3 good 1 evil. [Archive] - Wizards Community

3 good 1 evil. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Zeromus
04-06-06, 02:24 AM Ok so tonight we started a new campaign, all of the players save one, are good PC's. This other one decided to be N-E. Now the other players and I have a problem with this. He keeps stealing from them and doing everything to be uncooperative. Also we can't catch him in doing any of this because he has pretty good stats and his dex checks are crazy good. So none of the other playres can catch him stealing from them. Now, I'm sure the answer is simple and I'm ignoring something here, but please lend a hand.
Bloodtide_the_Red
04-06-06, 02:39 AM Well....first you can always talk to the player. Tell him if he just wants to be uncooperative and just steal from the other players, it's no fun for anyone else. I'm sure he gets a huge kick out of stealing from everyone, but that's three unhappy folk and one happy guy.

In the game you can have each of the other characters watch each other like hawks....then if Joe NE 'bumps' into one of them they simply grab him.

Maybe have the cleric of the group cast detect good or zone of truth or such. If they can't just have the whole group go to a good temple to get it done. And once they find him out to be evil, boot him out.

And it shouldn't be to hard to trip him up on the role-playing. 'hey guys lets give all the loot to the good temple' or such

BT
KJW
04-06-06, 08:20 AM The simple solution is to mandate that all characters be good. If 75% of your party wants to be good and only one player wants to be disruptive then forbid it. The stealing from party members and all that nonsense ends the moment you mandate everyone has a good alignment. The only reason a player in this situation wants to be evil is so that he can mess over the other players. Since I have mandated only good in my campaigns, this stuff has ended, sure a few players left, but amazingly those players that left were the disruptive ones.
Witch
04-06-06, 08:24 AM Personally I think Evil can be quite a fun thing to play, even (perhaps especially) in a good party. The problem is ofcourse, to prevent stupid things like stealing and not wanting to face the consequences.

If you steal, and you get caught, you're probably having a few options:
a) You get mind-affecting spells on you. - bye bye versatility
b) You get tossed out of the party - bye bye character
c) You get killed - bye bye character.

The important thing for an evil character in a good campaign is to have goals. With goals, you will probably try to stay undercover in the group. You will not do silly things such as stealing. Perhaps, when they find out you're evil, it will make some good roleplay. Possibly it'll end in your characters death, possibly they'll continue to have you with them.

The only thing you have to remember is that playing an evil character in a good party is risky. If you're not prepared to deal with that, don't do it.

I also agree that bluff checks are not suggestion spells and may be circumvented or even ignored by PCs.
Neverwrong
04-06-06, 08:25 AM The simple solution is to mandate that all characters be good. If 75% of your party wants to be good and only one player wants to be disruptive then forbid it. The stealing from party members and all that nonsense ends the moment you mandate everyone has a good alignment. The only reason a player in this situation wants to be evil is so that he can mess over the other players. Since I have mandated only good in my campaigns, this stuff has ended, sure a few players left, but amazingly those players that left were the disruptive ones.

That's sort of stuff sucks. Dnd is for escaping that sort of crap(at least for us lads). If he's playing evil-stupid, make a trap, catch hi, and throw him in the slammer(players, not you). And then, if they have second thoughts, then they can bust him out.
Ralphius_Maximus
04-06-06, 08:32 AM Witch has the right of it. This player isn't playing evil, they're playing annoying. Try to enmesh him in a plot of some sort if he isn't willing to give his character it's own goals. Have an archvillain corner him and bully him into spying on the rest of the party, with the threat of "get caught and I will skin you alive" or similar, so if he continues to pinch their gear, he's effectively committing suicide. Anything to make him pull his head in is good. It may be a little bit railroady, but it will only have an impact with the way he interacts with the party. He can still rob everyone else blind.
dragor_shadowfury
04-06-06, 08:36 AM i agree in that a player shouldn't be banned form the game or from his favorite alignment by the DM just because the other players alignments doesn't match his, but you could try to talk to him, and try to make some kind of in-game punishment for his deeds and alignment (making the local clerics of a good deity deny to heal him migth be a way), but bee sure that they makes sense
Neverwrong
04-06-06, 08:39 AM Don't give him the chance to steal anything. Does he hide the swag?
Does he keep it on him? Try tying bells to something you think he will steal.
You appear good, so coating your coins with contact poison seems out of the question. Can´T think of nothing more.
Rivelstraz
04-06-06, 09:09 AM I know by experience that most in-group stealing, or annoying act by 'evil' characters is greatly helped by metagaming. So, metagame yourself. Just kill him. I wouldn't have a friend that steals me. I'd sure NEVER go inside a dungeon with someone who can betray me for a few gold pieces.
KJW
04-06-06, 09:20 AM That's sort of stuff sucks. Dnd is for escaping that sort of crap(at least for us lads). If he's playing evil-stupid, make a trap, catch hi, and throw him in the slammer(players, not you). And then, if they have second thoughts, then they can bust him out.

OK the problem here is that three players don't want to deal with this nonsense nor does the DM. You have one player ruining the game for everyone else because he wants to play evil, come on there is nothing good about that. D&D is a group game not a chance for one player to dominate the game because he doesn't play well with others.

Yes, you can play it realistically with consequences, but if you do that then the DM needs to tell the other players: you can drop this PC from the party. That is realistic. Seriously, why would the other PCs want this evil PC in their party? They wouldn't and to be honest they should detect evil on him and boot him from the party. This is what my players do, they will reject a PC who doesn't fit with the group, sure they give a little leeway, but they are a good disciplined party and like it that way.

Yes, the DM can give consequences and all that, but do any of you realize how much time this wastes and gives the problem player exactly what he wants, attention. The squeaky wheel should be replaced not given oil. The game will descend from the greater story arcs to checking to make sure nothing was stolen last night, laying of traps and bells, and then the sudden, but inevitable, betrayal. Followed by the intra-party battle which leads to bad blood that manifests in new PCs drawn up by the problem player and the unlucky player killed off by the problem player. Repeat as needed until the DM learns to either mandate good OR drop the problem player.

The moment we dropped evil alignments from the game, everyone was happier, the problem players left, we got new better players, and the campaign covers more ground and allows for more roleplaying. Yes, there are still arguments and disputes among the players, but trust me 90% of people who want to play evil just want the fun of disrupting the game. It is also a maturity issue, most players who want to play evil in a good group are pretty immature, I don't necessarily mean age. It's just they don't know how to play well with others. This is the situation here as the OP has stated.

Now that said, an evil campaign may be fun, it is always a blast the first few times you DM an evil campaign, though it gets old after that. But in this situation, the majority is unhappy so the obvious solution is either mandate good alignments or drop the problem player. Personally, I would rather mandate good alignments to give the player a chance to grow up a little and have some fun.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Zeromus 04-06-06, 02:24 AM	Ok so tonight we started a new campaign, all of the players save one, are good PC's. This other one decided to be N-E. Now the other players and I have a problem with this. He keeps stealing from them and doing everything to be uncooperative. Also we can't catch him in doing any of this because he has pretty good stats and his dex checks are crazy good. So none of the other playres can catch him stealing from them. Now, I'm sure the answer is simple and I'm ignoring something here, but please lend a hand.
Bloodtide_the_Red 04-06-06, 02:39 AM	Well....first you can always talk to the player. Tell him if he just wants to be uncooperative and just steal from the other players, it's no fun for anyone else. I'm sure he gets a huge kick out of stealing from everyone, but that's three unhappy folk and one happy guy. In the game you can have each of the other characters watch each other like hawks....then if Joe NE 'bumps' into one of them they simply grab him. Maybe have the cleric of the group cast detect good or zone of truth or such. If they can't just have the whole group go to a good temple to get it done. And once they find him out to be evil, boot him out. And it shouldn't be to hard to trip him up on the role-playing. 'hey guys lets give all the loot to the good temple' or such BT
KJW 04-06-06, 08:20 AM	The simple solution is to mandate that all characters be good. If 75% of your party wants to be good and only one player wants to be disruptive then forbid it. The stealing from party members and all that nonsense ends the moment you mandate everyone has a good alignment. The only reason a player in this situation wants to be evil is so that he can mess over the other players. Since I have mandated only good in my campaigns, this stuff has ended, sure a few players left, but amazingly those players that left were the disruptive ones.
Witch 04-06-06, 08:24 AM	Personally I think Evil can be quite a fun thing to play, even (perhaps especially) in a good party. The problem is ofcourse, to prevent stupid things like stealing and not wanting to face the consequences. If you steal, and you get caught, you're probably having a few options: a) You get mind-affecting spells on you. - bye bye versatility b) You get tossed out of the party - bye bye character c) You get killed - bye bye character. The important thing for an evil character in a good campaign is to have goals. With goals, you will probably try to stay undercover in the group. You will not do silly things such as stealing. Perhaps, when they find out you're evil, it will make some good roleplay. Possibly it'll end in your characters death, possibly they'll continue to have you with them. The only thing you have to remember is that playing an evil character in a good party is risky. If you're not prepared to deal with that, don't do it. I also agree that bluff checks are not suggestion spells and may be circumvented or even ignored by PCs.
Neverwrong 04-06-06, 08:25 AM	The simple solution is to mandate that all characters be good. If 75% of your party wants to be good and only one player wants to be disruptive then forbid it. The stealing from party members and all that nonsense ends the moment you mandate everyone has a good alignment. The only reason a player in this situation wants to be evil is so that he can mess over the other players. Since I have mandated only good in my campaigns, this stuff has ended, sure a few players left, but amazingly those players that left were the disruptive ones. That's sort of stuff sucks. Dnd is for escaping that sort of crap(at least for us lads). If he's playing evil-stupid, make a trap, catch hi, and throw him in the slammer(players, not you). And then, if they have second thoughts, then they can bust him out.
Ralphius_Maximus 04-06-06, 08:32 AM	Witch has the right of it. This player isn't playing evil, they're playing annoying. Try to enmesh him in a plot of some sort if he isn't willing to give his character it's own goals. Have an archvillain corner him and bully him into spying on the rest of the party, with the threat of "get caught and I will skin you alive" or similar, so if he continues to pinch their gear, he's effectively committing suicide. Anything to make him pull his head in is good. It may be a little bit railroady, but it will only have an impact with the way he interacts with the party. He can still rob everyone else blind.
dragor_shadowfury 04-06-06, 08:36 AM	i agree in that a player shouldn't be banned form the game or from his favorite alignment by the DM just because the other players alignments doesn't match his, but you could try to talk to him, and try to make some kind of in-game punishment for his deeds and alignment (making the local clerics of a good deity deny to heal him migth be a way), but bee sure that they makes sense
Neverwrong 04-06-06, 08:39 AM	Don't give him the chance to steal anything. Does he hide the swag? Does he keep it on him? Try tying bells to something you think he will steal. You appear good, so coating your coins with contact poison seems out of the question. Can´T think of nothing more.
Rivelstraz 04-06-06, 09:09 AM	I know by experience that most in-group stealing, or annoying act by 'evil' characters is greatly helped by metagaming. So, metagame yourself. Just kill him. I wouldn't have a friend that steals me. I'd sure NEVER go inside a dungeon with someone who can betray me for a few gold pieces.
KJW 04-06-06, 09:20 AM	That's sort of stuff sucks. Dnd is for escaping that sort of crap(at least for us lads). If he's playing evil-stupid, make a trap, catch hi, and throw him in the slammer(players, not you). And then, if they have second thoughts, then they can bust him out. OK the problem here is that three players don't want to deal with this nonsense nor does the DM. You have one player ruining the game for everyone else because he wants to play evil, come on there is nothing good about that. D&D is a group game not a chance for one player to dominate the game because he doesn't play well with others. Yes, you can play it realistically with consequences, but if you do that then the DM needs to tell the other players: you can drop this PC from the party. That is realistic. Seriously, why would the other PCs want this evil PC in their party? They wouldn't and to be honest they should detect evil on him and boot him from the party. This is what my players do, they will reject a PC who doesn't fit with the group, sure they give a little leeway, but they are a good disciplined party and like it that way. Yes, the DM can give consequences and all that, but do any of you realize how much time this wastes and gives the problem player exactly what he wants, attention. The squeaky wheel should be replaced not given oil. The game will descend from the greater story arcs to checking to make sure nothing was stolen last night, laying of traps and bells, and then the sudden, but inevitable, betrayal. Followed by the intra-party battle which leads to bad blood that manifests in new PCs drawn up by the problem player and the unlucky player killed off by the problem player. Repeat as needed until the DM learns to either mandate good OR drop the problem player. The moment we dropped evil alignments from the game, everyone was happier, the problem players left, we got new better players, and the campaign covers more ground and allows for more roleplaying. Yes, there are still arguments and disputes among the players, but trust me 90% of people who want to play evil just want the fun of disrupting the game. It is also a maturity issue, most players who want to play evil in a good group are pretty immature, I don't necessarily mean age. It's just they don't know how to play well with others. This is the situation here as the OP has stated. Now that said, an evil campaign may be fun, it is always a blast the first few times you DM an evil campaign, though it gets old after that. But in this situation, the majority is unhappy so the obvious solution is either mandate good alignments or drop the problem player. Personally, I would rather mandate good alignments to give the player a chance to grow up a little and have some fun.