What’s your take on kill systems in web novels? (i.e., any mechanism where the MC gains power directly from killing, like leveling up, etc.)

[RainingFish]

Let's define a kill system as any mechanism where the MC gains power directly from killing, like leveling up, earning system rewards, or absorbing enemies’ strength. This doesn’t include general growth from overcoming challenges.

I’m curious about people's opinion on this popular fantasy trope. Do you enjoy kill systems when they’re well-written, or do they feel overdone?

 

[Deleted member 84247]

It's usually mehbleh.

 

[Justhetip...]

Let's define a kill system as any mechanism where the MC gains power directly from killing, like leveling up, earning system rewards, or absorbing enemies’ strength. This doesn’t include general growth from overcoming challenges.

I’m curious about people's opinion on this popular fantasy trope. Do you enjoy kill systems when they’re well-written, or do they feel overdone?

I believe it does depends on the circumstances.

 

[Deathfunny]

Depends on my mood.

 

[ArcadiaBlade]

Kill system is basically giving a gun to a child. Either they relish the bloodlust of killing or be traumatize by ending a person's life. While there are the grey area people, they sometimes justify their ego by being righteous but in the end, to grow strong, you need to kill.

Even with that, they still tasted the power, and they will want more. Whether they like it or not.

You can view it in terms of playing an rpg game. Killing = exp, you slowly feed the bloodlust knawing at you as you want to grow strong. In the end, it will condition you to slowly view lives as statistic and when facing a bigger threat, you slowly come into terms of moving the bottom area.





But who am i kidding. Authors gonna abuse the hell of the plot and make 'convenient' characters that won't question the morality of a protagonist's actions and continuously justify and glorified their kind nature *cough* *cough* Chinese MC *Cough* *Cough*.

 

[NotaNuffian]

Let's define a kill system as any mechanism where the MC gains power directly from killing, like leveling up, earning system rewards, or absorbing enemies’ strength. This doesn’t include general growth from overcoming challenges.

I’m curious about people's opinion on this popular fantasy trope. Do you enjoy kill systems when they’re well-written, or do they feel overdone?

For a slob goblin who frequents CN trash, the answer is it depends. And CN never fails to fall flat.

Because while the initial rush of murdering others and getting stronger is fun, really fun, like pumping all that dopamine in my slurry brain fun. It gets stale very quickly.

Murder should never be the only dish. It is like medium rare steak; juicy and gives good vibes and mouth feel.

But too much of it makes me irritated. I want my onion rings and fries plus a refillable beverage.

Second, the right type of people to murder. I find killing monsters and bandits boring. Yes, I can justify as self defence, but it is boring.

Killing for prize like becoming a sellsword to hunt criminals is also fun at first but becomes boring real fast.

I like main characters to hunt down people who really hurt them personally. Like, really, really, hurt them.

Take Rooftop Korean Swordmaster. When he was killing all the bullies, I was giggling like a girl on a running washing machine.

But after the blown load and MC starts going after the parents, I felt a sense of tiresome. Yes, cutting tanks and choppers are nice, but not as nice to see the bullies shit bricks live on TV.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

System = shit.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

Kill systems are a throwback to the early days of RPGs, where the only way to gain experience was to kill and loot. If in a fantasy setting where life is cheap, or the character is a monster (My Vampire System, My Werewolf System, etc.) it makes sense, but otherwise it's just a bit too brutal for modern standards (and most games have shied away from the concept as well, giving "story" or "milestone" awards instead of - or in addition to - "defeat the enemy" ones).

 

[GlassRose]

I don't hate them, they certainly are convenient, but I hate when killing is the ONLY way to get xp. Or if you get xp for killing even if your class is unrelated. Crafters should get xp from crafting, not combat (well, maybe acceptable if they're using what they crafted to fight). You should get xp for learning and leveling skills. For training. For winning fights non-lethally. Essentially, for doing anything that aligns with your class.

Or if there aren't classes, then for any accomplishment, based on the difficulty and significance.

 

[laccoff_mawning]

I've seen a few that fit. I've also seen a few that feel very artificial.

 

[Daitengu]

Bleh, all I see it doing is encouraging murder hobos.

 

[Arkus86]

It really depends on the execution and the setting, but as a general rule, it's bland at best.
In the usual VRMMO type setting, it makes sense. It's a literal game system designed around killing things.
But in a proper fantasy world, any sort of system is already a stretch. Still, being obviously artificial, its existence and background can be explained and used properly in the story, but most authors don't bother, using it merely as a crutch or way to quickly attract readers. Now on top of that, if you have a cookie-cutter system where you have to kill to progress? That's just bland, lazy and uninspired slop.

 

[BigBadBoi]

Murderhobo systems suck ass almost every single time. It's lazy and bland. There's no point in NOT being a murderhobo unless you desperately try to patch in some restrictions.

 

[Representing_Tromba]

I don't like them because it just leads to murder hobo stories where the justification is "get stronger" and I don't find that intriguing. It can be done right but there has to be consequences for death or some manner of balancing to keep the story interesting. Perhaps it is a forced murder that yes, makes them stronger but is more about the psychological impact of them being forced to kill when it is against their ethics.

 

[RepresentingThree]

After reading through these replies I think it is important to note that it doesn't have to be people. They could kill animals, or monsters. I've read novels where one could gain exp from both. Just as in real life most people still do not resort to murdering their fellow man. I see nothing wrong with hunting.

 

[Jerynboe]

It works best if it’s not the focus, I think, or you subvert it somehow. Or… idk, anything to make it so that the story itself isn’t about minorly incrementing a number. 2000 dead boars can not be the solution to all your problems unless you want to get into the logistics of gathering that many boars (which can be fun)

Standing around and saying “so yeah then I killed 900 skeletons so now I can speak Spanish” generally feels dumb and arbitrary vs something even as silly as “I beat the boss of the local cartel stronghold so now I can speak Spanish.”

There would be some comedic potential in someone getting a shitty job at a slaughterhouse and becoming an invincible god from all the dead pigs or whatever. Even more so if it was a slice of life and he was using all that exp to spec into things unrelated to combat, leading to hijinks.

I think it could work well if presented as the dark side for the system. Like. A knight could get crazy strong by killing tons of enemies personally, but he won’t get any perks for Logistics, Politics, Leadership, or Diplomacy that way. Great warrior, but terrible at any of the other aspects of being a knight. But hey, rich villain faction can just pay underlings to do those things, so it’s fine if they have their 12 year old children start doing executions and slaying bound monsters to level grind.

A PROPER knight would get at least half his exp through the Chivalrous Acts system and doing stupid jackass tier dares to prove his devotion to fair maidens! Harder, slower, but more well rounded and you’ll be much stronger when you do hit the soft level cap. So when peasant Joe unlocks the knight class by touching a fragment of Excalibur that he found in an old battlefield, and he decides to start acting like a knight as best he can, he’s unknowingly on the path to being the best knight specifically because he ISNT murderhoboing.

 

[Bartun]

They called it 'the quickening' back in the day

 

[CharlesEBrown]

They called it 'the quickening' back in the day

View attachment 38108

There Should Have Been Only One [TM]

 

[RainingFish]

They called it 'the quickening' back in the day

View attachment 38108

I remember watching that show thinking none of them seem any stronger no matter how many times they do the whole lighting thing.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

I remember watching that show thinking non of them seem any stronger no matter how many times they do the whole lighting thing.

In fact, for the first minute or so after a Quickening, they seemed weaker... Apparently the first movie was a mix of two ideas:
The Elevator Pitch was "A vampire movie but the vampires only feed on each other and do so by decapitation."
The other idea was the alleged Legend of the Clan MacLeoud - Supposedly, all of the men of a village, including all the men of the Clan MacLoeud, went off to war and the matriarch of the clan showed great courtesy to a traveling stranger, who took pity on her sadness and gave her a banner. Each time she waved it, she was guaranteed to bring back one member of the clan, no matter the distance, even if they had 'left this world;' the banner was allegedly waved three times, providing the names of the three characters from the movie (Connor), Live action series (Duncan) and the abomination of a cartoon (Colin).