs

People with that level of holiness are probably so rare that I'd make this a quirk version of CHI.

Depends. In a fantasy setting, you could have saintly types crawling out of the woodwork all over the place, and/or “Holiness” being defined to encompass “Has an office in an organised religion”. (“Yes of course the archdeacon is Holy. He’s a bloody archdeacon. No, I don’t know what he does with those baboons in his spare time, and apparently his goddess doesn’t care.”)

Ars Magica, James Branch Cabell, and Fritz Leiber might all be adduced as providing examples.

I’d be quite tempted to give demons and such a Dread of Holiness, with an enhancement to say that they can’t direct violence or magic towards it in any way as well as having to flee from it physically. But, well, depends on setting; if what demons have is a mental block on harming holy people, then it is closer to Pacifism. Sort of.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

In either case, "Cannot Kill Directly" is a Quirk.

Setting dependant of course. In games where indirect killing is difficult, this should be worth a bit more. Like maybe -5 points.

In games where the killing has to be up close and personal, it's basically worth even more, like say in Dungeon Fantasy.