>I wanna kill that party member >why the fuck would you

Let them.

No PvP. It only leads to an arms race, endless revenge characters, and hurt feelings.

>play LN character
>get it ok'd
>the two TN and one CN PCs act CE
>I lean LG
>don't try and just kill them
>tell them they better stop or I will take action against them
>they don't
>bring evidence of their wrongdoings to authorities so that they'll get arrested
>I do to for being an accomplice, that's ok because it gets those crazy fuckers off the streets

>>50470215
Drop them on the spot.

>>50470215
>What would you do ? Would you straight up kick someone who wants to kill a player for the hell of it or find a way to punish him in the game ?
Is this the first instance of this behavior?

Punishing someone is only possible when you know how they're defining success and failure. You can try to make someone feel like shit, only to discover that they don't give a fuck about what you're doing. There will be times when punishing a problem player is downright impossible and all you can do is boot them. It breaks immersion when a character suddenly vanishes from the story, but that usually only lasts a session or two.

>>50470215

I'm not ambiguous about my no PVP rule, and my players know that when they sit down with me. If one of them has a problem with that they can run their own damn game.

>>50470410
The issue with this is when I come to a game with a LG character. Get that character approved. Then the CN player begins strings of arson and murder. Am I as the LG player simply supposed to leave because I have no means of threatening him into stopping?

>>50470215
I'd only let it happen if I had something interesting and evocative to do with it, as a DM.

If you leave it entirely to them to respond how they like, chances are they're going to fuck it all up one way or another (or if not you don't need any advice). If you railroad them too hard on the point aka "look what I did with your cool idea I'm the GM aren't I clever", what direction the rails go won't matter and people will be malcontent (with the same disclaimer as above).

Give the player who wants to do the killing some context. Rarely is it necessary to let the killing go exactly as they imagine. Of course, turn around is fair play and if the target downs their attacker, well that's a thing too. Make it a dramatic climax of the session, but not so cleanly that it seems contrived. Give people enough time for gut reactions, and to set a few IC expectations for everyone else, then break until next time and do a lot of prep. Next sessions, don't let on about your prep and let them continue without a hint of "oh our GM obviously planned out how they want this to go". Basic DM stuff, really.

Things to have considered for the succeeding session:
- how to prevent things from simply degrading into a "players choose sides in the conflict and the party proceeds to kills itself"
- how to move the plot forward if everyone decides to swamp progression with IC/OOC dialogue
- how the setting will differently treat /affect the remaining party members after the incident
- how will the players of characters who have died or become non-combatants / disabled either find a new character to direct that meshes with the game or continue to contribute in their diminished capacity, and how long should this take
- how to signal all this strongly but informally to your players so you avoid all the regular pitfalls of contrivance and subtlety

>>50470525
In no time and in no world can Good suffer Evil to exist.

>>50470215
"Go ahead, but remember. If you stab the wizard, the cleric, in his turn, will cast hold person right before the fighter splits you in half"

File: 1452704864928.gif (1MB, 300x217px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x217px

>>50470596
>mfw I AM the red-faced Cleric in black

>>50470215
I would discuss it with him out of character and ask him why he's deliberately going against the spirit of the game and trying to ruin the experience for everyone else. then ask him to reconsider his actions or character.

I usually make it clear as a GM that the players are supposed to be allies and session zero usually leads to characters who mesh well together. IC arguments, rivalries and even fistfights, spars or duels are fine. But someone who just tries to be a dick will not be tolerated.

>>50470657
(not your) god save us

>>50470657
Sauce?

>>50470525
>>50470567
Firstly, you as a player can talk to the other players about this. Secondly, getting them to stop doesn't necessarily mean killing that person. You can always report their character to the proper authorities or leave them to their own fate. Ultimately, however, this comes down to an out-of-character problem, namely the group dynamics and lack of communication.

>>50470782
I generally in this case try and talk to either them or he GM and my first reaction is apprehending. I know that he is gonna keep killing and reporting will leave him to doing it until authorities mobilize. What sane person who is capable not try and restrain a murderer?

It's not my job to be judge, jury, and executioner. However delivering him along with evidence is within my power.

That or I threaten him into stoping.

>>50470657
Sauce, that looks pretty good

File: Strike out against God's enemies.jpg (169KB, 700x980px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 700x980px

>>50470690
If the gods favored coarse, direct interference with mortal affairs, would they bother with clerics at all?

>>50470215

Kicking players early is fruitless and punishing them in-game is petty. Sit down and talk to them about it. At least make a TOKEN attempt to remind them why, at the end of the day, TTRPGs are a group experience and deliberately fucking around trying to kill each other is unproductive, frustrating, tedious and selfish. Teach a man to fish.

>>50470835
Sometimes you have to be more inventive then beating the player's character up. Heck, push comes to shove you can always trick them into going into a room they can't get out of and lock the door behind you. Or put drugs in their drink and keep them under. Of course, depending on a GM's definition of PVP even this might not be allowed.

>>50470782
Presumably, that talk happened when the GM approves the CN character in the same game as an LG, complete with assurances from each player that the LG will not be an unnecessary hardass and the CN will not embark on a parade of lol-totally-random-technically-maybe-not-pure-evil.

IF CN goes back on their word and the GM doesn't take action, at some point the LG has to IC react to what's going on, and CN will escalate, because their established character motivation is "if I can get away with it".

With escalation, at some point you end in GM fiat or combat. Calling it an OOC problem doesn't negate it.

>>50470215
It's the rest of the party's decision whether they let their adventuring friend get murdered or not. We usually play with 5-6 people, so usually the guy trying to do the killing gets killed first, unless the entire party agrees with the killer.

>>50471068
It sounds like you guys are really bad at choosing your time, and assassination in general.

>>50470525
You're presuming a problem which most people simply don't have to deal with.

>>50470914
I can still try and offer them a goat

Actually, I just want to kill a goat

>>50470215
Before a campaign starts I'll outright say whether or not player killing is allowed. Sometimes it's just asinine to off a players character when you're all in it together for the greater good or whatever, but there are games that benefit from the grittiness of not even being able to trust your friends with not killing you.

>>50471096
So is the OP, and >>50470525 is a directly related response.

>>50471140
You start the fire, I'll scrounge up some libations and we'll eat it together.

>>50471089
well, yes, because we understand as players that separating from the rest of the group is stupid when there's a dickass rogue in the party, you gotta use the buddy system.
and also that it's stupid to play a dickass rogue

>>50471234
I think that fact that more classes than the rogue are capable of murder and betrayal has been covered elsewhere in the fridge.

>>50470236
>>no fun allowed!
Let them, OP. surf the Waves of butthurt, teach them an important life lesson about wasting time fighting amongst themselves while the BBEG lingers on putting his plans into fruition if you must but let them.

>>50471276
This guy gets it. I had a campaign roll 6 sessions in were the Paladin and Bard schismed the party into a civil war scenario over the life of a vampire. (the real cheeky part is that it was the Paladin on the side of the vampire but thats requires alot of explaining)

Shit was absolutely cash as the bard ooc and ic escalated to violence against the rightousness of the Paladin with the other 3 members falling behind one or the other as it became unavoidable.

When it came to an end the bard and his party lay defeated and the paladins mercy allowed a touching scene of growth between two characters which had grown into a father son dynamic over the course of the campaign.

Stopping this high emotion action hinders rp and had given me some of my greatest moments.

>>50471180
My point is that if you're a competent DM whose players have clear expectations for what characters are expected for them, you're probably not going to get a LG stick in the ass type and a CN murder is funny type in the same group. At least not without some in character reason why one is willing to compromise with the other.

>>50471549
Yes, but this situation is where such a thing has already happened and how to respond once it does.

File: Edition wars.png (405KB, 488x618px) Image search: [Google]

405KB, 488x618px

>>50470215
The dm has the right to forbid player killing. If you want your character to fight another player's character, because of RP, talk to the other PLAYER. If they're not down, buy them a drink and ask them to relax their standards for the night.

>>50471603
Is that a real Assigned Male, or a parody? It's her classic brand of horseshit, but the art looks way too good to be real

File: 1466227859713.png (339KB, 656x435px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 656x435px

>>50470215
>allowing PvP in your game
>wasting your free time watching players being shitty to each other
>allowing the shitstorm to brew

>>50470733
>>50470886
2011 Hungarian film called "The Tragedy of Man"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eSdOPcHum8

mega:///#!XBwgUKbZ!fsJg5ST65tvWAjC5dJ7IT2ltnG9vpNotbzkojlLpmU8
mega:///#!PVZXCRoT!V7ECtBsAooZq8PXKkAFwUHy778FxvHG40UAChi56-Lw

>>50472348
I owe you a bj. based anon

I've never allowed anyone to act against the party in my games mostly because it's only fun for the one doing it I've let them make attempts but it never amounts to anything
>5e problem player is Barbarian
>On a boat fighting a hydra and some merrow
>Paladin goes down
>Barb player "I pick up the paladin and drop him over the side of the boat"
there is literally no reason to do this since the hydra and mearrow arn't just going to leave them alone to go after the dying paladin in the water
>other player jumps in the water to save the paladin
>once the fight is over the paladin gets healed and casts hold person on the Barb
>barb fails his save and everyone wails on him
>he dies and is salty as fuck
this isn't the first time he's pulled shit like this and the party has killed him you'd think he'd learn desu

>>50470215
First off, it's your fault for playing with edgy social retards.

Its all about telling a story, OP.
He wants to try killing his teammate? You're the GM. Make a story around it. Play along.
You're not there just to narrate the adventure and compute rolls. If that was the case, we'd have a computer doing that.
The whole point of giving the players the freedom to roleplay their characters and having a GM is to create your own story with the people playing with you.

Let him try to kill his teammate but obviously don't let him succeed, then think of a clever or funny way to punish him in the game that doesn't spoil the game for him.

Then have a talk with him afterwards, explaining why that is detrimental to the game.