?

Log in

No account? Create an account
D&D 3E
Second question 
17th-Mar-2005 11:20 pm
tiger hand
We've already pretty well covered the question of whether or (especially) not the character who's been ripping schwarzstern, myself, and a few others off is, indeed, chaotic good. Here's the follow-up question: assuming the aforementioned player is playing a chaotic neutral character trying to pass herself off as chaotic good (and, of course, being neutral, thus being immune to the effects of detect evil), or assuming that he really thinks he's accurately portraying a chaotic good alignment and further that the DM will not do anything about his misplaying of his character (for example, if he agrees), what would you suggest we do about it?

Remember that our characters are neutral good, and as of this moment we haven't actually seen evidence of his treachery.
Comments 
18th-Mar-2005 06:19 am (UTC)
The alignment question is irrelevant. If it detracts from the fun of the game, discuss it and require that a change be made. Failing that, find a new game.
18th-Mar-2005 11:10 am (UTC)
Dude, alignment has nothing to do with this issue.

Pretend this was basketball for a second. You get together with some friends for some basketball. One of the friends you are playing with -- whenever they get the chance, punches you in the stomach and steals the ball. Then they get a stepladder and climb up and slam dunk it while you all stand there amazed. Then the friend dusts her hands off and explains that under the specific rules you are playing under, this sort of thing isn't exactly prohibited. Despite all of this, there's some grumbling but you muddle through. At the end of the 'game' you are all standing there with sore stomachs, and the score is like 120-0 in her favor. Because nobody wants to say anything.

Then the next week you get a call from the same friend saying "I've been practicing my gut-punching and I even have a new stepladder. Lets play some basketball!"

Thats where you are right now.
18th-Mar-2005 01:35 pm (UTC)
Metagame a trap encounter to reveal her treachery, then call the character out on it and refuse to adventure with them.

:)
18th-Mar-2005 02:58 pm (UTC)
I like this suggestion after making an adventuring compact. After seeing death on adventures, and seeing how little is made (especially after your friend gets to it) even a less intelligent character could see the advantage of a compact with punishments to divide loot and magic items, provide for ressurection, death benefits, etc., in increasing party cooperation and encouraging more risk taking.

Do the trap. Then punish as I commented in Schwarzstern's post
18th-Mar-2005 02:00 pm (UTC)
open the book, read off the good description, then the neutral description. If it were me, the evil description because crap like that pisses me off. Ask, rhetorically, which the dm thinks this pc fits. Cite examples of past activities to support your position.

If all else fails, metagame and hit the pc ingame with a large object. Can't be a jack ass if you're dead. ;) (kidding)
18th-Mar-2005 02:36 pm (UTC)
Sucky situation no matter how you look at it. How about (in game) never allowing that character out of sight of another party member while you're adventuring. I think you said the character is a sorceress, didn't you? Well, that means she has relatively few hit points, and you wouldn't want her getting surprised by something nasty, would you? So, have someone else in the party decide to become her "bodyguard." At the very least, it will make it more difficult to pocket stuff, and increases the chances she'll get caught.

18th-Mar-2005 04:43 pm (UTC)
I like this one.
18th-Mar-2005 08:29 pm (UTC) - A beautiful day in the neighborhood
That's what I would do.
18th-Mar-2005 04:52 pm (UTC)
This is not an in game issue, this is an out of game issue. All of you need to band together and bring it to your dm as an intervention. Then during the discussion you can talk about whether it is a violation. With all of you talking you cannot possibly exaggerate, and if all of you come to him he'll know your concerns are valid.
18th-Mar-2005 06:32 pm (UTC)
(Sorry if this has already been answered, but I'm still a little confused on this part so maybe you could clear it up for me?)

Maybe what we need clarified first here is whether or not your DM has already told you or not that this wizard char is within character or not in the DM's opinion. Whether your DM has already said their stance on this will effect what you can do.
18th-Mar-2005 10:18 pm (UTC)
Out of curiosity, why is this a problem? I guess it depends on how you play the game, but who cares who gets what stuff? I recommend you play your character and have fun. It is, after all, just stuff.

I do have to say quickly that I strongly, strongly advise against meta-gaming. I tend towards a fairly strict "have your character do what your character would do, without any extraneous knowlege the player might have" rule. It's sometimes tough and no one sticks to it 100%, but its the effort towards that goal that counts...

Lucifer >:}
19th-Mar-2005 02:01 am (UTC)
If I'm getting stiffed for like three-quarters of what I should be getting, I can't buy equipment that I need to do my job. Plus, buying new fancy equipment is one of the best parts of the game.
19th-Mar-2005 02:08 pm (UTC)
I apologize for this being so long...I tend to be wordy so as to not misrepresent myself. My sincerest thanks if you make it all the way to the bottom of this :)

See, here's the thing...

It sounds like the CN/CG player is moving away from the metagaming aspect of D&D, where the players work together towards common goals, much like a sports team or social group. He's moving into the sort of gaming where the players put the characters ideas and concepts ahead of what's necessarily good for the team of players. And it seems your DM is encouraging that.

Now, a bit about both types of play. Let's call the first sort "Player-Based Gaming." Playing D&D as a team of players means that, at the end of an encounter, the DM figures out the treasure and players sit around discussing how to split it up. It also lends itself to a lot of sharing of knowledge, discussion of tactics during combat, things like that. The party's fighter may have a 6 Intelligence, but when it comes to discussing what to do, each player offers suggestions and discusses things according to his own intelligence. And if someone steals from the party, he's violating some pretty serious social laws...he's stealing from his friends (or, at least, from the team he's agreed to join). The main goals of Player-Based Gaming are to accumulate rewards...treasure, xp, etc.

"Character-based gaming" puts a different spin on things. In this sort of game, people discuss things according to the perspectives of their character...i.e. that Int 6 fighter won't know a great deal and might make some stupid comments in the game (and yet, if he has a decent wisdom, still make the right choices, just not fully understand why. The characters, instead of the players, are the team. Each player is focusing on what his character would do in any given situation, given that character's background and experiences. In character-based gaming, a person stealing from the party is playing his character. He's not stealing from his buddies, the players. The negative aspect of that comes out when the character does get busted for it and the rest of the characters who've been cheated gang up on him for his dastardly ways. The goals of Character-Based Play are to collectively tell an interesting story.

Now, the cool thing about D&D is that it can be played in many, many different ways and none of them be wrong. But when you mix playing styles, you end up with a situation like you're in now. From your perspective, the CN/CG is breaking the social rules of your group of players...he's stealing from you and your buddies. From his perspective, the player is playing his character...the only one breaking the rules is the character, not the player. And there's a potentially good storyline there, when he inevitably gets caught.

[too long...continued in next post]
19th-Mar-2005 02:08 pm (UTC)
Now the key here is the DM...in the end, it's his job to set how the game should be played. Talk to him about the concept of Player-Based Gaming versus Character-Based Gaming and see where he stands on it. I'd gather that most of your group is more Player-Based. It sounds like the CN/CG guy and the DM want to move towards a more Character-Based Game. If that is true, you've really got three options, as I see it...

1) rework your approach to playing the game and move towards a Character-Based Game yourself (which doesn't necessarily mean stealing from the group...it just means playing the character as a personality with his own goals and dreams that may run contrary to the goals of the group)

2) try to convince the DM to move back to a Player-Based Game, because that's what the majority of the group enjoys doing.

3) Leave the game and find a more Player-Based Game to play. Not always an option if you live in a region with relatively few gamers.

Again, there's nothing wrong with playing D&D either way...its when some players choose to play one way and others another that situations like this pop up. Talk it out and see where things go for you. You may enjoy Character-Based Play, if that's where the DM is going with things, or you may not. In the end, that's up to you.

I wouldn't concentrate over-hard on the fact that you, as a player, are getting cheated. In the end, it's just some scribbles on a piece of paper. However, there's nothing wrong with daydreaming about what your character will do when he finds out what's been happening...

Lucifer >:}
21st-Mar-2005 05:39 am (UTC)
It doesn't really mean anything; but I just have to say that was a very well thought out and written response. It does deal with an awful lot of gaming issues too. Although there is definately a compromise position too, the groups I play with have tended towards a combination of the two methods.
This page was loaded Sep 23rd 2017, 10:56 am GMT.