Non violent solutions and making the party want to kill monsters

[Hoodooman]

Running a campaign where the party want non-conflict and "talking the monster to death" style options for some encounters. Face of the party is a Bard so this makes some sense. Ran a few encounters with Good aligned creatures who didn't see eye to eye with the party. A dryad that got pissed off when the party searched for rare herbs near her tree, animal encounters where the bard can use fascinate and the Druid wild empathy, etc. Any suggestions for how to run this without everything just being a series of diplomacy checks. Or suggestions for monsters to use that could be a grey area. Already ran a band of goblins who were fleeing from a Black Dragon that was a later boss fight. Also any tips for trying to goad the party into being less pacifist, making them actually want to take on something truly nasty. Ideally a good mix between the both, and identifying where there might be a possibility for a non violent solution.

[King of Nowhere]

if you don't want the encounters to be a series of diplomacy check, rooleplay them more, and have the roleplayed dialogue matter towards the diplomacy. possibly, if the diplomancer would otherwise be unstoppable, establish that you need specific arguments, specific tips to win particular diplomacies. you need to figure out what the npc wanted and give him at least some satisfaction.

For example, in my campaign I had the players face goblin raiding bands. I established that goblins have huge overpopulatiion problems, so they take those youths that don't show particular promise out in the desert to die, which in turn pushes them to become raiders and to take the nigh-suicidal odds against an adventuring party. the players tried to parlay. So, I had established that those goblins were desperate to the point of taking suicidal odds, so they would laugh off at threats of death, even if they were realistic. On the other hand, they could easily be bought with a bit of food and basic commodities.
Then they found a bigger band led by a miniboss, and it was a different case; when goblins kick out their youths, they have a condition that if they survive two years they can return and try once more to prove their worth. this goblin leader only had a few months left and she was fully confident of her skill. She also was successful enough at raiding. So in her case trading food would not work, because she and her band could get enough already. Threats of deadly resistance were more effective, because they weren't desperate enough to take big risks.
And all those informations could be found by making equiries. So a successful diplomacy required understanding the setting and reading the npcs.

If you do not want your pplayers to pursue diplomacy, you have two ways: you can make the monsters attack first, or you can give the evil npc some traits that will cause the party to actively oppose them.
For example, in my world the evil religions are actually quite diplomatic, and they are really not out for war. they'd rather stay at peace, and they only perpetrate atrocities against their own population; they are kinda like oppressive teocratic totalitarism. Then I used the excuse of a malfunctioning teleport to bring the party to the capital of the hetor fiefdom, and got them stuck there for long enough to see the situation firsthand. they've been actively plotting against the church ever since (which in turn allows a lot of "not so different" arguments. I like to have balanced villains with reasonable motivations that are nonetheless clearly villains)

[BowStreetRunner]

If you've read Homer's Odyssey about the adventures of Odysseus, there is a fantastic tradition of solving problems not merely through fighting but through cleverness as well. Even Hercules, the strongest man, often managed to use his wits as much as his might. I love the Greek stories in this respect, because for every battle between two mighty warriors there are an equal number of encounters that required creativity and resourcefulness as well. Such stories were always more fun to follow because they didn't fall into a repetitive pattern.

I would try to do everything you can to encourage your players to keep thinking creatively, as it seems they are having fun with it already. Just try to mix up the scenarios with problems that require more complex solutions. If it doesn't come down to a simple choice of diplomacy versus combat, their desire to do more than hack and slash should lead to fun and interesting solutions, regardless of whether combat actually occurs.

Here are a couple encounters you could throw in:

1. A flight of Hippogriffs have grounded a Griffon and are attacking it - the Griffon actually tried to steal an egg from a Hippogriff nest but the PCs don't know that. The egg was dropped during the battle and the Hippogriffs don't know where it is located. Since the Hippogriffs' territory has been violated and an egg stolen, they will automatically start out Hostile to the PCs as they see them as another threat to their flight and the egg. The Griffon will also be Unfriendly at first, but is mostly concerned with defending itself, finding the egg, and making its escape.

The PCs could handle this situation a variety of ways.

Since these are all Magical Beasts the use of Wild Empathy is limited. For the Hippogriffs it can be used with a -4 penalty on the check, but with the Griffon it won't work at all. Diplomacy is an option with the Griffon, but it cannot speak, only understand common spoken by others. Of course, they are already engaged in a battle - although none are injured yet. So getting them to listen won't be easy.

If the PCs help defeat or drive the Griffon away, the egg still needs to be found. It's lying amidst some of the undergrowth nearby. If they help the Griffon instead of the Hippogriffs, it will then try to find the egg and make off with it.

2. A group of Bugbears and Hobgoblins are raiding a village. The villagers ran off and the raiders are just ransacking and looting the place. While this could be a simple diplomacy versus combat choice, the Bugbears and the Hobgoblins don't actually get along. The Hobgoblins served their own chieftain, who thought to enslave a group of the larger Bugbears to beef up his band's fighting abilities. However, the Bugbears he captured eventually turned on the chieftain and overthrew him, and now the Hobgoblins are forced to fight for the new Bugbear chieftain. Their camp is a couple days away in the wilderness, and all of the Hobgoblin families are there watched over by a handful of Bugbear leaders while various raiding parties fan out across the nearby land acquiring loot and plunder.

At first glance, this fight would appear to be a very difficult challenge for the PCs. The combined force of Hobgoblins and Bugbears would be a stretch for their abilities. However, in this case the party might actually be able to use social skills to turn the two factions against one another and change the nature of the encounter. If they agree to help the Hobgoblins eliminate the Bugbears from their camp then the Hobgoblins will agree to move on from the area once they are freed.

You can see from each of these encounters that the additional complexity of the situations makes it unlikely that all combat will be avoided, while simultaneously leaving plenty of room for the use of social skills as well.

[Dawgmoah]

There is really an unlimited number of scenarios you can throw at the party which does not include battle.

Have them discover that the popular man in the town, who gives away large amounts of money and treats everyone so kindly, is actually a crime lord or evil sorcerer type sacrificing people. Have them try to convince the townsfolk that he is not all that wonderful of a person.

A rogues group asks the party to do some consulting work for them. Use the party as stooges for rogues to learn to pickpocket, break into their rooms, etc.

Have a conman sell a few fake magic items or other type "treasures" and have him use the name of one of the player characters. Sooner or later people will start showing up and demanding their money back. Depending on the role-play or Diplomacy rolls, the person may go away knowing he was hustled by someone else, or seriously think that the player is lying and seek redress.

Another idea based on training: have a group ask the party how to build a successful and nonlethal course to test scouts, rangers, rogues, etc.

Have them come across a crime scene: when the guards arrive will they immediately suspect the party or will they ask for their aid in apprehending the criminal(s)?

[Darth Ultron]

First off, if your playing D&D or Pathfinder, then that is the wrong game for ''non violence non combat'' type role playing.

For example: DramaSystem, as seen in Hillfolk. DramaSystem is designed around interpersonal dynamics and social interactions. It's about whether someone gets the emotional concession she is seeking in a given interaction. It has extremely limited rules for "procedural" actions, where you go and DO things, including combat, because procedure, including combat, is not the focus of the game.

Other then a diplomacy check or a charisma check, D&D/PF, really does not have 'non combat' rules.

You can just free form role play a lot, but then your not really ''playing'' the game.

[liquidformat]

If you are wanting to force combat start throwing in things such as wyverns or money of the dummer monsters that have no language, then your party can get back to being the gang of murder hobos they were always meant to be!

[Kelb_Panthera]

This was my first thought. My second was ultimate intrigue's social combat system (some adjustment may be necessary).

One you've pinned down what rules to use, it's just a matter of scenario building.

[Rynjin]

You don't need to goad them into being less pacifist, just enforce the rules: Diplomacy takes 1 minute to perform.

Certainly, monsters that are willing to engage in lengthy conversation can be Diplomancied. Anything else? You can safely have them just ATTACK, or listen to the PCs for a couple of rounds and decide they prefer them as a snack instead of hearing out the full proposal.

Don't do it all the time, of course, because your players are enjoying the social resolutions, but there are a lot of circumstances where it makes sense for the enemy to just be hostile.

[Fizban]

Any suggestions for how to run this without everything just being a series of diplomacy checks.

Create an actual social encounter system that uses more than one skill, where no class has access to all of them so the whole party is actually needed. Or give up the pretense of character-based social skills and make it all roleplay.

A flight of Hippogriffs have grounded a Griffon and are attacking it. . .

Hippogriffs have animal intelligence, so helping them is of little use aside from feeling good about it.


Generally if you want the players to see red, you just hit them where it hurts, which is basically their pride/agency/territory. Steal an innocuous trinket and they'll hound the thief to the ends of the earth, have someone double-cross them for instant vendetta, etc. Perma-killing favorite NPCs is so obvious and trite that a lot of players specifically refuse to care about NPCs because it will only cause them grief, but they can't forgo magic items and plans.

[BowStreetRunner]

Hippogriffs have animal intelligence, so helping them is of little use aside from feeling good about it.

I DM sandbox-style games, so by default I never assume the motives of the PCs. If they want to help the Hippogriffs just to feel good about it, I'm going to be prepared for that. If they walk in on a bunch of women and children from a village that was just ransacked by goblins and go all murder-hobo on the women and children even though I've expressly indicated that there is no XP to be awarded for doing so...I'm going to be prepared for that too.

(And yes, I've had that sort of thing happen in a game. Not much that players do surprises me all that much any more. Saddens at times. Annoys now and then. Exasperates often, yes. But it doesn't surprise me all that much. And the feel-good types are only slightly outnumbered by the murder-hobos.)

[Hoodooman]

I like the complex skill check variant which allows some failures before a threshold for success. I'd already been using a number of knowledge skills and all the social skills during the conversation. Want to know if there's enough goblins here to pose a threat to the city? Fighter's going to have to make a wisdom check. Then someone else can make a sense motive check to see if the orc warlord leading the gobbos knows he can't win and he's bluffing, or stupidly violent to the point of suicidal over confidence. Then have the fighter and bard work together as a good cop bad cop on intimidate and diplomacy rolls. I've said certain characters are immune to diplomacy alone, orc diplomacy would require a number of threats. I've also said some characters won't take a Bard seriously. "No, I want to talk wizard to wizard about this. Not to the foppish idiot with the lute."

[Bohandas]

The undead. Particularly mindless undead that can't be reasoned with and vampire type undead that are compelled to attack even if they don't want to. Also mindless constructs and oozes; also can't be reasoned with. And demons; things of the sort that will kill on a whim you even if they like you or they've been convinced that it would be in their best interests not to.

[Talverin]

Someone who wants to take advantage of them. I like the idea of a conman. Maybe someone travels along with the party after being 'rescued' from an encounter on the road with some wild creatures? Well, it turns out, this guy is a pretty competent fighter, but is good at faking that he isn't.

Maybe he did some serious wrong in a neighbouring city... or a neighboring den. When the party starts being attacked by raiding goblins, kobolds, etc it will be hard for them to start with diplomacy, force them to fight a few... and then, later on, when they catch one alive and find out who they're travelling with, he's going to pretend repentance, never to do it again, and on and on. And then he'll escape the first chance he gets.

Do it like the Joker. He's going to force you to kill him sooner or later. It's the only way to fully stop his mischief.

Turn him over to the town guard? He's gonna find a sympathetic ear who he persuades to let him go, or convinces that he is the true innocent in all of it.

If he does well enough, he might even turn some of the people against the party.

But, again, all he is, is a con man. Only death is gonna stop him for good, and he doesn't seem much inclined to kill... but what happens when they find out most of his thefts have been vanishing, turned over to Mammon (Or an appropriate Evil God of Greed) as paying his ticket into the ranks of Devilhood?

[Hoodooman]

The undead. Particularly mindless undead that can't be reasoned with and vampire type undead that are compelled to attack even if they don't want to. Also mindless constructs and oozes; also can't be reasoned with. And demons; things of the sort that will kill on a whim you even if they like you or they've been convinced that it would be in their best interests not to.

The undead and demon summoning cultists have been the bulk of true antagonists so far campaign wise.

I've used a nerfed clay golem which had a non-violent solution. You cannot argue with them if constructs are told to kill everything that enters. However, I've ruled they have a limited amount of exact instructions and possible exploits. Course you have to work them out before the golem spots you and goes all crush and kill.

[unseenmage]

Those friendly NPCs the PCs have previously helped or gained a fondness for?

Use them.

PCs saved a puppy? Bad guy tortures and kills it for the lolz. See how much they want to combat the BBEG to death after a few of those.

Be more subtle, of course, but you get the idea. Friendly NPCs are just plothooks on parade.

[Bohandas]

First off, if your playing D&D or Pathfinder, then that is the wrong game for ''non violence non combat'' type role playing.

For example: DramaSystem, as seen in Hillfolk. DramaSystem is designed around interpersonal dynamics and social interactions. It's about whether someone gets the emotional concession she is seeking in a given interaction. It has extremely limited rules for "procedural" actions, where you go and DO things, including combat, because procedure, including combat, is not the focus of the game.

Or Toon. Toon is another good violence-not-required RPG

[Geddy2112]

There should be a balance-you don't want every encounter to be diplomancable, but players using nonviolent solutions to beat encounters is still using their abilities. It is not just diplomacy-a variety of spells can solve encounters nonlethally, as will using stealth to sneak by, or turning the environment against the enemy. In the past I remember beating a horde of who knows what when the party simply decided to bar the door. The counterpart is making encounters where fighting(or running for your life) is inevitable. The creature jumps out swinging, roll initiative. Some mindless horror hellbent on killing and eating(or something worse) the party.

You don't need to goad them into being less pacifist, just enforce the rules: Diplomacy takes 1 minute to perform.

I know 3.5 has the rushed diplomacy rule to take a -10 to reduce influncing attitude to a full round action. It also only takes one round to make a request, although it will be difficult to impossible, if the creature will even listen.

The undead. Particularly mindless undead that can't be reasoned with and vampire type undead that are compelled to attack even if they don't want to. Also mindless constructs and oozes; also can't be reasoned with. And demons; things of the sort that will kill on a whim you even if they like you or they've been convinced that it would be in their best interests not to.

+1 to this. Even pacifist good guys who never harm humanoids or intelligent creatures have a long list of things they can beat up on guilt free. Destroying undead is seen as a good thing in the majority of the world.