The Bible is full of stories of violence. From beginning (Cain murdering his brother Abel) to the end (war that ravages the entirety of the planet), the Bible is a testament to the incredible inventive and pervasive nature of humanity’s dark and selfish violence. The time that the Bible was written into was violent and produced some of the earliest law codes that placed limitations on the violence that people could inflict on each other, even in retribution for violence done against them. The Code of Hammurabi and the Levitical law of the Bible both contain the rule of “an eye for an eye” to specifically reduce the escalating cycle of vengeance that ends in wars.
Roleplaying games are full of violence too. Most roleplaying games today thrice off of various combat simulations and conflict resolution mechanics of varying levels of tactical expression. Finding justice for wrongdoing is a common theme throughout RPGs and being the force that stands against injustice and drawing the line against a violent oppressors is something that comes up frequently, but what if there was a another response against the violent offender? What if the response of force against force wasn’t the only option? Jesus had something to say about this specific issue.
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.” (Matthew 5:38-42 NIV)
Many have cited this example as a reason to endure abuse or to merely passively engage with an offender, but there is a slightly off component to Jesus’s advice that doesn’t come up all that often. Each of the slights and responses that He discusses had a cultural context. Turning your cheek into the slap forces your opponent to attack you either with a fist and acknowledge you as an equal or slap you with the left hand and be shunned for breaking cultural taboos. Roman soldiers could force an occupied person to carry their equipment and march with them, but only for a mile. Jesus’s suggestion is delightfully loving yet subversive to show that you can’t put them down.
Now I’m not suggesting that you should turn all your combat resolutions into peaceful protests or civil disobedience, but some of the best little moments in my roleplaying experience have been when violence or killing was not an option. The time I took my players weapons away after they were knocked out with sleeping gas and they had to not only break out of jail, but escape with out their lethal tools. It was hilarious seeing them come up with alternative ways to face their opponents. I also played a character in a campaign once who had never killed a thing in his life. Whenever he attacked, he deliberately tried to knock his opponent unconscious and find the means to release them safely. When his friend was mortally wounded by a creature and he resorted to real violence and killed the beast, it was a turning point for him. Lastly, I played in an adventure where we were investigating strange doings in a mine that was being haunted by Orc ghosts whose burial grounds had been disturbed. We couldn’t make them stay dead or dissipated, so we had to do some problem solving to satisfy their angry disposition and set them at rest and it was a very compelling and interesting adventure to explore.
Basically, violence doesn’t have to be the main theme of a game you play. Overcoming adversity and even combat can and should be a big part of the roleplaying game experience, but there is no need for it to remain a bloodbath. There is something empowering and in my opinion more interesting about finding a solution that might take a bit more time and creativity than simply at the end of a bloody dagger.