Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 wizard Dec 27, 2003 13:37:37	Most DM’s quail at the thought of in-game conflict between players. Why shouldn’t they? Alignment violation, favoritism, separate sets of character knowledge: it’s enough to give anyone a headache! The best tool for this sort of situation is your control over alignment. There’s no need for “DM lightning bolts that do 1000000d6 ‘DM’ damage, save for half.” Simply change the alignment of the involved character. Also, if the other party members apparently don’t care, change their alignments too. What, the other two just couldn’t team up with the victim and manage to defeat the ONE other party member? Put it this way. If the other party members don’t care because the players don’t care, punish them for it. IN-GAME. Simply send them against foes that the now-dead character would come in really handy against, i.e. undead if the cleric’s dead, monks if there are only casters left, etc. Oh, and their alignment is now neutral, on the way to evil. And all allies desert them, for fear of being betrayed. If the other party members don’t care, and actually AGREE (Yeah, that dumb wizard was always needing gp to make me items anyway…), THEN you can lay down the smackdown. They are now DEFINITELY evil, and any allies they may have had turn on them, for fear of betrayal. What about the player of the dead? Didn’t he get screwed? Yes, obviously. But there are some in-game, believable (for D&D at least) possibilities. --------The character’s god resurrects him. Think about it---gods in the D&D game are much more visibly active than in real life, and they won’t take kindly to those that betray their followers. --------Let the player now play as one of the party’s former allies, on a mission to annihilate the betrayers. Finally, remember that if the players have derailed your good-aligned plot, remember that you can still have that plot. They’ve now switched to evil, and it’s very acceptable to finally bring out that stock of DMPC’s to annihilate the now-evil party and win for the forces of good. How do you adjudicate intra-party warfare as a DM? Two words: Natural consequences.
#2 77im Jan 12, 2004 10:35:28	A much better idea would be to simply discuss the issue with your players. Ask them directly: Do they want to play in a party where everyone squabbles all the time, betrays one another, and sometimes fights break out? Or do they want a cooperative campaign, in which they can generally work together towards common goals, with only the occasional disagreement for roleplaying purposes? If your players actually WANT to fight each other a lot, let them! If this becomes tiring for the DM, hold the discussion again, explaining your reservations. Maybe it's time to DM a different group. Most players, though, really don't want to be arguing with their friends, constantly looking over their shoulders, or struggling for dominance. If you sit down with them and say, "Please make a party of characters that get along with one another, because it will end up more fun for everyone," your players will probably respect that request. In general, it's a good idea to discuss everyone's expectations before the campaign begins. It can prevent a lot of problems, including this one. -- 77IM