POLL: Would You Play with Female or Child Casualty Figures?

294 votes were cast.

Warbeads

writes:

"…I have no interest in "colateral damage" been there done that. It is really in bad taste…."

Opinions vary. Depends on the rules/scope of the game.

Without civilians to rescue (in danger or injured) Supers would just be boxing on steroids. (Okay that is hyperbole but it was intentional.)

Gracias,

Glenn

Back to the Homepage

1,121 hits since 13 Jul 2009
©1994-2012 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

If you were a member of this website, you could participate in website polls. Would you like a free membership?

VOTING RESULTS
Answer	Votes	%	Chart
Yes, I'd use both dead and injured women or children	138	47%
Yes, I'd use injured women, but not children	8	3%
Yes, I'd use dead women, but not children	22	7%
Yes, I'd use dead women but only injured children	4	1%
No, I find it distasteful	29	10%
No, it reflects poorly on the hobby	13	4%
No	53	18%
no opinion	27	9%
not a gamer	0	0%

POLL IS CLOSED

POLL DESCRIPTION

Neotacha wonders...

A while back, I asked who made female casualty figures. We mostly do RPGs, and riding into town or a clearing with a couple of wounded folk or corpses can be a good set-up for an adventure, if a little cliche. It can also, for some reason, make players paranoid.

Someone said he found the discussion tasteless. Fair enough. Someone else suggested female casualties would work as objective markers for some FIW skirmish games.

So if you could get casualty figures (dead or immobile wounded) of women and children, would you use them in your games, or would it be too creepy for you? Assume the figures are in the appropriate period and scale for your games.

(Options taken from this discussion.)