There’s no such thing as a nonlethal weapon. Less lethal or incapacitating, sure. Older D&D’s use of nonlethal was as much for aesthetics as bogus simulation. The newer “knock ’em out if you want at 0 hp” is better for play if a little weird on the sim front. 1/7 Simming nonlethal is really about fighting techniques (lethal and less lethal) within the game world. It doesn't require mechanics. "I'm trying to knock him out not kill him" from a player suffices. You might claim some weapons can't be nonlethal… 2/7
— Chris S. Sims (@ChrisSSims) August 20, 2021
…but in D&D, frex, that’s bogus damage-type divisions getting in the way. Almost any weapon can be used as a bludgeon to deal less-lethal damage, and they were used that way, from sword pommels to axe hafts to pistol grips. Special ammo is required for projectile weapons. 3/7 It is harder to use even less-lethal weapons in nonlethal ways, but making that reality a literal mechanic is fiddly. I've never seen a subsystem worth its system space. Mechanical penalties for specialized use? Nope. Nonlethal damage tracking? Holy crap, no. 4/7
— Chris S. Sims (@ChrisSSims) August 20, 2021
And this thinking segues into improvised weapons. It’s a conceit in some games that these are harder to use effectively. In D&D, frex, it’s another aesthetic choice and minor, bogus sim attempt. But it’s another fiddly rule that isn’t worth its system weight. 5/7 For play, or sim if you prefer, it's easier and fair to assume anyone skilled in simple weapons can use improvised weapons effectively. That includes pistol grips and rifle stocks. (I'm peeved when a modern or sci-fi game prevents or fails to acknowledge their use.) 6/7
— Chris S. Sims (@ChrisSSims) August 20, 2021
Anyway, the reason I'm on about this is that I'd like to see these rules disappear from games, either by design or by house rule. To support ease of play mostly, but also to resemble typical genre fiction. To a much lesser extent, to resemble reality. What do you think? 7/7
— Chris S. Sims (@ChrisSSims) August 20, 2021
“I would sooner destroy a stained glass window than an artist like yourself, but since I can’t have you following me either…” *clunk* Allowing any attack (not just melee) to drop a creature unconscious as to opposed to killing them has always seemed an obvious solution to the problem. But adventures can also do a better job reminding DMs that it’s okay for foes to run away or surrender.
— Scott Fitzgerald Gray (@scottfgray) August 20, 2021
I agree, although the main issue with flight is that players rarely (never) go for it in situations where the retreating foes have the potential to cause more trouble. For sure. That’s always felt to me like part of the same problem, though — the built-in assumption that NPCs and monsters have a single set of motivations that can’t change. Having NPCs make it clear that they’re done and just want to go home is usually a great RP setup… 1/
— Scott Fitzgerald Gray (@scottfgray) August 20, 2021
…except then it’s often too tempting for a DM to want to have NPCs subsequently go back on their word, because drama. 2/2
— Scott Fitzgerald Gray (@scottfgray) August 20, 2021