Provocation and Retaliation

I might be playing Strahd wrong. Count Strahd von Zarovich, Lord of the Valley of Barovia, was standing on Yester Hill, staring off into the distance, while some nearby Druids, loyal to Strahd, but with goals of their own, were performing a ritual to awaken a massive tree monster to destroy a nearby building. Now, Strahd couldn't care less about the building or even the druids' lives, so when a party of heroic adventurers came to stop the druids, Strahd merely looked on in mild indifference. As the party started defeating the druids with their remarkable talents, Strahd was eventually convinced that they were worthy of some of his attention. Still, he stayed neutral, preferring to see how the battle played out instead of joining the battle to support his supporters. If fact, the only time Strahd made any aggressive moves toward any of the party was when one of them incessantly attacked him.

Now, because Strahd is supposed to be the main villain of the story, the character whom the player's characters hate and whom they ultimately wish to kill, perhaps I should have made Strahd more aggressive, violent, evil, and hateable. But I figured that there's plenty of time in the campaign to convince the party to hate Strahd later, if it is even necessary for them to hate Strahd at all, and Strahd's indifference towards his underlings' survival made him plenty evil. Besides, Strahd's relative indifference about this whole situation illustrated an interesting point: he only attacked one member of the party, and only because that party member attacked him first. If Strahd had been left alone, he would have left the party alone.

And so it is with many people. Most people are perfectly content to leave other people alone, until they are provoked. Whether because they have no ill intentions toward us, or because we are merely beneath their notice, most people won't attack anyone unless they themselves feel that they have been attacked. Some weeks ago, I had a personal experience with this. I had been experiencing intense frustration, and I gave in to the urge to lash out in no particular direction. No one else was around at the time, but one person proved to be in earshot, and that individual felt attacked by my lashing out. That individual responded by reproving me, and I, feeling attacked by that reproof, continued to behave unkindly. With both parties feeling that they had been and were being unfairly attacked by the other, we both acted with more aggression than either of us normally feel for each other. It seems to me that we both felt that we would have left the other alone if only they had left us alone, and we each retaliated only insofar as we had felt that we had been attacked.

The moral of the story is to not start fights, and perhaps, when a fight has started, to deescalate rather than to retaliate. Naturally, it takes a good deal of humility and patience to deescalate rather than starting or perpetuating fights, but if we do that, if we refrain from provoking others and refrain from responding in kind even when provoked, we will start and continue fewer fights, and we will have greater peace. This particular combat scene is extending into its third straight role-playing session because neither Strahd nor his assailant were willing to stand down, and we can only wait and see how the fight will continue to play out when it resumes next week. But however this plays out, I choose to see it as a cautionary tale. Both parties would have had more peace had they not confronted nor retaliated against the other. If we want peace, and I certainly do, we need to learn not to attack others and, except when necessary, not to strike back at others when they attack us.