PDA

View Full Version : Would you allow this as a DM? (Long Opening Post)



sleepydwarf
2009-04-14, 01:16 AM
Hi all,

The party I currently play in is involved in realm jumping (not just between planes but from Ravenloth to Forgotten Realms etc and back again), which has made for some very interesting sessions, especially when we have to basically re-learn what our characters can and can not do after each realm jump. Imagine a cleric changing to a realm where their deity doesn’t exist at all, suddenly they have no new spells are meditating :smalleek:

Due to a series of deaths (followed by resurrections) or the retiring of a character to bring in a new one, the level gap between my character (lvl 11) and the others (lvls 4-6) is getting larger. I have even started trying to make it easier on the DM by taking my character off on his own rather than with the group, so that the DM can target the rest of the party with level appropriate encounters without me being able to just about wipe out the encounter solo. Although this is fun for me, it does mean that there is often times when either I am sitting around bored or the rest of the party is.

My character is planning to kill the remainder of the party very soon, yes that’s right, I am killing off the entire group (except for me and one other character that is assisting me). The reason behind it is that my character is travelling with the group purely to gain more power and knowledge to assist in tracking down his father’s murderer. Whilst the rest of the group have been helpful in this, he feels that they are now holding him back to much and that it is time to leave them. Unfortunately, he cannot leave them until the group has completed what they are in this realm for, which we should complete in the next session or two. Once this is done, then a medallion that my character is carrying around can be used to transport the group (or the survivors or just him) back to our original realm. Rather than leave them behind alive, as they may then start working on a way to get back and seek revenge on him for leaving them stuck there, he is going to kill them all.

The DM is aware that I am planning something, especially as I tried to form an alliance with the last BBEG we faced against the party, this didn’t work, although I did manage to convince the party (both in game and out of game) that I was not betraying them, but it is merely a trick to get us into the lair of the BBEG. The other party member I am teaming up with to pull this off is normally the most quiet and least likely to try anything player, so it is highly unlikely that anyone else will see it coming.
The act of killing off the other party members that are in is way is definitely inline with my characters normal behaviour and thought pattern, as is teaming up with the other character, so the DM shouldn’t have any problems with that. Our DM is semi organised but he always has loads of alternative plans in mind for just about everything we have thrown at him so far, but if not, then he has always managed to make quick adjustments to the plans e has and keep going anyway. As we have all been running 1-2 characters throughout this campaign so far, we are actually used to rolling up new characters and bringing them in, so this shouldn’t create any problems for the DM either. In fact, the only problem I can see coming is tat one of the other players may get rather upset (cant really express this strong enough on here unfortunately) and leave the group, which would actually mean that we would lose 2 players. This also may not be as bad as it sounds, as we do have another player or two that are interested in joining the group soon.

So basically:
As a DM, would you allow one of your players to kill off the entire party to suit his own warped desires, basically taking over the direction of the campaign and possibly ruining the game for one of the other players?

Definitely upset by this 1
Would absolutely love it 2
Wont really care either way 1
Doing the killing 2

Total players 6 plus the DM

Thanks for any and all constructive comments, if you would like to know some more about the party members before offering your opinion, then just ask :smallbiggrin:

Behold_the_Void
2009-04-14, 01:20 AM
Bottom line - if someone is going to be upset over this, it's not OK.

Ponce
2009-04-14, 01:22 AM
You are level 11 and everyone is level 4-6? That by itself is pretty bad.

Kyouhen
2009-04-14, 01:37 AM
I'd probably allow it. Though I would either find a way to let the guy who would be upset by it escape or would revive the character after and bring him back as a major villain (hero?) out for revenge against your player and the new party. The player in question would likely still have to make a new character, but knowing his old one will come back and at least try to get revenge might keep them from leaving the group.

Ent
2009-04-14, 01:41 AM
I don't think I could ever bring myself to DM myself or my players into a corner like that; this story reminds me of STing for Vampire larps in OWbN.

Personally, I'd try to use a break like you stranding the party somewhere to fix the problem that is your character (no offense).

sleepydwarf
2009-04-14, 01:45 AM
@ Behold: so basically I should stop playing my character just because one person is going to be upset? That would potentially upset me so either way, someone is going to be upset.

@ Pounce: thats the other reason why I (player) am planning on killing of everyone and leavin their bodies behind. They would all get to bring in a new character in the original realm at a higher level, either level 10 or 11 bepending on the DM

@ Kyouhen: the only problem with bringing him back as a major villian would be that he is level 4, so he would have to get some major boosting before he could challenge me. Especially as he is an unoptimised Minitor Rogue/Sorcerer attempting to be played like a front line fighter, whilst I am running a reasonably optimised Halfling Rogue/Fighter/Shadowdancer who is set up for being a killing a machine.

@ Ent: no offense taken, I know that the majority of the headaches is the fact that my original primary character as never died or been retired, thus getting a huge gap over the other characters. But our DM has stated that he doesnt want to punish me for playing my character smarter/safer than the others upto now.

Gorbash
2009-04-14, 01:49 AM
@ Pounce: thats the other reason why I (player) am planning on killing of everyone and leavin their bodies behind. They would all get to bring in a new character in the original realm at a higher level, either level 10 or 11 bepending on the DM


How altruistic of you.

If I was DMing that campaign, I'd probably insert a deus-ex machina to save the party and kill you. That way you could make a new character who is lvl 4-6. If the rest of the party doesn't kick you off the campaign for being a douche.

742
2009-04-14, 01:50 AM
the level gap seems a big DM mistake, he/she/it/they knows that as DM you can just say "oh, by the way, your level 11 now, make a note of that." and PC murdering, wow, that sounds like something i would do! corny cliche bad explaination for it, but sounds fun.

Lycan 01
2009-04-14, 01:56 AM
I would let you do it...

You've put a lot of thought into it, it makes a lot of sense, and as you've said the other players are used to making new characters.

The only issue I can see is if one of the other players actually gets upset to the point of insulting you or even getting physical. I've had this happen before when I purposefully TPKed my entire Call of Cthulhu party - it was all just a dream, though. But they didn't let me explain that... Once Nyarlathotep, messenger of the Outer Gods and lover of madness, backhanded one of the player's faces off, everybody turned on me fast. One guy basically "Blue Screen of Death"ed on us, while another actually cussed me out and got up to leave.

As it turned out, the guy who's face got backhanded off was in on it (I made a copy of his character sheet - and tore up the copy during the game after he "died" in order to prove I was "serious" about what was happening), and all was forgiven once I explained everything. In fact, the guy that cussed me out gave me a hug and said I was the best Keeper ever... The BSOD guy said it was the most epic session ever.

So yeah, TPKs can be fun. :smallbiggrin: But like I said, be careful that the players don't take it too seriously. Its all in good fun, after all...

Plus, if what you said is true, they get to buff up to level 10 or 11! Whats wrong with that? XD

Maybe you can strike a deal with the DM afterwards that they can somehow get revived or something if they really get that bent out of shape about it... :smallconfused:

Kris Strife
2009-04-14, 02:04 AM
Ask the DM for a boss battle where the villan attempts to escape through a portal and you're the only one who can get to it in time. Have the other characters be raised to level 10 or 11 and say that it took you and the BBEG a few months/years of real time to exit the portal and they scryed where you'd come out.

Juggernaut1981
2009-04-14, 02:05 AM
As a DM, I would honestly be looking at the three BAD magic letters of RPGs...

T.P.K.

I'd bump all of you off, wipe the slate clean and let your nicely bleached bones be found by the next party. Do it in a way that NONE of you were probably seeing it coming... (for instance since this party seems to happily include Evil PCs, I'd probably have one of them sell their soul to a Devil and when you cut short that Devil's Investment Plan(tm)... have you targeted by all of what is mean and nasty... and give the devil's to other players to play...)

Berserk Monk
2009-04-14, 02:12 AM
Sacrifice the fun of 4 players for two? Yeah, if he tries anything, this is when the 30 paladins randomly appear and bring about justice.

Narmoth
2009-04-14, 02:39 AM
I think something is very wrong with the campaign if you haven't agreed beforehand on playing an evil campaign. In the last instance, I'd allow it.

TPK would simply not be fun for the 4 lvl 6 players who can't do anything but get killed by a character that is for some, most likely very unfair, reason much more powerful than them.

Townopolis
2009-04-14, 02:42 AM
I'd try and find a way that makes everyone happy. The aforementioned portal idea is one that I like. You follow a BBEG through a portal, it leads to a plane where the timeflow differs in such a way that, when you are reunited with the rest of the party, they've all caught up to you (maybe a little lower, 10 to your 11).

You could also come across some source of "Training from Hell" wherein everyone else takes the opportunity because they seriously need it, but your character is more focused on his mission, so he doesn't The training works, and the rest of the party catches up with you having reached level 10.

Just some way for your character to leave the party on good terms so you don't have to PK people who aren't going to be OK with it.

Tempest Fennac
2009-04-14, 02:48 AM
I wouldn't allow it either (I don't like inter-party conflict anyway, but your plan sounds a bit excessive). Would having a subquest for a powerful Outsider to recover the lost levels work in place of you killing everyone?

Satyr
2009-04-14, 02:50 AM
There is one completely workable solution for this: sleepydwarf's character abandons the group, and leaves it in the other realm for supposedly good. The character becomes a NPC then. Sleepydwarf creates a new character with an appropriate level equal to the rest of the group, the former PC becomes the big bad of the next act of the campaign and is eventually slain by the group. An enemy like this will create a rather strong emotional response in the players, because of the treason, which is a good base for a suspenseful game; and if you cooperate well with your Gamemaster, the rest of the players will probably be surprised and get an interesting new plot arc, which is in probably every single regard than the originally intended scenario while it probably stays true to the characters' motivations and M.O.

Yuki Akuma
2009-04-14, 02:58 AM
I would never allow it.

Instead, I'd tear up your character sheet and tell you to make a level 3 character. Yes, level 3.

lord_khaine
2009-04-14, 03:30 AM
to start with i would say that the dm must carry some of the responsibility, for letting the level difference in the party go so far, my personal experience says that anything over 2 levels in difference is a bad idea.


As a DM, would you allow one of your players to kill off the entire party to suit his own warped desires, basically taking over the direction of the campaign and possibly ruining the game for one of the other players?

still, if any of my players came up with an idea like that, then i would stone him with my dice.

OneFamiliarFace
2009-04-14, 03:34 AM
Personally, I wouldn't allow it. I admit that I do play with a friendlier GM style than many. But TPKs and PvP are generally strongly discouraged in my campaigns, as I feel that their presence develops a strong reluctance to become involved in the GM's story or a character's personal history and motivation.

I guess, first, the level gap wouldn't have occurred in my games, as I don't require a level loss for dying. Rather, resurrection is more expensive.

Second, and more importantly, I would not Deus Ex Machina the situation. I would simply work with the player to find alternate solutions. It probably helps with this that my only requirement for characters is usually some basic form of party cohesion. This may sound like railroading, but DMing is a LOT OF WORK, and party infighting draws games to a screeching halt (not to mention the fact that is is rarely, if ever, appreciated by all party members involved).

I think a good thing to read on this subject is the Giant's own write-up of character motivations and what-not. Essentially, you are in charge of your own character, and you can set it up to where Killing the Party is never a necessary option for your character.

Of course, I have no idea how the group normally flows and deals with situations like this. Still, I would agree with others that the fact that it would cause a player to leave the game makes it Automatically Off-limits. Breaking up the party is one thing. Breaking up the game is another thing entirely.

Killer Angel
2009-04-14, 03:45 AM
So basically:
As a DM, would you allow one of your players to kill off the entire party to suit his own warped desires, basically taking over the direction of the campaign and possibly ruining the game for one of the other players?


This is the key.
Even you admit that this is going to ruin the game for the other players, and the risk is to have some guy leaving the table.
NO GOOD.
I can understand that you now have no fun, but... TPK (or single character killing) by another character, can be done with minimal consequences only within a group of seasoned gamers and friends, and only if they all know and agree to such a kind of game (I DM once such a campaign, and we have fun, but it was a once-in-a-life).
First af all, your DM has a lot of fault for letting rise this situation, so you should pass the burden on him.
Tell him what you want to do, WHI you want to do it, and ask him for some ideas to resolve the mess without TPK and with satisfaction for all the players.

tomaO2
2009-04-14, 03:51 AM
I don't understand how players can betray each other like this... You are a TEAM, you are suppost to work together. I haven't played very much but I did get attacked by a fellow player once. He tried to kill me and chopped off my hand before I killed his character. I then died in a session that I wasn't able to join. Though in fairness, probably would have died anyway. The whole thing left a very bad taste in my mouth but all the players seemed too not like how I played. It was my second character ever for D&D, give me a break.

Everyone thought it was good I died though cause I wasn't fighting upfront like a fighter type character should do. I don't know what the problem was. It's the GM's own fault. Every time he attacked we got lots of notice and it was a desert so we could plainly see them coming. I saw no reason to run out to close range when I could lob off a few arrows and wait for them to come to me and THEN go melee.

They insisted I not pick a melee character after mine died. I got my original character as the replacement though so that was good. Especially since it was a regular D&D mage, transported into Dark Sun. Naturally, my guy would know nothing about how to draw magic the proper way so he was going evil and WOW the level progression on evil mages is great in that setting. I was going to quickly build up a few levels, have some sort of alignment crisis, learn the proper way, take a one level hit and still be way ahead of the game.

Unfortunately, the DM decided to get rid of him arbitrarilly. *sighs* In rerospect, I think that was meant as a peacemaker to take the sting out of the loss with no real intention of having me keep it.

Anyway, killing your party members is not cool in my book. Regardless of the reason. Unless you have very antagonistic IC relationship with another party member, like Paladin vs thief.

RebelRogue
2009-04-14, 04:04 AM
I'm saddened by the killing of fellow PCs appearantly being seen as a fair and common way to solve problems! :smallmad:

Kurald Galain
2009-04-14, 04:16 AM
While there's nothing wrong with killing other player characters as long as it won't break their enjoyment of the game, the fact that you have to ask indicates that it likely will stop their fun. And that makes it not OK.

arguskos
2009-04-14, 04:16 AM
I'd allow it, yes. I'd also be ****ING PISSED YOU DIDN'T WORK ME, AS YOUR DM, IN!!!!

Look, PvP CAN work out in D&D, as long as the DM is in on it! If you go to your DM and say, "Hey, I want to kill the party to solve this horrendous level disparity, what do you think" you and he can then work out a solution that doesn't drive the other players insane, and actually gets everything fixed.

Now, if you pull something like that w/o telling me, I'll let it happen... and then ask you and anyone who helped you to leave, on grounds of being bastards who are more interested in ruining friendships with juvenile behavior than solving a mutual issue with the guy running everything.

RebelRogue
2009-04-14, 04:26 AM
I'd allow it, yes. I'd also be ****ING PISSED YOU DIDN'T WORK ME, AS YOUR DM, IN!!!!

Look, PvP CAN work out in D&D, as long as the DM is in on it! If you go to your DM and say, "Hey, I want to kill the party to solve this horrendous level disparity, what do you think" you and he can then work out a solution that doesn't drive the other players insane, and actually gets everything fixed.
So it's ok to screw up things for 4-5 persons (the players) but not for one (the DM). That doesn't sound right to me!

sleepydwarf
2009-04-14, 04:28 AM
This is the key.
Even you admit that this is going to ruin the game for the other players, and the risk is to have some guy leaving the table.
NO GOOD.
I can understand that you now have no fun, but... TPK (or single character killing) by another character, can be done with minimal consequences only within a group of seasoned gamers and friends, and only if they all know and agree to such a kind of game (I DM once such a campaign, and we have fun, but it was a once-in-a-life).
First af all, your DM has a lot of fault for letting rise this situation, so you should pass the burden on him.
Tell him what you want to do, WHI you want to do it, and ask him for some ideas to resolve the mess without TPK and with satisfaction for all the players.

I never said that it would ruin it for the other players, although yes there is a risk of one player leaving. Also, I never said it was no fun for me now, i am still having fun and I have pulled my main character back as much as possible to ensure that the others have fun also. In fact, the only one it would ruin te game for is the guy that may leave over it. Even then, the idea that he would hate it and leave is only my thoughts.

As for the rest of the party knowing or agreeing in advance with regards to PvP, lets looks at the party history abit:
First death was player 4 at the hands of player 3
Second death: Player 3 at hands of player 5 (me)
Third death: Player 2 at hands of player 1
Forth Death: Player 3 at hands of NPC Bad Guy
Fifth Death: Player 3 at hands of player 4 (its called revenge people :smallsmile: )
Sixth Death: Player 3 at hands of player 4 (accidental)
Seventh Death: Player 1 (accidental by combination of players 2, 4 & 5)

And it just goes on from there. The majority of deaths in our party is from party conflict. As for the idea "Your a team, you should all be happily working together" well no we are not a team, we got drafting at sword point into an army setup, got forced through the rifts to start jumping between realms, at all times we have kept trying to advance out own motives etc based on our individual backstory.

@ Arguskos: Naturally the DM has final say in matter, I have already discussed the betrayal of the group with him (as in me joining forces with the previous and the next BBEG). He actually loved the idea, when the rest of the party found out (although convinced otherwise, unless they are reading this now), not one of them complained or thought it was a bad thing. Oh, and I did mention in passing to him that I was considering the idea of killing the rest of the party off and gave a basic in game reason behind it to him. He didnt seem to mind it at all, although I know he would want more information about the motives etc behind it

arguskos
2009-04-14, 04:32 AM
So it's ok to screw up things for 4-5 persons (the players) but not for one (the DM). That doesn't sound right to me!
*sigh* Look, if you read my post, you'd have gotten my point.

The point was that IF he decided to go ahead and do this w/o considering the consequences, then yes, I'll permit it and then tell him to leave and never return to my gaming group for his lack of consideration. I would then proceed to apologize profusely to the other players, who are completely innocent of wrongdoing. We would go on and play something where people actually respected their friends.

Of course, if the player came to me and said, "hey, want to try X, wanna help me make something happen?" I'd respond, "Yeah, but maybe let's try Y instead, it won't piss off everyone else, ok?" And things would be good.

See? Ideally, everyone wins. :smallbiggrin:

Oh, and to OP: sorry if my tone was/is a touch harsh, but this sort of behavior really gets under my skin. My advice: TALK TO YOUR DM!!!!!! Work out something that solves the issue w/o pissing off everyone else.

EDIT: I see you have. However, have you considered that you can solve the issue in an in-character fashion that doesn't involve PvP? It's just a thought. Find a way to retire your guy and rejoin at their level. It really is best to avoid the possibility off angering players/DM (as a DM who had a player do this, and it ended poorly, even WITH my attempts to dam the floodgates of anger, it's best to just not start down this path).

Narmoth
2009-04-14, 04:35 AM
Why do you even need other monsters?
This really sets our new dms first effort on running a long campaign in a different light. I think I'll go and give him a big hug.

Okay, I won't. But I'm certainly thank him. Maybe help him a bit more with making his larp equipment.

bosssmiley
2009-04-14, 04:39 AM
My character is planning to kill the remainder of the party very soon, yes that’s right, I am killing off the entire group (except for me and one other character that is assisting me).

What makes you think that your enjoyment can be had at the cost of four other peoples' enjoyment? :smallconfused: This situation could be used as a case study for noisms' first rule test (http://alturl.com/ctqg). :smallannoyed:

Oh, and as for screwing things up for the DM: he should expect it; it's what players do. :smallamused:

sleepydwarf
2009-04-14, 04:39 AM
No worries Arguskos :smallbiggrin:

I want honest emotional responses to the question, especially as I only have 2 weeks left in which to work out exactly what my character is going to do. I also have to sit down with the DM before then and let him know.

He has floated te idea of my character joining the BBEG as a senior henchman and being retired away form the group that way (until it is time to face him again). So I have also been making up my new character at level 4 (the same level as the lowest member of the remainder of the party) so that no matter wat is decided, we are able to continue the gaming without major interuptions.

arguskos
2009-04-14, 04:58 AM
No worries Arguskos :smallbiggrin:

I want honest emotional responses to the question, especially as I only have 2 weeks left in which to work out exactly what my character is going to do. I also have to sit down with the DM before then and let him know.

He has floated te idea of my character joining the BBEG as a senior henchman and being retired away form the group that way (until it is time to face him again). So I have also been making up my new character at level 4 (the same level as the lowest member of the remainder of the party) so that no matter wat is decided, we are able to continue the gaming without major interuptions.
See, now THAT'S a great response! Gets your guy out of the way, doesn't ruin any fun, and gets everyone where they need to be! :smallbiggrin:

Killer Angel
2009-04-14, 05:00 AM
lets looks at the party history abit:
First death was player 4 at the hands of player 3
Second death: Player 3 at hands of player 5 (me)
Third death: Player 2 at hands of player 1
Forth Death: Player 3 at hands of NPC Bad Guy
Fifth Death: Player 3 at hands of player 4 (its called revenge people :smallsmile: )
Sixth Death: Player 3 at hands of player 4 (accidental)
Seventh Death: Player 1 (accidental by combination of players 2, 4 & 5)

And it just goes on from there. The majority of deaths in our party is from party conflict.

Wow... this put the thing under a total different light.
Still, even if the DM knows something, i think it's better to be very clear with him before acting. Talk to him and discuss the matter.
PvP is a minefield (for social interaction between players) and I wouldn't recommend it.

Myou
2009-04-14, 06:04 AM
If you tried to kill the entire party without even talking to me about it I'd kick you out of the group right there at the table.

If you talked to me about it I'd suggest that you do betray the PCs, but that your plan fail and you become a recurring NPC villain.

I'd also let you make a new PC at the average party level. (And I'd do something about the terribly disparate levels of the PCs, having a level 11 in a group with a level 4 is just bad DMing, however it happened the DM needs to do something to even the levels out a bit.)

KIDS
2009-04-14, 06:09 AM
As a DM, I'd "Definitely be upset by this (1)". To be honest, it sounds like poor roleplaying that is being caught in the allure of an opportunity to do something really nasty to others without risk to yourself (given your level difference). It would be the end of the campaign one way or the other, and unlike other ends, it would cause enormous angst for the future so I'd be against it. As a player, I'd be pretty pissed off too, particularly for such an unconvincing reason.

Related quote from WotC forums:
Originally posted by Grumman:

I'd just like to point out that playing this character would probably be a really bad idea, as it sounds like you're wanting to screw with the other PCs and do things which may make the other players uncomfortable. Expect to be murdered in your sleep at the soonest opportunity. Your character too.

However, your second post about how all the previous deaths happened puts the situation into a different context. You should have posted that in the first post.

In that case, what you're about to do is nothing new and won't cause any more damage or fun that what has already been caused. I need to say that I'd not enjoy myself even a bit to play in a group like that, but since it seems to be the standard, there's no further harm to be done on your side.
IMO, it sounds like if you scrap your character for one of their level then everyone will still murder each other, only with more chances to fight back. But from my point of view, the entire affair is doomed already :(

Kylarra
2009-04-14, 09:27 AM
Maybe at this point you should just murder everyone (even your erstwhile ally) and then go join the BBEG. Then at the group reroll you can make characters that actually have a reason to not stab each other in the back at the first opportunity.

sleepydwarf
2009-04-14, 09:48 AM
Gee, it sounds like everyone here plays in these nice friendly groups that stop and pick flowers for each other and rush them to hospital when they get a splinter.....
.
.
That's nothing like the group I play with. Do we work together when we need to, damn right we do. Our group of 6 have managed to take over 5 of the lands in Ravenloft. We have negotiated deals with the Iron Kingdom and made sure they were kept. We have successfully managed to get a group of drow through Elven lands, during a war, without any casualties. And yes, we have even managed to kill each other quite a few times.

Do we have fun playing this way? Yes we do. Have we played characters more along the lines of the perfect teammates working together for the greater good? Yep, and we took over 2 of the 9 layers of hell and cleaned them out of demons etc.

Its just that this time round, we are all evil characters, we are not a team, we were forced to work together purely for the benefit of the Army at first, but at no time did anyone of us turn our backs on our original personal goals and intentions, whatever they may be.

But as it turns out, after chatting to my DM online and getting him to read this thread, as the last surviving member of the original team, my character needs to finish what we are doing in this realm and return to our original realm. Otherwise, the campaign ends here as whole, as only my character can activate the item to get us back to the original realm again. Whilst that wouldn't be so bad, as it means we all restart with new characters, we are having fun with this campaign as it is, as it involves many twists and turns being thrown at us by the DM.

Do we expect to survive to epic levels, definitely not. Do we hope to, maybe. Will the DM let us, probably not :smallbiggrin:

Grey Paladin
2009-04-14, 09:50 AM
I'd let you fight, as per the rules.

If you win, you leave, become a recurring villain, and bring in a new character at level N+1, where the next highest-level party member is level N.

If you lose, party gets your items and you bring in a new character at a level lower than the level of the weakest party member.

Either way, party gets resurrected/healed by some deus ex machina afterwards and now has at least one new plot-hook.

Tahlspar Ka'nes
2009-04-14, 10:11 AM
Everyone thought it was good I died though cause I wasn't fighting upfront like a fighter type character should do. I don't know what the problem was. It's the GM's own fault. Every time he attacked we got lots of notice and it was a desert so we could plainly see them coming. I saw no reason to run out to close range when I could lob off a few arrows and wait for them to come to me and THEN go melee.

I was reading this forum, from a friend recommendation, and had to stop on this post.

So you're a fighter? Since when do fighters not carry a bow and arrow? Who the heck said a fighter can only hack and slash at melee? In your situation, if I were a fighter, I'd be unloading every arrow I could if the opponents were making themselves visible from such a great distance. Rangers are not the only ones who can use arrows, who says you can't play your character creatively?

Oh, and my original reason for stopping by here.... I'm one of those drow trying to get through the land. An added problem I have, is my character is half drow, half deep dragon. So for the most part, even the other drow hate her.

However, just because my character has no initial interest in helping anyone, and is a nasty piece of work, doesn't mean she won't help them. Our group might have friction most of the time, but how else would you relate to a bunch of total strangers?

Kylarra
2009-04-14, 10:13 AM
While it might be thematically apropos for "evil characters" to go around killing one another, I find that constant rerolling kills my enjoyment of the game. At this point in the campaign, you've achieved a pretty constant cycle of inter-party conflict -> death, complete with metagaming reasons to off someone else's character (you yourself posted that revenge was taken by player 4 on player 3 etc).

So, whatever works for your group I guess. I don't live in magical fairyland where everyone works together in harmony while holding hands and singing kumbaya, but I do feel that PC deaths at the hands of other PCs ought to be kept to a minimum.

sleepydwarf
2009-04-14, 10:16 AM
Um, Tahlspar, if you go back and reread the post you quoted by toma02, toma said that they did hang back and let loose with arrows first, which is exactly what you suggested should have happened.

Now be a good little half-drow/half-deep dragon and say your sorry to the nice bite size snack :smallyuk: :smalltongue:

To Kylarra: The revenge one wasnt meta-gaming, the it was a post resurrection revenge, so the character did actually know who had killed him in game, butotherwise, good points raised :smallsmile:

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-04-14, 10:17 AM
The main problem that I see is the level disparity. Normally, while it may be an in-character response to kill the rest of the party, your smart enough not to because 3-1 odds would end with you dead. If one character is powerful enough to kill all 3 others, the DM needs to talk to them about backing off the optimization. Here, though, the difference in power is due to chance more than anyone being a jerk, which leaves us with the situation where one character wants to kill everyone else, is fully capable of it, and it isn't the players fault. The majority of the blame, IMHO, falls on your DM. There's a reason the DMG recommends not letting respawning knock anyone more than 2 levels below their allies. I'd recommend finding a way to retire your character and come back in at the party level.

I also have to ask, why hasn't the party caught back up? Looking at 1 ECL 11 and 4 ECL 5s v. a CR 9, they should level in 1 day of adventuring, while you gain nothing. When the party hits level 6, it takes 2 days. You have, at this point, gained 1/4th of a level. Over the course of maybe a week(in-game), they'll reach 9th level and you'll be 12th. That's a manageable difference.

sleepydwarf
2009-04-14, 10:32 AM
Yes they should have managed to catch back up in levels by now, but one particular player (yes player not character) seems to be responsible for keeping them all down. He keeps getting others killed and then also getting himself killed. As an example, whilst attacking a castle filled with undead, he decided that it would be a good idea to leave our very injured magic users alone on a walk way and charge into a huge dining room that we knew had over 50 skeletons in it. this room had actually been setup specifically for my character. Even though the DM quickly rerolled the stats and HP for the room, it was still to great for the Minitor Rogue/Sorcerer character that was pretending to be a fighter (not using magic or Rogue skills at all at that piont). We knew about the room before hand out of game so that the players knew about it and could make sure we avoided it (except me of course). This is just one example, of many things he has done that keep them from catching up to me. Most of the time, because I split my character off from the group, I end up having to fight my way back to them to either rescue them or retrieve the bodies :smallfrown:

I tried the room out with the DM later, after the session was over, and my character would have actually died in there, it was that close it came down to the last couple of initive and attack rolls.

Calinero
2009-04-14, 10:38 AM
Well, I would recommend consulting the DM on this beforehand. It's nice to surprise the other players sometimes, but it's never a good idea to surprise the DM too badly. That's a great way to derail a game right there. See what he/she says.

AdmiralCheez
2009-04-14, 10:40 AM
I've been in only one game that allowed inter-party killing. The DM simply warned us in the beginning, if it happens, it happens.

In that one, we had a character who specialized in charming just about anything. We all thought that would be cool, being able to charm enemy guards. It was, we evaded a lot of unnecessary combat. Then he took it too far, and started charming party members over stupid things. One party member, a druid, warned him in-and-out of game that if he did it again, we would kill him.

That's exactly what happened, and without telling anyone else, the druid changed into a bear, killed him, stuffed the body into the deceased's bag of holding, changed to a giant octopus and buried it deep in the ocean.

That's the only instance of this I've ever encountered, but it made sense to the story; as it turns out, he was also blessed by the dark gods to do evil. We just didn't know it.

Volkov
2009-04-14, 10:51 AM
I'd leave level increasing artifacts for the rest of the party so they can catch up with you. Probably from a cult or a few.

Thajocoth
2009-04-14, 11:50 AM
This is why, in campaigns I'm in or run, everyone's the same level. If we have 6 players and one misses a session, the xp earned is divided by 5, but the 6th player will gain the same amount when they return. A new character started would start at the same level and xp amount as everyone else.


For your current situation, I'd recommend one of the following solutions:

A - The higher level player leaves the party & finds a new party. The party finds someone to replace the higher level player that's around their own level. This splits it into 2 separate campaigns.

B - The higher level character gets hit over the head so hard he has amnesia about the last few levels.

C - The higher level player gets frozen in a block of ice and the other players quest to save him, with lots of other quests along the way. It takes them until they're around his level to do so.

D - Everyone adds their xp together then divides it evenly amongst them.

E - The higher level's character splits in half somehow, each with half his xp. He plays two characters at that new level.


Most of these kinda penalize the higher level player, but it's better to penalize one than everyone else.



In my campaign, if anyone turned on the party and fought them, I'd allow it. They'd likely need to reroll shortly thereafter, as no one member of the party could take on all the rest by themselves. However... I do plan on infecting a party member with something that, if left in their system long enough, will make them try to convince "the nearest humanoid" to be alone with them, then kill them... But they'd have to let the "disease" progress 6 stages for that to happen, and I doubt they'll do that, and even then, the other players have learned not to split up.

Typewriter
2009-04-14, 12:17 PM
I agree with the characters motivation, but not the players.

What do I mean by that?

Your character is being held back on his mission, and needs to go off on his own to do these things.

Regardless of the decision you make, or the final outcome you have roleplayed yourself into the position of NPC.

As a player you need to realize that. Unless the party makes new characters that are useful to you are you going to kill them off again?

You have roleplayed straight into NPC territory, where the will of the character cannot coincide with the will of the player in a team way. Killing one party member off, and offering him as a sacrifice to get the other players power(RP that would have to be done with your DM) would get the power balanced. It would also make you able to leverage over the rest of the party.

But for your own goals to mean this means that you have no reason to continue playing him as a character. NPC.

valadil
2009-04-14, 01:09 PM
Player on player conflict is something that varies from group to group. Some groups like it, some don't. But, the whole group has to be on the same page with regard to this kind of conflict, or else out of game drama will happen. If the other players in your party are not aware that they're in the type of game where a PC can kill them, they will be *very* upset if that sort of thing happens.

You were right for telling your GM what you planned to do and for questioning if it's okay.

What I think is the right way to handle this situation is for your character to retire and become an NPC. Then have him turn on the group, but somehow fail to kill him (how this goes down should be determined by your GM). Then let your character be the BBEG for a few sessions. I find this kind of BBEG to be very effective because betrayal is far more personal to the players than generic evil that has to be wiped out.

Jerok
2009-04-14, 01:15 PM
This is why I don't allow evil characters in my campaigns. Evil characters will want to kill off other characters if it is in their benefit. It upsets players, something I don't want to deal with. I am even hesitant to allow neutral characters in the party (especially chaotic neutral)

I never want to force a player, *out of character*, to do or not to do something. Each player is responsible for playing as their character would.

Basically, evil campaigns can be fun, but it turns into a risk-type game where the party is working not together, but for themselves. Some people like these games, and that would be fine, but the whole party has to agree with it.

Townopolis
2009-04-14, 02:20 PM
Gee, it sounds like everyone here plays in these nice friendly groups that stop and pick flowers for each other and rush them to hospital when they get a splinter...
Oh snap.

Whatever works for you works for you, but I feel that I should let you know that--when it comes to playstyle--the best defense is not a good offense. Lose the passive aggressive hyperbole and let us focus on the situation at hand.

-----

With the situation at hand, it seems that the group in general is going to be just peachy with the plan as you have it laid out. There are just two problems.

1: The player who might quit.
2: The Minotaur (assuming this isn't the same player as #1).

I'd get the DM to talk to both these players, as it seems that it's they who aren't in line with the rest of the group's desires and playstyle, and not actually you.

For the first player, the DM might want to warn him that his character is probably going to get killed fairly soon. I'm not sure specifically how to do this without giving away your plot--assuming you can't trust the player to keep his mouth shut or trust the other players to successfully partition IC and OOC knowledge--but find some way to tell him that the party is going to be cutting the chaff and serving those characters' players a tabula rasa. If the player isn't OK with this, perhaps this isn't the game for him and suggest that he find a new group, because this group is going to continue at this tack. Whatever the details of the conversation, give him some warning and a chance to back out under his own "initiative." It generally feels better to quit than to be fired.

For the second player, if it isn't the first, someone just needs to sit down with him and help him build a better character, one that he'll play well. It sounds like he'd be better off with a full fighter or a gish. If you have the books for it, you might try to get him to roll a duskblade, swordsage, or warblade for his next character. Otherwise, a barbarian charger sounds like his playstyle. If he balks at this, try and get the rest of the group behind whoever's offering the help and try to impress upon him that it's not a matter of him being stupid or inept, but rather that you think he's a bit disoriented within the system and that you're just trying to steer him in the direction of his strengths.

Alternately, get everyone else to avoid frontliners and tell him that the party really needs a frontliner built as a frontliner with no hedging whatsoever. This is pretty manipulative, and something I'd personally avoid--it's bitten my hard in the ass before--but may be a better option depending on the circumstances.

Behold_the_Void
2009-04-14, 02:24 PM
@ Behold: so basically I should stop playing my character just because one person is going to be upset? That would potentially upset me so either way, someone is going to be upset.

You're going to be upset if you can't screw everyone else over for your own personal enjoyment?

Really.

d13
2009-04-14, 03:48 PM
Sacrifice characters for the common joy of the group?

I'd probably sacrifice you both, rather than the other 4 guys... 50% of the "lost" time will be needed to get new pjs =)


EDIT: And that's why you should read the whole thread before posting... Just one thing to say...

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/7417/23503ac0.jpg

sleepydwarf
2009-04-14, 08:48 PM
You're going to be upset if you can't screw everyone else over for your own personal enjoyment?

Really.

Lets see, would I get upset if I had to stop playing a character I have been playing for just over a year now? Yes I would be upset by that, if he died in combat, or retired of his own choice then that is a different matter. Upset because I cant "screw everyone else over" as you put it, not in the slightest.

Also, how is it screwing them over? Most of the characters in question can not travel back to the original realm when we leave Ravenloft, tis has been confirmed by me with the DM already, so they are basically dead soon anyway (most of us are running 2 characters each, although I am only running one at the moment though).

Of the two that can definately travel back (me and the Minitor), the Minitor is basically next to useless in the roll he is trying to play, he is trying to be a tank, due to bad choices made at creation and at each level up.

Ignoring my character, the party would have been totally wiped out by now on mulitple occassions , and thats just from going up against CR appropriate encounters for the rest of the group. Yes I could roll up a new caracter as a tank for the group, but that is not the type of character that I normally (or ever) play.

So that would basically just make the entire game less fun, how would you feel if you spent a year building up a character and ten got told "Stop playing that character and make a new one of class and type that you dont like" ??

erikun
2009-04-14, 09:14 PM
1.) Why do you need to kill them before you go home? Because they're slowing you down? Evil little bugger, aren't you? :)

2.) I'm waiting to see your "PC ally" suddenly turn on you, join up with the group, and help them kill you for EXP and the lovely items you're carrying. Heck, he'll be the hero of the survivors, having saved their butts from your treatorous ways. And let's face it, that would be the most amusing outcome anyways.

Suedars
2009-04-14, 09:39 PM
Maybe I'm misreading your initial post, but I see zero in-character reason for your character to kill the party. What's to stop you from teleporting everyone out, yourself included, and amicably parting ways?

Also, it sounds like you're unsatisfied with the rest of the group. Are they fine with the party's unoptimized state? If they are, it's more likely than not that you're the odd one out, and might want to look for a group better suited to your preferences.

OneFamiliarFace
2009-04-14, 09:48 PM
So that would basically just make the entire game less fun, how would you feel if you spent a year building up a character and ten got told "Stop playing that character and make a new one of class and type that you dont like" ??

I've changed my opinion to agree with you since you posted the list which shows that the majority of player deaths have been at the hands of players. But you have said this once or twice now, and it begs the question:

What about the other 4 players who have been playing their characters equally as long (presumably)? Your plan is to leave those 4 years of character development as nothing more than broken corpses in the dirt. Now, maybe these guys have only been playing with you for a month. If that is the case, then that (like your list of player deaths) is a very important addition to your OP.

sleepydwarf
2009-04-15, 12:45 AM
Of the other characters, only the Minitor has been around as long as my character. The rest of them are replacement characters picked up from within Ravenloft, which is probably why they they can not travel back to the original realm. The player that is probably going to be upset by my actions is the Minitor, who keeps dying and taking other characters with him.

The other characters have been with us for far less time than that, which includes Tahlspar who is our newest character, we only met him last session. To be totally honest, I would actually love to see Tahlspar turn on my character and defend the party, since it would be a massive change in playing style for the palyer. Except I think Tahlspar would be more likely to help my character at first, killing off 3 characters in particular and then either turning on me or dropping out of the fight.

The other players seem to bring in a new character roughly every two months. The new character I am rolling up at the moment is supposed to come in as my secondary character and will be my third character in total since this campaign started. My previous secondary character was retired out about 6 months ago.

PS: I am seriously learning just how much addtiional information I should have put in the original post :smallredface: which could have made the entire situation alot clearer for everyone at the start

Behold_the_Void
2009-04-15, 01:16 AM
Lets see, would I get upset if I had to stop playing a character I have been playing for just over a year now? Yes I would be upset by that, if he died in combat, or retired of his own choice then that is a different matter. Upset because I cant "screw everyone else over" as you put it, not in the slightest.

Also, how is it screwing them over? Most of the characters in question can not travel back to the original realm when we leave Ravenloft, tis has been confirmed by me with the DM already, so they are basically dead soon anyway (most of us are running 2 characters each, although I am only running one at the moment though).

Of the two that can definately travel back (me and the Minitor), the Minitor is basically next to useless in the roll he is trying to play, he is trying to be a tank, due to bad choices made at creation and at each level up.

Ignoring my character, the party would have been totally wiped out by now on mulitple occassions , and thats just from going up against CR appropriate encounters for the rest of the group. Yes I could roll up a new caracter as a tank for the group, but that is not the type of character that I normally (or ever) play.

So that would basically just make the entire game less fun, how would you feel if you spent a year building up a character and ten got told "Stop playing that character and make a new one of class and type that you dont like" ??

What makes you more important than them? You aren't the only one playing this game, even if your one character does have more time invested in him. Also, failing to see why killing them all is even necessary.

Learnedguy
2009-04-15, 01:53 AM
After reading the first post, I can't honestly understand why your character would be motivated to pretty much randomly kill the other people in his group.

Is he mentally sick or something:smallconfused:?

Gerbah
2009-04-15, 02:58 AM
Though all seems to be said and resolved, I'll just chime in and say that "No, I wouldn't allow it." Like a lot of other folks have said, there are alternative solutions which don't involve everyone dying.

On the subject of group PvP, yeah, it's generally kinda dumb. In a campaign I'm playing with 5 other folks, all of us are Good except one Neutral... And then there is one Evil character. The group has a rather good cohesion and plays well, but the one Evil guy always, ALWAYS, mucks things up (and if he's reading this, well, he probably doesn't care right?). He's killed a few of the party members, actively gone out of his way to make things difficult for the party, and his catchphrase has become "I'll kill you". Though he claims his character has a lot of depth and personality and that there are reasons, his character(s) have been rather shallow archetypes of just "jackass". Case in point, first character was Chaotic Evil or somesuch, and did all of the above. That character died, and he brought in ANOTHER Evil character (NE this time), who he claimed wouldn't be such a bastard. Hey guess what, it was the same character.

Anyways, forget that tangent, like most have said, if it's not fun for the rest of the party, just don't do it, causes problems. "'Nuff said", right?

OneFamiliarFace
2009-04-15, 06:59 AM
PS: I am seriously learning just how much addtiional information I should have put in the original post :smallredface: which could have made the entire situation alot clearer for everyone at the start

:smalltongue: Yeah, usually, telling player dynamics and character dynamics is good in these cases. The actual narrative story of what is happening can only serve to confuse people as they interpret your actions through the eyes of their own gaming groups. Hence, some people's inability to understand your motivations for killing the party.

My view, for example, is biased, because I was only not DM of two campaigns in my 13 years of playing, and I DM non-PvP games (in theory :-p). And as to the other two campaigns: I actively promote party cohesion as a PC (with one exception, and that became grudging respect).

For the record, I still think a non-TPK solution is the best route. Especially for that one player who would be upset.

Typewriter
2009-04-15, 08:32 AM
It just seems to me that in D&D you have two groups. One group is the DM, and the world he controls, and the other group is the party.

Obviously the DM controls an entire world which is sometimes in conflict with itself, just as a party may come into conflict with itself.

But when one player no longer meshes with the group at all that means he's either a third group unto himself(and having two groups play against each other is fun), or he falls into the DMs control, because hes no longer part of the players group.

Evil the Cat
2009-04-15, 08:40 AM
First I have to say that as as GM I would never allow that much pvp in a game. I pretty much mandate that the characters have to be willing to work together. They don't have to like each other, or be nice, but they have to share enough goals to prevent killing each other.

That aside, I see a few issues with your plan. 1: As described, since the item that lets you leave takes the whole group at once, your character would be killing them off for no reason at all. They aren't even an inconvenience, since you plan to use the item anyways. If anything, once getting back, your character should tell them they're just not useful anymore, and leave. You say they've worked together in the past, and now he's killing them for essentially no reason at all? CE really isn't good for games IMO. Personally, If I had something like that happen in my group, the game would end with that session, and next week would be a whole new campaign, with all new characters for everyone, assuming they'd still want to play with you after you basically ended a game.

When one character has an issue with the rest of the group, its far better for the 1 character to leave or die than for everyone else to have to. As a player, putting your character above everyone else's is pretty selfish. If you want to keep that character, you might be better off finding a reason to have him leave temporarily, then play a different character until the rest of the group gets to a point where your current character can rejoin them. You even admit it might piss off one of the players to the point he'd leave the game. Pissing off another player to avoid inconveniencing yourself seems kind of harsh, even if the guy does seem to have a bit of a temper.

Everyone playing the game is there to have fun, sometimes you have to ask if doing something will ruin the game for other people. If so, you probably shouldn't do it.

ViktorStronarm
2009-04-15, 09:13 AM
After reading over all of this, I have to ask...

Why'd you bother coming here to ask in the first place?

I ask this question because throughout the thread, whenever someone has disagreed with your method or approach on how to deal with the difference in levels, you have argued with them.

Clarifying the situation as you have done in a few cases is fine, but why argue when you've asked for the opinion of the board?

Personally, I would use the approach that someone else suggested. Your char becomes a NPC (and a future BBEG) and you join the party at their level. Yes, the DM is at fault for lettings things get out of hand, but in the end, someone isn't going to be happy with the decision that is made due to a character dying/leaving the party. At that point its the DM's job to make the logical decision, which is to remove the high lvl char.

Then again, when everyone started killing each other, I would have left the group then. I play to enjoy building my character up with a team, not using everyone else until they are worthless then killing them off. Kind of defeats the purpose of the whole "party" in my eyes.

sleepydwarf
2009-04-15, 08:59 PM
Firstly, thanks to everyone that replied :smallsmile: I am glad that people here were willing to both answer what could be seen as a difficult question and give an honest and emotional response.

Secondly, I have posted this same opening question on 2 other forums and got totally weird and different answers to the ones I got here. The first forum I posted to seem more inclined to just say what they thought I wanted to hear, which was that I should go ahead and do it, that I didn’t really need to discuss it with anyone except to tell the DM at the start of the next session just before I do this. The second forum I posted this to have the opposite extreme, no advice or alternative solutions offered, just nothing but abuse and insults freely given. I don’t think I will be reading either of those forums again.

What I wanted was honest emotional responses from players and DM’s alike. I expected people to abuse and insult me (thank you all for not being too nasty when replying). The other thing I wanted was to get some alternative ideas from people on what could be done. My DM loves a lot of the ideas given here, which actually means that my group and I should now be rather worried about what he is planning to throw at us.

Basically, I have discussed this matter at length with my DM and between the two of us we have come up with a very workable solution to all of the problems, although two of the underlying causes won’t be solved quite so easily. One of the biggest problems is, as has been mentioned numerous times, the fact that my character is so much higher in level than the rest of the party. The DM won’t tell me what his solution to that is going to be, except that my character will still be in the group at his current level and will still be a “player character” rather than a NPC. The second problem is a problem player (and no it’s not me :smalltongue:) within the group. The solution we came up with should make him pull his head in and actually listen to the more experienced and knowledgeable players, especially when it comes to making characters that are workable.

As at least one other player in the group does read these forums, I won’t be posting the details of the solution just yet, but if anyone wants to know what the end result was, after it has happened, just send me a private message through the forums and I will let you know.

Finally, thanks once more for your advice, ideas and thoughts.

Sleepydwarf, the homicidal psychotic Halfling :smallbiggrin:

Shpadoinkle
2009-04-15, 09:53 PM
You are level 11 and everyone is level 4-6? That by itself is pretty bad.

This.

Also, I'd never allow a PC to slaughter the rest of the PCs. If one of the players in my group decided his PC wanted to kill the others, I'd say "Okay, have fun with that. I'm not going to DM it, so you guys work it out between yourselves on your own time."

If a player persisted on trying to do this deliberately in-game, he'd be struck by a bolt of lightning (possibly several) from the clear blue sky. That's bull**** and you don't do it unless you KNOW everyone is cool with it.

Mushroom Ninja
2009-04-15, 10:03 PM
A little pvp is okay here and there, but I tend to be against largscale pvp slaughter if anyone is going to get upset about it.

OneFamiliarFace
2009-04-16, 11:43 AM
Firstly, thanks to everyone that replied :smallsmile: I am glad that people here were willing to both answer what could be seen as a difficult question and give an honest and emotional response.

Kudos on the last post here. I'm hope I don't have to say I speak for most posters in saying it is much appreciated. I hope the solution works out.


Sleepydwarf, the homicidal psychotic Halfling :smallbiggrin:

May all your homicidal psychotic dreams come true, and may they involve mostly annoying NPCs and BBEGs.

Another_Poet
2009-04-16, 12:54 PM
Bottom line - if someone is going to be upset over this, it's not OK.

This.

I know it's a longshot, but on the off-chance you'd consider a different way of RPing your character's quest for power...


Instead of killing them, your player might realise that as the strongest member of a group he's well-suited to lead the group and use the group for his own purposes.

But, they would need a little power boost first, since they are so far below him.

So he could start to spend all his XP on item creation. If your character doesn't have the feat, your DM will probably allow another character (PC or NPC) to do the item crafting using your character's XP. This makes it cheap for everyone, helps get the levels balanced, and keeps your character true to his motivations.

All those extra items will help the other PCs take on tougher critters and level faster, while you stall at 11th level from spending all your XP.

Once they're level 8-9 you should have a more balanced group and still be in position to act as leader. They'll love you for the loot both IC and OoC.

edit: I see you've already found a solution. Hope it works well. I'e crossed out the "on the off-chance" but because it's obvious you are a very reasonable player.

Fiery Diamond
2009-04-17, 09:14 AM
Bottom line - if someone is going to be upset over this, it's not OK.

Pretty much this. Unless 100% of the players AND the DM would be at the very least indifferent, preferably glad, killing off other players is a Bad Idea.

VirOath
2009-04-17, 02:33 PM
I can actually give quite a bit on insight as I have seen alot of intra-party warfare, and have been tempted with it many times for various reasons.

But the point is that your current situation has alot of problems and a TPK with you being one of the survivors will cause some bad blood with one player, as you have said. And if you do this, the worst thing that can happen is for them not to leave the group. At this point he will begin to start meta-gaming to get back at you or to sabotage the campaign.

All things considered, it's not worth it. The game is meant to be fun for all, and as you have said it's a major bore not having anything to do. Instead the focus should be fixing the level disparity while maintaining the RP element.

Now, you character has an excellent reason to do this, have made very good plans and this is quite sound. But the problem is with the outcome, being that everyone but you and the ally write up new characters. Sadly, it's akin to rewarding intra-party warfare since you two will also be picking up their wealth, and getting a higher wealth than your level while the rest of the group makes fresh characters with starting WBL.

Instead, I do as you plan, but have those two characters go off on their own and go into the background for story and plot, and to be used against the party. This not only completely levels off the party in terms of both level and wealth, but will prevent hard feelings between players too. And it will add another dimension to the story and a rogue element. Now there is a plane hopping duo that is a higher level, loads of wealth and have shown they will use whatever means they desire to reach their goals.

And no offense, while I agree that you shouldn't be punished for playing smarter, better and being more lucky, what you don't realize is that you are now. The massive level gap pulls the fun from the game, as there is now a single character that pulls the spotlight unless you leave the group, at which point dead time is created dealing with multiple groups (Though done well, this is alot of fun in certain systems, but not so much in D&D). Continuing to reward you in terms of a power boost in gameplay will continue to run the same problem, you'll be much stronger than the rest of the party due to your wealth. The only real way of fixing this is a complete rewrite of the party to level the field.

Though I do agree that you should be rewarded still. But this would best be done with RP elements, not something that can be dragged out into power terms, or not a very meaningful one in any case. Getting Shapechange as a doppleganger for free on your new character or something, as long as it doesn't offer any enormous advantages due to the campaign setting, or something of the like could make the game alot more fun for you and add another dimension of RP for you.

That's just one way I would deal with it though.

Darth Stabber
2009-04-17, 03:23 PM
Gm'd a campaign based on the Idea of Evil PCs and PVP happens. The premise of the story was that one of them empires has a Prisoner unit, where they group together the countries most ruthless thieves, murderers, necromancers and other assorted scum into a military unit (as a sort of value added death sentence). The Group was overseen via scrying, and on site High level paladins, but big brother only stepped in to stop them from hurting the empire. The PC's were random foot soldier in this horde, and when they died they had a back up character that was just somewhere else in the unit. It ended up being comedic campaign (albeit sadistic gallows comedy). Every one realized that they were far more likely to get killed by fellow party member or the overseeing paladins than by the enemies. Also the party level held steady around 8-12, since if someone got too tough, the others would off them, and a new lvl 8 would join the team, and everyone had a great with it. @ one point a cleric of orcus killed off an evil bard just because he would make a pretty zombie, and other craziness like that. But this was understood from the beginning that A) the whole story is fairly sandbox, and B) PvP was encouraged in order to keep players rotating so people could sample the power of certain builds with out committing long term to anything. I may run something like this again in the future.

Zhalath
2009-04-17, 03:32 PM
As a longtime DM, I would highly advise against this course of action. A near Total Party Kill will anger near everyone involved. It doesn't matter whether you think it's in line with your character, it's out of line as a player. It comes off as incredibly rude and callous, that you'd kill them off because of their mistakes and because you think your character says so.

What you guys need is teambuilding. You need to learn to function as a group better, to cooperate, to learn from each other. In reality, a group of people like your characters wouldn't just kill each other like they do (unless you're all evil psychopathic monsters). There'd be some working together. If you and your party could find a way to coexist without sword-stabby, then you'd be a better group, and it would be a better game overall (especially because you don't keep having to shell out for resurrection).

Now, if you were to go through with this, first of all, you'd piss everyone off. What you're doing is overstepping the line. In the past, people were resurrected and such, and the game kept going. In this case, you're leaving them all dead. Not fun for them. Essentially, you're going do something to enjoy yourself at the expense of others. To use the game's alignment system, sounds like an Evil act.

The risk of losing group members is a terrible one, and if you are going to lose group members by doing something, DON'T DO IT. Replacing people is really hard (I would know, I've been trying to pull together parties for years).
For those people who stay, they now know that you have little respect for them, so little that you are willing to kill them for your own gain. And this isn't like an MMORPG, where you don't know these people. These may be your friends, and killing them will alienate them. You'd lose friends, and maybe gain some enemies. Enemies who are right there in the room with you. Who don't like you now. Who are angry. And have nothing else to do. They will then be asking themselves the question that you see in my signature.

Such a course of action will ruin your game, unless you like solo questing. What I'd propose, and I'm sure others have too, is retiring the character and getting a new one. Turn your current one into an NPC. This could get rid of the level gap, and you now have a good recurring character.

As a final note, if all the players don't quit and they don't beat you up in disgust, remember, they can make new characters. Who are right there in the room with you. Who don't like you now. Who are angry. And have nothing else to do. They will then be asking themselves the question that you see in my signature.

So just don't do it.

Doug Lampert
2009-04-17, 03:39 PM
Let me get this straight. There's one player who's most responsible for everyone else being SEVEN levels back, and he's the one who'll be upset if you TPK the rest of them?

SEVEN! as others have pointed out, they should be catching up a level a session or so since they need about 1/3rd the XP and gain over four times as much XP and it sounds like they're STILL falling behind of all the insanity.

Talk to your GM, he may WANT to lose that player. Seriously, some players are more trouble than they're worth. Is this guy the GM's best friend or wife or girlfriend outside the game? Heck, if my wife played that badly I'd do something about it (probably switch systems to something where her style worked or was acceptable, Toon or Paranoia or Teenagers from outer space maybe).

At this point the party is probably hopelessly broken as is. Either your character has to just up and leave or their characters have to die and be replaced by characters closer in power to yours. Maybe the GM can offer to let anyone start a new character 3 levels below the highest level character and everyone else will voluntarily let you kill them.

Or maybe your character can just abandon them rather than killing them and you start a new character one level higher than their best character. Is that really a problem, is your current character so SERIOUSLY worried that these bozos will somehow catch up to him in power and then hunt him down that he can't let them live? Why?

sleepydwarf
2009-04-19, 08:55 PM
Let me get this straight. There's one player who's most responsible for everyone else being SEVEN levels back, and he's the one who'll be upset if you TPK the rest of them?

SEVEN! as others have pointed out, they should be catching up a level a session or so since they need about 1/3rd the XP and gain over four times as much XP and it sounds like they're STILL falling behind of all the insanity.

Talk to your GM, he may WANT to lose that player. Seriously, some players are more trouble than they're worth. Is this guy the GM's best friend or wife or girlfriend outside the game? Heck, if my wife played that badly I'd do something about it (probably switch systems to something where her style worked or was acceptable, Toon or Paranoia or Teenagers from outer space maybe).

Yep, one person is mostly responsible for the level difference :smalleek: who is not related or in a relationship with any of the other players. Fortunately, he is also the one that is going to be the most upset (and possibly leave the group) if I was to go ahead with this. Even the DM is getting sick and tired of him stuffing everything up for the rest of us.

The plan that is being put in place between myself and the DM however will either make him leave (but keep the rest of the group intact and happy) or make him pull his head out of his.........(you can fill in the blank with what ever you like) and actually listen to the rest of us. I wil know this weekend what way it goes.

My character isnt worried about them catching up in power and hunting him down, its more that they know some of his secrets, and he doesnt like leaving loose ends laying around. Could he just up and leave them trapped there, yes he could, but with the knowledge of realm jumping availabel to the authorities back in the original realm, there is a chance that they may send another party to that realm in the future and that they may find the others. If that happens (and I wouldnt put it past my DM to do that) then the authorities back "home" would find out some very nasty secrets that I have. Hence, kill them off making sure they cant be resurected or anything like that and keep my nasty secrets safe. the one member of the group that would be assisting me, doesnt know any of the secrets and is therefore safe.

As for replacing him in the group if he decides to leave, well that wont be a problem as we actually have two new players lined up to join the group.

Zen Master
2009-04-21, 03:36 AM
If I was going to do something evil, I would definitely leave the rest of the party alive - so they'd have opportunity to seek revenge in the future.

Naturally, that's a totally meta-motivation. My character might *want* everyone dead, but I'd ask for the GM to intervene so everyone survived. Basically, revenge is just so much fun to play with.

Also, it would leave everyone alive, and no one would be upset.

My friends character, Ento Endymion (a priest of Lathander, up until a certain point) once pulled this exact stunt. We spent a very happy 4-5 levels hunting him down and finally bringing him to justice (naturally, the guy playing Ento took over as GM - no point in him hunting down his own character).