Taken Alive

Really? His "official" DA didn't have anything in the gallery. I guess I should just google the name he used on the DA.

My group uses non-lethal force all the time and I expect if they ever got into a fight they couldn't win or escape from they would be happy to negotiate a surrender.

In a medieval-style fantasy campaign, being taken hostage is a great opportunity for some social gaming. Hostages were often given quite a bit of freedom and would have the opportunity to meet people they wouldn't normally interact with.

>I bet she's some noble brat who thought it would just be fun to play soldier.

The crown on the collar implies royalty perhaps?

No. "you've lost all your stuff and powers" is an incredibly overdone trope that isn't remotely interesting anymore.

I once got sold as a character after I lost a fight. In this Shadowrun campaign, i somehow ended up becoming a vampire. My party wanted to lay low and they didn't trust my character (since I only did 4 sessions with this character.)

Ended up getting into a fight with them, they won. I asked them in game (and also out) not to kill me. They complied and sold me to Renraku. Following this, the GM said i had to make a new character.

But the interesting part was what happened afterwards. We had one player who's conscious was so guilty and during the off times in the mission would try to track down where my character went. My character was being experimented on in terrible ways. They were trying to make a cyber lich by combining magic and tech.

And that's when the lead went dark. We had several investigations into us by Renraku. Near the middle of the campaign, we were assaulted by something that killed my new character. Turns out it was my old character out for revenge against the party. The GM even let me roll for my old character.

Honestly I'm fine with GM fiat.
Capture is a cool trope, narratively interesting, And frequently a hellacious bitch to do according to the rules. Escaping, being rescued weathering captivity, and defying captors from gross are all cool things that a PC who isn't captured will never get a chance to do.

>implying every player has seen every trope
>implying you're even a tiny fraction as original as you think you are

Nah, user, nah.

You're supposed to reply with

>trope
and a picture of an anime girl rolling her eyes.

If you're gonna invite me to dance you're gonna have to buy me a drink first.

>playing in campaigns where 90% of fights end in death for one side or the other
>current year
Shiggydiggy.
Seriously though, unless I'm playing the most bubblegum-chewing pulp game possible, there is really no good reason (barring special circumstances; mindless undead, rabid monster hungry enough to go after well armed humans, an assassin contracted specifically to kill a target, etc.) death should be the intentional outcome of each and every fight.

>And if setting appropriate, and your players are mature enough to handle a bit of grimdark, some physical, mental, or sexual torture is also ok. It helps reinforce the idea that villains are evil and you really don't want these guys to get their hands on you, which can create some really strong motivations to fuck them up in the future. The possibilities and roleplaying are endless really.

Not bad thoughts, I was mostly thinking of ways for the NPC side to handL things rather than the PCs. Mine are quite accomplished escape a(r/u)tists, but of course no everyone's got that kind of party.

Particularly in settings with mutations\insanity/etc, I'd probably make that the prime risk.

Stop imagining every player is a jaded TVTropes MtG junky who's seen it all before.

Certainly, if that's your player base, they're going to smell even being imprisoned as cliche--but that's a particular, small group of gamers. And even those who check all the stereotypes boxes could still have a fun time if the DM executes well and it feels like a real part of the story/universe.

This poster said it more concisely.

This is what happens when GMs are instructed to use Challenge Ratings and not Morale ratings.

I've never had a GM who understood morale rules have a mindless fight to the death unless it was against mindless opponents.

Conversely, I can't even count how many times I've had a GM who throws the entire wave of antagonists at us relentlessly even after seeing all their companions be slaughtered.

I was thinking that was the sign of a praetorian guard, or some elite hand picked by royalty. Maybe in this case some noble's daughter was being insistent on serving despite not knowing the first thing about combat aside from a few dueling lessons and the family pulled a lot of strings to get her in the royal guard where she'd be surrounded by hardened veterans and not get herself killed.

This user knows.

From gross disadvantage, I meant

>Conversely, I can't even count how many times I've had a GM who throws the entire wave of antagonists at us relentlessly even after seeing all their companions be slaughtered.
This shit makes me irrationally angry, especially with people who aren't even really fighters/killers (and even they generally have mercy of some kind and a strong sense of self preservation), like bandits. Like, in a group of six bandits or highwaymen or whatever, even one bandit going down in a gout of blood (not even necessarily dead) is going to scare the rest off easy unless there's some outside influence. Their goal is to bully, rob and leave; it's just not worth it to stand and fight against even remotely capable enemies, they gain nothing from it.

USE YOUR FUCKING HEADS, GMs.

I couldn't agree more.

Unfortunately some GM's are more gamist as opposed to simulationist, they forget that not everything has to be viewed through the prism of is this challenging my players, but are these npcs behaving correctly in this context.

>Ransom
Since the setting has every dingbat with a castle and a fancy hat calling himself king of [name of castle], that's a lot of infighting. Capturing a general, a knight, or a noble lord serving the kind means huge payouts for the captors.

Of course the prisoner is treated well. Party uses these captured prisoners as an opportunity to pick up information about the state of things, and even build connections as these nobles once released will help the party get through their territory. A kind of 'you were nice to me, so I'll help you' sort of deal.

>The crown on the collar implies royalty perhaps?
Which makes it even worse. A royal is supposed to be dignified above all, even if their role in society is utterly redundant. Even that fat, incompetent traitor Louis XVI at least had the common courtesy to not piss himself.
>Inb4 "b-but Robespierre shot himself in the cheek"
Yes, but how did his actual execution go? He remained mostly silent, his last words were "thank you" to the man who dressed his wound, and he died leaving all of his debts accounted for. Not crying like some little spoiled bitch.

To be fair, you need to really understand the nuances of combat well to be able to proper calibrate and balance opponents for the PCs where there is significant but not overwhelming challenge. Like all things, it becomes easier with time.

*Depressed sigh*
Same

You are like little baby
I bet in your magical realm it's the man capturing and raping the woman, right?
Get on my level, women claiming men as their 'property' and forcing them to become live-in butlers that they grope at will is where it's all at

Thinly veiled rape in TTRPGs thread? Thinly veiled rape in TTRPGs thread.

I like this post and I like you

You didn't even bother reading the thread huh? You wanted to appear clever and try to push your magical realm into the conversation like these fucks did.
Try again.

(You)

...

how big is your shitposting folder?

Bigger than yours rapefag

rape
thanks for keeping the thread on the front page

No problem, eventually this thread might attract people who aren't interested in making plastic figures have nonconsensual sex with each other will show up again.

or you could make your own thread, or go be productive in another thread, instead of shitposting unironically in a thread you admit yourself you don't enjoy posting in.

I've never wished my cock was a flintlock so much.

Oh I enjoy this thread when it brings up conversations on how to work it in to a game without sex like or
instead of fucktards like you coming in with your pants already down and hands on your dicks.

As a general rule, monsters are either too stupid (or are compelled to) fight to the death. Those that don't try to flee and will become a nuisance if left unchecked, so the PCs are better off killing them before they escape. Humanoid enemies are a bit different. Most normal people will surrender when badly hurt, and most mercenaries follow a code of peaceful surrender if it's clear they're outmatched. A lot of the nastier types will fight to the death, especially cultists and black mages since it's a death penalty if they're thrown in jail anyway. So, generally speaking the players will know both in and out of character when it's acceptable to slay an enemy and when doing so would be illegal and immoral.

there's nothing inherently sexual about rape, stop being a pervert, user.

It's reasonable to have players surrender provided it's not done in a gimmicky fashion.

But, like anything that takes power away from the players, it can't be absolute, and has to be done well. Bullshitting knock-out gas and having everyone wake up restrained in magical chains is a fast way to annoy your players - if you must do this, engage them as soon as possible with more information and storytelling.

For example, if you arrest your players and send them to prison, they have to have NPC's to interact with, things to do, and at least some control over their actions. Instant maximum security isolation cells is a fast way to make your players bored and annoyed. Ideally, they should either be released in short order, or have the ability to escape (but remembering that escaping from prison makes you a fugitive).

Ah, just realized OP cared more about taking the players alive, not taking the enemies alive. That and rape. Uh, if the PCs get defeated in combat some enemies will take them alive as prisoners. Of course there'll be some way for the PCs to either bargain or escape, though they might lose something in the process, be it wealth, equipment, reputation, time, etc.

>there's nothing inherently sexual about a sex act

rape is an act of domination, it may involve sex, which is not a requirement for rape, but also it is not overtly sexual, nor is it done for pleasure.

>Maybe the mage which has been swallowing (and subsequently pooping out) a magic ring every four days is finally vindicated for being so paranoid and prepared.
craftymage is crafty

Ransom was way more common than people think.

If you were rich/well connected (which, realistically, most adventurers are compared to the common folk and most of the people the adventurers are fighting) you could probably get yourself captured instead of fighting to the death.

Now it's just a matter of negotiating the payment of your ransom (assuming you have wealth back home somewhere; I'm assuming they'll take what your carrying as booty (maybe you could bargain for some of your magic items back, depending on how mean the DM is)).
If the whole group is captured, and they/someone they know have the money, then it's pretty simple to say that X months pass as negotiations are conducted and payment is sent.

The players could also always try to escape.

Note that you can just as easily have sentient non-humans accept an offer of ransom in place of outright murdering the PCs.

If they don't have the cash?
Let them get away? I don't know. Maybe they get enslaved and, as competent warriors, have to go into some dungeon or something for their captors (which will obviously give them an opportunity to escape).

user no

>it may involve sex, which is not a requirement for rape
(You)

If they were going to kill her, the gun would be to the back of her head, not lowered towards her armored torso. And there probably wouldn't be a blanket on the ground in front of her scattered with rose petals. And the guy with the gun wouldn't be fiddling with the end of his belt.

There's no dignified way to face rape.

I prefer to use it when they're fighting an intelligent enemy that may want something from them.

Death is the least interesting thing you can do to your players.

The picture is during a coup during a celebration, hence the ceremonial outfit, banners, and rose petals.

The girl is related to the royal family in some manner, and is crying because she has just lost so many people near and dear to her.

The guy with the gun is not messing with his belt.

It might just be my group, but we actually go out of our way to take people alive on a regular basis. It's frequently useful to have someone you can question, and having a reputation for being merciful to prisoners who cooperate encourages future prisoners to be cooperative. Also a lot of the time people realize that they're outmatched and surrender, and since you can still get injured fighting desperate people with nothing to lose, it's generally wise to honour those surrenders.

We're also willing to surrender ourselves if there's reason to think that we won't be killed or otherwise fucked over for it. Like that time we accidentally set a tent city on fire while fighting off an ambush. When the city guard showed up we figured blaming the other guys - who were dead or run off - would work out better than trying to fight our way out of town. It's easy to blame everything on someone else when they're not around to contest the charges, you know? Though it turned out the guard is massively corrupt, so after a friend of ours found a non-corrupt judge to let us out, we've been running around taking apart the whole operation.

Given her uniform is a crop-top and she's visibly beaten up and sobbing, I'm going to wager the image is intended for fedora-tippers to jack off to and grunt about how whores have no place on the battlefield. I've seen similar images like this. Is there a name for this fetish or is it just called misogyny?

Taken as an opportunity to have a player temporarily swap characters, or to set up a cool Great Escape, or to allow a functional/plausible solo adventure, I think the chance of being taken alive is cool. In moderation. Consider discussing it with those being kidnapped behind closed doors, or foreshadow the chance/stakes of such an event beforehand. And don't railroad to get to the juice, as tempting as it may be.

If there's a name for it let me know what it is because it's makin me rock hard

Also OP, when running humanoid enemies keeping morale in mind is super important. People aren't video game grunts that throw themselves into the party to die. As a result, don't be afraid to start with a sizeable number of bandits for example like 15+ vs 5 heroes because once three or four go down the rest are potentially gonna break and leave. It can add weight and scale without really needing to worry about how many opponents your party can kill in a meat blender situation.

On the flip side, encouraging your party to take hostages to ransom or bounty warms them up to the idea that they might also be returned that kind of kindness by the world so to speak, and plants the idea in their head that it's even an option. Most players wouldn't dream of surrender simply because they have it in their heads they'll be shown no mercy because in the reverse situation THEY would show no mercy. You've gotta tease the idea out of them first.

>You've gotta tease the idea out of them first.

Agreed. It's very important for the players to understand their enemies approach to combat and how honorable or merciless they typically are. Different groups should have different motivations and if the players are aware of what those are, it helps even in situations where nobody needs to surrender. The fact that such an option is even available increases the verisimilitude of the world in which they're fighting.

How often should PCs be savagely raped by thugs?

My party takes prisoners all the time desu

Long time 40k RPG player. Our group always ahave a guy with shock/web/snare weapons and a dedicated torturer. Not having them is a sure way to drag the investigation part of the game. No hard feelings aboit it - our master takes great effort to make it clear the alternative is MUCH worse.

Once every this many rounds.

Uh...sure thing, boss

I would play that solely to try and escape the yoke of the mistress

the thing that actually bothers me most is the boob cuirass

are you implying big breasted women can't be warriors too?

He's implying having a recess in the middle of your plate drives enemy blows right into the middle of your chest rather than deflecting them sideways. Women plate cuirasses should generally be tha same shape as man plate cuirases.

physics is sexist

Has anyone ACTUALLY tested this? Because what about that greek/roman armor that looked like pecs and abs? Was that channeling blows into organs too? Really this sounds like a lame excuse made up by an SJW to try and make what is inherently impractical armor seem more impractical.

>Because what about that greek/roman armor that looked like pecs and abs?
Designed as decorative/display/ceremonial pieces only as far as anyone's been able to tell. The last thing you want with armour is excess complexity or weight.

Chances are that they saw more parades then uses in actual combat, since they were reserved for higher ranking officals

To be fair a piece of decorative armour is exactly what the pic in the OP looks like.

doesn't really help with the fact that she actually must have worn it during combat or do you think she got captured during a parade?

People wore decorative armour plenty, especially in the kind of era that the picture is based on. I don't think its too far-fetched to imagine some prissy general trying to look hardcore by making a set of pretty sweet-looking armour that functionally does fuck-all.

a high ranking official is going to wear decorative armor the majority of the time if they aren't on the front lines

>The young man escapes in the dead of night
>Figuring out that he's pretty good at sneaking, he becomes an adventurer and focuses on stealing treasure out of dungeons without being spotted
>Through circumstance he manages to sneak the captured, childless king of the realm out of an ogre camp
>In his gratitude, the old king appoints him as the sole heir of the realm
>The old king dies a few days later, knowing that he leaves the realm in the hands of a competent heir
>Just after the young adventurer has formally been crowned king, the bandit queen bursts in shrieking that he's still her property
>He tries to have her executed, but the chancellor of the realm claims that she may have a strong case
>This is backed up by a group of legal experts who refer to centuries of legal precedent
>HFW he has to slaughter his entire legal team
>HFW his subjects now call him a tyrant
>HFW he goes down in history as Adamar the Bloody, despite having invested tons of money into reforming the education system and improving social mobility
Bitches: not even once.

If he is sneaky enough, he can make it all look like an accident. Maybe put some poisonous snakes in their chamber or have them accidentally fall off a balcony

>the country is invaded
>the royals all start dressing in ceremonial armor
I mean, it's not that farfetched, right. In fact, I'm adopting this as my reason, as I originally here to blow the image out for mixing boobplate armor with a pair of fucking jeans or something.

>And so the bandit queen, her bodyguards, all 45 legal experts of the realm and the chancellor fell to their deaths, as the ill-constructed balcony that had been part of the palace for 467 years without the faintest sign of trouble suddenly collapsed under them. This was a tragic accident, everyone at the time agreed it was a tragic accident and nobody even dared imply otherwise.
wrote the chronicler as the king held a knife to his neck.

Not to hijack the post, but did anyone have images similar to the OP?

Need some for a campaign.

It's pretty obviously a parade, hence the braid, earring, crop top and the belt that's not really attached to anything

I fucking love seeing cheesecake in peril. It just makes it all the sweeter.

>The last thing you want with armour is excess complexity or weight.
Because nobody's ever made their weaponry impractical to flaunt their wealth or status.

>What are Teutonic helms

The primary role of a officer is to command and inspire troops, not tank blows to the abdomen. Looking impressive has a very practical purpose.

no

Rip

How?

...

...

...

If it's made of metal, it's gonna deflect blows, it's as simple as that. Of course later armor was more effective at that. Look at the collar thingy on this cuirass (that I forgot proper name for), it's made to stop weapons from sliding to your neck and prevent things that people are talking about from happening. SICK ABS on ancient armors would probably lead a spear right to your stomach, but considering that most people fought with shields and in formations that wouldn't be that much of an issue, especially if we're talking about bronze weapons vs bronze armors.

I don't normally make the party captive as this takes away player agency for an extended period of time, normally. Even if it makes sense for the story, players fucking hate feeling like they can't do anything (and being captive is just this, until the party can figure out how to escape). At least when they die they can just roll a new character and get on with it.

Still, sometimes you'll get that party or that player that just doesn't really mind, and that's where you can have fun with it.

If the whole party doesn't mind having limited agency for a short time, you can use their capture as a hook for an adventure or really just a prompt for a string of scenes where they make their escape or kill their captors.

I do not recommend at all capturing just one PC, as this excludes that single player from the game while everyone else plays. Unless that player is going to be absent for a couple of sessions, it generally will not work out very well for you. My favorite way to run a single PC getting captured is to get them captured the session before their absence, and use it as a quest hook for the rest of the party. During the session where the PC is saved, the player comes back from their absence and joins in. It's hard to pull off, but it's practically one of the only ways that doesn't suck for that player.

Many people scream "RAILROADING@!@@!!!111!" when the party becomes captive, and that's because it DOES take away agency, and railroading is the removal of agency to fit into your story. However, if you have a group that is okay with giving up agency temporarily, you'll be fine. I don't consider becoming captive railroading unless it is unavoidable and it only happens in service to the story.

...

>when there's only one guy in the group that knows Berserk
>when you have that guy's character get taken alive by the NPCs
>when you have that guy's character tortured to the point where all his stats say "-"
>when you give him the chance to pull a griffith
>and the absolute madman does it

Another side theme in this thread is the role of morale in combat, breaking the enemy's will instead of taking his last hit point. If your armor makes you look like some kind of bronze demigod, that could help win fights.