When is "I Kill this guy for insulting me" appropriate? asking specifically for a Fallout/Exodus game

Or you can pick pistols, if you don't want excitement today.

...

I'm going to be running a Fallout game, soon, and naturally the players all want to play a raider group. A raider group with a pet deathclaw and a child-sized ghoul. I suspect I'll be running into that a lot.

Considering how often NPCs open combat with the player due to insults in the Fallout series, I'd say it sounds totally acceptable at any time.

when he's your henchman.

maybe you are a barbarian cheiftan or similar society that respects honor or whatever

You're the one who decides what is appropriate and what isn't. Kill that fucker dead.

Yes but no.

When you are higher status than the attacker so you have something to lose, but not high enough that the gap between you is large enough to not take him seriously.

In Fallout its every man for himself (most of the places) so it makes a lot of sense for a character to respond very aggressively to slights. Especially if the character was a bitter, hateful person even before becoming a ghoul and suffering the bundled discrimination everywhere he goes

Also watch this for a discussion on culture's role in how we react to insults etc. (manual English subtitles in menu)
youtu.be/gPxQFyxdDz4

Why are they bashing each other with pistols when they have swords?

Because if you pay attention:
1. Pistol has a reinforced bottom end, making it into a good bashing tool
2. They are fully armored, meaning hey can't really be stabbed
3. They already shot each other, and only managed to kill each others horses
4. Both of them are carrying some variant of cavalry sabers, which doesn't really work well for their situation

>Fall off horse at same time as opponent
>Drop empty pistol
>Try to draw sword
>Opponent just clubs you with HIS empty pistol before you can draw it
>Stunned
>Clubbed again and again by large, heavy, reinforced blunt object
>Fall over, start dribbling
>Opponent stands up and stabs you with his sword as you try to regain your wits

Directly after you've responded to their insult with, "I ain't no bitch."

Depends on the setting and the group.

In most pre-modern settings that go for realism, it would be expected of your character to challenge another person to a duel to the death for an insult, or just to beat the crap out of him. In a society without a legal system to uphold the rule of law it becomes every man's duty to protect his own honor, and not doing so is an open invitation for people to take advantage of him.

That said, many groups aren't cool with little detours like that, no matter how in-character they are, because they feel they get in the way of the story or the progression of the game or whatever. So if you find yourself in the situation where your in-character actions get in the way of everyone else's fun, you have to ask yourself whether doing something like that is a meaningless detour to you, or if you would rather play with a group that saw such in-character moments as the heart of the game. If the latter, then you should probably find a different group.

If the NPC insults the guy in power armor wearing a lazer gatling, he sincerely deserve anything he can get.

>To kill a person over a personal insult with no stakes is evil, petty, insane or any combination of the above.
"Argument" is currently the most common reason for given for homicide according to the FBI crime stats.

>"Argument" is currently the most common reason for given for homicide according to the FBI crime stats.
And an argument isn't an insult. It may contain insults, but an argument is a disagreement between two or more people.

When two people want different things, holy shit, there's all sorts of resolutions, and people dying is one of them.

>A raider group with a pet deathclaw and a child-sized ghoul.
Christ that sounds awful.

If someone insults you, why shouldn't you kill them?

Why should anyone tolerate an insult?

>legal repercussions
>you might get hurt in the process
>family and friends may seek vengeance
Take your pick.

So you are saying that we should be ruled by fear?

That we should tolerate insults because we are afraid of what happens if we stand up for ourselves?

you know, its funny, I just always kind of assumed Eddy was evil. I never thought, "Hey, maybe hes just a guy, you know?"

So what, you're going to beat the shit out everyone who hurts your feelings?

People who say shit that cuts to the bone aren't really worthy of your empathy. It shows they are too scared to trust and don't have the courage to be vulnerable.

If you let your guard down and somebody uses that opportunity to deliver a sucker punch, they were already scum to begin with.

>hurts your feelings = being insulted

How old are you?

Unless of course, you are completely full of yourself and someone needs to take you down a peg, you special little snowflake.

So what then, someone damages your reputation and you fire back with a cunning retort?

I'm not sure what you think an insult is.

You don't need to insult someone to cut them down a peg. You need only demonstrate that they aren't actually all that they are claiming to be.

>So what then, someone damages your reputation and you fire back with a cunning retort?

What? Are you even addressing what I am talking about?

conan the barbarian sometimes thinks about this. in the harsh, barbaric north where he's from people don't insult each other lightly because the other guy can bash his skull in and not get punished by law

then when he goes to the south he gets in trouble when arrogant, rich or even drunk people insult him in one way or another and he sometimes kills them in retaliation. so he concludes that laws and order aren't that civilized since people can insult each other without fear of retribution

to ask your question, when a guy that follows a code of honor more than some community's law gets insulted

It's okay if the guy agreed to a duel of honor.

If he accepts and you kill him it's okay, if he refuses he will look like a giant pussy.

I am asking you what you think an insult is, if not something that hurts your feelings or your reputation.

Pretty much this, though most duels aren't to the death. Most people don't want to die over something someone said about your mother.

killing somebody over an insult is about the most childish, petty, vindictive thing you can do. Its like stabbing somebody over a game of 4 square.

Not him, but you are wrong. A game you can win or lose, but the objective is having fun, some times winning something.

An insult the objective is hurting your own worth: be it your name, your reputation, your character, your status. You would be defending yourself against an attack against your own self.

>this is what people from guilt cultures unironically believe

Sounds like you need some diversity, user.

in witcher a guy tore his own tongue out because he made the mistake of insulting his king while drunk

That sounds pretty cool but who the fuck in their right mind will be insulting people who have a Deathclaw for a pet? Also what does a child sized ghoul mean? A Ghoul Child or a Dwarf Ghoul?

It means you have a pedophile in your group

>You would be defending yourself against an attack against your own self.
and a little grievance of your reputation is worth more than another human life, i see.

When your reputation is a key component of keeping yourself alive or powerful and human life already has impaired value, like in a post post apocalyptic setting, yes. Definitely.

Sorry if you consider an idiot worth more than your own fucking name.

Kill him, then what?
Then they whisper behind your back, saying that what he said must be true, as it sure struck a nerve..

Sorry you consider the words of an idiot more important than your actions and character

Yes. Duelling had to be outlawed by Royal decree in both England and France because the nobility couldn't sustain the casualties that duelling culture was inflicting. Early members of Congress in the US spent a good deal of time retracting insults levied against their political opponents on threat of a duel.

Reputation has been worth more than life since pretty much ever.

Never.

"I kill this guy for insulting my wife" is a different story though.

>literally never happened
Yeah user, I'm sure that Sir Quickblade killing Sir Idiot in a honorable duel means that he is really honorless.

It's actually pretty in character killing a loudmouth as long as it's in a fair battle.

>everybody who stands in the way of my ambitions in a worthless idiot
i am smart enough to understand people like you and where your lack of ethics leads to. i love insulting people like you and should you raise your hand against me i would love to kill you not for my name or merely to protect my life but to remove one more ambitious, unscrupulous human being from the face of planet earth. making it overall a better place.

he has none, all he has is ambition. he is literally defined by his will to be seen superior to others and will not stand it being questioned. i question it, come hell or highwater.

That's not a Conan-specific thing, that was a common saying in the US around the end of the 19th century, and is often involved in the romanticization of the old west. There are court cases to back it up at times, like when Edward Muybridge was let off for a murder he definitely did when someone in the Jury went "wouldn't you all do the same?" and they were all like "yeah I guess so".

you will note that lethal honor duels have fallen out of fashion because it's been recognized as pure stupidity.

P U R E S T U P I D I T Y.

>Yeah user, I'm sure that Sir Quickblade killing Sir Idiot in a honorable duel means that he is really honorless.
yes, killing another man in a duel that has been fought fairly according to rules isnt anything honorable. it's something antiquated and retarded.

anyway, enough with this baiting.

Pretty sure it's because they're decreed as such by authority figures, not because there's nobody left who actually wants to do it.

>enough with this baiting.
Well, I suppose it's well enough that you've gotten tired and stopped on your own, then.

>i am smart enough to understand people like you and where your lack of ethics leads to.
Yes user, you are so smart that you don't realize that you shouldn't go messing with other people.

>. i love insulting people like you and should you raise your hand against me i would love to kill you not for my name or merely to protect my life but to remove one more ambitious, unscrupulous human being from the face of planet earth.
Seeing how you are retarded enough to throw yourself in a death fight because you simply cannot act like a decent person, I'm pretty sure that will end for you. Really user.

>Making it overall a better place.
Sure thing roleplayer. Removing another retard such as you will indeed improve it.

>he has none, all he has is ambition. he is literally defined by his will to be seen superior to others and will not stand it being questioned.
Yes user, simply asking to not be insulted is like claiming to be superior. You should turn on your brain before posting.

>i question it, come hell or highwater.
Yes, please don't kill me with your shitposts.

>yes, killing another man in a duel that has been fought fairly according to rules isnt anything honorable. it's something antiquated and retarded.
And to think you could have avoided looking like an uber retard if you looked at the setting...

>yes, killing another man in a duel that has been fought fairly according to rules isnt anything honorable. it's something antiquated and retarded.
It's... because you said it is? Nice argument.

Seriously user, do you have no interest in history?

im asking in the context of a apocalyptic world.

It's immoral and a disproportional retribution.

>It's immoral
Subjective. This fantasy society can hold standards different than ours.

>disproportional retribution.
Subjective. Honor can be hold as more important than life.

Only in some areas. Honour duels / honour based conflict is still pretty prevalent in areas without strong central authorities. In America we call them drive-bys.

Blood feuds are most certainly still a thing.

If it's a matter of honor and prestige for you, your family, or your superior then you gotta step up and challenge the guy to defend what he says. Either he accepts and you take em down or he backs down like the lying coward he is. Don't dishonor your good name and shoot him in cold blood. Even the Wasteland has got some civility.

youtube.com/watch?v=Ie_ltlRVCrk

Our group kills everyone so DM stopped giving us NPCs

There actually three options, which is something many anons here aren't considering
>a. The guy who insulted you backs off and outs himself as a coward
>b. The guy who insulted you accepts the duel and you kill him
>c. The guy who insults you accepts the duel and kills you

What happens if C occurs?
Do you go down as the man willing to put his life on the line for honor? Or as the idiot who actually challenged that guy for an insult and died?

I feel like, when matters like this are being discussed, people in favor of defending their honor with violence assume that being insulted gives you some sort of superpower that will allow you to win the duel everytime.
Like some anime girl that suddenly gains enough strength to lift a 100 pound hammer and whack a man so hard they fly into low orbit because he touched her boob.

To go back in topic; Let's say you make a character that is quick to resort to violence when slighted. How would they handle being insulted by somebody clearly more powerful than them? Heck, how would they react to losing against somebody on their level, or lower?

You seem to be misunderstanding the nature of duels. You don't challenge someone to a duel over a small slight you overheard while at a party you attended. Duels take place after your adversary has been actively dragging your name through the proverbial dirt for an extended period of time, to the point where it's actively harming your social standing.

Duels also largely take place between peers. A superior mocking his underlings comes off as petty and you'll probably get more respect for shouldering it. Inversely an underling actively undermining his superior seems conniving or bitter and can expect to get challenged by his peers who have more respect for the superior.

Thats just for "classy" nobility and martial society duels however. In a wasteland scenario you ice every mother fucker who thinks their hot shit and tries to tear you down. It's not about honor, it's about being respected as the crazy motherfucker you are. If you're not in a position to retaliate right away, then you wait for the opportunity to arrive. Unless your character is stupid, then you go for it and die. Thats just good roleplaying.

Interesting, but I was refering to the anons (And users on other forums and communities) who seem hell bent on the idea of "defending their honor" and bring the idea of duels of old to justify their views.
While i appreciate you giving more insight into historical duels, by "more powerful" i meant somebody who will is more skilled than you (read: your character) and win, especially if they were the ones that started insulting you and damaging your reputation because they are sure of their capabilities, and have the skils to back it up.

>In a wasteland scenario(...)
This is the correct answer, given the context

Well in that case you cheat discretely and hope that's enough. That would actually be a decent mini-quest, finding a way to covertly and nefariously defeat a stronger opponent in a duel.

t. weak little manlet upset that he can't talk shit without getting stomped

And yet the one that insulted you is sobbing through broken teeth and bleeding to death while you stand over him laughing. Meaning you won.

>It's not about honor, it's about being respected
That is exactly what HONOUR is

It's when someone says an insult.

google.com/search?q=insult&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS697US697&oq=insult&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i61j0j69i61j0l2.3642j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

It's not about a grievance of reputation.

It's about whether or not such a vile creature deserves to live.

Let them whisper. My actions will prove all truth. So long as they don't say it to my face then they do not die.

If it's in the true spirit of fallout, it should always be an option. However, from the lowest raider to leaders of post war polities, it should always have consequences. You can gun/bomb/slash/punch your way through life in the wasteland, and a lot of folks do. But the truly successful are the ones who have learned when to talk and when to fight.

Or you can be the asshole telling Joshua to put a cap in general gobbledygook. Your call

Society collapses if you're going to kill people for every insult.

It's especially bad in a culture focused around fighting and war, seeing those as the ways to get honor and glory. You have to be able to constantly direct that outward so you don't tear your own community apart.

It depends on the culture you're in. In some cultures refusing to fight - or just being unable to fight - when challenged is incredibly shameful. You're letting someone besmirch your honor, and it doesn't matter why - you're supposed to be doing something, and you're not.

There's a lot of places where you really don't have the choice to let an insult go. Getting a reputation as someone people can insult to their face shows petty weakness, and that is something that can be real fucking dangerous. More so if you also represent something else. If you are a Feudal Baron or motorcycle gang member you can't let shit go because an insult to you is also an insult to your people.

Don't make you crazy. You might fucking hate it, but you still have to kill an idiot because Clan O'Donald isn't a clan of bitches, so if someone calls you one you've got to make them swallow the words or choke on them.

Society is overrated.

Never saw Eddie as explicitly evil. He's just a dead guy always in a middle of some bloody mess with some stuff vaguely pointing at him as the perp, but nothing definitive.

depends on how hard he's going you, and what the culture is like. Up until the 18th century there very much were "fighting words" where people were willing to look the other way if you straight up merced a man for saying it, though that often times depends on who you were and who he was.

Not really. People who insult people aren't valuable the long-term health of a society.

When you have to for political reasons, ofc. If you want to kill someone for personal reasons your a child.

When you kill someone for reasons outside your own then you are a slave.

We're all slaves to mortality and our station in life friend. From slaves to Caesar we all must do what we must do.

Dude, you can't be a slave to something that is natural.

You are compelled to eat, to fuck, enjoy yourself. Your a slave to your own needs and desires. You can deny them as a slave would his master, and you will suffer for it. Some think its better to suffer like that, stoicists and some religions.

But you are a slave to your mortality.

It used to be, yeah. You are looking at it with modern morality which is the wrong way to go. Back when people looked at it more like "talk shit, get hit." If you don't go around insulting people, you ain't got to worry bout nothing. But if someone insults you and you don't defend your honor then people will just walk all over you.

Not how it worked, if the other guy is talking shit, and you kick his ass then that means that he was speaking lies because surely god has aided you against his vile slander....or you are just a bad ass motherfucker so people will think twice before shit talking you while you are in the room.

Is he useful alive?

If so, stay your hand (Most, if not all PC's are useful alive)

You may kill him, but not yet... not yet. (Save it for a finale or climax, with GM/PC discussion.)

>pet deathclaw
>not outcast/descendant of vault13 deathclaw that leads the raider gang
disappointing.