| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1GnollbaneMay 30, 2015 13:40:12 | I recently had a player suddenly betray the party (he stole some loot they had just found and made off in to the forest), and now the rest of the party is pretty much hell-bent on finding and killing him. However, I don't have any ideas for how to run this storyline. Do I do one-on-one sessions with the rogue character? Or do I still have him come to normal sessions and just have him wait until the rest of the party finds him? How do I create an adventure that incorporates this betrayal while not making the rest of the campaign fall apart? |
| #2UmbraCarmenMay 30, 2015 14:45:43 | Basically it's up to the players - especially that specific player - to be reasonable and work out how that character might come back into the group. Otherwise the character should probably be relegated to an NPC arch-enemy.
Other alternatives might be the player playing some other character for a while and then returning to the campaign with the "missing" character at a later date. Perhaps he just walks in to the party Inn or campfire at a later date (perhaps months later) with some kind of explanation for his actions - he was being extorted, blackmailed etc. by a crime boss? Maybe his family was under threat? Retcon this in if need be.
Goes without saying that this could easily become a player vs. player (pvp) issue so encourage the players to deal with what their characters are doing and pause the session if necessary to handle pvp friction. Ask the player what he wants to do meanwhile as you cannot handle a split party over a whole session (no DM can - even an experienced one) to all the players satisfaction.
I once made the mistake of changing sides in a fight when playing a Chaotic Evil character - this was what my character would have done - but this ended that particular campaign (though we all stayed friends and started a new campaign straight away). I speak from experience in that I recognise that although I role-played my character authentically it was absolutely a mistake. I won't play Chaotic Evil anymore though I will play Lawful Evil (evil with a code of honour or some sense of loyalty) or Chaotic Good (loose morals but an intent of not doing serious harm).
Just don't lose friends over this!
|
| #3pukunuiMay 30, 2015 14:37:04 | I hate it when players do stuff like this, especially if they haven't told anyone else that they're going to pull some dick move like that. That's why, when I DM, I have rules against players being jerks. The PCs are meant to be a team. They're not supposed to betray each other.
Personally, I would give the player the opportunity to have his PC make amends to the rest of the party. Maybe he realizes the error of his ways, and he can then subject himself to the judgement of the rest of the party. Otherwise, if he is determined to follow this course, then I'd say his PC has become an NPC and ask him to make a new PC that is actually a team player. |
| #4ProletheusMay 30, 2015 15:21:32 | First of all, you should talk to your betrayed players. Do they approve this course of action out of game?
If they do, then play it out. Over the course of at max one or two hours, they should find the betrayer and resolve the issues. If the betrayer insists on fleeing and therefore ruining the fun of the other players, give him some random encounters aimed at a full group. This should end the splitted party situation, since he'll be dead then.
If the players don't approve, which is most likely, have a private talk with the betrayer's player and tell him that D&D is a game where you are supposed to have fun together. Tell him that this means when creating a character, he is not free to create an asshole - he should instead roll someone who is able to work together with the other party members. If this doesn't work and he does this stuff repeatedly, do yourself and the group a favor and kick him. |
| #5BRJNMay 30, 2015 15:57:53 | The jerk could always find out his "magic items" are either fakes (magic aura placed on mundane item) or traps, like a Mimic is to a treasure chest. I have no problem with killing off a character who damages / sabotages the party.
Then have a talk away-from-table about how to proceed.
|
| #6BoldItalicMay 30, 2015 15:58:49 | Turn it into a mini-game using the Chase rules from the DMG. The thief is the quarry and the other players are trying to catch him.
If he escapes, he's gone from the game. That player can start a new character (possibly a few levels lower) or go home. If he is caught, the other players take him prisoner can decide what to do with him. |
| #7ZalbarthemadMay 30, 2015 16:36:37 | I've done that. The players didn't talk to me IRL for 3 weeks. It wasn't so much me being a dick as it was completely in the nature of the character, and he got tipped over the line by a captured NPC. |
| #8NevvurMay 30, 2015 17:17:40 | If the player didn't discuss the idea of his character betraying the party with me before the act, I would have no compunctions about him having a "random" deadly encounter as he made off with the loot. Poor guy ran into a pack of displacer beasts as he made off into the woods, oh well.
Every player at my table understands my expectation that the party work together, and dysfunctional adventurers are not permitted. If the player has to stretch or break the PC's behavior to maintain party integrity, this is preferred to PVP consequences. That said, as the DM I need to be aware of PC motivations so that I can create drama within the party without tearing it apart. That's good story telling. Gnollbane, did you have any reason to suspect loot would be sufficient cause for this PC to betray the party? Given that you're posting here, I'm guessing not, and I'm not suggesting you blame yourself for the situation. Loot sharing should (almost) never be a core cause of conflict in the party due to its near ubiquity as a reward. |
| #9OoftaMegMay 30, 2015 19:03:17 | Part of my session zero is the whole "team" speech. As in, if you betray the team, you are no longer part of the team. Expect to roll up a new character if you cross the line.
In this case you have two options - The thief immediately becomes an NPC. Anything that happens is completely under your control. - You run a session where the party hunts the thief down and deals with the situation.
Unless the thief can somehow talk his way out of this (and I don't see how) that character is no longer viable as a player's character. I personally don't put much credence in the "but my character would do it" statement. When the player decided they were going to steal the loot, they knew or should have known their days of adventuring with the group with that character were over.
The trick is that while the characters may hunt down the miscreant and kill him, you don't want anything similar happening with the players.
This is a situation where you may just want to talk to people off line. Let the thief's player know he's going to have to come up with a new character. Ask others how they want to play it out. |
| #10durntaurMay 30, 2015 19:04:44 | This really doesn't seem like the player being a jerk, it's what his character would do as a rogue/thief.
There's another thread here where they're discussing a disruptive player who might/would/has used the same excuse, but it has to do with the degree of disruption; the player is deliberating derailing the campaign including having his character sabotage everything, everywhere in a manner that would have the character dead by the end of the day if they were to act in the same manner IRL.
Conversely, the fact that the other players have their PCs wanting to kill their fellow/former party-member doesn't exactly speak highly of the way they're playing their characters' responses to this theft.
|
| (Reply to #10)CCS |
|
| #12MechaPilotMay 30, 2015 19:59:09 |
|
| #13BarkyMay 30, 2015 20:50:18 | Here's an idea on how to approach this without causing player-v-player antagonism. This would assume you have a good group of players and the "bad guy" isn't really trying to troll the group.
1) talk to the player out-of-game. Tell him he'll have to make a new character, but ask if he wants to play as an enemy for a session. Basically he'll call the enemy shots while the others play their PCs, and you simply adjudicate. 2) Let that player work with you to create an adventure where the "enemy" PC works towards his goal while the other PCs try to stop him. Perhaps he's trying to fence the goods. Perhaps he needs to make it to a rogue's guild safe house. Maybe he actually wanted to save the party from a curse or a bounty. Both of you can create a challenge for the other players. 3) on game night, run the adventure but let the "enemy" PC play all the enemy NPCs, let the others play their own PCs,
I call this "co-DMing".
I might try this sometime, it sounds like it could be fun. |
| #14GlimjackMay 30, 2015 21:12:09 | I once ran a Star Wars campaign that was set during the Clone Wars that explicitly set up to be a betrayal upon receiving Order 66. The players chose amongst themselves who would play the one Jedi that I allowed, the rest would be Clone soldiers. After everyone chose, I asked the Jedi player in private if he was comfortable running an Order 66 campaign, whereby at some point in the future the other players would recieve orders to kill him. He loved the idea, and we kept it secret from the Clones that they would eventually have to betray the Jedi.
That is the ONLY time I would allow betrayal in a campaign. If a player steals from everyone else and runs off with the loot, he might succeed, but he becomes an NPC, and the player can create a new character that works better with the party. The game shouldn't be derailed by a PVP scenario, and doesn't work at all if the players are playing adversarially. |
| #15ProletheusMay 31, 2015 2:23:35 |
|
| #16PsikerlordMay 31, 2015 4:22:54 |
|
| #17OrethalionMay 31, 2015 8:01:57 |
|
| (Reply to #17)OoftaMeg |
|
| #19NoctaemMay 31, 2015 9:06:02 |
|
| #20iserithMay 31, 2015 9:03:30 |
|
| #21durntaurMay 31, 2015 9:14:38 |
|
| #22iserithMay 31, 2015 9:22:59 | In my groups, long gone are the days of "What would my character do?"
Now it's "What would my character do that is also fun for everyone at the table and helps contribute to an exciting, memorable story?"
And if a player cannot answer that question with the character as-is, then it's time for the character to undergo change. Believable change is at the heart of good character development and it's very easy to imagine how a character might undergo such a change. It means the character is dynamic, more like an actual person, not flat and unchanging. |
| #23OoftaMegMay 31, 2015 9:27:40 | Or another question the player of the thief should ask.
Would my player steal from a powerful group of individuals that I've entered into a mutually beneficial arrangement knowing full well that the likely outcome is that they will try to hunt me down and kill me?
|
| #24OrethalionMay 31, 2015 13:40:58 |
|
| #25grendel111111May 31, 2015 19:43:58 |
|
| #26HorwathJun 01, 2015 1:06:17 | You should introduce the player with "don't be a jerk" rule and if everyone agrees, rewind the event like nothing happens if all agree on that. Or that character becomes an NPC. I dont know if any characters would want to continue to work with him after that.
If not killing him on the spot, they would probably leave him butt naked in middle of nowhere. |
| #27MalzeriousJun 01, 2015 10:59:20 | When people pull out the "just playing my character" card I call shenanigans. The player should always over-rule the character. The character is not written into stone, the player decides at every action what to do. You can certainly role-play a less than loyal charcter in a way that promotes the fun. The pc that runs from dangerous combats, or stares longingly at the other party members shares of the treasure. I ask such players, as part of the pre-game set up, to publically explain what would keep them from stealing from their fellow party members, or what would prevent them from running away at the first sign of danger. And then the Player can create triggers, and safety valves for the other players (and DM) to use to get actions in accordance with loyalty, even if the feeling of loyalty is not (yet) there.
Ex. J is, as of now, only interested in himself. So he will outright refuse to go on resuce missions and risk his hide for no profit. Of course, if he thought (truthfully or not) that there was some kind of profit in it (or other rewards) then he can be convinced.
J: "Hmm. Don't much see the benefit in getting involved in strangers' troubles without a upfront price negotiated."
That said, sometimes people do unwise things and when they do, the question is what to do. I prefer creativity to ret-conning. If it looks, like in the OP, that there is no easy solution immediately, it might be worth asking the players, all of them, whether the party could continue to exist as it is. Is there any reason the main party would take the rogue back in? Could the rogue have second thoughts, not just based on fear but something else, that might lead to greater trust and loyalty.
Ex. The rogue absconds with the party's loot and is happily imagining spending it all, when he comes upon a strange sight. Several cultists, who he sees now are members of the local nobility, are in the process of making a human sacrifice to some dark god as part of a plan to do something horrible to townsfolk. This crosses a line that even he can't abide, for one, there'd be no town to spend the loot, but also human sacrifice? That's too much. He realizes that the PCs are the only thing that can stop this, and that he needs to go back, and try to win their trust or at least explain what is happening. Something like that, might be a turning point that lets all the characters save face (we have bigger problems now).
|
| #28AtrophusJun 01, 2015 9:30:49 | When i have player conflict i decide on the situation. Before the game i tell the people i dont want "evil" PVP (killing other sleeping characters just because you can for example) but in a sandbox scenario things are open to be played out. I once had a paladin going into a cave while the others made a short rest outside. Inside the paladin talked to the bandit leaders and realized they are not just some head money on legs but dudeskies fighting the leading class (magocraty) to end the injustice resulting from their carelesness towards the common people. When he left the cave on their cart the party didnt have a short rest and was damaged somewhat with the paladin (AC 22 and constant dodge vs simple bandits) still having full HP and only shield of faith expended for that day. The others instantly jumped upon the bandits and in the following fight got defeated, the paladin in his conflict between bandits and original group choosing not to do anything. In the fight all once stopped to talk and the players pretending to let them both go away and trying to sneaking them into the back once they start going, but they still got defeated.
In such a situation in my opinion i can't go ahead and tell the player he hears the sound of a piano and will get smashed by it if he doesnt keep to the group a 100% or such a bull****, im a fan of free will in my sandbox campaign, if a player decides he wants to go with the bandits and roll a new character while having the old paladin become an NPC that can show up in the latter. And he actively brought the bandits to the point of not killing all the PCs for betraying them after a cease fire. Yes, if he deliberately tries to randomly kill off a group or a character without former insults thats the point i step in and say "There must be an other solution to this", but generally i dont forbid the backstabbing that can come up if it doesnt cross certain boundaries. |
| #29EckJun 01, 2015 14:03:38 |
|
| #30Ralif_RedhammerJun 02, 2015 7:21:47 | This. The fun of one PC ends when it infringes on the fun of another.
My question to Gnollbane is, how are the players handling this? Are they enjoying the roleplaying out of this unexpected turn of events? Or are they cheesed off because the one PC just stabbed them in the back for greed?
If everyone’s enjoying this, I say, why not, run a session where it’s everyone against the one PC in some sort of chase or cat and mouse run. But if tempers are legitimately growing heated, or people are unhappy about the whole thing, I say move past this fast. Talk to the group and explain that they need to reconcile. The onus needs to be on all of them, not just the rogue PC (though admittedly, they have the lionshare to heal here).
|
| #31GnollbaneJun 03, 2015 16:57:02 | I suppose I forgot to bring up the fact that it's not really something his character would do. He's a Chaotic Good Dragonborn with an ex-soldier background. But then he just decided to change courses instantly, and I went somewhat reluctantly with it seeing as I am a firm believer in the "never say no" DMing philosophy (although that might have been my mistake here).
But I don't neccesarily think he did it just to peeve off the rest of the party and myself. I think it was more of a case of "what would happen if I did ____?"
I'll be honest here, my group doesn't treat the game overly seriously. I mean, yes, we have a lot of fun around the table (most of the time), create stories together and make kickass fantasy battles happen. We just don't get so enveloped that we begin to see it as a simulation of real life, if that makes sense. If my players want to see what happens when they try something in-game, they will do so, regardless of alignments or character morals. But there's no bad blood around the gaming table, and I'm confident we won't create any, regardless of what he PCs do to each other.
|
| #32OrethalionJun 03, 2015 19:02:54 |
|
| #33ErrantJun 03, 2015 19:06:23 | When Dragonlance first came out, my DM made some liberal changes to the standard plot, including a telepathic, sentient artifact power Dragon Orb that made Raistlin an offer he couldn't refuse... the moment he accepted the offer, instantly gained +5 levels and turned on the party to seize the Dragon Orb was a classic campaign moment that our group still looks back on fondly years later. It was also a moment our Raistlin became an NPC.
The impact of the betrayal depends entirely on how it played out and the players in your group feel about it, but that doesn't mean as DM you're obliged to take on extra work - unless you get some enjoyment out of the development storywise.
The simplest path forward is to run a chase scenario if the players feel thats "what their characters would do" (fair turnabout after all) but the rogue either escapes and becomes an NPC, gets caught and fights to the death, or gets caught and grovels enough to earn a reprieve from the rest of the players.
|
| #34GnollbaneJun 04, 2015 13:05:16 | I think I've decided to take the run-as-an-NPC-villain route.
Now I need some help with creating an adventure out of hunting him down.
My idea right now is to make it so the traitor is actually a member of the evil rival guild (The Dawnfire) to the good-guy guild (The Ebonshields) that the group joined a few sessions back. The Ebonshields have sent out search parties, but to no avail. The guild hires the party to find the outlaw and bring him to justice.
The Guildmaster comes to the party with reports of shady cloaked men seen around a new area I'm introducing called Sailor's Bane. Upon arriving to the area and investigating, they find a Dawnfire camp located inside one of the many shipwrecks found scattered among the coastal area's crags and rocks. This is where the crap hits the fan and the revenge happens.
I know this is a rough idea, but I've never had to deal with this kind of surprise before. |
| #35Danny_MontannyJun 04, 2015 15:17:16 | Did the player ever state their intent other than, "just to see what happens?" Do they want to continue playing this character? If so, is there a way to get them back in the group that the other PCs would accept? I wouldn't just automatically make them a NPC unless the player was also on board. |
| (Reply to #35)OoftaMeg |
|
| #37Danny_MontannyJun 04, 2015 15:49:02 | Because no one ever makes mistakes that they regret? And no one could ever forgive such a thing as a breach in trust? And material goods are more important than the life of someone you've came to know and trust? There isn't even one PC that's more concerned with their friend's sudden change in character, than revenge? There's plenty of ways it could play out depending on how everyone wants it to. |
| (Reply to #37)OoftaMeg |
|
| #39ProletheusJun 04, 2015 16:30:50 |
|
| (Reply to #37)Gnollbane |
|
| (Reply to #39)OoftaMeg |
|
| #42ProletheusJun 05, 2015 7:56:52 |
|
| #43GnollbaneJun 05, 2015 11:39:58 | I talked to the player and he said he was fine with me running his character as an NPC villain "as long as he doesn't die" and I "let him barely escape during battles". Now what? |
| (Reply to #43)OoftaMeg |
|
| (Reply to #43)Sol_seeker |
|
| (Reply to #19)wellerpond |
|