Have you ever betrayed the party? I tried a few times because

>>49563288
If this is a serious thread, stop. Stop playing evil characters. Stop betraying the party. Stop playing rogue stealing from the party. Stop playing an evil mind controlling mage.
Stop.

>>49563306
Not the retarded op, but my evil characters are all evil for the party rather then evil to the party.

File: Sith.png (33KB, 820x246px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 820x246px

>>49563342
This also often tends to backfire, when the paladin doesn't share your notion that burning that torturing that bloke to death and raising him as a zombie was for the greater good and the benefit of the party.
Also, I suddenly remembered picrelated.

>>49563367

>hurr durr backstab circle

>>49563288
Good, if you betray the party you should end up dying.

Traitor.

That said, my character (party healer) is on his way to Lichdom. When our campaign is at its end, when we decide to retire this group of characters, I'm going to fight the rest of the party.

I generally play an evil character, which leads sometimes leads to minor altercations between me and the party's good cleric, and rarely some of the neutrals, concerning our methods but never a full on betrayal. The wicked things I do are usually done behind the party's back and always out of the eye of our paladin.

>>49563288
Don't do it. As a GM I've worked the occasional betrayal into the plot and NOTHING creates a bigger vendetta. In the biggest case an NPC managed to strike at them during their most vulnerable moment and very nearly TPK'd the party. It took every ounce of their willpower not to slit that NPC's throat on the spot after they had him hog tied, and they only managed that because he had information they needed. They were angry, they were frustrated, they blamed themselves for letting him in, and they absolutely despised that NPC from then on, long after his death. As a fellow player all that anger, frustration and hate will be focused on YOU.

I'm not saying it can't be done well by an experienced roleplayer, with a group that works together to weave a good story from it. But if you do it poorly, all the hate, hurt and pain caused by the betrayal (and there's a reason it's often seen as the biggest crime a human being can commit) will be redirected at you, the cause. It can and will reach outside the game, dissolving groups and destroying friendships. Don't treat it lightly.

I have not; however there is a wonderful story.

>Running Cthulhu-esque game
>Doing a heavily modified version of the Kingsburry Horror sample adventure from Trail of Cthulhu
>The beginning and end were the same, but the trail of clues, locations, and characters were completely changed
>Players have finally found the 6-headed monster
>It's in a chamber underneath the orphanage that was recently built by the same guy who made the Scylla-thing
>As a hint after they tried killing it with gunfire, a formerly-important NPC got too close and got fuckin' eaten
>The head became wholly occupied with the body
>Party figures out that the only way to stop Yog-Sothoth from fucking everything up is by feeding 5 more dudes
>Rich guy goes upstairs and finds 3 frightened orphans
>Drugs them with roofied lemonade and lures them into the lower chamber
>Engineering guy finds a single homeless man, knocks him the fuck out, and drags him down to the chamber
>Other PC couldn't find anyone
>1 more life needs to be sacrificed
>Reality is tearing apart with the manifestation of Yog-Sothoth
>Rich guy shoots the engineer
>World saved

>>49563288
>Lawful Evil Paladin
>rest of the party is good/neutral
>we all get along horribly, even the goods and neutrals as everyone is on opposite sides of the lawful/chaotic spectrum
>campaign is going for months
>slowly, truths of big bads actions come out
>apparently not derp evil but is acting through a strict ideological code for the greater good of all
>character begins to sympathize and am contacted by minions
>DM gets a feeling and messages me
>am brought to big bad for a secret meeting as group has become noteworthy in the realm
>compare opinions, ideologies, and answers to hypothetical situations
>we completely agree on all matters
>swear loyalty and say we will meet again, but with guests
>sessions go by and I begin to befriend CN fighter
>eventually think our bond is close enough to discuss the big bad and how things must get worse, temporarily, before they get better
>"Going to need a lot of money to secure my lips"
>disgusted but make contact for him with minion
>he's in
>the final session
>me and the fighter are given the layout of the lair
>we actively tell rogue to check areas we know are safe to give false sense of security and stay in the back when traps are triggered
>give signals to enemy soldiers to leave areas we enter to save their numbers, though some must be sacrificed to sell the act
>enter the grand chamber
>Big bad begins his speech
>everyone is getting hype
>Says they are outnumbered and party laughs at him saying there are five of us and one of him
>that's our queue
>merc fighter starts it "Actually, there's three of you"
>party goes full wut
>BB laughs and beckons us to him
>we walk to his side and the retreated enemy forces flood in from the side and main door
>party is surrounded and raging
>combat is over in just three turns
>me and fighter are triumphant as fuck post session chat, party has two rage quitters and the other guy was actually cool with it saying it was awesome that everyone was so in character

File: 1421750377129.jpg (1015KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1015KB, 1920x1200px

>>49563288
Yes, but it wasnt good idea.

You should consult playing such characters with DM or, even better, whole group.

>>49563367
I wouldn't play an evil character if there was a paladin in the party.
And i wouldn't play a paladin if there was an evil character in the party either.
It all depends on who is first and who is more attached to their concept than the other.

>>49563288
>I always end up dying...
Gee I wonder why!

File: 1457063931732.png (154KB, 500x444px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 500x444px

>>49563625
Congratulations, you completely ruined a campaign for two other players.

>>49566008
The main reason betraying the party is so vilified is not (only) that is a shit move. But that the other players take it so personally.
That character betrayed the party, won, and got away with it? Deal with it
That character betrayed the party and got slaughtered? He has to deal with it

It is that simple.

Once. It was my GM who suggested it, and we planned it together. I was moving to another part of the country due to studies, and he wanted to take a break from the campaign anyway.

>Exalted 2e, mixed campaign
>My character joins the party later (as I joined the campaign later)
>She (my char) wasn't necessarily egotistical, but she didn't care much for others (we've all had our edgier phases, okay?)
>In our collective inventory we have a magical key and an orb with some moving mechanical parts (which was basically a Wyld bomb)
>My char is the only one who knows how to activate the key (fresh blood) and the orb.
>We're in the castle of the BBEG
>The plan is to set the bomb to detonate in 5 minutes and run (of course it was more complex than that, but the details don't matter)
>The time comes
>I nod at the GM
>He describes how my character sets the bomb, grabs the magic key, stabs some random servant with it, runs to a door, opens it with the said key and disappears
>The other players are just sitting there with the mouths open and stares at me
>GM: "The bomb goes off, the Wyld starts to manifest"
>Me: "I sat it at 20 seconds instead of 5 minutes"
>Other players start to yell and shout and throw dice at me
>I deserved it, but it was worth it

Of course their characters survived due to Wyld immunity or whatever. It was a fun thing to plot with the GM "against" the party, since it caused a minor plot twist and the GM felt he could work this to be some sort of cliffhanger conclusion of the campaign. I wouldn't do it just for the "lulz evils" though.

Oh! There were some in-char reasons to why she would do such a thing. Details are unnecessary, but she had other goals than the party (and the key could get her there and yadayadayada)

>>49563306
explain yourself! now!

>>49566125
>That character betrayed the party, won, and got away with it? Deal with it
>That character betrayed the party and got slaughtered? He has to deal with it
because neither must ever happen to (a) special snowflake PC(s)?

>>49563288
Our All evil pathfinder party is going to betray one of the other PC's. He has stated multiple times that he wants to start rebellions in the kingdom we been controlling for over a year. However our DM fucked us over and told the player we where going to betray and kill his character so we're not sure what to do now.

>>49566420
Did the DM tell him in front of you, or did you find out he'd squealed independantly?

If he doesn't know you know, make a blatantly obvious trap, then set another trap inside it.

If he does, frame him for crimes that will make him a pariah to whoever he's trying to incite into rebellion

>>49566560
Our DM Told him in secret but then the player just straight up confronted me about it knowing that my character was involved. I already confronted out DM on it. Infact out DM got pissed at the player for telling me that he knew despite the fact we told the DM not to say anything.

File: 126546307.png (102KB, 345x230px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 345x230px

>>49563625
You must feel soooo smart, because the GM allowed you all that shit and actually played against the other players.

Once I was playing an imperial agent traitor. I've had mainly noble levels, so I've spent ridiculous amounts of cash on mercaneries that I've hired to kill the other PCs.
The party entirely consisted of the jedi knights, so at no point of the game my mooks were more than an annoyance. My traitorhood was never found out.

>>49566637
Jesus Christ, what a bundle of dicks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhLqPfAylF4

>>49566420
>>49566560
>>49566637
See kids? This is why party betrayal is idiotic: it creates inter-party drama for absolutely no fucking good reason and it makes everyone feel angry.

>>49566743
Yeah to be honest the whole experience left me with a bad taste in my mouth and our same group was considering playing Black Crusade afterwords but that is just party betrayal the game. I even told our DM after this whole incident I wasn't comfortable with him DMing a game like that.

>>49566743
Sounds more like a terrible DM, not the betrayal being inherently bad.

There are so many better ways to handle that shit if you're not comfortable with the players doing it.

File: 1565498143.jpg (49KB, 600x337px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x337px

>>49566800
>There are so many better ways to handle that shit
I agree up to a certain point.

There are certain game with mechanics that hinge on inter-party conflict, like Paranoia. It says that in the name itself: players should be distrustful of each other and probably kill one another too, if they think they're probably going to get backstabbed.

But in other games, where you're supposed to play cooperatively, it's just a very dick move to backstab the party.

Especially if someone talks about it with the GM and he does whatever he can to make that guy succeeds, without giving the party chances to catch him red-handed and deal some justified PC Killing.

>>49566800
>There are so many better ways to handle that shit
Could you elaborate?

File: 1474377942158.png (645KB, 722x525px) Image search: [Google]

645KB, 722x525px

HEY!
You know what a REALLY SHITTY THING TO DO AS AN INDIVIDUAL IS?

Playing a completely different game to everybody else at the table!

You know what game they're here to play?
The game of co-operative storytelling, where you work together to construct an ongoing fantasy themed narrative, thats what.

You know what game YOU'RE here to play?
The game of "Fuck you, heres where I reveal my master plan and use out of character knowledge of the other players against them!"

You know why your character is fucking with them? Because they were stupid enough to think that you were playing the same co-operative game.

F*$% you.
F#$%%^ you.

Why?
Because in order to achieve your bullshit, which stars ONLY YOU, you had to lie to other players.

Not their characters, you had to lie to other players.

Because thats the only way you could TRICK them into willingly playing with you.

I am livid with antipathy for you.
Get out. Fuck off. Roleplaying doesn't want you. Go play D&D 5th ed with the rest of the casuals, and find out what its like being in a team of you arseholes.

You know that bit in Southpark, where Cartman goes "AHA!" to Kyle, who knew he was going to betray them?

They knew you were going to pull this shit, but they thought they'd give you the benefit of the doubt.

Well, well done, edgelord, you killed another game! Go fuck yourself you disruptive little POS.

I am so angry right now.

>>49567174
No need to be so anal about it :3

File: 126546308.gif (199KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 200x200px

>>49567174
Couldn't have said it better myself. Bravo, anon, bravo!

File: 1395359107682.jpg (326KB, 1000x779px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 1000x779px

>>49563306
I never understood why people have a problem with evil characters. The cons are huge. Are most players too cowardly to kill the That Guy's character once he starts doing edgy shit or something?

>>49567200
>anal
That word does not mean what you think it means, anon.

>>49567250
It creates unnecessary inter-party drama.

>>49567174
>You know what game they're here to play?
>The game of co-operative storytelling
Well, then they are morons. I came here to do some role-playing. In this case the role of a traitor.

>>49567270
That drama can be resolved in-game. Or are you telling me one edgelord can survive against 4+ other PCs?

>>49567314
It can be resolved IC, but you know that it won't be.

>>49567174
>Not their characters, you had to lie to other players.
Because the faggots would metagame otherwise.

>I am livid with antipathy for you.
Good.
>Roleplaying doesn't want you.
Cooperative storytelling has spoken, kek.
>I am so angry right now.
Excellent.

>>49567270
Care to remind me what is wrong with inter-party drama? Drama is good, isn't it?

>>49567330
It kind of depends I guess? If actual drama starts then some players shouldn't be in the group.

File: 1465707766951.jpg (142KB, 687x480px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 687x480px

>>49567174
>F*$% you.
>F#$%%^ you.

File: 1475100253272.png (149KB, 444x312px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 444x312px

>>49567250
Its a betrayal that ONLY occurs in the GAME WORLD because the PLAYERS were unlucky enough to be in a game with THAT GUY.

It only works because they made the single mistake of choosing to play with you.
You're playing a different game to everyone else, and it stars ONLY YOU, and is about having fun at their expense, because, OOC, they trusted you.

You expose only their mistake.

IC betrayals focus is on characters who are significant only because they have real, human players, in this universe.

Its not an in character goal, its an out of character goal to mess with other players, and its only achieved by being DISHONEST OUT OF CHARACTER ABOUT YOUR GOALS.
This makes YOU the liar and betrayer, not your character.

Why the fuck should anyone play with you?

>>49563288
Sounds like you got your wish.

>>49567308
And you told everyone else out of character that was your goal and they were okay with it?

No, you had to lie to the other players.
You missed the goddamn point, and you know what?
If they allow you at the table, they are morons.

Get the fuck out of my game, you edgelord spazz.

Its not roleplaying, its a power fantasy that NEEDS to involve other people for the masturbation action to have any excitement for you. Get your jollies elsewhere, and don't come back.

>>49567444
See, that's when the other players turn and have fun on That Guy's expense, instead of letting him have all the fun. Or are you just gonna sit there and let him do all that stuff?

>>49567517
Thats fine if thats the game that everybody at the table agrees to. You should know this.

If you fuck someone without their consent, you're a rapist.

>>49567174
>livid
livid means pale
It doesn't detract from your point, tho'

>>49567539
Actually, no, why should the gm ever allow That Guy to undermine or potentially party-wipe his campaign? We're back into the '4 people playing one game, and featuring That Guy's Power Fantasy That Intimately Involves Getting One Up On People That Shouldn't Be So Significant To His Character'.

Give me a reason why the 4 players should let you ruin the narrative of the campaign so you can have your 'I'm a betrayer' masturbation?

>>49567331
You have to go.

File: 1387416942009.jpg (46KB, 672x391px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 672x391px

>>49567174
>F*$%

>>49567539
I agree, and I think the DM and the group should talk about if the want their game to be noblebright or grimdark or in between.

>If you fuck someone without their consent, you're a rapist.
Whooooa, calm down. Compating being an asshole in D&D with actual rape is pretty fucking dumb.

>>49567587
Not all campaigns rely on the bad premise that all characters will get out alive and everything will go according to dramaturgical rules, and even then it's probably more likely that That Guy gets his shit kicked in and has to sit being mad for 3 hours while everyone else is having fun.

>>49567163
Off the top of my head

1) work with the players to make the betrayal interesting enough that no mature player would get mad at it.
2) ask them to belay their plans and have a quiet words with the soon to be betrayed party, in order to make them realise how much of a dick they're being by sabotaging the group's efforts
3) flat out saying it's not happening, and say the same to the player bringing the betrayal down on his head

Encouraging Metagaming to one party via information told in confidence is just about the worst way he could possibly have handled it.

I had my hand forced once to betray the party.

I was a LN Wizard who valued the rule of law as a structuring force to the world.

The rest of the party was a TN alchemist, a TN Fighter, and a NE Cleric. However they all three acted CE. I was forced to deal with them because my character didn't think just leaving the party would be responsible because they were a bunch of sociopathic murderers. I actually worked with the GM and worked with in setting authorities to do a string operation on them.

Because god damn they were evil.

File: 1475100573104.gif (3MB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 200x200px

>>49567825
yeah, but you're that guy, because you couldn't work it out with them ooc.

Think of it this way;
You CHOSE to prioritize roleplaying an arbitrary character trait (THAT YOU HAVE COMPLETE CONTROL OVER) over and above whatever story the gm and the other 3 had planned.

You lied (by omission) to the other players about what you were up to, or you would have done it openly, ooc.

You betrayed your allies, which is the very example of an evil act, on its own.

Your actions ARE justified. But they're oocly dishonest to the other players, and thats why you're the jerk.

I totally understand, but the principle remains. You had complete control, and you could have made your character compatible, rather than INCOMPATIBLE with the team, which is the origional, overarching idea here.

Or it should be.

>>49563288
Technically they betrayed me, I just had prepared some precautions for the eventuality. Also it was Black Crusade, so certain degree of in party distrust is to be expected.

I don't care what bodily fluids or body parts your Dark Gods demand in tribute. You're not raising hand against man's hard-earned pet and expect there to be no consequences.

>>49567934
I could have made my character compatible from the getgo if their information was correct. I would even have been fine with a NE character.

I was essentially lied to because they did not have the alignments of the kind of folk who kick babies because they thought it was funny, and my character couldn't just suddenly become evil. I preferred to work as the character in the situation he found himself in.

And if I had told them the sting operation wouldn't have ever worked.

I understand what you're saying, but if the rest of the party turns out to be evil despite what I was told I will try and correct this is some manner.

My only option was to have clairvoyant that they were all actually CE or to drop the character when it became apparent despite what the character would have done.

File: 1392815474618.jpg (109KB, 425x425px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 425x425px

>>49567934
>You betrayed your allies, which is the very example of an evil act, on its own.
>betraying sociopathic murderers is evil

I'm genuinely curious how you came to this conclusion.

File: 1429004936614.jpg (18KB, 300x265px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 300x265px

>>49567174

Ignoring her fear of saying fuck on the internet, this girl got the right idea.

Being "le backstabby mastermind" is selfish and tends to crash parties. It's pure self-indulgent faggotry. Anyone who thinks this is cool is pretty immature in my eyes.

File: 1474373492447.jpg (203KB, 474x444px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 474x444px

>>49567982
Would it be fair then to say that, in part, the problem WAS ooc, and could have been solved that way too?
I mean, I see no reason to disbelieve anything you say, and don't doubt you in the slightest.

... But it has to do with agreed-upon-team-ethos, which was sort of 'hammered out through trial and error' of the 80s and 90s gaming eras.

Doesn't count for Dark Heresy of course, though the only campaign in that setting that seems to make sense to me is "YAAAAARRGH!!!" Tale of the Chaos Warband....

(Where, Ironically, Everyone has a Reason To Work Together (the Imperium), and either suspicion, or in fact vocal confirmation that all the other players WANT to betray them for power, but its just not convenient or profitable right now. Kaaaoss eeezz stroooonnngk!)

File: learning engrish.jpg (118KB, 597x447px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 597x447px

>>49567174
C'mon. Say it with us...

>>49568024
In this example, they WERE INDEED your allies.

You can make moral arguments, but the Moral Extremes (at least in D&D, some versions) literally do not care, and its about the letter of the Law (TM).

It doesn't matter if you betrayed the Devil himself, you still -betrayed- him. Thats a corruption point, secretly noted, in my games at least.

I'm not saying its the wrong thing to do either... but betrayal is what it is.... or is theft for good intentions somehow no longer theft, by way of analogy? We're now discussing the difference between chaos and law, on the topic of good, I think.

>>49567607
I need to post more.

>>49563288
I once ditched the entire group by driving off with a pickup truck, leaving them running for their lives from eldritch monsters after they justified trying to murder me for getting angry at the cowardly guy who always leaves us for dead.

When I say "getting angry" I mean "raising my voice and calling hima dickhead" and nothing else.

>>49568113
>and its about the letter of the Law (TM).
And that contradicts itself when you consider that some interpretations would consider inaction against personal preventable evil to be an evil act itself, and would certainly consider it a good act to prevent the spread of evil.

It honestly sounds like you're hiding behind interpretations you prefer in order to hinder a playstyle you don't like.
Nothing wrong with having personal interpretations and valuing certain aspects over others, of course, but that's something you really ought to make clear to your players, since I'm fairly sure a large proportion of people who consider themselves good wouldn't think twice about backstabbing Satan.

>>49563533
This, this so much.

A player in my group tried to pull a betrayal once where he intended to job and lose at the very end. And he still almost made us all hate him for a very long time.

The betrayal never happened because the GM tpk'd us before it could happen.

>>49568245
Betrayal is betrayal is betrayal.
Lies beget lies, and Evil makes evil.

You're wrong by the way.
Discussing Inaction against preventable evil
IS MOVING THE GOALPOSTS OF DISCUSSION.

We're having a conversation about if Betrayal, specifically (as far as I'm concerned) in D&D, is, on its own, good, evil or nuetral.

Guess which one I'm backing.

You want me to be the voice of some, stick in the mud, arbitrary, letter of the law lawful good deity?

Fine. Heres what I think they'd say.
You used evils methods, for good reasons. Your intentions may have been noble, but your actions were not. Your paladin must atone, for not finding a way to vanquish evil without compromising what is supposed to be good.
The trash heap has spoken.

>>49563288
I kinda betrayed our party in a short DnD campaign

We had picked up a stray waif of a girl that the fighter and ranger took under their wings (the characters were a couple unable to conceive as the ranger was barren). My warlock managed to sway the girl to see the ways of my master and "volunteer" herself to become my first step towards becoming immortal. My master demanded i slay a innocent life and i essentially stockholm-syndromed the girl into hating the fighter-ranger pair and wanting to be my sacrifice when the fighter-ranger pair were busy with other stuff.

Yes it was That Guy-ish but since it was kind of a pre-story campaign for our upcoming campaign i felt i could act out a bit of classic evil. My warlock eventually showed up in our regular campaign as a warlock-variant of a lich, and the fighter-ranger pair ended up running a orphanage and taking care of kids in need.

>>49563625
NTR is a shit fetish. That is all.

>>49567559
Livid can also be used to describe being angry, as a shortened version of 'livid with rage'.

A big problem with party betrayals is that it forces players who don't want to deal with them to treat everyone as an enemy, unless you want your fun ruined.

Do you really want to spend the entire game expecting your friends to rain all over your parade?

>>49567486
Because real life betrayals start with telling everyone that they're going to betray everyone. Get over yourself, you wet noodle pussy bitch. Go back to tumblr. Christ.

Roleplaying means playing a role. If that role is a traitor, so be it. Getting angry OoC because your pwesus pwesus chawactah got ded is baby tier kindergarten shit. Either that, or you're fucking mentally unstable. No matter which of those, I would never allow you into a game I played because you'd probably flip out and try to stab someone or shoot up a school when your beloved mary sue piece of shit got killed by someone else's character.

Cry some more, it's all you're good for.

>>49568346
I am the wizard. I don't care if it was good or evil. I was LN.

>>49568462
THIS. THIS. A THOUSAND TIMES THIS.

You other guys go be 'free' somewhere else.

>>49568346
>Autism the post
>Making a good point is moving the goalposts
>EVERYTHING IS BLACK AND WHITE

And this, children, is why Alignment systems are trash. It lets people like THIS waste of oxygen have an excuse to be secret robot infiltrators.

>>49568530
No, you ignoramus,

Your betrayal is IC,
your LIES are OOC in their basis.
You are, in the REAL WORLD lying to the other players.

Go on, find me players that want to play with LYING players by preference.
Ill wait.

Your reading comprehension is poor, or you are INCAPABLE of separating IC from OOC.

If the ONLY WAY you can pull of your GENUIS AND TOTALLY UNFORSEEN public masturbation, sorry, BETRAYAL, is by LYING BOTH IN AND OUT OF CHARACTER, then, perhaps, its not quite as genius as you think.

>If that role is a traitor, so be it.
Thats not the role that we agreed upon at all.

>I would never allow you into a game
I told you already to get the hell out of MY game. Now you're just copying me.

You have to go.

>>49568639
>Go on, find me players that want to play with LYING players by preference.
Actually most people I play with would rather you lie by omission if you had secrets IC. They don't want you spoiling it.

What kind of people are you playing with?

>>49568665
Look, I already told you to go be free somewhere else. We don't want you.

You have to go.

>>49568639
Let me preface this by saying that I have a policy of kicking any party traitors. Before I do that, I will make sure that character meets a humiliating end accomplishing nothing.

But you're coming off as ass-mangled and probably making the rest of us come off as equally ass pained, calm the fuck down.

>>49568665
>Actually most people I play with would rather you lie by omission if you had secrets IC. They don't want you spoiling it.

Most people write character secrets that don't lead to two months of sessions ending on a sour note.

File: foodtruck.jpg (2MB, 1600x1355px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1600x1355px

>>49568639
This is some legit buttmad and autism.

>>49568639
You want people to spoil all their secrets? Lying OOC by omission is essentially required for some character's arcs, whether they have to do with betrayal or not.

>>49568688
>Most people write character secrets that don't lead to two months of sessions ending on a sour note.
I mean sure, you can try. I worked with the GM in order to make this go off well and talked with him about it. If the GM just flat out said "no don't do that" I would have probably handed my character in because there was no way he would stick with the party unless he was attempting to bring them to justice.

As someone who I was betraying you can try, if you succeed then awesome I have no problem with that. It's part of roleplay. Honestly if you take IC actions personally then there are serious problems. Me and my character are different people, him trying to bring you to justice doesn't mean I'm not still friends with you or want to play. If I didn't want to play with someone I wouldn't spite them by setting up some kind of elaborate "ruin the fun" mechanism. I would just leave.

File: HELLO CHOSEN UNDEAD.png (339KB, 410x518px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 410x518px

>>49568679
>badwrong fun is bad and wrong
>"You have to go."

Welcome to /tg/, anon. I won't be your guide. The exit's up and to the right.

>>49567486
Kind of hard to play the traitor if everyone knows you're it.

Those shits will metagame murder you on S1.

File: 1436751624835.gif (2MB, 337x268px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 337x268px

>>49568530
>Because real life betrayals start with telling everyone that they're going to betray everyone.
Not him but what the shit is your problem?

>Roleplaying means playing a role. If that role is a traitor, so be it.
What the fuck? If you're playing Paranoia, maybe. If you're playing Werewolf, maybe. But if you're playing a COOPERATIVE GAME like D&D, where the group has to stick together to kill mobs and shit... and you betray them: you are That Guy. You're the shitlord that has to stand in the spotlight, acting like the main character and go
>"I am so much better than you, I managed to trick you all -thanks to the GM who let me- and you all are so stupid for believing in me! What a bunch of idiots!"

If you're a fucking traitor, I will personally make a character that will dwarf pun-pun by miles and shit all over your next character because that's what traitors do. And you brought this on yourself.

>>49568761
>Me and my character are different people, him trying to bring you to justice doesn't mean I'm not still friends with you or want to play.

It's nothing personal... kid... heh but that doesn't make it any less aggravating. We're all here dedicating three to five hours every week to tell this story. And I personally do not enjoy NTR, that simple.

If my game ends in what is essentially NTR, but instead of a fat bald guy stealing my wife. It's your character prematurely ending the story or foiling our plan to defeat the BBEG, because you felt the BBEG's cause was just? I'm gonna feel I wasted those two months we ran this game, and would rather have just known it would be this kind of game so I could bow out and play in a different one.

>>49567250
Yes, people find it hard to kill their friends, even if their friends are doing bad things.

>>49568825
I can see that. I personally disagree, if it happens to me I don't mind. Betrayals are narratively exciting, especially well executed ones. Suddenly pivoting and having what you thought was safety turn not is exciting.

I've had it happen to me, it was super cool because we had a moment of "you enemy is right here" when we were fighting on of the BBEG's lieutenants.

People seem find when NPCs betray the party (at least I don't think anyone here is angry about that), but when a player does it the act suddenly can't fit into a narrative even if he worked with the GM.

File: bestbait.png (52KB, 500x501px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 500x501px

>>49567539
Took some build-up.

File: 1565498144.jpg (82KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 680x680px

>>49568761
>As someone who I was betraying you can try, if you succeed then awesome I have no problem with that.
People like you are the reason I always make my characters paranoid, with maxed out insight, perception and, if available, with mind reading abilities.

>Oh, how can I make this game more about me and how great I am? I know! I will kill all the other characters, that way I won't have to share the spotlight. And before I kill them, I will make sure to humiliate them as much as I can to show off how smart and macchiavellian I am.

Traitors should be sodomized with a rusty machete.

File: 1463109316830.jpg (173KB, 800x1000px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 800x1000px

>>49567934
You honestly can't be a real person.

>>49568868
>Betrayals are narratively exciting, especially well executed ones.

Most game betrayals, including the kind discussed in this game are the ones that focus on the 'epic master plan' sort. They are never executed well, because if you had the capacity to execute them? You'd be on Wall Street, in big government or working with the intelligence community.

You know, the xanatos gambit where the outcome usually happens shortly after execution. At which point usually the game ends.

If someone wants to play the turncloak and then turn their character into an antagonist at some point as an unexpected development, that's just fine with me. Just don't turn it into NTR.

>>49568639
>your LIES are OOC in their basis.
>You are, in the REAL WORLD lying to the other players.
i told you before, you giant douchebag, that this is because the other players are metagaming faggots that are guaranteed to thwart all my plans based on "hunches" they suddenly got out of nowhere.

>>49568928
>They are never executed well, because if you had the capacity to execute them? You'd be on Wall Street, in big government or working with the intelligence community.
I have personally both seen it well executed and been the one to execute it well.

The last one that was done to me involved another player apparently being the one funding street gangs.

I mean hey, if you think it can never be executed well how to GMs do it? Not everyone is terrible at planning, some people actually can do it well and didn't go into politics. You're just taking things to an extreme to try and justify your position.

>>49568888
>People like you are the reason I always make my characters paranoid, with maxed out insight, perception and, if available, with mind reading abilities.
No the thing is that's perfectly fine. I am fine both with being betrayed and doing the betraying if it's narratively appropriate and adds to the overall story. Or if for some reason I am forced to play with people I hate, and for some reason can not leave, I may do it out of spite (again I would be much happier to just leave).

File: not rustled.gif (995KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

995KB, 500x281px

>>49568868
>People seem find when NPCs betray the party
Yes, because all players have the mentality
>'The GM is in full control of the game and wants to make it fun for everyone.'

They trust the GM to make decisions that will make the game more fun.

If a PC betrays the party, it's usually a cheap way to show off how great the player is and a shit way to stroke the main-character mental stiffy that most traitorous shitstains have.

I only find betrayal acceptable if the party KNOWS that the player character has a certain personality and holds certain beliefs dear that the group as a whole is going against. The PC has some legitimate grievances with the party, such as "The nobles might have a good point, but this war is really fucking over the poor peasants. I should do something about it, even at the cost of fighting my companions"

They have to have a _good_ reason to be a turncoat, not just
>Oh hey, the villain pays more and gives me a better career path and even dental if I join him: see you later suckers

Or the more reviled
>it's what my character would do
when he turns to the aforementioned villain to be his contracted trusty liutenant because he is a fucking greedy jew son of a bitch. Those are abysmal.

>>49568824
>COOPERATIVE GAME like D&D
D&D is first of all a roleplaying game. Coop mode seems to be kinda standard but it's by no means mandatory.

File: Iseeheresy.png (172KB, 500x404px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 500x404px

>>49568978
>No the thing is that's perfectly fine. I am fine both with being betrayed and doing the betraying if it's narratively appropriate and adds to the overall story.
You probably wouldn't be fine with being betrayed if the traitor that attacked and killed your character with a lucky crit did so just because
>hurr, I wanted your shiny
or
>you said something mean, now you have to pay, shithead

Because that's what most traitorous assholes do.

99,9% of betrayals in RPGs suck big fat cocks, with a 0,9% margin of error. I would really enjoy seeing a betrayal that actually makes the game fun and enjoyable, but in all my time on 4chan and suptg I haven't read a single story with a betrayal well-made!

>>49568989
>If a PC betrays the party, it's usually a cheap way to show off how great the player is and a shit way to stroke the main-character mental stiffy that most traitorous shitstains have.
You seem to have more of a problem with shitty players than betrayal itself.

>I only find betrayal acceptable if the party KNOWS that the player character has a certain personality and holds certain beliefs dear that the group as a whole is going against. The PC has some legitimate grievances with the party, such as "The nobles might have a good point, but this war is really fucking over the poor peasants. I should do something about it, even at the cost of fighting my companions"
See and this is why someone should betray, not just to get their jollies. Unless their CE, then they should just do it for the jollies because they are actually sociopathic.

>They have to have a _good_ reason to be a turncoat, not just
The reason we were discussing was a LN wizard stuck with three people who turned out to be CE and kicked babies for fun, and who worked with authorities to have them arrested.

>>49569054
>>hurr, I wanted your shiny
>or
>>you said something mean, now you have to pay, shithead
Yeah I wouldn't because neither of these are narratively exciting.

>99,9% of betrayals in RPGs suck big fat cocks, with a 0,9% margin of error. I would really enjoy seeing a betrayal that actually makes the game fun and enjoyable, but in all my time on 4chan and suptg I haven't read a single story with a betrayal well-made!

I mean I have a few, the last cool time I was betrayed is something I mentioned already involving a party member secretly funding organized crime.

>it's another "evil character always = party betrayal!!!" episode
I fucking hate this show

>>49569117
In this case we were talking about a LN character betraying CE party members.

>>49569054
>99,9% of betrayals in RPGs suck big fat cocks, with a 0,9% margin of error. I would really enjoy seeing a betrayal that actually makes the game fun and enjoyable, but in all my time on 4chan and suptg I haven't read a single story with a betrayal well-made!

well, we never finished it and it might not count as true betrayal but my Radical Scum in DH was working on converting the puritan group into radicals. had the sacribe discover a radical tome, etc. also, they made the Scum be in charge of the group's throne gelt stash. creative accounting ensued. also, I told my contacts (arms dealers) to overcharge me for items that the group ordered and to split the add-on.

>feelsgoodman.png

File: 1436734141201.jpg (70KB, 300x444px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 300x444px

>>49568997
90% of D&D games are standardly cooperative games, where the group stays together for a common goal and try to do their best to further the plot as a team.

>>49569055
>You seem to have more of a problem with shitty players than betrayal itself.
I usually do, yes.
>Unless their CE, then they should just do it for the jollies because they are actually sociopathic.
Which just makes me reiterate that alignments are fucking garbage and CE teammates, especially in a neutral/good game should be thrown into a dumpster full of australian stinging nettles.

>LN Wizard
Or, you know, the player could've just handed over control of his PC to the GM stating that he is not a good fit for the party and that he is probably going to be going his own way before bringing in an evil character himself.

Although, if the group was cool with him having all the glory I guess he is playing with too many betas and that doesn't really matter. A group full of betas is not a group at all, just a circle-wank fest of shit.

>>49569085
>I mentioned already involving a party member secretly funding organized crime.
Good for you: the other players enjoyed that game? Good for them too.

You know what, actually I retract my previous statement. I do not want to read stories of betrayals. I got enough disappointing shit about that: traitorous things, even those that are fun for the group, are ruined for me forever.

>>49568888
Wait, so if other characters persist in doing shit that your character thinks is wrong, and they won't stop on your behalf, isn't the game ruined for you anyway?

Why do you assume all games are PVE? Shadowrun's a good example of where this isn't the case at all.

>>49569163
Then get out of the thread and hide it, nigga.

>>49563288
Yup, though it was a dick move that stemmed from me making an unworkable character. She threw an autistic tantrum when another PC refused to give her information she thought she needed, utilised her super-artifact, trapped the PC in a time bubble and fucked the surrounding countryside in the process. Tried to fix everything by hurling magic at it, then threw another autistic tantrum when she was told by the local high priest (And the rest of the party) that she should put the super-artifact down and stop trying to help.

Appeared later on as a villain, after going completely off the deep end and deciding that clearly she was always totally in the right and everybody else being able to disagree with her was the problem. The solution was to turn them all into clockwork servitors and warp them until they could feel nothing but absolute devotion to her.

The trapped PC later got released and was put to use as a quest giver after the player had made a new character.

I wouldn't try it again. Nowadays I basically try to make characters who are going to be motivated to work with and stand by the party, because betrayal rarely works out well in terms of group enjoyment.

>>49563288

I've never done that, because it leads to all kinds of drama. I've killed PCs before, however, and for good reason.

For instance, one of our party members decided to let a seductive spy go 'Just this once', because she was flirting with him. I knew he'd try something stupid, so I told the DM I'd wait outside her cell in case he tried to free her.

When he did, I froze him with Hold Person and smashed his head in with my mace. The spy was shot full of arrows by the Ranger, but boy was loverboy mad about it.

File: GLORIOUS.png (313KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 600x800px

>not playing a double agent to eventually help the party

>>49563288

That's sort of the point. If someone tried to betray the party, we'll just gang up on him and kill him dead. Probably defile his corpse, too, because fuck that guy.

File: 1461506669782.png (821KB, 1330x1080px) Image search: [Google]

821KB, 1330x1080px

>>49566008
It's not like we were going to continue with the same characters after it was done. A campaign tells a story, and it just turned out that the bad guys one this one. I mean, nothing else was going to happen. This was it, the final session, when everything was going to be wrapped up and ended. We all know eachother irl and the faggots got over it in a week or so.

>>49566697
>GM allowed you all that shit

It was always in-character and appropriate for the setting. Our GM always runs extremely flexible campaigns with little to no rails at all. So if some guy is wrecking your shit and turns out that he could be an underling that will loyally serve you, why would he not take the chance? After everything was said and done the fighter was the one who killed them off anyways. I wanted to keep them alive until they saw the path of righteousness that I wanted to forge came to fruition so that they would seek penance in their wrongdoings up to that point.

File: 1310566609761.jpg (22KB, 638x359px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 638x359px

>>49568824
See? More crying. You're doing a great job, pussy! Keep crying. How does it feel knowing you'll never be able to control what I do in campaigns? I'll keep you in mind next time I ruin it for everyone else.

>>49563288
The players in my group constantly backstab each other. Not in the literal sense, but figuratively. The trick is that they keep it secret from each other, so they still all get along as a party, though everyone is still suspicious of everyone else.

Since we are running kind of heavy on the themes of political intrigue and conspiracies, I just let them roll with it.
All of them seem to be enjoying themselfes, too.

Sometimes even my NPCs get to backstab them. They enjoy the plottwists too much to care, it seems.

Once. My character wanted to break free from an NPC's leash and tried to have all characters loyal to that NPC die. It didn't work, but it was easy to Bluff my way out of it. Afer all, I waited 6 sessions for a safe opportunity.

The big problem with betrayal in your usual adventurers is that it's usually a really bad deal. You risk losing your allies and your life if the group survives (and they usually are resourceful enough to make it out alive despite impossible odds). Even if you succeed, you lose your allies. There usually isn't a reward which justifies that action - especially since smart villains won't just trust a traitor.

File: I dunno.png (27KB, 299x200px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 299x200px

>>49563288
Yes, technically?
Does it count when you're the GM?

>>49571123
Like, as a NPC?
NPC betrayal is to be expected.
As a DMPC?
It's even more dickish, and you should burn in hell for making a DMPC.

>>49571476
NPC. And technically it hasn't happened yet. After all, they haven't found out that he's literally Satan yet.
And I only have a DMPC in that particular campaign for two reasons.
1. I was originally a Player, but the GM at the time couldn't consistently come up with adventures for the group, so I offered to take over.
2. GMPC's a healer/enchanter/information repository, and never takes center stage in the combat, unless you count "being wrecked every time he so much as sticks his head out" as taking center stage.

>>49567250
Because they do so in explosive and unfun ways. Like trying to throw someone out of an airlock, or sinking the ship by trying to blow up several barrels of powder at one. Sure traitors are easy to despatch but chances are they're gonna fuck up something that you all worked hard for or kill a character.

>>49567265
I'm pretty sure the joke is that the anime girl he posted is frequently portrayed enjoying anal.

>>49563288

Frankly, the evil character who tries to betray the other party members and gets killed deserves what he got.

I see little difference between playing a shitstain whose goal is or becomes to destroy the other three or so players that thought you were all a team against the GM, and roleplaying the guy who would shun the party in-character. If "what my character would do" is "mess up the game for everyone else trying to include me in the party," you're being an ass. Betrayals by NPCs are something the party should honestly expect, but not being able to trust your party members when the game functions around you working together against the GM is just irritating because one guy has decided to RP in a way that disrupts the enjoyment of everyone else playing the game, and usually doesn't give a shit if it pisses everyone else off. If your group is shit about keeping IC and OOC separate, you should not try for a betrayal plotline because that's going to get real personal real fast. If your group ISN'T shit about keeping IC and OOC seperate, you have no excuse not to float the idea of the plotline to the rest of the group besides "I know none of them would be OK with it (but I'm going to do it anyway)."

Don't be that guy.

File: 80`s DM.jpg (3KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 320x180px

No evils. unless we play thiefs world or shit like that.
if we play vanilla "kobolds got my car" pathfinder we play all "ok" guys. no one has to be superman but no backstabbers.
when i sit my ass down and creat a session. read through the PCs sheets and improvise, im spending my time on a nice evening with friends. its hard enough to get a party of 4 to cooperate if they are all good, seeing how character backstory and motivations are more often than not completly different. if i spend time for the group and the group spends time flashing out their characters and how they need to rollplay them, i cant have a rat on the ship that eats up all the crackers. and NO it has nothing to do with acting in character. you made the character up a.e you are responsible for his effect on the game. much like a DM cant just spanw a demi lich and eat the whole party claiming the demi god was just acting "in character" if i find some edgelord who wants to play stabby Mc anime angst, i make some thief game where EVERYONE is a backstabber. he will know no friends. nobody he can trust. every ones a potential terrorist. trust me he wont think of it as some cool concept when hes done playing one of my grim dark campaigns
its a good way of showing players if this is what they are looking for. if they like to backstab but cant stand being backstabbed themselfes we got a case of mommy didnt hug me enough. if he can stand the heat we can play some thiefs world

>>49572386
>mess up the game for everyone else trying to include me in the party

Fuck that, I've been attacked multiple times from players who want nothing to do other than be murder-hobos plenty enough times to know that there are just some groups that you have to cull. It's almost always a fighter with dude-bro mentality that never pays attention and is on their phone, a barbarian who makes conversation with NPCs almost impossible because they equate barbarian to "always be a rampaging dick and intimidate to get what I want." Or theres the no fun allowed pally/cleric that will force the party to not do certain actions as they are bound to not do whatever it is that may force them to spend an extra day or two praying for penance, or the wizard that is just "studying go away" and contributes nothing to the game other than the occasional high level spell to kill a boss that was already almost dead.

It all depends on the individuals in the group, as "the party" isn't a hive mind that is allowing you into the fold but some dudes that are playing a tabletop game, and every now and then you get shitty players who just dont care about anything the session or even campaign is about. Should you try to make them aware that they are being a buzzkill? Should you be an adult about it and NOT kill their character? Sure, but killing their character(s) is always so much more fun.

>>49572467
>much like a DM cant just spanw a demi lich and eat the whole party claiming the demi god was just acting "in character"

Who says a demi-god can't, or wouldn't, do that? I mean obviously the combat would have to happen and all that instead of just railroad into ur ded, but if they died then tough shit. Don't start shit with a demi-god until you can handle it.

>>49563288
If you are prepared to betray the party, you should also be prepared to fail and die. If you're serious about it it's probably best to work with the DM to become part of the plot in one way or another.

>>49572555

Eh. I tried that. Campaign group went bad after a friend left, I stayed on for poor reasons, still playing a NG character in a party that went full evil campaign pretty quickly after my friend and one other guy left.

Unsurprisingly, I got murdered by the others over something petty, and rather than leaving like a smart person, I decided to be a vindictive dick and rolled up an evil character of my own.

I was now roleplaying within the party, but being younger, stupider, and sore about the sudden PVP killing my last character, my new character's evil got them and the rest of the party killed when I decided, knowing full well what would happen, to have the fallen paladin I was playing unleash the divine beast of wrath we were sent to keep sealed because that would rain destruction down upon the unworthy and that was kind of what the edgelord I'd made to fit in was all about.

I got back at the other three, but it wasn't satisfying. I was just prolonging the cycle of being a dick instead of doing the smart thing and walking away to play with people I liked.

File: 1454433186FWXDM.jpg (75KB, 550x636px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 550x636px

>>49572617
you find yourself in a tavern
befor you can look eachother in the eyes the bard tilts his chair and crushes a very old skill incrusted in diamonds.
roll for init niggas ITS ALL IN CHARACTER HUE HUE HUE HUE HUE

File: LightningBoltSkull.gif (16KB, 299x299px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 299x299px

>>49572755
skull
SKULL

>>49567174
You know what else is cooperative storytelling?

Working with the DM to pull one over on the other players.

File: 1466682834280.png (308KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 600x600px

>>49563288
Best VLR Girl Ranks
Dio > Everyone else

File: ASSuming.png (180KB, 445x290px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 445x290px

>>49569654
>assuming I am the one you were talking to before

>>49569268
>Wait, so if other characters persist in doing shit that your character thinks is wrong, and they won't stop on your behalf, isn't the game ruined for you anyway?
It depends on what they are doing first and foremost.

>Why do you assume all games are PVE?
I feel misunderstood: I did say that most games are about players working together for a common goal. Not many pathfinder games see the party pit against each other like in other RPGs like Paranoia. Then there's games like Werewolf where you are supposed to lie to each other and be a traitorous cunt, because that's what the game is all about.

>Shadowrun's a good example of where this isn't the case at all.
I did not understand what you mean here: do you mean to say that shadowrun is a good example for why betrayal works or something? From what I've seen, it really doesn't. It's another cooperative effort for the group to finish runs together, not dick each other over.

File: fuck-no.gif (493KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 500x375px

>>49569308
I'm enjoying the rage too much, as well as reading about how idiots destroyed their group by being pricks that needed all the attention they could get.

File: mynigga.jpg (35KB, 552x464px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 552x464px

>>49569418
>>49569342
>I wouldn't try it again. Nowadays I basically try to make characters who are going to be motivated to work with and stand by the party, because betrayal rarely works out well in terms of group enjoyment.
>I've never done that, because it leads to all kinds of drama.


You are my nigga.

>>49563625
This would've actually been a good move if this was all a set-up by the villain to conquer and recruit the lot of you. Then you could've instantly flipped to an evil campaign and rolled from there. Unless the rest of your party actively decided to fight then your DM is a shit.

File: 1436738284736.jpg (67KB, 720x524px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 720x524px

>>49569613
>It was always in-character and appropriate for the setting. Our GM always runs extremely flexible campaigns with little to no rails at all.
And that means that you should totally plot against the party with the help of the all-knowing character of the GM. Let's face it, you are put in a win-win situation because you get the help of the character played by the GM, who not only knows where the game is going, but what part of the plot comes next and if you win gloriously you will be able to gloat over the pathetic PCs who were not as smart as you; whereas if you lose, you still win because hey: you managed to hog the attention of the group for the whole time the betrayal was revealed.

And you mean to tell me that the GM gave the others a fair shot at finding out your secret like, say, insight rolls while they are talking to you, opposed to your bluff, perception rolls when you go off doing your own shit that was detrimental to the party, for the good of the enemy?

File: fuck yeah.jpg (263KB, 573x1941px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 573x1941px

>>49572386
>I see little difference between playing a shitstain whose goal is or becomes to destroy the other three or so players that thought you were all a team against the GM, and roleplaying the guy who would shun the party in-character.
>you're being an ass.
>Don't be that guy.
>you have no excuse not to float the idea of the plotline to the rest of the group besides "I know none of them would be OK with it (but I'm going to do it anyway)."

Preach it brother!

What's with this idea that evil characters must necessarily oppose good characters? You can play any alignment you want so long as you're not going to shit up the game as a result. (Which generally means not making Paladins when there's going to be an evil character in your group and not making an evil character when there's going to be a Paladin in your group.) Seriously, why would you intentionally try to ruin your friends' fun?

File: Too bad so sad.png (6KB, 358x235px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 358x235px

Funnily enough, a GM I ran with in a 5e campaign at one point tried to spice things up by starting the players off with the knowledge that each player had a secret goal that would negatively impact one and only one of the party members. My rogue was supposed to steal papers from the party's fighter that proved he was the rightful lord of my employer's lands, while the party shadowdancer was supposed to win the cleric's trust and then take and destroy a sacred relic from his church.

The GM was really put out when in the process of doing actual adventuring so we'd come closer together, the shadowdancer got in over her head and nearly got vaped by a demon thing, I nearly got killed distracting the monster before it finished her off, and the cleric saved the shadowdancer's life while the fighter pulled my ass out of the fire. Having been given nothing but a directive, a piddly amount of spending cash, and some veiled threats by my client while the fighter had been a 10/10 bro who saved my life at great personal risk, my rogue told his client to get stuffed and began planning with the fighter how to retake his ancestral castle while I'm pretty sure the cleric and the shadowdancer shacked up in character.

Nobody backstabbed anybody, but hey, "it's what my character would do."

>>49572866
There's good cooperative storytelling, then there's bad storytelling.

An edgelord little shit who thinks it's cool to abuse the free spirit of RPGs to make a character who is secretly a murderous sociopath who joins groups of adventurers to kill them after adventuring with them is most likely not good storytelling because the player only does it to get some fucking attention from the rest of the group.

He wants to hog the spotlight and show off his 'Eeeebil character muahaha, you best be afraid of my macchiavellian genius' and has to somehow get the GM on his side so he doesn't fuck him over like he would fuck over the other players.

I appreciate all GMs who recognize this PvP shit that will leave the group with a bad aftertaste even after the deed is done and nip the shit in the bud.

>>49574054
>Seriously, why would you intentionally try to ruin your friends' fun?
Welcome to 4chan, where some autists think it's cool to fuck over their friends for laughs. Enjoy your stay

I've considered it. With a character looking for any leg up in the world who was introduced a handful of sessions later than the rest, I've had the idea to temper his actions around becoming close to the party. They've been in the process of transporting a nook to get deciphered, and it's become apparent a powerful organization wants it. Signs point to the book being valuable for a specific purpose but nothing world-shattering, so I've proposed just selling it and joining up- though it's technically the birthright of of someone the party helped up in the beginning quest. Thus far they've been slightly dickish (such as committing fraud on a whim) but still Good, with this being the first main moral delimma, and it's been cool to see fairly new players get that interested. We've still got a ways to go before any of this develops.

So I've been getting thoughts of "BUT MY CHARACTER WOULD" in regards to snatching and grabbing once we've got it deciphered. It could prompt a chase or inspire a minor villain, have them hack the turncoat apart later or something. I'm mostly likely not going to bother for simplicity's sake, or having to pull on my DM's sleeve in advance to ask if I can fuck with their plans in a few sessions. That, and maybe the party can surprise my poorly thought out character and his heart will grow three sizes. Who knows.

File: 126546306.gif (1MB, 256x192px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 256x192px

>>49574065
Good shit. I would play with your group: they sound like maximum bros

>>49574076
BOOK

>>49574072
You seem to be under the impression that the end goal of the traitor's player is to defeat the rest of the party. Sometimes you just want to be the endboss, with the inevitable defeat that entails.

But you're going to put up a damn good fight.

>>49569613
You ruined someone elses fun for what sounds like lol we were evil all along shit plot. You need an out of game chair to the face

>>49563288

My former DM never allowed this. The last time I tried to take a magical amulet we needed, he just said "No, you don't." and shut me down. No going off the plot railroad for that guy at all.

We don't play together any more. It was always 'his way or the highway'.

>>49574735
>You seem to be under the impression that the end goal of the traitor's player is to defeat the rest of the party.
From what I have experienced, heard from others and read here on /tg/, 90% of filthy traitors do it because they want the attention, they crave it and really want to be acknowledged as the best of the group.

I haven't had any instance where that was not the case, so far.

>>49563625

does anyone have a double-agent story, where you would make a deal with BBEG but then end up betraying him?

>>49574821
There are counter examples in this thread

My character got mind-controlled once. The GM told me about it straight and asked me to play along. It was actually ridiculously fun because I am the most cooperative player at the table, and my characters (Generally) are the same way.

Then again, nobody got really salty about it because it fucked over my character as well, so it's not like I was dicking them over for my benefit.

>>49575196
I guess that some people in this thread have played a betrayal better than others they are the 5-10% that aren't filthy traitors who do it for the lulz, but from my experience it never ends well.

>>49563288
>Playing warhammer fantasy roleplay 2nd
>Emerald wizard
>No healer in the party
>Gm allows me to gain access to a weak healing spell
>We're deep in some mines, few lights, I have the only light.
>Two guys from the party try to kill me when they see me use the healing magic (as the gm had told them such a thing was unheard of).
>I survive and run away
>I lose the party
>They are stuck in the darkness and slowly die, lost in the maze

This is the closest I have been to betraying my party.

>>49575450
>Two guys from the party try to kill me when they see me use the healing magic
Why the fuck would they do that?

>>49567486
It's just a game, man. Lying when you're playing a game isn't like lying in real life.

>>49575450
>No healer in the party
That's 99% the case. Warhammer doesn't function like your average D&D group.

>>49566125
When someone betrays the party, no matter the outcome, everyone loses.

>>49575480
>Why the fuck would they do that?
Because magic is uncontrolable and every wizard is a ticking timebomb.
Untrained wizards are even worse since they never really learned to control their magic like those in universities.

>>49567250
>killing the betraying character solves the problem
No, stop. That's the problem, once someone betrays the party, there's no action for anyone else to take which can recover from it, the game's irrevocably ruined.

>>49576007
>the game's irrevocably ruined
A good thing you are so smart and know exactly how every single player in the world works thinks and how every game works.
Please enlighten me about the secrets of life.

Seriously guys, you overreact. Yeah, betrayal can be a dick move, but it is not the end of the world.
We had enough stories where that guy betrayed the part, got killed and then still had a good time afterwards.

File: 1445064840228.jpg (162KB, 474x595px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 474x595px

Well, not really, although the closest thing is close enough.
>Be playing Munchkin
>Game that revolves around you reaching level ten and players buffing themselves to win over the monsters and other players buffing the monsters to kill you.
>All five of us are level nine and about to win
>Me and another bloke gang up on one guy who's about to win.
>I suddenly realize that instead of working against him, I can aid him in fighting the monster, and win alongside with him, since both of us can't be out-buffed by the third guy
>He agrees
>I turn on everyone else and kill the monster with him, we both reach lvl 10 and win
>MFW we never play that game again

>>49563625
This could have been cool if it didn't culminate in setting the other three characters up against completely impossible odds and wiping the floor with them, the DM is shit for setting it up like that.

What if all the players came into the game and admit that interparty conflict would be a theme of the story going forward and that they were all given the freedom to work together or against each other as much as they wanted? As long as the DM runs the game with that in mind, and the players know that it's all a possibility going into the game, I can't imagine that it would be taken as badly as some of the scenarios that others have presented here.

>>49568346
>pointing out the inherebt flaws in your retarded ideology in an example you brought up is moving the goalposts
Literal autism, and disgusting weasel tactics.

>>49573980
>Let's face it, you are put in a win-win situation

I know, that was the cherry on top. Either we win and all would be made whole under our rule, or we lose and it would have made for a pretty kickass climax. Though with our group mostly there is never any sort of communication in combat or any sort of planning that goes into, quite literally, any battle or encounter so I knew it would more then likely be the former.

>And you mean to tell me that the GM gave the others a fair shot at finding out your secret like, say, insight rolls while they are talking to you, opposed to your bluff, perception rolls when you go off doing your own shit that was detrimental to the party, for the good of the enemy?

Yes actually. The rogue attempted to pick the lock on my personal chest at least three times, and he even succeeded once but his passive perception wasn't high enough to notice the hidden compartment I had installed into it, nor did he ever attempt to investigate into it once he had it opened because he thought it would make too much noise. There were other times when me, and later on the fighter as well, would say something that we knew were false or misleading and we would be whispered to do a hidden deception roll. The fighter failed once though almost giving us away, but it was during the final assault anyways so the group was too into the moment to really think about what the DM meant by "X's claim seemed rather suspicious."

There were also times early into the secret meetings when people tried to find me because I was taking too long and they thought it was just pally taking forever to pray and all that. They started to get really suspicious when they would never ind me near any sort of holy site, good neutral or evil, and an inquisition was out for me for a few sessions. Thankfully nothing feigns loyalty more than "sacrificing" myself for the group as they made there escape from the oncoming horde of enemy soldiers owned by the big bad.

>>49567174
>F#$%%^ you

This was clever enough to make me laugh and also go reread the manga it's from. Congrats!

File: 1461506927255.gif (810KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

810KB, 500x281px

>>49574758
>You ruined someone elses fun for what sounds like lol we were evil all along shit plot.
To be fair, everyone knew I was evil. During character creation I told them I was playing an evil pally and the lawful good cleric instantly had problems with me, and vice versa, because of our conflicting faiths. I never hid the fact that he was evil.

>You need an out of game chair to the face
And you need to dip your sore ass in an ice bath.

>>49572386
>a team against the GM

Really? Why? Players and the GM should be working together so everyone enjoys the game. Don't conflate the GM and the party's antagonists. If the game is a contest, it's not going well.

>>49576820
>I know, that was the cherry on top.
And you're happy about making two players ragequit the group because..?

If I had been the GM I would've called for insight every time you talked to the rest of the group, since you need a good poker face to bullshit still being their friend when you already plot to kill them all.

>>49576857
It's not antagonistic. It's the mentality that the GM puts obstacles for the player characters to overcome: that doesn't stop the players from cooperating with the GM to make the story better.

>>49576820
>ut his passive perception wasn't high enough to notice the hidden compartment I had installed into it
You're a total faggot

>>49576820
You realise that the rouge checking the chest meant dick all because the DM could have easily made it impossble to keep le ebin eebil tweest

Anytime one of my players said they wanted to betray the party I just said "no, that's stupid."
When they said it's the only way they could play their character I said "play a different character."
Problem solved.

>>49567250
So Neutral Good, Chaotic Good and Chaotic Neutral are the worst alignments

>>49577149
They raged out of the game in the final session. There was no "game" to continue after that, and we all still play together anyways because we aren't thin skinned fagets. And to make you roll deception on apparently any and all statements regardless of whether they are even tied to (enter lie here) is just you being a sore cunt. Any time we lied about our knowledge we would roll deception to the DM and he'd judge whether or not it passed. There were even a few times when the party chose to insight check us without the suggestion of the DM but luckily our rolls were higher. It was all fair and the deceivers won. Suck it nerd.

>>49577206
I put a shit ton of detail and currency into that chest. Fucking research into dimensions, compartment functionality, and intricate medieval locks. I think I spent about 9000g to meet the DMs standard on increasing lock DC alone.

>>49577234
No, he could have easily found my shit if he would have found the compartment that ha the insignia that I would show enemy troops to show that I was actually a high ranking officer in their own ranks. After everything was said and done the rogue was telling me how he was even thinking of investigating it that night after he had opened it but thought the chance of me waking up wasn't worth it. It was.

>>49577501
You sound like such a fucking douche to play with, eat dirt.

>>49577501
>Thinks that a guy planning to backstab someone wouldn't act in a different manner around that person.
Yep, that's why backstabbing and traitors are fucking cancerous. They think that they can just hide all their emotions and keep a pokerface the whole time, without ever cracking or messing it up.

>>49577515
And you sound like an entitled child that can't take losing.

>>49577558
So talking about how good the tavern food is warrants a insight on how I'm a spy. Yep, makes total sense.

>>49567174
>Go play D&D 5th ed with the rest of the casuals

What's wrong with 5e?

I always hate the "playing an evil character is always edgelord shitty" sentiment thats so popular in these threads. My current character is evil but he follows a strict code of honor, that while a little evil is still tightly defined. I think lawful evil is a totally valid alignment for a pc. He hasnt betrayed the party yet. But when he does itll probably just be him killing the damn dragonborn fighter who keeps foiling his shit

>>49577812
>"playing an evil character is always edgelord shitty"
I got nothing against evil characters, as long as a good story comes out of it.

Shitheads like >>49577614 give evil characters a bad name.

>>49577874
I agree! I dont think being inherently evil excludes struggles and depth. If good characters can be tempted to commit evil i think the reverse can be equally compelling

>>49577812
It *can* be done well.

The problem is, most of us have seen it done *badly* to the point where we don't want to fucking bother. When you've been bitten three times by the same thing, it makes most people leery to want to pet that weird looking cat a fourth time.

>>49577944
Fair. Been playing with one group of friends most of my life so i guess im biased, only one who ever made a shitty evil character is the forever dm, which is why we keep him dm'ing

>>49577874
>Shitheads like >>49577614 (You) # give evil characters a bad name.

So you admit to not reading the story on why my guy betrayed the party. My evil pally was slowly turned to the BB after learning that his code and ideals better matched his own. I even stated that I wanted to keep them alive to lead them towards the right path while they sought penance from the foolishness of their decisions to that point.

Once again, you show yourself to be nothing more than a child throwing a tantrum.

>>49563288
>Have you ever betrayed the party?
Yes.

>>49563288
>I tried a few times because I like to play Evil character
:Sigh:

>>49578067
Not the guy who youre replying to , but man if you use the words nothing more on an online forum youre either trolling or insufferable

>>49563288
Being Evil in a party with Good-aligned party nearly always gets you killed. Funnily enough, the reverse is not true as often.

>>49578090
Says the person using the word "insufferable."

It's a two way street when it comes to merely judging someones character by the words or phrases they use.

File: 20160917_193522.jpg (3MB, 4128x2322px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4128x2322px

>new campaign as PC with a couple brand new players
>DM wants me to roll lawful good cleric to ease us in and guide new players
>suits me just fine
>other PCs are half orc warrior and human rogue
>getting into all sorts of fun but morally questionable shenanigans with these two
>DM gets a tiny bit miffed when my asshole cleric spits on a blacksmith's shoes (he deserved it, and the half orc had a hilarious crit fail when he decided he'd also like to spit on the guy but took a gut punch instead)
>DM reminds me of my devotion to Pelor and suggests these new travel buddies are having a negative effect on my inner character
>decide to start reflecting on my recent actions and work towards regaining my past piety
>fast forward to a crypt-clearing side quest
>discover a pissed off thief trying to unlock a door down in the depths
>not hostile, but wants no company on his excursion and demands we leave immediately
>half orc already has his big dick sword drawn, rogue is in stealth with bow ready
>desperately trying to keep everyone calm and avoid a bloodbath
>offering all sorts of fine wine and trinkets to the thief, he's having none of it
>fail all attempts at persuasion
>half orc, affectionately nicknamed "the door disintegrator" has already vaporized said locked door and is becoming impatient with my recently rediscovered respect for human life
>charges the thief, who screams like a ninny, waking some skeletons
>instead of turning the undead I rush to grapple the half orc and stop his murder charge
>succeed and command the rogue to ignore the thief and handle the skeleton
>he listens to reason and we clear the room
>thief begrudgingly thanks me for saving him but flees in fear of the half orc
>found out later that he nabbed some of my best cloak booze amidst the chaos

The goddamn smirk on the DM's face when I realized my best flask was missing. Being lawful good is harder than I thought.

Yes, but that's because the game was literally about betrayal. After we introduced our characters, we were given a card. The card told us exactly what our "true" objective was.

Not me but we've had it happen in game yeah.

File: 20160920_154524.jpg (2MB, 4128x2322px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4128x2322px

>>49579229
>Being lawful good is harder than I thought.
Because being good is its own reward.
Here, have a cute cat.

>>49563625
Dude if you and merc had striked Bbeg when the minions swarmed in it would have been truly epic

>>49576077
You... can't do that in Munchkin.

But then again breking the rules and getting away with it is perfectly in the spirit of Munchkin.

I ended up almost joining a sympathetic BBEG once - the only remaining God who'd betrayed and imprisoned the entire rest of the pantheon for Greek level dickery. He'd done some awful shit, but I still felt the status quo was better than that fucker getting out. The GM couldn't handle it, though, so he just had the bad guy betray me and fuck me over.

File: 20160802_120228.jpg (3MB, 4128x2322px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4128x2322px

>>49579628
I fell into temptation, but I will redeem myself before Pelor going forward.

>>49579834
I imagine he was an Elf.