Alright, /tg/, I've got a bit of a situation. One of my

>>44257406
a) The player the stole is a lolrandum Chaotic Stupid shithead who should be told they're no longer welcome in your game.
b) The player that got stolen from is an immature retard incapable of serious roleplay and should be told they're no longer welcome in your game.

>letting your players steal from each other

Let somebody else DM.

>>44257406
Why'd you let him do that shit in the first place idiot?

>>44257406
So here's what happened. Party was camped for the night after a brief encounter with some bandits. The Ranger of the group went out hunting, both for pelts and to mitigate their living cost in terms of rations (with some exceptions, I mostly just let players pay the cost of whatever rations they need as they need them, rather than having them decide just how many they want to buy in town. It saves time.) and while he was out, the Rogue announced he wanted to go through the Ranger's pack.

I attempted to gently dissuade the perpetrator from this, telling him it was not a smart thing to do considering he's a part of a group, but the player in question has always been a bit of an edgelord, and simply insisted "this is what my character would do," and I avoid vetoing in situations that don't involve magical realm, so I made him roll. I made him roll twice, on no other basis than "making it so that no one nearby happens along" and "putting things back so that the victim doesn't notice" and the DC in my mind for the second was a 20. So he rolls, and gets a 18 for the first roll, and a non-nat 21on the second. He came away from the pack with 1d8 gold pieces, for which he was a little bitter.

This was a bad call on my part, I am fully aware of that, but in the moment there was an argument going on and I was trying to solve the problem in the moment in a way that would satisfy both parties. I failed.

All I ask is a way to prevent this in the future, and mitigate it from now on.

If people are still going to post "why you let him?" It's because my previous and only consistent DM to measure myself against let that shit go every time, and I had no argument for why, in-character, he couldn't. I'm honestly considering just booting the offender, because he's a problem-player, but that would make things even more volatile in the group of friends outside the game.

>>44257603
my suggestion? the other PCs alibi each other, PC B figures out PC A did it and kicks his ass for it, fist fight style and declares he will kill PC A if he does it again. Inform Player A that you will allow this if he does it again.

>>44257746
That's what I had in mind and, based on the way this thread has been received in such little time, I think a blanket Veto on inter-party thefts and violence without a damn good reason (better than "My character is a thief!" at the very goddamn least) is appropriate.

I have come to greatly regret allowing it in the first place, especially because I can already see the offending Rogue claiming it as precedence in future dickery, or even worse, the victim acting this way out of revenge.

The assurance of inter-party conflict resulting from actions is something my party needs to keep closer in mind.

>>44257603
> "This is what my character would do."
> "Rock falls, you die. Make a character that wouldn't do such a thing or you're not welcome anymore."

That, or outwit the rogue and have him leave a clue (for example, footprints) and have the ranger and rest of the group do "what their characters would do". Like kill, banish and/or fail to assist.

Alternatively, if the character is a rogue, have him be accused by NPCs of theft from prior to the game, as it is obviously something his character would've done before. To other adventuring parties and/or merchants and/or nobles. Make sure the other PCs are shunned by the NPCs for the simple fact of associating with the Rogue.

Have lesser demonic foes (e.g. Quasit) not attack the rogue on purpose, going so far as to "protect him from his own party members" which would attempt to redeem him and his evil ways, as he is to become the ultimate asshole if left unchecked.

You know, consequences.

>>44261696

> There's no room for the likes of you. Get out.

> I am afraid doing business with you may hinder me more on the long run than any deal you might be offering.

> Look, one of these days, you'll confront him, and when you'll do, you'll probably end up shived. Better walk away from the feller.

> Of course, I'll deal with you guys. I'm not one to turn away a customer just because of a few rumors (pickpockets the PCs and/or charges 300% suggested retail price).

> Bob here told us how he had to buy back his father's watch from a travelling merchant that was about to leave town. Guy gave a pretty good description of your friend here. We ought to give you guys a lesson.

> By order of the council, you are to leave the district. If you wish to remain within city walls, you are confined to [Slums' nickname].

And, of course, have one or two stores / inns / brothels / neighborhoods close their doors and windows shut as the PCs walk by / attempt to buy whatever supplies they require.

"That's what the rest of the universe would do."

> Letting a player at your table who steals from other players' characters in a non-ironic manner.
> Player thinks justifying it as roleplaying will cover his lolrandumb ideas.
You brought this upon yourself OP.

Yeah. Just give both of them the "This won't happen again because it causes too much inner-party conflict" conversation. If the edgelord doesn't understand tell him you're sorry but if he doesn't change you'll have to remove him from the group.
>"But it's what my character would do!"
>"This is what the DM would do."

>>44257603
>"this is what my character would do,"
Stopped reading here, tell the player that he isn't channeling the alternate universe astral projection wandering creativity manifest dream spirit of his stupid character. He's consciously directing his character. If he can't stop to think about why his character would not be a cunt, then his character explodes into meaty gore bits that don't inconvenience anyone else. Then he gets to make another character who isn't a raging asshole.

Basically, he shapes up or he gets the fuck out.

>>44257406
>out-of-character conflict between the players involved
Better find some better people to play.

>>44263305

This is the right move. Cleverly screwing over your chaotic stupid players is a good enough way to deal with actions that are directed against NPCs. But I think it's better to be honest with your players someone is causing OOC conflict. If you try to do something clever like leave in game clues for the ranger to figure out who stole the gold it's only encouraging more inter-party conflict and dragging out the issue. Just make an announcement at the beginning of next session, to all of your players. Something like: "I was thinking about how player A's theft from Player B worked out last session, and I wasn't really happy about about. I'm worried that shenanigans like that are going to derail the game and reduce everyone's fun.So, We are all going to let this one slide. But not again."

If the thief protests, t ell him you already made your call. He's welcome to try to dick NPC's (but there will be consequences) but not party members. If that interferes with his concept, he's welcome to free re-build of his character with no penalty. If he insists on trying to pull more bullshit, tell him no. Don't make up an in game excuse- say no because you already discussed this, and you are not running that kind of game.

>>44257406
You tell the player that has been stolen from: when you get back and look through your things again, it seems as though your moneypouch is missing. What do you do?

Eventually, the PCs will find him and deal with him... what will happen, will be their characters reacting to the thieve's bullshit.

Natural selection at it's finest.
Thieves get away with stolen goods...when they are already far away when the theft is noticed.

I've got an edgelord teifling PC to deal with in my next homebrew, this was a good lurk.

>>44257406
>>44257603
The group should kick the Rogue out. If he steals from party members he clearly doesn't respect the contract.

The Rogue's player can roll up a different character who isn't a shithead. His original character can be a recurring antagonist or something.

>>44257603
>simply insisted "this is what my character would do,"
The correct response to absolutely insisting on this is to get rid of that character and roll up one who would actually cooperate with the fucking party.

Unless this is supposed to be a CE game where everyone hates each other or something.

>be me
>character is resting after a hard fight
>requisite lolrandumb player decides now's a great time to pick my character's pockets
>surreptitiously heat metal on the coins, drops quite badly wounded rogue into negative health
>"Wait, what the hell was that?"
>"They were warm from my body heat."
>simply leave the explanation at that and go back to resting
>lolrandumb player is now convinced my character is a polymorphed dragon, or a demon, or some kind of half-fire-elemental thing
>refuses to hear reason on the matter
>stays the fuck away for the rest of the game

But seriously, OP, if you can't handle a problem player find a reason to kick that player out. Shit like that doesn't get better, at least in my experience.

>>44265083
Please be true

>>44261753
Over 1d8 Gold. Jeez.

"If you want intra-party conflict, play Vampire. This is D&D."

>>44257470
/thread

>>44265326
This is a fortune to the commoner and business owner. Besides, the 1d8 gold limit was set by the DM.

>>44257406
>sparked out-of-character conflict between the players involved,

1: Tell them to stop acting like retarded kids
2: If they persist, kick them out of the group.

>>44257406
I would ask him if he is sure he wants to do that, then for the appropriate rolls. Then I would turn his character into an NPC. I'm the only one that gets to control antagonistic shitheads, the players create characters that work together, when they don't I have one less NPC to make.