Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Valor22 01-27-06, 11:11 AM	How often do you as characters steal or kill your fellow players in the game? I’m just wondering because in my matches our group spends about half the time plotting against each other and stealing their stuff and yes, killing each other. On some scale this has always been a part of D&D for me, but what about your characters? Do you groups do this kind of thing? Valor
BoneCrusher369 01-27-06, 11:22 AM	well the group I am in currently greatly disliked someone else in the group(everyone hated the kid) so we all planned to stab him to death while he was sleeping. And me being the guy with the big axe they told me at the last second to do it, well lets just say this person didnt show up to any more meetings after that
EntropicSG 01-27-06, 11:34 AM	I'm glad to say that I have never played in an evil campaign of that nature. Not that I haven't played in some sick and twisted scenarios, but the PC's were never at eachother's throats. I guess my only question about that sort of thing is whether it was strictly an in-game choice, or whether it's the players having their characters do what the players wish they could. If it is purely an ingame thing, and all the players know it, expect it, agree to it, etc. etc. etc. - if it isn't taking away from anyone else's good time - then it's fine. If your characters attack or steal from a particular character because you as players don't like that character's player - an OOG issue - then there's a problem. The bottom line is this: if everyone in the group is still having fun despite the PC vs. PC stuff, then you've got nothing to worry about. If the PC vs. PC stuff is happening because of OOG reasons, then you probably need to deal with the OOG issues. You have to put the right group of players together, just like you have to have the right group of PC's. You don't all have to be best friends, but you should all be having fun. My characters have enough problems to deal with in the game as it is - the last thing any of the PC's need is to worry about the other PC's. But that's just my humblest of opinions.
UltimateReality 01-27-06, 11:39 AM	How often do you as characters steal or kill your fellow players in the game?Now that we don't have any intentionally disruptive players in the group? None. When we did? Every damn session, every damn week. I'm currently playing an evil druid in a neutralish party that just acquired a paladin of freedom. The worst I've ever done to the party is buy a minor item off the cleric for the price of an identify and sold it back to my druid circle for it's proper price. (Made about 850gp on the deal, so meh. *shrug*)
BoneCrusher369 01-27-06, 11:40 AM	well check this out, we were fighting a bunch of giant skeletons or something like that and a couple fungi monsters (bare with my crappy descriptions) and I got ambushed and knocked out and another one of my group members (who was a cleric) decides to shoot an arrow at the fungi and ignore me laying on the ground a little bit away from him unconcious well lets just say Ive been at his throat ever since
danielinthewolvesden 01-27-06, 12:19 PM	Generally, such a game/group is a sign of immature players. And, frankly, in my over 30 years of gaming, such a thing is very very rare, even when I was playing with folks in High school. Now, we have played a few Evil campaigns, and such does occasionally happen in those- which is expected.
Valor22 01-27-06, 12:26 PM	In my group the scheaming and plotting useualy come down to two camps, teh spell casters vs everyone else. Its not that big of a deal seeing as a good deal fo the party is made up of brothers, so like older borthers vs younger brother. More often then not is do to something incredibly stupid that a player had his character do and the other characters are upset about it. As for the theft is is basicaly an oppertunity thing. Valor
geekling 01-27-06, 12:30 PM	How often do you as characters steal or kill your fellow players in the game? Never. Or well, I guess one have to add that stealing is a bit different it's a bit more of a grey scale with stealing. There's a big difference between my character never telling anyone that she found a silver ring or two, because it's so shiney, and well making off with another PC's entire fortune. It's a simple matter of I don't like the flavour of those game, and just wouldn't stay in one like that. Not that there's really anything wrong with wanting to play those games. It's just not my thing.
Thelandrach 01-27-06, 12:34 PM	Very rarely with the attacking and stealing. The worst it usually goes is the situation in my current campaign: My wife is playing a book-crazy gnome wizard. Can't get enough books. Can't spend enough time reading. Wears a Ring of Sustenance so she can read all night long, except for when she's not on watch or sleeping. She found out the dwarf cleric of Dumathoin (secrets) had some books of secret knowledge that he studied and she wanted to read them. He refused because they were, duh, secret, so she just waited until he was asleep then went through his pack and read them anyway. And other stuff like that. She'll break into peoples' houses if she knows they have books they don't want her to read. She also thinks her character is still CG. She's been sliding slowly into CN for a long, long time...
High Octane 01-27-06, 12:38 PM	Depends on if they sleep. And dont lock their doors. Well enough.
Dyrcona 01-27-06, 12:45 PM	Not intentionally, no. Friendly fire *does* happen from time to time, though. I just have to learn to aim those fireballs better....I'll get the knack of it someday. *Strolls away while whistling.* I agree with danielinthewolvesden, though. To me, that is a sign of immaturity in the players who are constantly plotting and scheming against the other players. Perhaps, they don't realize that the goal of the game is to work as a team and not against each other? I've not seen it very often, myself, because I've not really tolerated and neither have most of the folks with whom I've usually played.
Twisted Puppy 01-27-06, 12:53 PM	If you're in an evil campaign, I can see plotting against each other. Otherwise, I'd call it lack of understanding what the game is about or a lack of maturity. In any campaign there is going to be some conflict within the party, but that should be strictly in character. For example, in current campaign, my character (a wizard) cast Haste on some characters and NPCs that were guarding a caravan. One of the PCs receiving the spell, a fighter, proceeded to hide from onrushing horde of goblins. Now, that player is entitled to play their character however they want. It doesn't matter to me. However, in the eyes of the wizard (a gray elf, no less), that fighter (one of those low-born elves ;) ) is a coward, pure and simple. The fighter is going to have to prove himself in the eyes of my character before he ever receives another buff spell. My character is not going to stab him in his trance, steal from him, etc. If it comes down to letting him die or buffing, the wizard would (reluctantly) help him out. Maybe I'm just an old curmudgeon, but I don't see the point of a D&D game where the characters are always trying to shaft each other.
Fraser1986 01-27-06, 01:07 PM	The only time i ever killed another pc was when my chaotic good dwarven barbarian uncovered the parties paladin in the middle of a ritual sacrafice that would turn him into a blackguard. The player didn't mind much when i killed him since he never really connected with his paladin so in the end we didnt even roll the dice, we just described the fight to the DM
MadMoly 01-27-06, 02:25 PM	Intra-party conficlt is a potential in any game. I disagree that it is (always) a sign of immaturty. If you have the right (really it is the wrong, but for the sake of a hypothetical situation) party build, a lack of conflict is more the sign of immaturty. Say you have a neutral party consisting of an atypical ranger (CN) who sees no wrong in sport hunting every chance he gets, a druid (TN) with an affinity for deer, a fighter (TN) who couldn't care less, and rogue (CN) that likes shiney things. There should be constant strife between the ranger and the druid, unless the ranger changes his targets. Assusming that OOC the players all are okay with it, it would not be immature if the ranger was to meet a fatal "hunting accident" at a down time in the campaign. Not having the strife come to death would be just as mature, such party builds nearly mandate strife, which requires roleplaying. Party confilict should ALWAYS come down to role playing, never roll playing, though. In a seriously unbalanced evil campaign i'm in (DM uses CL and ignores ECL), my Minotaur (CN) is in a group with a catfolk 'leader'. Low wisdom has caused him to think she was a Rakshasa, which he hates beyond reason. Not sharing a language, the catfolk (DM's PC, lol) has not cleared up the misunderstanding. Last session, the party rested for the night and I took watch. After sending the vampire away, I walked over to the sleeping 'team mate' and was lining up my coup de grace when a charasmatic party member woke up and stopped me. (thankfully by telling me we would finish the job at a future date.) The DM watched the events while chuckling, accepting graciously that her character almost died by my hand. She enjoyed it, I did, as did the other players. Immature? No, it was the proper actions given the character stanced of my minotaur and the person who woke up. And do I want to kill her(DM) in her sleep with a gigantic axe? No MadMoly
Cymraegmorgan 01-27-06, 02:26 PM	How often do you as characters steal or kill your fellow players in the game? I’m just wondering because in my matches our group spends about half the time plotting against each other and stealing their stuff and yes, killing each other. On some scale this has always been a part of D&D for me, but what about your characters? Do you groups do this kind of thing? Valor Never. Never ever. In twenty-five years of gaming, I have never tolerated this as a player or as a DM.
HammerHeart81 01-27-06, 03:01 PM	Very rare throughout my gaming life, even more rare if it was within reason and fun. Most of the PvP where by complete immature power gamers who cared little for anyone else's enjoyment. Those campaigns hardly lasted long, and first case this happens, even to someone else being on the receiving end, I don't bother showing up to the next game.
2nd Ed Paladin 01-27-06, 05:10 PM	I, as a DM, never allow party attacks. Up froint people know this and also know that any character that tries it will be eaten by a passing red dragon/struck by lightning on a clear night before they finish the attack. However, it has only ever happened once, we've always played Dnd to have fun and get together with friends. I guess we think that kind of garbage would just ruin the session.
Adam Smite 01-27-06, 05:46 PM	It really depends. In most of our games, the party is either pretty well knit together when we start or are very goal-oriented, so intra-party conflict doesn't happen much. However, sometimes two players will end up being on complete opposite sides of the scale of reason for the party, so they end up squabbling, which normally only amounts to some interesting RP. If it ever gets beyond dice rolls to see if they can peg eachother in the head with a rock, the one that identifies less with the party is booted, or the party splits in two and may fight against each other, or not.
Valor22 01-27-06, 06:41 PM	Here is a little bit of irony for you. It has been my experience that when PC go at it very rarely is initiated by a Evil PC. For example we had one Lumi who couldn’t stand lies, I mean when some one told a lie, it became there life mission to hunt this person down and kill them, burn the body, **** on the ass and then scatter them to the wind. (Did not actually happened but came close). Another example was that a paladin that would walk into a room and check to see who was evil and then proceed to slaughter all said evil beings in the room, PC or not. My personal favorite is the same paladin who saw that one of the caster’s eye’s turned black when he cast a spell went nuts and attempted to kill the caster. We ended up putting that poor old boy down…sniff sniff…he was a good dog old yeller… So its been my experience that more often then not team killing sprees are started by Lawful Good characters…does this make sense to anyone? Valor To Home and Victory! For the Glory of Tollana and the fall of Starran!!!
kraegor 01-27-06, 08:47 PM	You have to first deduce... are they doing it out of fun, boredom or hatred? Do the PLAYERS really love eachother, its just the characters that have the problem? Are they just fighting cuz its funny to see who can steal the most from eachother? Are they bored and play tricks on eachother? If its any of those, its fine, let the game go on, and the DM and players should work WITH it. If it takes up the whole night of 2 rogues stealing from eachother though,t hen thats out of hand. Now if its just because the PLAYERS hate eachother, then you need to find out whats wrong, and fix it, ASAP.. Nothing will tear apart a group faster than that!
keith187 01-27-06, 09:44 PM	In each and every single game I play in nowI always think up some way to quickly and easily defeat/immoblize the other people in the party. Not so I can kill them in their sleep or anthing, but I've had way to many characters get killed by a charmed/dominated PC character that I didn't have any idea of how to defeat. In a world where magic is fairly common and in an adventuring life a character would be foolish to not have some sort of plan to protect him/her self against the others in the party. I've been on the giving end and the receiving end of a charmed/dominated PC, and all to often I've seen TPKs or neat TPKs happen because noone likes to plan for then time when you might have to fight against your own party members.
Ut-Napishtim 01-27-06, 10:01 PM	Hmmmm... lots of stuff here. Well let's start with stealing. If someone claims an item from the treasure haul before it's properly divided, to a LN character that's stealing. Of course it happens all the time in D&D and most don't care unless they have an interest in that item too. If the party Rogue finds 500 platinum in a body search and Sleight of Hand's it to his backpack without telling anyone, most would consider that stealing (there have been threads dedicated to whether the other PC's should kill him in this instance so I won't address that). I've seen it happen, but in most instances yes - the player(s) is(are) just too immature. Killing other party members? Yeah, I've seen it hapen. Yet again though, in most groups it's seriously frowned upon. In some rare instances it's required to put Old Yeller down (if I may steal an analogy), but most of the time it's really just immature players again. Good roleplayers will always have conflicts in-game, but taking it to that level is usually an overreaction attributed to limited social skills on the player's part. Look at it this way. Let's say your identity was stolen and you found the dude who bought a new plasma TV on your credit card. Do you: A) Grab a .45 and a shovel and give him a lesson in Southern justice in a shallow grave. B) Turn him in to the authorities. or C) Give him a good pummeling and take the TV? Two out of three of those answers are acceptable in most mature gaming groups. A is not (in case anyone was wondering). On a closing note though I have to disagree with Cymraegmorgan on the absolutist policy of never tolerating it on either side of the screen. That immediately reminded me of the first game I played in 3E (that caused me to flee to GURPS for the next couple years) where the DM told us up front that any PC who attacked another PC would die. Sounds good right? Wrong. This DM was a facilitator of the "DM's friend syndrome". That means that one character (his bud) in the game was able to bully every other character and take the lions share of the treasure. If the rest of us (eight other) characters ever stood up to him we would all die via deus ex machina. That game died faster than the XFL. :twocents:
Callista 01-27-06, 10:21 PM	Never in our games. Once, my character had to go on the run from another character over a difference of opinion about mental torture, though. (I was rather glad to get rid of her--Evil isn't my favorite alignment to play.)
Kyuketsukiouji 01-27-06, 11:12 PM	I've played evil characters in many campaings, and I tend to take the pragmatic attitude that my party isn't there for me to victimise, they're there to be my minions, whether they know it or not. So, no, I don't kill fellow PCs, and I try to more or less keep them on my good side. That doesn't mean I won't swindle them when I have the chance, though, but when fights break out, I'm usually the nice neutral guy everyone is glad to have outside the fight. And since that means I always survive in the end, I'm glad too.
On_the_wings_of_TPK 01-27-06, 11:24 PM	So its been my experience that more often then not team killing sprees are started by Lawful Good characters…does this make sense to anyone?That's because they're not playing Lawful Good. They're playing Lawful Stupid.
Vaelan 01-28-06, 12:55 AM	How often do you as characters steal or kill your fellow players in the game? I never steal from or kill my fellow players! I, however, am not opposed to the idea of intraparty stealing or killing so long as it is done for an in-character reason substantially more valid than mere greed.
Cymraegmorgan 01-28-06, 06:47 AM	On a closing note though I have to disagree with Cymraegmorgan on the absolutist policy of never tolerating it on either side of the screen. That immediately reminded me of the first game I played in 3E (that caused me to flee to GURPS for the next couple years) where the DM told us up front that any PC who attacked another PC would die. Sounds good right? Wrong. This DM was a facilitator of the "DM's friend syndrome". That means that one character (his bud) in the game was able to bully every other character and take the lions share of the treasure. If the rest of us (eight other) characters ever stood up to him we would all die via deus ex machina. That game died faster than the XFL. :twocents: But in your example, the DM was not being absolutist about not stealing/killing. He was playing favorites, which is just as grave a sin, in my opinion, as PCvPC killing/stealing. That DM was just facilitating player thievery, which is what I do not tolerate in my games.
geekling 01-28-06, 10:43 AM	Hmmmm... lots of stuff here. Well let's start with stealing. If someone claims an item from the treasure haul before it's properly divided, to a LN character that's stealing. Of course it happens all the time in D&D and most don't care unless they have an interest in that item too. If the party Rogue finds 500 platinum in a body search and Sleight of Hand's it to his backpack without telling anyone, most would consider that stealing (there have been threads dedicated to whether the other PC's should kill him in this instance so I won't address that). I've seen it happen, but in most instances yes - the player(s) is(are) just too immature. Again, as I said. It's scales of grey when it comes to stealing. While shoplifting a candybar is without doubt stealing it's a far cry from bank robbery. And I suppose if some Lawful-whatever really did want to get on a high-horse about my PC being unable to resist the temptation of a little pretty trinket. Well, she'd just have to tell him to get off, because you know - that thing about killing someone, even if they were the ones that attacked you, and then apropriating their property... And let's not forget the breaking into the BBEG's property, with the intention of eliminating him and, well... you know picking up a few items here and there. As you do. Yep - you guessed it - that's stealing. It's just a question of from who the PC is stealing, not a question about is it stealing or not. Then again, this is not a bad thing though. As I see it, it's the beginning of a long fine argument, you'd probably be able to milk a couple of months of bickering and debating from it. But, really... Hot-diggery-damned! Sleight of hand check for man handling 10 lbs (500 pp, 50 coins to the pound) of clinking metal. I don't think that's even allowed according to the PHB, the sleight of hand skill is talking about small items, indeed it's all about coin-sized ones, or hiding light weapons. A sack with 500 plantinum pieces.... don't even apply. Ummm... I guess at a DC 10 for a coin-sized object we're talking a DC 5000 for the whole thing. If he suceeds at that check - he's earned those coins.
Cifer 01-28-06, 12:44 PM	Well... first thing to be said: No, I would not kill a character of a friend. I don't have to, becaus of a thing I shall explain later. I don't like the idea that every single crime (or violation of honor... or stuff) in a fantasy world is punishable by death. In my opinion, Paladin fanaticism (which is a nice theme in the right campaign) is absolutely misplaced at LG. Strict adherence to laws or ideals would rather be LN since LG implies a benevolent interpretation of the law and the Paladin who uses Detect Evil as "who is the one I kill on sight" misunderstands it: Damn, evil means basically selfish in this game. Is selfishness worth a death sentence? The second thing you probably should get an idea of is the concept of building characters basing on one another. That means: If a fanatic Paladin wants to enter the group, a usual rogue shouldn't be present. If someone would like to play a rogue who is going to steal from the party members, noone who would kill him or exile him from the group should be inside (that pretty much leaves noone, meaning that this kind of rogues should better be left out). Why not play a group around a common theme? So for example assume you've got this Paladin as a core character of the group, then get him a Cleric of his religion (or a good religion if the Pal doesn't have a specific deity), maybe a Fighter who also stands in the service of the church and a Rogue who has repented his former deeds and now uses his skills for the good guys only. Or, another direction: The characters all come from one village, have gone away and after several years meet each other again. They are friends from the childhood on, so they certainly wouldn't kill each other, would they? Now those guys meet each other at the ruins of their village which was burned down by orcs/drow/insertmonster So you now have a party with an awful lot of plothooks and without the potencial of killing each other. Conclusion: A bit of infighting is entirely good for the roleplaying, yet the weapons of this fight should consist of words alone. And if I may offer advice to the threadmaker: Ask your people if they enjoy the state of affairs. If they don't, make everyone abandon their characters and roll up new ones, but talk to each other this time! It may seem to cripple their freedom of character choice, yet ask yourselves: Is it better not to play a character at all or to play him and destroy the party with it? Anyway, with a bit of forethought the most of those problems can be solved without having to resort to forbidding a char.
The Grand Mystic 01-28-06, 03:07 PM	In one online game I played in we were a party of mostly LN and CN characters, but our party rogue gained the Assassin PrC and went LE (thank goodness we didn't have an LG paladin). We are all worried at first that he was going to end up killing us in our sleep and steal our loot and such. He never killed any of us (and never planned to either), but he did some minor stealing - Sleight of Hand checks when running hands through dead bodies, quietly pocketing a gem or two when opening treasure chests, small things like that. While a player or two did balk a bit when it happened, I think it died down pretty much when we found out what he was using the extra money for - us. A good amount of the extra money he pocketed went towards poisons from his assassin's guild, while the other part went towards mundane items. All in all, he balanced out his stealing through his various forms of compensation (he bought a Boccob's Blessed Book for our Wizard's birthday a few hundred gold less than the listed DMG price; the DM let him roll to see if he could get a discount via his guild connections). All in all, it's all about how everyone feels about it and whether everyone is mature enough to handle it (that means not beating each other up OOC for IC stuff, etc.). If even one player is against the idea of allowing other players to steal and kill within the group, as a DM I would not allow it. If a player is doing it just for the hell of it (to miss off the group or further his own personal gain without helping the party in any meaningful way), then it seems you have a problem. To this day there's still talk over whether using roleplaying as an excuse to steal with a rogue is valid or not. If anything, the rules for party killing and stealing have to come from the table you're playing at. Talk to your fellow players and DM about what the rules are, preferebly before the game starts.
Silvilya 01-31-06, 05:18 PM	in our current campaign, we do not kill, maim, or steal from one another.. at least not that we ever find out about. Our Rogue, when we encounter a new PC (someone joins the group), invarably picks their pocket whilst they are unconcious (because the always are), but returns most of their stuff when the other PCs have decided to let this person live and join the group. If we plot too much, our DM throws someting at us to distract us.. nothing brings a party together like a prismatic dragon or something like that. Silvilya
Ut-Napishtim 01-31-06, 07:51 PM	Then again, this is not a bad thing though. As I see it, it's the beginning of a long fine argument, you'd probably be able to milk a couple of months of bickering and debating from it. Huh? Were you talking to me? I didn't quote you in my post or anything, dude. I must say I was rather surprised to find someone quoting me to disagree with my reflections on the topic and then imply I was the one with an antagonistic attitude. Did we have an argument before and you're still bitter? If so it must not have been a very good one because I sure don't remember it. My comments were purely my own thoughts on the topic to contribute to the thread. In fact I don't see anywhere that I even hinted otherwise. Maybe try decaf? I don't know, man. Sorry if I pushed your "angry button" there, geekling. Hot-diggery-damned! Sleight of hand check for man handling 10 lbs (500 pp, 50 coins to the pound) of clinking metal. I don't think that's even allowed according to the PHB, the sleight of hand skill is talking about small items, indeed it's all about coin-sized ones, or hiding light weapons. A sack with 500 plantinum pieces.... don't even apply. Ummm... I guess at a DC 10 for a coin-sized object we're talking a DC 5000 for the whole thing. If he suceeds at that check - he's earned those coins. Actually the example was intended as hyperbole (that's a figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton). Why you missed that and seized on it as some sort of rules argument is beyond me. But if you feel good about "correcting" me on some kind of grevious rules infraction - then you run with that, sparky. Everyone deserves a good vibe every now and then and it sounds like you could really use one. :ayyyy!:
Darth K'Trava 01-31-06, 09:10 PM	We don't play evil characters, so we don't have that problem. If you're going to play an evil campaign, expect constant theft and backstabbing.
Warboss Morgrum 02-01-06, 03:09 AM	Look at it this way. Let's say your identity was stolen and you found the dude who bought a new plasma TV on your credit card. Do you: A) Grab a .45 and a shovel and give him a lesson in Southern justice in a shallow grave. B) Turn him in to the authorities. or C) Give him a good pummeling and take the TV? Two out of three of those answers are acceptable in most mature gaming groups. A is not (in case anyone was wondering). True, in reality. In reality, violence isn't the answer to 90% of life's problems. In D&D, murder is perfectly acceptable as long as the person you murder is "evil." How many adventures boil down to "smack down this group of creatures because they stole money/items from someone friendly toward the PCs"? You really can't compare D&D morality with real morality, given the body count generated by the average campaign.
cynical 02-01-06, 03:40 AM	Look at it this way. Let's say your identity was stolen and you found the dude who bought a new plasma TV on your credit card. Do you: A) Grab a .45 and a shovel and give him a lesson in Southern justice in a shallow grave. B) Turn him in to the authorities. or C) Give him a good pummeling and take the TV? Two out of three of those answers are acceptable in most mature gaming groups. A is not (in case anyone was wondering). We have a mature non backstabing gaming group. Yet in some cases the answer is A. reasons: 1) Your in a place with no law but the law you make your self. You can tote around a prisoner and you know if you let him free he will do it again. Example horse thieves in the wild west were Hung if caught. 2) Your charicter is evil and ****** off. I see no reason why this would be an immature thing for an evil charicture to do. (and no not all evil charicture are immature) 3) Because this guys crimes are too numerous to count and he has bribed all the local currupt authorities. If you're going to play an evil campaign, expect constant theft and backstabbing. Currently in an evil campain, No backstabbing going on. Think Yakuza or Mafia.
ErinLyger 02-01-06, 03:42 AM	It depends on the character. If I am playing a good character, then I obviously will not attack allies. If I am playing a neutral or evil character, I would willingly do so if it seemed to be the best option. I've only had to do so once in my many years of gaming, however. But that was completely an IC thing. The guy I killed is still a very good friend of mine, it wasn't personal. His character was compromising our goals and being willfully ignorant of the ramifications of his actions. If he wasn't stopped, it likely would have spelled death for the entire group. So I stopped him.
Ut-Napishtim 02-01-06, 09:36 AM	We have a mature non backstabing gaming group. Yet in some cases the answer is A. Well I think the general topic of this thread is reffering to intra-party conflicts. There have been a lot of hotly debated threads over NPC prisoner treatment and whether an evil game can really be fun or not. Not that you don't have perfectly valid points, but my example was purely intended to illustrate how extreme one PC killing another is. Generally there are more acceptable options available (if you want to keep your friends). In the game world as a whole though, you're right - a plethora of varying circumstances create so many possible shades of gray that a single example really couldn't possibly apply to every single one of them. There's a world of difference between a Vamprie draining the life from his victims, and Frodo stabbing Aragon in the back because he ate the last turnip. :twocents:
jasper 02-01-06, 10:39 AM	Generally, such a game/group is a sign of immature players. And, frankly, in my over 30 years of gaming, such a thing is very very rare, even when I was playing with folks in High school. ..... 30 YEARS! Dear Speaker, I respectfully move that we beat up the honorable Mr. Daniel in the wolves den. Take his stuff and his players. How say you? :D I had that a lot in high school and with immature players. Now I don't play with goobers even if it means I don't play at all.
tarsia 02-01-06, 12:08 PM	How often do you as characters steal or kill your fellow players in the game? Generally speaking - never. As a group we just don't find it that fun (at least not in the DnD setting, some game settings are more designed with in-fighting in mind). However, we had one case where a random guy showed up to play (we were playing a college dorm lounge at the time). His character was about the shadiest guy we've ever seen, who demanded to join the party and in the next breath was saying how he was going to kill us all. So the party turned on him. He was just another annoying NPC, right? :D
Landman 02-01-06, 12:13 PM	I am a rogue (read thief) in a campaign where our party for the most part wants to collect a set of artifacts to eventually take on some god. However, I don't care about this killing this god and just want the artifacts for my guild that asked me to acquire them. Once we have the artifacts, unless the DM gives me good reason to prevent me from stealing the artifacts, I will attempt to do so and leave the party before helping the rest of the group fight this god and risking my life in the process. It just makes sense. However, it is likely that the DM will prevent this from happening by making the act unprofitable to my character (ie. my whole guild is too weak to resist an attack by the remainder of my party). I really hope hope he does, for the fun of the campaign.
Milandros 02-01-06, 12:20 PM	Barely ever. I've never murdered one of my friends out of boredom, spite or greed. I've not even beat one up. So why would my characters kill their friends? Or, if he doesn't like the others, why is he travelling with them in the first place? I'm not that fond of internal party conflict except in situations where it's planned as part of the fun. I've played in Paranoia, where you generally expect to kill all the other players six times over. That's a lot of fun. Of course, there are occasional exceptions, but I generally prefer less antagonism. It's hard to not have it bleed through into real life. In addition, we generally run characters with complex backgrounds rather than "toons" or "builds". Wiping out a character someone has written five pages of backstory and spent loads of RP time developing isn't done on a "oh yeah! Well, sez you! Now you'll be sorry!" fit.
Ikeren 02-01-06, 05:08 PM	I've once had a serious battle with another party member (We were both level 1, completing a duo mission, something simple. He didn't want to obey the kindly old lady paying us, and I did. We postured for a while and I casted a few enhancement spells before taking a swing. I think in the end I took 3 damage before the town guard came and we settled down). My characters have argued a lot. On the other hand; in the near future I am taking a Lawful Good cleric dedicated to healing, learning and experiencing things (a true adventurer) into the underdark, where he'll be joined by 4 drow. They are all friends IRL, but it will be interesting to see how the DM does the party link. I'll have offensive spells that bypass SR ready just incase.
FreeTheSlaves 02-01-06, 07:04 PM	The number of threads that use 'player' instead of 'character' makes me wonder sometimes whether there is a more serious problem that promotes this confusion. It is almost like there is a sub-culture that does or will not distinguish between player & character. Depending on the campaign theme, stealing & killing may or may not be acceptable. I usually don't run or play in games where the players have carte blanche over what they do without regard to the theme. More often than not the games usually don't have a cut-throat theme like this because interparty fighting doesn't go down very well with the d&d system. The d&d system assumes cooperation to beat appropriate encounters & screwing over your allies seems very short sighted indeed. I'd guess it only really makes sense if the character anticipates a very short period of association with the group. Outside of the appropriate ratbastard mini-campaign you'd have to ask the player why they made such a short term character? I mean the expected response is for the group to be very wary of letting another person associate with them. You might reach the point where it makes most sense that the group wouldn't accept the company of a stranger in their midst, & then you'd have to tell a player that they need to work hard to figure out a character concept that would be accepted. Meanwhile any overarching adventure plot may be sidetracked as the party hunts down the thief/murderer.
Heahengel 02-01-06, 08:15 PM	I was recently involved in a campaign where I almost killed a PC in two seperate incidents. Both cases were based on RP considerations, and before taking action, I consulted with our DM (and IIRC the other player involved), and we worked out a solution that did not involve killing the other PC. My character was NE, but I initially intended him to be only mildly evil. Over the campaign he became much more evil for various RP reasons (which the DM was pretty complicit in - I did not make my character evil in a vacuum). The first situation began at character creation. When we were deciding our character backstories, our DM had each of us decide one thing about everyone elses character. Another player decided that his character had indirectly killed my wife before the campaign started, but that I did not know about it. Sessions later my character found out, so I waited until the end of the session and talked to the DM (My character wants to kill him, what should we do about it), and we worked out a reason for me not to (specifically, the DM decided that the God of Hatred sent a messenger to me in a dream, and I had to swear my soul to him - as a consequence I could not destroy the thing I most hated, but let my hatred feed out of his presence). Later on a new character was introduced to the group, but was intitally set up as an opponant, and additionally was of a race that our group had religious reasons to hate. He got knocked out in a fight against us, so I tied him to a tree and tortured him for information, and proposed that he could join the group if he became my slave (not that I was trying to force his player to obey my commands, but I could not think of any way that we would not just kill him). So he became an unruly slave, and gradually his character proved himself to us over time IIRC (I know the player left the group soon after, but I believe that was mostly over issues he had with the DMs style - he invited me to play in a campaign of his, so I don't believe there were any hard feelings over this). In general, my attitude is that I have no right to cause some permanent change (like death so often is) to someone elses character without consulting them first.