Dealing with *THAT* player - with a twist

[ironkid]

We've all dealth, or heard, of *THAT* player - the one that won't share loot with their teammates, what will outright try to get more loot than the others. The case I'm dealing with is like that - with a twist.

First of all, this character isn't a Rogue, except it is - it's a Kenky Trickery Domain Cleric with a criminal background. We've playing for about two months, and so far has been more than asset to the party - they'd all be dead without him. Yesterday however, he became truly disruptive for the first time. They finished a hard encounter, and received a very big gold reward - and he insisted in stealing for the loot, to try to steal from the pot when they were distracted.

I flatly told him I would simply won't allow that, since that sort of thing is disruptive in the game. He accepted it, but it became clear to me he felt a little frustrated. The key point here is, he didn't want to do it because he wanted to "win" or "get ahead" or even troll the other players; it was because roleplayingwise it actually made sense for his roleplaying - I know it sounds like a tired excuse, but I know it to be true: his character is by far the most fleshed out character in the party, and I've been in games where he plays a completely different character. This is unusual: players that want to win or to troll rarely have characters as alive as this.

I know better than to allow him to steal from the party - the quantity stolen is less important than the fact that the players themselves knowing that they've being deceived - but I'm wondering about the best way to handle this, so he wont feel restricted, by metagame no less.

Any advice would be welcome!

[KorvinStarmast]

... quantity stolen is irrelevant is less important than the fact that the players themselves knowing that they've being deceived - but I'm wondering about the best way to handle this, so he wont feel restricted, by metagame no less.

Any advice would be welcome! It's not your problem, it's his problem.

Why is this party together? What is it that created a bond strong enough between these four or five characters such that they are doing dangerous things together? When you forge a relationship like that, how is stealing from those who have to have your back in dangerous situations anything other than totally screwed up?

If he wants to trick them, he needs to pocket something before the group knows that it has been recovered or found. That makes the thievery less overt and more tricksy - but there is still a chance that the others will notice.

Once they know of the loot/gold/treasure, now he's being an untrustworthy partner. PvP is one way to resolve this, but if the other players (OOC) do not like players stealing from each other your answer is simple:

I have to look after the harmony of this whole table, not just you getting joy from your character.


That's a different way of saying: "It's not all about you."

On the other hand, if your group likes PvP, ask him: are you OK with the others killing your PC if you steal the loot?
Are you cool with the conesquences going that far when they discover that you have betrayed their trust?

We had a few old school games where no few players used to pull crap like that. Now and again, the other players attacked and combat began. And that got messy both IC and OOC on all but one of those occasions.

I no longer will play at a table where that goes on. Some folks will, though.

[MoiMagnus]

1) Have a talk with the other players (either as a group, or individually if some of them are shy) on the boundaries they feel acceptable. It's good that you're trying to "protect them", but you might as well ask them if they want to be protected.

2) Have a talk with the cleric's player. Assuming you let him act, how would he want it to resolve?
(a) The consequences are too negligible to be noticeable outside of some small RP elements. In which case, refer to (1) to set up the boundaries as a group.
(b) The consequences are significant. In this case he will be caught. The question is "what's next?". Since he is a cleric of the trickery domain, redemption is hardly a possibility. Does he want his character to be supervised by the other characters, building tension and a mix of trust and mistrust? Does he want his character to risk having to leave the party?

3) Talk to the cleric's player, and see if you can engineer a RP reason for him to not behave like that. Maybe make a somewhat railroaded mini-quest that result in some character evolution.

[Unoriginal]

We've all dealth, or heard, of *THAT* player - the one that won't share loot with their teammates, what will outright try to get more loot than the others. The case I'm dealing with is like that - with a twist.

First of all, this character isn't a Rogue, except it is - it's a Kenky Trickery Domain Cleric with a criminal background. We've playing for about two months, and so far has been more than asset to the party - they'd all be dead without him. Yesterday however, he became truly disruptive for the first time. They finished a hard encounter, and received a very big gold reward - and he insisted in stealing for the loot, to try to steal from the pot when they were distracted.

I flatly told him I would simply won't allow that, since that sort of thing is disruptive in the game. He accepted it, but it became clear to me he felt a little frustrated. The key point here is, he didn't want to do it because he wanted to "win" or "get ahead" or even troll the other players; it was because roleplayingwise it actually made sense for his roleplaying - I know it sounds like a tired excuse, but I know it to be true: his character is by far the most fleshed out character in the party, and I've been in games where he plays a completely different character.


Is he playing a Cleric with self-destructive tendencies or who somehow believe they can get away with betraying the party and still benefit from being in the party? Because otherwise, no, it does NOT make sense for a character who knows what the rest of the PCs are capable of to steal from them.

Even being greedy and selfish doesn't stop a character from realizing that it benefits them more to work with the party than against them. It'd take a huge amount of arrogance or a subconscious desire to sabotage themselves to go "you know this sweet gig I have going on with those adventurers? I bet I can get more money by stealing from them".

It's killing the golden egg goose when keeping it alive is what's making you rich.



This is unusual: players that want to win or to troll rarely have characters as alive as this.

You'd be surprised.

[cutlery]

I play with lots of neutrals. Seems to me that the character thieving from the party has to sleep some time.

The problem would resolve itself, and then I'd have to have a conversation with the player about employing just enough meta-gaming to not steal from other players. It isn't monopoly (or munchkin) where the whole point is to screw over the other players.

[kbob]

We have a rule at our table that has helped with this. We implemented it before anything happened (cuz I’ve been in games where people were stealing).

There is no PvP or stealing loot. The exception is role play wise if it makes sense and it can’t be significant. If the Paladin and rogue are at each other due to differences and they battle it out without lethal damage after a build up to such event, then that’s allowed as its story building and fun for everyone. Everyone has to be in agreement to do it. As far as stealing goes I let someone do it for RP purposes only. And then it can’t be significant. There’s a chest of 100gp and the rogue pockets 2 or 3 extra. That’s not gonna change anything, the player feels he got to play his character, and the others don’t feel they were cheated. It also builds story. The above example for PvP plays into this. We actually had this happen. Rogue was stealing a few coins here and there (nothing significant game wise). Got away with it time and again. Everyone knew out of character and laughed. They would tell him, better hope my character doesn’t find out. Finally he rolled like crap and the paly rolled good on perception.
What happen next was the rogue being beaten like a red headed step child (no offense to any red headed step children) and the Paladin sitting him down afterwards and preaching to him about how stealing from the group meant stealing from starving children as the Paladin tithes on his share to children in need. The sermon was he biggest punishment. Haha. He (character not player) repented and all was better. Should note no abilities like smite or sneak attack were used, not that they couldn’t be. Just a short “lesson” from one character to the next. It added to story and was a nice climax to building tension with characters (not players). This requires players being mature and setting expectations ahead of time. Everyone knew he would get caught eventually and the character learned that his seemingly innocent, “no one would miss a couple of coins hat they didn’t even know existed” acts actually were not so innocent as his deeds were causing children to go hungry (or something like that).

That is just an example. This may or may not work for y’all but I thought it may be helpful. If it does great! If not, I hope you find what will work for you.

[Gtdead]

The only advice I can give, is that when players are included, even in such a scenario, there is a good chance that they are going to play along, assuming that the "disruptive" player in question isn't a jerk irl.

I can tell you about a time when I was disruptive and how I solved it. I created a Vengeance Paladin with quite a rich backstory (perhaps too rich). DM actually encouraged this, even though we were starting at lvl 1. So I thought I'd give my character a lot of quirks based on previous experiences.

One was that he would be very impatient. The other would be that he disliked elves. What I didn't know at the time, is that all the other players had created elf characters (yes, I thought that they would create vhumans like I did...). So when I started "roleplaying my quirks", 2 of them started getting frustrated irl.

The whole "it's just roleplaying" talk wasn't going to work, so I decided to solve it in character. I wrote a "journal page" in a piece of paper and gave it to the DM, then while having downtime ingame, I left my journal open in broad view because something "came up". DM urged the other players to take a look, and they learned that my character was in a romantic relationship with an elf, he failed to save her, and to cope, he started blaming the chaotic nature of elves in general. Being around elves reminded him of her.

Anyway the sob story worked perfectly fine, because then, when I was "roleplaying", the other PCs were acting all secretive and trying to hide the fact that they "knew". It was fun and it increased the party banter tenfold.

[Yakmala]

If he wants to trick them, he needs to pocket something before the group knows that it has been recovered or found.

This is similar to how I've handled it in the past. If a character wants to steal, they need to do it before the party is aware of the loot. In such cases, the gold/gems/etc they steal are from a smaller pool that does not affect the intended party loot.

Once the loot is divided, no stealing. The party already knows the amounts they should have and regardless of how successful the thief's stealth or slight of hand checks were, the party is going to notice when something is missing. Then those characters/players would be well within their rights to kick the character/player out of the party, or even PvP (which I normally do not allow).

The important thing is to lay out the rules for these kinds of interactions up front, preferably before your players settle on their character's class and personality.

Because if you think a thief is bad, wait until "THAT" player is an assassin instead of a thief and is trying to murder the party in their sleep.

[Nhorianscum]

We've all dealth, or heard, of *THAT* player - the one that won't share loot with their teammates, what will outright try to get more loot than the others. The case I'm dealing with is like that - with a twist.

First of all, this character isn't a Rogue, except it is - it's a Kenky Trickery Domain Cleric with a criminal background. We've playing for about two months, and so far has been more than asset to the party - they'd all be dead without him. Yesterday however, he became truly disruptive for the first time. They finished a hard encounter, and received a very big gold reward - and he insisted in stealing for the loot, to try to steal from the pot when they were distracted.

I flatly told him I would simply won't allow that, since that sort of thing is disruptive in the game. He accepted it, but it became clear to me he felt a little frustrated. The key point here is, he didn't want to do it because he wanted to "win" or "get ahead" or even troll the other players; it was because roleplayingwise it actually made sense for his roleplaying - I know it sounds like a tired excuse, but I know it to be true: his character is by far the most fleshed out character in the party, and I've been in games where he plays a completely different character. This is unusual: players that want to win or to troll rarely have characters as alive as this.

I know better than to allow him to steal from the party - the quantity stolen is less important than the fact that the players themselves knowing that they've being deceived - but I'm wondering about the best way to handle this, so he wont feel restricted, by metagame no less.

Any advice would be welcome!

The issue here isn't the players behavior, it's the players behavior 2 months into a campain and this should be addressed in character by the party if and when they catch him.

As DM's it's not our job to manage this particular party mechanic.

As a player if I'm in full stealy the theivy mode I'm 100% looking forward to the party dynamic it creates and the opportunities for RP.

In short: Let him steal, and let the party play off of it. He's upset because this was a missed opportunity for fun RP.

[Mastikator]

He made a character with a backstory and personality that is incompatible with the rest of the group. He can either change the character and excuse it as "growth" or make a new one. I know because I've been this player.

The good news is that he should have a better feel for the group and should be able to come up with a new character that is more on the compatible side.

[OldTrees1]

I flatly told him I would simply won't allow that, since that sort of thing is disruptive in the game. He accepted it, but it became clear to me he felt a little frustrated. The key point here is, he didn't want to do it because he wanted to "win" or "get ahead" or even troll the other players; it was because roleplayingwise it actually made sense for his roleplaying - I know it sounds like a tired excuse, but I know it to be true: his character is by far the most fleshed out character in the party, and I've been in games where he plays a completely different character. This is unusual: players that want to win or to troll rarely have characters as alive as this.

I would ask them "Why does your character not want to steal from the other PCs?". You have established a characterization requirement that is open to hundreds of answers. However you are also drawing a line in the sand. They will come up with a reason, or could ask you for suggestions. Once they come up with a reason, they will become accustomed to the situation rather than feeling a RP need to be disruptive.

Examples:
1) Allies are worth more than gold. Stealing from an ally is a net loss of wealth.
2) Those "allies" are mine! I gain nothing by stealing what is already mine.
3) I actually like these people. Others are valid targets because they are jerks/stupid, but these allies are alright.
4) I actually like these people. One of the reasons I acquire wealth is to help protect them.
5) I don't want anything tainted by their contact. Ew.

[Evaar]

I flatly told him I would simply won't allow that, since that sort of thing is disruptive in the game. He accepted it, but it became clear to me he felt a little frustrated. The key point here is, he didn't want to do it because he wanted to "win" or "get ahead" or even troll the other players; it was because roleplayingwise it actually made sense for his roleplaying - I know it sounds like a tired excuse, but I know it to be true: his character is by far the most fleshed out character in the party, and I've been in games where he plays a completely different character. This is unusual: players that want to win or to troll rarely have characters as alive as this.

So if this is all true, then I might add some stuff to loot rewards to account for it. Not valuable stuff, but interesting stuff that might catch the eye of someone like a Kenku Trickery Cleric. Basically stuff from the Trinkets table.

Let him build a little collection of stuff that isn't strictly valuable and doesn't make other players feel like they're being cheated, but does enable him to lean into his character's quirks. And down the line if he has a collection of 40 different trinkets with weird little effects, maybe there comes a scenario where he's asked to give up that collection to achieve some cooperative goal, and the character gets to really decide what matters to him.

[MoiMagnus]

As DM's it's not our job to manage this particular party mechanic.
As a player if I'm in full stealy the theivy mode I'm 100% looking forward to the party dynamic it creates and the opportunities for RP.
In short: Let him steal, and let the party play off of it. He's upset because this was a missed opportunity for fun RP.

I fully disagree.
[More precisely, I disagree with this hand-off approach unless that's what the table expect from the DM]

Players come with expectations on what kind of games they want.
If I signed for a fully cooperative campaign, I don't want to be unfairly punished by having my stuff stolen just because I didn't play paranoically. And me, as a player, might get very unhappy about it.

Semi-cooperative campaign are fun too (precisely because of those RP opportunities), but I'd rather be warned in advance, as it's not the same stress level for me.

And it's definitely part of the DM's job to manage those guaranties.

Since OP's first reflex was to prevent this action, it is very clear that he envisioned the campaign as fully cooperative, and probably presented the campaign as such. This mean that the players are probably expecting the campaign to continue to be fully cooperative, and changing by suddenly allowing non-cooperative behaviours would be betraying the other players' trust.
[Unless he first ask them if they are ok with it, and they agree]

[Nhorianscum]

I fully disagree.
[More precisely, I disagree with this hand-off approach unless that's what the table expect from the DM]

Players come with expectations on what kind of games they want.
If I signed for a fully cooperative campaign, I don't want to be unfairly punished by having my stuff stolen just because I didn't play paranoically. And me, as a player, might get very unhappy about it.

Semi-cooperative campaign are fun too (precisely because of those RP opportunities), but I'd rather be warned in advance, as it's not the same stress level for me.

And it's definitely part of the DM's job to manage those guaranties.

Since OP's first reflex was to prevent this action, it is very clear that he envisioned the campaign as fully cooperative, and probably presented the campaign as such. This mean that the players are probably expecting the campaign to continue to be fully cooperative, and changing by suddenly allowing non-cooperative behaviours would be betraying the other players' trust.
[Unless he first ask them if they are ok with it, and they agree]

The other players didn't get a chance to react or interact with this, showing any like or dislike for the action as per the OP.

This is not stated to be a fully cooperative campain and the player has not made a habit of being chaotic stupid as per the OP.

This was clearly the Kenku player "stirring the pot" for a fun RP moment and it got shut down.

It's something the player and DM should have stepped aside and spoken over if the DM had an issue, or it should have gone to a party resolution. A hard shut down feels wrong.

My only critique would be that the player "could" have covered this with the GM prior but discussing these things with the party pre-game just ruins the impact of the moment and leads to less memorable RP.

That said after 2 months there should be a level of trust between the DM and the player where as the DM we just sit back and have faith in our players to tell their story in our world.

[Keravath]

I think you need to have a chat with the Kenku trickery cleric player. It is great that they have invested time and effort in coming up with a cool character and background but they have left out developing that background to account for their interactions with the group of characters they travel with.

You can have a character who likes to steal things ... but is it a character that will steal from their friends? Are these the type of long term friends that would put up with a companion who occasionally steals things from them? In the longer term, it will be impossible to prevent the rest of the party from noticing that the Kenku has extra wealth, treasure or magic items since the party is with the Kenku almost all the time, where is he getting the extra income from? What happens when someone notices the Kenku stealing? It will happen.

If the player is fine with the Kenku eventually being either kicked out of the party or killed by the party (depending on the party alignments and the nature of their characters) then maybe some PVP is ok. However, usually this kind of behavior happens not because "It is what my character would do" but because "It is what my originally created character, without regard for making new friends or getting along with new acquaintances or needing the help of others to accomplish their goals, would do."

The Kenku player needs to decide why their character is actually adventuring with these folks and incorporate that motivation into their decisions about "What the character would do". Even an unwise or unintelligent character with a proclivity for theft might decide not to steal from the party because
- they like their new friends
- they are afraid of being noticed and how their new friends would react
- they are so tempted but don't want to let their new friends down
- they can't resist but don't want their new friends to cut off their hand the way he saw a town constable do to a thief they caught

Friendship, fear, loyalty could all be very good reasons why a character that likes to steal stuff might decide not to steal from their associates. Most of the folks who roleplay this for their characters haven't really thought out what the interactions with the party actually mean to the character and what effect this would have on the character backstory and motivations. In the few cases I have seen where the player had thought it through, the character was aware that there might well be negative consequences when they were caught.

In addition, the group has to be ok with some pvp ... but that is a separate chat to have with all the players altogether ... if there is no option for PVP then you have to tell the Kenku player that they need to come up with a reason for the Kenku to play nicely with the group since stealing from the group is an inherently pvp activity.

[Unoriginal]

The other players didn't get a chance to react or interact with this, showing any like or dislike for the action as per the OP.

This is not stated to be a fully cooperative campain and the player has not made a habit of being chaotic stupid as per the OP.

This was clearly the Kenku player "stirring the pot" for a fun RP moment and it got shut down.

It's something the player and DM should have stepped aside and spoken over if the DM had an issue, or it should have gone to a party resolution. A hard shut down feels wrong.

My only critique would be that the player "could" have covered this with the GM prior but discussing these things with the party pre-game just ruins the impact of the moment and leads to less memorable RP.

If something is a no-no for tsomeone at the table, then it's a no-no. Even if this someone is the DM.

[Nhorianscum]

If something is a no-no for tsomeone at the table, then it's a no-no. Even if this someone is the DM.

The player did immediately stop, he wasn't happy about it but he did, apparently without arguing by the OP.

So there was likely not a session 0 where "nono's" were laid down.

---------

My gut is just... this is a good player, and I have no read on the DM but this should have been a side discussion on the spot rather than a hard shut down.

As such they need to talk this one out and come to an understanding.

[Segev]

Discuss this with the table. See if they're okay with an IC "he's feathering his nest" thing that he's "hiding" from the other PCs, but all the loot he "steals" is, mechanically, non-existent. IC, he stashes the money in places as a "rainy day fund" or a "retirement fund" but never touches them for mechanical gain.

This would let him PLAY a guy who's stealing from the party for his own greed/compulsions, but which hurts nobody and the other players are in on the joke, they can join in the fun of knowing this tidbit about the character.

[False God]

I generally consider "stealing from the party pot" to be a form of PvP. Not necessarily because it is direct PvP, but because it can start PvP.

I understand good role-playing is necessary for the game, but I'm sure the player will have plenty of opportunities to steal from NPCs throughout the game time, even potentially items and gold that may have become party loot had he not taken them first.

But IMO, once it's in the party pot, even if it would be in-character to do so, don't do it and don't allow it. If the player is having difficulty expressing their character without taking anti-party actions, then a discussion needs to be had. If the player is otherwise having no trouble expressing their character then the anti-party actions are unnecessary.

[elyktsorb]

Feels weird. I play a lot of games where the players are all sort of involved with the characters. I would state my intent for such a thing where the other players could hear and would likely gauge their opinions myself. Of course from a roleplaying aspect, I'd accept whatever may come my way for acts of skullduggery my character committed.

Usually this doesn't come down to money though, I don't tend to play a lot of greedy characters, though I did one time that I can recall, I was a Rogue, with the Charlatan Background, Neutral Good, when that character got introduced to the party, he was pretending to be the bouncer for a ship captain they were going to see, fleeced 50 gold off of each other party member to get on the ship, after that whenever the character would open locks to containers, he would typically slight of hand specific jewels or small items of high worth.

I'd likely just roll with it as a player, if my character never found out, it would never be an issue, and 9 times out of 10 if my character would find out, depending on my character my response would likely either be nothing at all, or not even caring, what's a handful of gold really (which is usually all you would get from slight of handing actual gold pieces.) Certain gems might cause more of a response because those can be much more valuable.

[Pex]

We've all dealth, or heard, of *THAT* player - the one that won't share loot with their teammates, what will outright try to get more loot than the others. The case I'm dealing with is like that - with a twist.

First of all, this character isn't a Rogue, except it is - it's a Kenky Trickery Domain Cleric with a criminal background. We've playing for about two months, and so far has been more than asset to the party - they'd all be dead without him. Yesterday however, he became truly disruptive for the first time. They finished a hard encounter, and received a very big gold reward - and he insisted in stealing for the loot, to try to steal from the pot when they were distracted.

I flatly told him I would simply won't allow that, since that sort of thing is disruptive in the game. He accepted it, but it became clear to me he felt a little frustrated. The key point here is, he didn't want to do it because he wanted to "win" or "get ahead" or even troll the other players; it was because roleplayingwise it actually made sense for his roleplaying - I know it sounds like a tired excuse, but I know it to be true: his character is by far the most fleshed out character in the party, and I've been in games where he plays a completely different character. This is unusual: players that want to win or to troll rarely have characters as alive as this.

I know better than to allow him to steal from the party - the quantity stolen is less important than the fact that the players themselves knowing that they've being deceived - but I'm wondering about the best way to handle this, so he wont feel restricted, by metagame no less.

Any advice would be welcome!

Doesn't matter how in character it was. The player chose to play a character where such a thing is in character, so the player is a donkey cavity. Do not feel bad for telling him "no". Keep telling him "no". If he quits because of this call it a win.

[NecessaryWeevil]

Discuss this with the table. See if they're okay with an IC "he's feathering his nest" thing that he's "hiding" from the other PCs, but all the loot he "steals" is, mechanically, non-existent. IC, he stashes the money in places as a "rainy day fund" or a "retirement fund" but never touches them for mechanical gain.

Ooo! That's creative. I like it.

[Throne12]

I don't do a here is a pile of treasure yall sort it out unless its just coins. But I'm lucky my group don't care about individual money they just keep it all in a party fund. But when I had games at a store and had a few that person sit at the table I would just give everyone X-amout of coins and everyone a magic item. If they want to trade they could.

[Greywander]

My gut is just... this is a good player, and I have no read on the DM but this should have been a side discussion on the spot rather than a hard shut down.

As such they need to talk this one out and come to an understanding.
I think you're correct.

You should talk to the player and try to understand why they're stealing from the party. Are they really trying to "win", or is it possible he knows that this will create a roleplay opportunity? The player needs to understand that stealing from the party is a bad idea because they will be caught eventually, and there will be a confrontation. If it's all in good fun, it might be resolved with roleplay, but if this is coming from a competitive desire to "win" at the expense of the rest of the party, there's a good chance the party will either kill or abandon them.

You should also talk to the rest of the table. You never know, they might be down for some PvP, or at least some inter-party drama. Some things you should establish are: (a) what are the limits, what is and isn't allowed for PvP? (b) should things be hidden from the other players, or should it be openly known by all players who are then expected not to metagame? It can be good fun to know as a player that shenanigans are afoot, all while your character, who is oblivious, is making that crucial Perception or Insight check to see if they notice what's going on.

A properly channeled "disruptive" player can help to spice things up and create interesting roleplay opportunities between the party members. The key thing to remember is to make the characters suffer, not the players. You're all there to have fun, after all.

[Corran]

Stealing imaginary gold coins is not important. What is important is to not waste other people's time. And that goes for everyone involved in your game.

A) Do your players want to spend time roleplaying the potential consequences of the scenario were the thief gets caught? Are the players mature enough not to take in-game stuff personally and end up having real drama at the table? Are the other players ok with potentially operating with less gold than they might have expected to get? As a player, I know what my answer is to all these questions (at least 99% of the time; there might be an odd case here and there). Do you know what answer your players would give to such questions? If not, ask them. It's important to remember that there are no wrong or right answers for this one. It's just a matter of taste. When you know the answer, you'll have to act depending on it. Good DM's know how to please players with different expectations from the game at the same time, but they also know when that is beyond their ability to do so. Meaning, that depending on the answers you'll get, you might have to do anything from a number of things. For example, if everyone but the thief is fine with what the thief is doing but they dont care roleplaying anything that has to do with it, but they would instead prefer to get on with saving the innocent and killing the monsters, your job is as simple as creating a resolution mechanic that speeds up anything that has to do with this kind of thieving. Like, rolling a few d100's every X sessions and letting the thief add that number to his loot, and subtracting it from future rewards (meta but simple, and more importantly a fast way to go about it without trivializing the impact of the thief's actions). Or if one of the players doesn't want to get robbed by an ally, because he wants to play in a game where the enemy is restricted to the ''monster of the week'', you find a way for the thieving to happen without actually impacting the player that takes offense with that (perhaps that player's character is indeed very touchy about his property, and that's apparent enough to the thief -in character, to the point that the thief knows better than to ever attempt to steal from that one character specifically; or the thief steals from that character and ends up loaning him back the coin, with interest of course, so that at the end of the campaign that one character owes to the thief a whole fortune, but who will care really since the campaign will have ended?). Or if you see a gap that you can't bridge, then it's time for one or more characters to retire. And you should start paying attention just in case it's not an issue with the characters, but with the players themselves. Not all players are compatible.

B) What I said earlier about the players, goes for you too. You dont owe to anyone these dnd sessions. The game has to be fun for you too, obviously. Assuming all of your players were on board about roleplaying the consequences of the thief being caught red handed by his fellow pc's. Would you like to watch how that plays out? What if it drags for the whole session? What if it carries on during the whole of the next session too? What if it goes on for a year or three? Once started, pvp can escalate and drag on (despite the DM's best efforts to make things move on to some new direction), and sometimes for a very long time even. Not all DM's like that. Some DM's have a story to tell and they dont want the players' actions to detract from said storytelling. Some DM's just want to create dungeons and see their players try to survive them. Some DM's like watching their players roleplay conflict, but their preference regarding both the tension and the duration of said conflict can be very different to that of their players. Whatever the case, if there is a problem on your part, you just address that the same way you did it as if it was one of your player's problem. Only in the reverse. You dont ask. You tell. Something like ''guys, I am getting bored of this campaign, because you are doing X, and I would like to dm for a group that does Y and Z instead with the occassional V from time to time. Again, it's a matter of compatibility. Maybe your players can play in a way that makes the game exciting for you too. Or maybe it's time to step down from the DM's chair and play a character instead. Or maybe it's time to find a new group.

C) Your player (the one playing the trickery cleric), raises the worst kind of red flag to me. Doesn't matter how good of a roleplaying I'd think he might be, I'd actively avoid playing with someone like that if he didn't change the way he approaches the game after I would have told him what's bothering me. I am not bothered by what his character is doing. I am bothered by the apparent fact that he did not ask if playing such a character would be ok. Probably it's not entirely his fault, as session 0 is not the exclusive responsibility of any one player. And maybe he doesn't know better yet. I've played similar characters and ''worse''. But when I plan for something like that, I dont just go to the table and when they ask me ''what will you be playing?'' I smile and respond ''you'll find out''. I present my character concept before I bring it to life, and I do so only when I think that I can offer some good in character drama. And if there are objections I discuss them. And if I cannot get what I think is a 100% ok from everyone else, then I save my ''disruptive'' concept for some other game and I present my backup ''normal'' concept (which will probably be something simplistic enough in term of motive -eg glory, gold, power, do good/bad, etc, that I know it wont create any such kind of frictions). And furthermore, when playing some disruptive character concept, I always make peace with the fact that the character might be forced to retire early. Meaning, that when I discuss my disruptive concept, I am not only asking to see if people are ok with the mess my character will be creating. I am also asking to see in what lines the other characters will move in response to what I am doing, so that I know if I am ok with that too. So, if for example I want to play a thief, and the other players are excited at this roleplaying opportunity because they all want to play judge Dredd, I have to be sure I am ok with the possibility of having my character killed by one of the other players. Else, I'll opt to play something else.