Alignment issues (lawful with a bunch of chaotic stupids) [Archive] - Wizards Community

Alignment issues (lawful with a bunch of chaotic stupids) [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Reflux
12-13-06, 04:08 PM I am playing a game with a 1st time DM where I am a 15 year old Psychic Warrior with a wisdom of 18 that is rash, irrational, and somewhat judgemantal.

My Psychic Warrior (Lawful Good) in his campaing plays with a Barbarian (Chaotic Good), Sorcerror (Chaotic Neutral), Druid (Neutral), Bard (Chaotic Neutral), and a Rogue (Chaotic Evil). Now, I am not an alignment monger when it comes to realities of a character doing something, but I am having much difficulty with the rest of my party in this reguard.

The Barbarian (Chaotic Good) has an intelligence of 6 and a wisdom of 6, and plays his mental capacity accordingly. His character runs off to smash the thing that is getting in his way. If he sees someone suffering, he runs up and stops the suffering by smashing. Smash seems to be Ugh, the barbarain, favorite thing to do. While that approach works for him, the player deems it necessary to inform me that my character being rash is against my lawful allignment. He also saw fit to tell me that shooting the Drugar negotiator after ten in-game minuets (meaning 60 rounds) was not good.

The Bard (Chaotic Neutral) has a gambling problem. I mean that both the character and the player have a gambling problem. First time we went to town, the bard lost all of his equipment and money gambling. He has not managed to come back from town clothed since.

The Sorcerror (Chaotic Neutral) has a problem with sharing. That translates to him not allowing others to have anything from any corpse he loots or any chest he opens. This "everything is mine" attitude coupled with the bard's "I need more money so I can gamble" drives me to exhaustion because I am a back-line archer and am not near any corpse when they drop, meaning I get no loot.

The Druid (Neutral) and Rogue (Chaotic EVIL) have no issues with playing a party. It bugs me to no end, but the EVIL member of our party understands the concept of group loot better than the bard, the social character.

After the encounter with the Drugar, my DM changed my allignment to Lawful Neutral because while I was taking retribution on those who were not following me ideals, I was not being good in how I went about it. The sorcerror, unfortunatly, got shifted to Chaotic Evil because he decided to torture the Drugar to get information out of them for where we were to go next.

Now fast forward a session, we are inside the same dungeon and kill three Drugar blacksmiths guarding two chests. The Sorcerror loots one, pockets the money, hands the healing wand in the chest to the Druid, and moves on. The Bard goes in, takes the money in his chest, pockets the +1 Composite Longbow (+2 str). That bow was meant for my character! My character succeded his spot check to see the bard pocket it, and demands the treasure to be divided evenly. The bard laughs and moves on. I offer an exchange of words with the bard in-character explaing party looting and how the item suited for a character should be given to them. He just started flipping through the PHB to see how much he should sell it to me for.

At this point, I saw it appropiate for my character, being 15, rash and judgemental, to one-shot the bard. The bard had grosly violated what my character thought of as right by gambling away his money multiple times, not sharing, and by bringing down the party. As I announced the action to the DM, the DM laughed because he knew how weakened the Bard was. I landed a Psionic Shot and was equiped with a Composite Longbow (+2 str). I rolled and landed for 19 HP. The bard had 1. Bard died.

Because the DM determined that my character was contemplating his action (DM's world, whatever), and I had let the other character make actions till they were 90 feet from my character, the DM decided that all but the Sorcerror were too far to react to me in the first round, which I took to run out and back around to the side entrence to the BBEG.

Now. At the BBEG, I show up 5 rounds into it. The BBEG was a Large Black dragon (never learned its age). We kill it, me dealing 30 damage, the other 25ish delt by the party. I am right next to the chests. The night ended there because we had finals the next day and it was 3 am.

I realize I just vented, but hold on a moment.

I am having a hard time explaining the dynamics of a party and how looting works to the other players. The same goes for allignment. As I try to explain either concept at either time, they all pull out some bull about how their character would not share because that is not their personality. The characters had made multiple infractions against my "Judge" styled character, so one of them was felled for it. I admit I had sunk to their level to grab their attention, but killing them was the only thing I could think of to make sure something worse did not happen, such as me killing them as a person. The only part that sickens me about my character killing the bard is the fact that the other party members were ready to kill him three sessions ago, but could not find a reason to do so in character.

Now here is where I stand on problems.

1) How can I explain to them the importance of sharing. The druid is neutral and has basically taken a vow of poverty. the barbarian sees shinies and shares them if you ask nicely enough. But the Rogue (Evil mind you) sees no reason to do you a favor unless you have done one for him. I think pouring a pot of Cure Light Wounds down his throat was a favor enough when he was at -9 hp and not near enough to the any other source of healing. The Sorcerror also seems to like holding on to the glim, being so rude as to demand a 10 gold payment for each charge of Cure Light Wounds he expends from the first wand he got of it (he has had three now, all found as loot). The Bard might be gone now though.

2) How can I explain that allignment means near on nothing. They tell me I can't shoot at evil characters. They tell me I can't threaten people in public. They tell me that killing things almost does not qualify me for good. They say that invading the dwarven runins (under the request of a dwarf) and rationalizing that the Drugar (evil dwarves) stole it from them, which they did, is unlawful. I am almost to the point of asking my DM to change my allignment to Chaotic Evil so I can kill things indescrimentally, but I realize that the "RP-Monger" would ask why I went evil.

<sigh> Is there any suggestions for what I could do. Changing chracters is acutally an option, seeing as we just completed the big dungeon and are heading back to town.
Toloran
12-13-06, 04:46 PM 1st) Your party has quite a few jerks. I suggest you talk to them individually about how much of a jerk they are being and how giving each member a share of the loot benefits the party as a whole. If they respond with "But thats how my character is!" then just tell them that their character doesn't have to be that way and it is rude to play one that way.

2nd) Without knowing more about the situation, I can't say anything on the alignment change due to you killing the durger amists negotiations. However, killing something does NOT make you evil. Or even non-good. If something attacks you (that you know is evil) you are well within your alignment to attack back and kill them. As far as lawful, that just means you follow a fairly generic code of laws (from your country, society, etc). You were hired to to enter some ruins by a dwarf. If he had legitimate rights to send you in or the ruins were otherwise abandoned, you are still lawful. Stealing is NOT lawful and thus fighting durger who stole from the fore mentioned dwarf is perfectly legitimate.
Usiris
12-13-06, 04:51 PM Hmm where to begin. I've dealt with this in the recent past. Characters who screw other characters over due to their own selfish desires.

I'll play devil's advocate for a minute. I believe the barbarian's player is right about being chaotic. Acting on impulse and emotion is a very strong chaotic trait, regardless of your age.

This party dynamic is a case of "art imitating life." You all seemed to be in character with personality traits that are really at odds with one other. Those traits have torn the party apart because three of the party members have put their own selfish desires above the good of the group. Your character's reaction while not "good" was not totally uncalled for.

How to fix this? I'd say take your DM's option of making new characters and make sure they know they can trust each other. Making a background where the characters already can trust each other (as friends, family, or simply very trustworthy associates) might be your best bet.
nastynate
12-13-06, 04:58 PM I am playing a game with a 1st time DM where I am a 15 year old Psychic Warrior with a wisdom of 18 that is rash, irrational, and somewhat judgemantal.

Rash and irrational are not appropriate characteristics of a character with this kind of Wisdom score. You should probably have mental traits that reflect your phenominal wisdom score.

My Psychic Warrior (Lawful Good) in his campaing plays with a Barbarian (Chaotic Good), Sorcerror (Chaotic Neutral), Druid (Neutral), Bard (Chaotic Neutral), and a Rogue (Chaotic Evil). Now, I am not an alignment monger when it comes to realities of a character doing something, but I am having much difficulty with the rest of my party in this reguard.

It is not uncommon for people of vastly different philosophies to clash. In the future it might be wise to build your character with party compatability in mind. The teamwork required to play D&D successfully begins even before the first gaming session (character generation). Of course you are not entirely at fault here; you just happen to be odd man out from an alignment perspective.

The Barbarian (Chaotic Good) has an intelligence of 6 and a wisdom of 6, and plays his mental capacity accordingly. His character runs off to smash the thing that is getting in his way. If he sees someone suffering, he runs up and stops the suffering by smashing. Smash seems to be Ugh, the barbarain, favorite thing to do. While that approach works for him, the player deems it necessary to inform me that my character being rash is against my lawful allignment. He also saw fit to tell me that shooting the Drugar negotiator after ten in-game minuets (meaning 60 rounds) was not good.

If you are unhappy about the out-of-game advice this player has been giving you, just talk to him. Politely ask him to allow you to play your character; its really none of his business how you role-play, unless you ask for his input specifically.

The hulk smash approach might rub you the wrong way, but there is nothing fundimentally wrong with it either.

The Bard (Chaotic Neutral) has a gambling problem. I mean that both the character and the player have a gambling problem. First time we went to town, the bard lost all of his equipment and money gambling. He has not managed to come back from town clothed since.

Eventually this character will become a liability to the party. His power level will lag behind because of his reckless and wasteful habits, and his equipment will never be up to par with the rest of the party until he changes his ways.

Sooner or later somebody should inform the player of this out of game. Smart characters would probably find a suitable replacement for him on their adventures, and he will end up being left behind. If he tempers his bad habits a bit, all will be well, but otherwise he probably should expect to roll up a new character.

The Sorcerror (Chaotic Neutral) has a problem with sharing. That translates to him not allowing others to have anything from any corpse he loots or any chest he opens. This "everything is mine" attitude coupled with the bard's "I need more money so I can gamble" drives me to exhaustion because I am a back-line archer and am not near any corpse when they drop, meaning I get no loot.

This is annoying. Not because its necessarily bad roleplaying, but because its inconsiderate to the other players. Again this should be discussed out of game. PCs need to play well with others, and this one isn't.

The Druid (Neutral) and Rogue (Chaotic EVIL) have no issues with playing a party. It bugs me to no end, but the EVIL member of our party understands the concept of group loot better than the bard, the social character.

The evil character recognizes that he needs the skills of the other characters to accomplish his goals. Making enemies of your allies is not evil; its foolish. Bravo to this player.

After the encounter with the Drugar, my DM changed my allignment to Lawful Neutral because while I was taking retribution on those who were not following me ideals, I was not being good in how I went about it. The sorcerror, unfortunatly, got shifted to Chaotic Evil because he decided to torture the Drugar to get information out of them for where we were to go next.

This sounds reasonable. I wouldn't dell on it too much

Now fast forward a session, we are inside the same dungeon and kill three Drugar blacksmiths guarding two chests. The Sorcerror loots one, pockets the money, hands the healing wand in the chest to the Druid, and moves on. The Bard goes in, takes the money in his chest, pockets the +1 Composite Longbow (+2 str). That bow was meant for my character! My character succeded his spot check to see the bard pocket it, and demands the treasure to be divided evenly. The bard laughs and moves on. I offer an exchange of words with the bard in-character explaing party looting and how the item suited for a character should be given to them. He just started flipping through the PHB to see how much he should sell it to me for.

The players are being selfish (not their characters). When the actions of the PCs has a detrimental effect out of game (you seem pretty upset) it's time to have a sit down. If you aren't having fun, then this is not a successful game.

At this point, I saw it appropiate for my character, being 15, rash and judgemental, to one-shot the bard. The bard had grosly violated what my character thought of as right by gambling away his money multiple times, not sharing, and by bringing down the party. As I announced the action to the DM, the DM laughed because he knew how weakened the Bard was. I landed a Psionic Shot and was equiped with a Composite Longbow (+2 str). I rolled and landed for 19 HP. The bard had 1. Bard died.

Now you are being as petty as the other players...

Because the DM determined that my character was contemplating his action (DM's world, whatever), and I had let the other character make actions till they were 90 feet from my character, the DM decided that all but the Sorcerror were too far to react to me in the first round, which I took to run out and back around to the side entrence to the BBEG.

The game is already ruined. No need to keep playing. Nobody cooperates and you have a hopeless cause here. Quit and start over with either a new group or with some ground rules about sharing and teamwork.

Now. At the BBEG, I show up 5 rounds into it. The BBEG was a Large Black dragon (never learned its age). We kill it, me dealing 30 damage, the other 25ish delt by the party. I am right next to the chests. The night ended there because we had finals the next day and it was 3 am.

you're still trying to salvage this game?

I realize I just vented, but hold on a moment.

ok

I am having a hard time explaining the dynamics of a party and how looting works to the other players. The same goes for allignment. As I try to explain either concept at either time, they all pull out some bull about how their character would not share because that is not their personality. The characters had made multiple infractions against my "Judge" styled character, so one of them was felled for it. I admit I had sunk to their level to grab their attention, but killing them was the only thing I could think of to make sure something worse did not happen, such as me killing them as a person. The only part that sickens me about my character killing the bard is the fact that the other party members were ready to kill him three sessions ago, but could not find a reason to do so in character.

uhg.

1) How can I explain to them the importance of sharing. The druid is neutral and has basically taken a vow of poverty. the barbarian sees shinies and shares them if you ask nicely enough. But the Rogue (Evil mind you) sees no reason to do you a favor unless you have done one for him. I think pouring a pot of Cure Light Wounds down his throat was a favor enough when he was at -9 hp and not near enough to the any other source of healing. The Sorcerror also seems to like holding on to the glim, being so rude as to demand a 10 gold payment for each charge of Cure Light Wounds he expends from the first wand he got of it (he has had three now, all found as loot). The Bard might be gone now though.

This is very easy. D&D requires teamwork to succeed, it requires the consideration of the other players' feelings, and it requires (even in game) that the characters trust one another. Without trust, there is no team, and the characters would part company and move on to other adventuring parties with whom they share common ideals.

2) How can I explain that allignment means near on nothing. They tell me I can't shoot at evil characters. They tell me I can't threaten people in public. They tell me that killing things almost does not qualify me for good. They say that invading the dwarven runins (under the request of a dwarf) and rationalizing that the Drugar (evil dwarves) stole it from them, which they did, is unlawful. I am almost to the point of asking my DM to change my allignment to Chaotic Evil so I can kill things indescrimentally, but I realize that the "RP-Monger" would ask why I went evil.

Try to avoid discussing alignment at all. Erase it from your character sheets and have the DM adjucate it until the other players understand it. In time they should be able to grasp things, but as of right now its not worth arguing over.

<sigh> Is there any suggestions for what I could do. Changing chracters is acutally an option, seeing as we just completed the big dungeon and are heading back to town.

Some new characters is a brillaint idea. It looks like the only two worth keeping are the druid and the rogue, who are the only two team players; they should find three new adventurers to team up with, and ditch the back-stabbing, greedy, gambling, characters. (Your character killed a party member; he needs to go too.)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Reflux 12-13-06, 04:08 PM	I am playing a game with a 1st time DM where I am a 15 year old Psychic Warrior with a wisdom of 18 that is rash, irrational, and somewhat judgemantal. My Psychic Warrior (Lawful Good) in his campaing plays with a Barbarian (Chaotic Good), Sorcerror (Chaotic Neutral), Druid (Neutral), Bard (Chaotic Neutral), and a Rogue (Chaotic Evil). Now, I am not an alignment monger when it comes to realities of a character doing something, but I am having much difficulty with the rest of my party in this reguard. The Barbarian (Chaotic Good) has an intelligence of 6 and a wisdom of 6, and plays his mental capacity accordingly. His character runs off to smash the thing that is getting in his way. If he sees someone suffering, he runs up and stops the suffering by smashing. Smash seems to be Ugh, the barbarain, favorite thing to do. While that approach works for him, the player deems it necessary to inform me that my character being rash is against my lawful allignment. He also saw fit to tell me that shooting the Drugar negotiator after ten in-game minuets (meaning 60 rounds) was not good. The Bard (Chaotic Neutral) has a gambling problem. I mean that both the character and the player have a gambling problem. First time we went to town, the bard lost all of his equipment and money gambling. He has not managed to come back from town clothed since. The Sorcerror (Chaotic Neutral) has a problem with sharing. That translates to him not allowing others to have anything from any corpse he loots or any chest he opens. This "everything is mine" attitude coupled with the bard's "I need more money so I can gamble" drives me to exhaustion because I am a back-line archer and am not near any corpse when they drop, meaning I get no loot. The Druid (Neutral) and Rogue (Chaotic EVIL) have no issues with playing a party. It bugs me to no end, but the EVIL member of our party understands the concept of group loot better than the bard, the social character. After the encounter with the Drugar, my DM changed my allignment to Lawful Neutral because while I was taking retribution on those who were not following me ideals, I was not being good in how I went about it. The sorcerror, unfortunatly, got shifted to Chaotic Evil because he decided to torture the Drugar to get information out of them for where we were to go next. Now fast forward a session, we are inside the same dungeon and kill three Drugar blacksmiths guarding two chests. The Sorcerror loots one, pockets the money, hands the healing wand in the chest to the Druid, and moves on. The Bard goes in, takes the money in his chest, pockets the +1 Composite Longbow (+2 str). That bow was meant for my character! My character succeded his spot check to see the bard pocket it, and demands the treasure to be divided evenly. The bard laughs and moves on. I offer an exchange of words with the bard in-character explaing party looting and how the item suited for a character should be given to them. He just started flipping through the PHB to see how much he should sell it to me for. At this point, I saw it appropiate for my character, being 15, rash and judgemental, to one-shot the bard. The bard had grosly violated what my character thought of as right by gambling away his money multiple times, not sharing, and by bringing down the party. As I announced the action to the DM, the DM laughed because he knew how weakened the Bard was. I landed a Psionic Shot and was equiped with a Composite Longbow (+2 str). I rolled and landed for 19 HP. The bard had 1. Bard died. Because the DM determined that my character was contemplating his action (DM's world, whatever), and I had let the other character make actions till they were 90 feet from my character, the DM decided that all but the Sorcerror were too far to react to me in the first round, which I took to run out and back around to the side entrence to the BBEG. Now. At the BBEG, I show up 5 rounds into it. The BBEG was a Large Black dragon (never learned its age). We kill it, me dealing 30 damage, the other 25ish delt by the party. I am right next to the chests. The night ended there because we had finals the next day and it was 3 am. I realize I just vented, but hold on a moment. I am having a hard time explaining the dynamics of a party and how looting works to the other players. The same goes for allignment. As I try to explain either concept at either time, they all pull out some bull about how their character would not share because that is not their personality. The characters had made multiple infractions against my "Judge" styled character, so one of them was felled for it. I admit I had sunk to their level to grab their attention, but killing them was the only thing I could think of to make sure something worse did not happen, such as me killing them as a person. The only part that sickens me about my character killing the bard is the fact that the other party members were ready to kill him three sessions ago, but could not find a reason to do so in character. Now here is where I stand on problems. 1) How can I explain to them the importance of sharing. The druid is neutral and has basically taken a vow of poverty. the barbarian sees shinies and shares them if you ask nicely enough. But the Rogue (Evil mind you) sees no reason to do you a favor unless you have done one for him. I think pouring a pot of Cure Light Wounds down his throat was a favor enough when he was at -9 hp and not near enough to the any other source of healing. The Sorcerror also seems to like holding on to the glim, being so rude as to demand a 10 gold payment for each charge of Cure Light Wounds he expends from the first wand he got of it (he has had three now, all found as loot). The Bard might be gone now though. 2) How can I explain that allignment means near on nothing. They tell me I can't shoot at evil characters. They tell me I can't threaten people in public. They tell me that killing things almost does not qualify me for good. They say that invading the dwarven runins (under the request of a dwarf) and rationalizing that the Drugar (evil dwarves) stole it from them, which they did, is unlawful. I am almost to the point of asking my DM to change my allignment to Chaotic Evil so I can kill things indescrimentally, but I realize that the "RP-Monger" would ask why I went evil. <sigh> Is there any suggestions for what I could do. Changing chracters is acutally an option, seeing as we just completed the big dungeon and are heading back to town.
Toloran 12-13-06, 04:46 PM	1st) Your party has quite a few jerks. I suggest you talk to them individually about how much of a jerk they are being and how giving each member a share of the loot benefits the party as a whole. If they respond with "But thats how my character is!" then just tell them that their character doesn't have to be that way and it is rude to play one that way. 2nd) Without knowing more about the situation, I can't say anything on the alignment change due to you killing the durger amists negotiations. However, killing something does NOT make you evil. Or even non-good. If something attacks you (that you know is evil) you are well within your alignment to attack back and kill them. As far as lawful, that just means you follow a fairly generic code of laws (from your country, society, etc). You were hired to to enter some ruins by a dwarf. If he had legitimate rights to send you in or the ruins were otherwise abandoned, you are still lawful. Stealing is NOT lawful and thus fighting durger who stole from the fore mentioned dwarf is perfectly legitimate.
Usiris 12-13-06, 04:51 PM	Hmm where to begin. I've dealt with this in the recent past. Characters who screw other characters over due to their own selfish desires. I'll play devil's advocate for a minute. I believe the barbarian's player is right about being chaotic. Acting on impulse and emotion is a very strong chaotic trait, regardless of your age. This party dynamic is a case of "art imitating life." You all seemed to be in character with personality traits that are really at odds with one other. Those traits have torn the party apart because three of the party members have put their own selfish desires above the good of the group. Your character's reaction while not "good" was not totally uncalled for. How to fix this? I'd say take your DM's option of making new characters and make sure they know they can trust each other. Making a background where the characters already can trust each other (as friends, family, or simply very trustworthy associates) might be your best bet.
nastynate 12-13-06, 04:58 PM	I am playing a game with a 1st time DM where I am a 15 year old Psychic Warrior with a wisdom of 18 that is rash, irrational, and somewhat judgemantal. Rash and irrational are not appropriate characteristics of a character with this kind of Wisdom score. You should probably have mental traits that reflect your phenominal wisdom score. My Psychic Warrior (Lawful Good) in his campaing plays with a Barbarian (Chaotic Good), Sorcerror (Chaotic Neutral), Druid (Neutral), Bard (Chaotic Neutral), and a Rogue (Chaotic Evil). Now, I am not an alignment monger when it comes to realities of a character doing something, but I am having much difficulty with the rest of my party in this reguard. It is not uncommon for people of vastly different philosophies to clash. In the future it might be wise to build your character with party compatability in mind. The teamwork required to play D&D successfully begins even before the first gaming session (character generation). Of course you are not entirely at fault here; you just happen to be odd man out from an alignment perspective. The Barbarian (Chaotic Good) has an intelligence of 6 and a wisdom of 6, and plays his mental capacity accordingly. His character runs off to smash the thing that is getting in his way. If he sees someone suffering, he runs up and stops the suffering by smashing. Smash seems to be Ugh, the barbarain, favorite thing to do. While that approach works for him, the player deems it necessary to inform me that my character being rash is against my lawful allignment. He also saw fit to tell me that shooting the Drugar negotiator after ten in-game minuets (meaning 60 rounds) was not good. If you are unhappy about the out-of-game advice this player has been giving you, just talk to him. Politely ask him to allow you to play your character; its really none of his business how you role-play, unless you ask for his input specifically. The hulk smash approach might rub you the wrong way, but there is nothing fundimentally wrong with it either. The Bard (Chaotic Neutral) has a gambling problem. I mean that both the character and the player have a gambling problem. First time we went to town, the bard lost all of his equipment and money gambling. He has not managed to come back from town clothed since. Eventually this character will become a liability to the party. His power level will lag behind because of his reckless and wasteful habits, and his equipment will never be up to par with the rest of the party until he changes his ways. Sooner or later somebody should inform the player of this out of game. Smart characters would probably find a suitable replacement for him on their adventures, and he will end up being left behind. If he tempers his bad habits a bit, all will be well, but otherwise he probably should expect to roll up a new character. The Sorcerror (Chaotic Neutral) has a problem with sharing. That translates to him not allowing others to have anything from any corpse he loots or any chest he opens. This "everything is mine" attitude coupled with the bard's "I need more money so I can gamble" drives me to exhaustion because I am a back-line archer and am not near any corpse when they drop, meaning I get no loot. This is annoying. Not because its necessarily bad roleplaying, but because its inconsiderate to the other players. Again this should be discussed out of game. PCs need to play well with others, and this one isn't. The Druid (Neutral) and Rogue (Chaotic EVIL) have no issues with playing a party. It bugs me to no end, but the EVIL member of our party understands the concept of group loot better than the bard, the social character. The evil character recognizes that he needs the skills of the other characters to accomplish his goals. Making enemies of your allies is not evil; its foolish. Bravo to this player. After the encounter with the Drugar, my DM changed my allignment to Lawful Neutral because while I was taking retribution on those who were not following me ideals, I was not being good in how I went about it. The sorcerror, unfortunatly, got shifted to Chaotic Evil because he decided to torture the Drugar to get information out of them for where we were to go next. This sounds reasonable. I wouldn't dell on it too much Now fast forward a session, we are inside the same dungeon and kill three Drugar blacksmiths guarding two chests. The Sorcerror loots one, pockets the money, hands the healing wand in the chest to the Druid, and moves on. The Bard goes in, takes the money in his chest, pockets the +1 Composite Longbow (+2 str). That bow was meant for my character! My character succeded his spot check to see the bard pocket it, and demands the treasure to be divided evenly. The bard laughs and moves on. I offer an exchange of words with the bard in-character explaing party looting and how the item suited for a character should be given to them. He just started flipping through the PHB to see how much he should sell it to me for. The players are being selfish (not their characters). When the actions of the PCs has a detrimental effect out of game (you seem pretty upset) it's time to have a sit down. If you aren't having fun, then this is not a successful game. At this point, I saw it appropiate for my character, being 15, rash and judgemental, to one-shot the bard. The bard had grosly violated what my character thought of as right by gambling away his money multiple times, not sharing, and by bringing down the party. As I announced the action to the DM, the DM laughed because he knew how weakened the Bard was. I landed a Psionic Shot and was equiped with a Composite Longbow (+2 str). I rolled and landed for 19 HP. The bard had 1. Bard died. Now you are being as petty as the other players... Because the DM determined that my character was contemplating his action (DM's world, whatever), and I had let the other character make actions till they were 90 feet from my character, the DM decided that all but the Sorcerror were too far to react to me in the first round, which I took to run out and back around to the side entrence to the BBEG. The game is already ruined. No need to keep playing. Nobody cooperates and you have a hopeless cause here. Quit and start over with either a new group or with some ground rules about sharing and teamwork. Now. At the BBEG, I show up 5 rounds into it. The BBEG was a Large Black dragon (never learned its age). We kill it, me dealing 30 damage, the other 25ish delt by the party. I am right next to the chests. The night ended there because we had finals the next day and it was 3 am. you're still trying to salvage this game? I realize I just vented, but hold on a moment. ok I am having a hard time explaining the dynamics of a party and how looting works to the other players. The same goes for allignment. As I try to explain either concept at either time, they all pull out some bull about how their character would not share because that is not their personality. The characters had made multiple infractions against my "Judge" styled character, so one of them was felled for it. I admit I had sunk to their level to grab their attention, but killing them was the only thing I could think of to make sure something worse did not happen, such as me killing them as a person. The only part that sickens me about my character killing the bard is the fact that the other party members were ready to kill him three sessions ago, but could not find a reason to do so in character. uhg. 1) How can I explain to them the importance of sharing. The druid is neutral and has basically taken a vow of poverty. the barbarian sees shinies and shares them if you ask nicely enough. But the Rogue (Evil mind you) sees no reason to do you a favor unless you have done one for him. I think pouring a pot of Cure Light Wounds down his throat was a favor enough when he was at -9 hp and not near enough to the any other source of healing. The Sorcerror also seems to like holding on to the glim, being so rude as to demand a 10 gold payment for each charge of Cure Light Wounds he expends from the first wand he got of it (he has had three now, all found as loot). The Bard might be gone now though. This is very easy. D&D requires teamwork to succeed, it requires the consideration of the other players' feelings, and it requires (even in game) that the characters trust one another. Without trust, there is no team, and the characters would part company and move on to other adventuring parties with whom they share common ideals. 2) How can I explain that allignment means near on nothing. They tell me I can't shoot at evil characters. They tell me I can't threaten people in public. They tell me that killing things almost does not qualify me for good. They say that invading the dwarven runins (under the request of a dwarf) and rationalizing that the Drugar (evil dwarves) stole it from them, which they did, is unlawful. I am almost to the point of asking my DM to change my allignment to Chaotic Evil so I can kill things indescrimentally, but I realize that the "RP-Monger" would ask why I went evil. Try to avoid discussing alignment at all. Erase it from your character sheets and have the DM adjucate it until the other players understand it. In time they should be able to grasp things, but as of right now its not worth arguing over. <sigh> Is there any suggestions for what I could do. Changing chracters is acutally an option, seeing as we just completed the big dungeon and are heading back to town. Some new characters is a brillaint idea. It looks like the only two worth keeping are the druid and the rogue, who are the only two team players; they should find three new adventurers to team up with, and ditch the back-stabbing, greedy, gambling, characters. (Your character killed a party member; he needs to go too.)