Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="overgeeked" data-source="post: 8527866" data-attributes="member: 86653">I think the PCs should have as much freedom as possible in their individuality so long as it’s not disruptive to the game or other players’ enjoyment of the game. If everyone’s on board for an evil campaign of plotting and assassinations, great. But if one character is evil and plans on screwing over the group, that’s going to lead to problems. If the group wants to play D&D they need to be at least minimally cohesive as a group. Otherwise you’re sitting around someone’s dinning room table listening to real people argue about their characters arguing while sitting around a tavern table. Up to a point, yes. Group cohesion. Both at the game table and in the game. Some people love the game Diplomacy, others hate it. If everyone’s expecting heroic D&D with a cohesive group and it turns out to be a game of Diplomacy…there will be problems. Some players want group cohesion as an absolute baseline to enjoy the game. Any kind of disruption to that will wreck their enjoyment of the game. Up to a point, sure. Depends on what the group is okay with. We had things get so bad with “secretly evil” PCs being disruptive we had to house rule thieves who stole from the party were assassinated and any stolen loot returned. Clerics who refused to heal the party unless paid were instantly struck down by their gods. It turned the supposedly cooperative game of D&D into a competitive one. Destroying some players entire reason for playing the game. Camaraderie. Only if blackmailed or magically controlled. Otherwise the spy PC is a dead man walking.</blockquote>

Verification