Scratch 100 xp off your character sheet and tell your DM that you're casting Commune.
1. Did the rogue get his new ring in this dungeon?
2. Has the rogue gotten additional treasure without telling us about it?
3 and on. Hey, ask about the plot while you're there.
EDIT: And if you're not high-enough level for that, the next time your party kills a big bad humanoid, heal people while the rogue "searches the body". After he's done, say that your cleric wants to be certain that they didn't miss anything, given how foul and evil this guy was. Cast "Speak with Dead" and get the corpse to tell you what magical items he had equipped in the last fight. When that ring and wand show up as missing, you can stare at the rogue acidly and let things fall into place.
Tell the DM to let the players play; even if it means the party spends more time fighting itself than the enemy, those are the sessions that are remembered long after everything else.
In my case, anyway. The sessions I remember best are when we were joking and playing with a common goal in mind, or when a player really botched something in a comedic way, not any inter-party conflict sessions. In fact, I have the same rule in my games: "Thou shalt not screw with the other players' fun."
As for the "Rogues Steal" line, Elf Witch, you can remind the player in question that rogues do not have to steal; it wasn't written with that implicitly in mind, otherwise they'd get sleight of hand as a class ability, rather than an optional skill.
It all comes down to the DM being able to mediate between people for the game, which is an important part of his skills. There's a whole brain-ful of NPCs out there to screw with; why they'd want to get other players ticked at them is beyond me. If they want the attention, they're not seeing it's a BAD kind of attention, one that could end up with NO ONE in the group getting their D&D fix.
A certain amount of tension between characters can be interesting, but it so easily becomes conflict between players. I also think, the whole Rogue stealing from the party thing is as old as the hills, and boring as the planes. When a player offers an in-character explanation for something like that, it just begs the question; why did they make up a character like that? When a player decides that his character will obviously and consistently act in a manner contrary to the interest of the others, it's a bum move. Explaining that decision on the basis of in-character thought process doesn't work for me.
BTW: Another wya to handle the character that strikes out on his own is to just follow the main characters instead. "Okay, can you come by on Thursday and we;ll play that out as a 1 on 1. We're going to finish this scenario here and since your character isn't part of this, I'm afraid you'll have to excuse yourself for the rest of the session. If a player knows he can monopolize the DMs time while others sit there, then he may just do that. If he knows that he is taking himself out of the game by following a whim off the side trail, then he may think twice about it.
The proper response to, "Your character wouldn't know that." is "But I the player know and that knowledge is making me upset. So how about cutting it out?"
The group I'm in had a thief in a prior campaign that made it a habit of stealing from party members... and then acting comedically inncocent when he got caught. He didn't do it every game, and he very, very rarely picked on one character... and he never stole anything the character really needed. That character was one of the most memorable characters we've ever had.
On the other hand... I inherited a group where the DM had the Monty Haul mentality, and the party was able to kill a huge red dragon at 4th level with the magic items we had found. I did something that the DM in this case would be wise to do (plus it would give him the BIGGEST giggle): Send the characters into a dungeon or cavern, or somewhere else the party cannot take their hroses, or the majority of their gear... then have the horses dead and the extra gear gone when they return, by way of an orc/kobold/ogre/troll attack.
In one small sentence, I was able to get rid of most of the magic items and much of their monetary treasure as well, so they could not replace it.
The proper response to, "Your character wouldn't know that." is "But I the player know and that knowledge is making me upset. So how about cutting it out?"
The problem is both a DM and player problem. The DM for failing to properly manage his campaign and be fair and equitable to all players, and a few problem players whose idea of fun is at the expense of the rest of the other players.
I'm nearly 38 years old and have been running rp games for 27 years. The only thing I might add to BlackMoria's clear and well presented statement is, based on the information presented, would be that it's a game. If two players are behaving in a selfish manner and damaging the game for another player then the purpose of the game is being defeated... to have fun! The players in question can argue that they are "just playing their characters", but the bottom line is they are being deceitful, selfish, and based on the information presented, childish. When what a few want comes at the expense of someone else at the table, the game has gone wrong.
The DM's "job" is to see to it that everyone is having fun, and if someone isn't to find out what he/she can do to address it and correct is so that everyone can enjoy the game, within reason. To say that a DM should never "railroad" players is as inaccurate as to say that DM's should always railroad the game. There is only one real rule to gaming... to have fun. Once the fun goes missing, why exactly are you playing?
While I agree that the DM is partly at fault here, I doubt that you're going to get anywhere with changing his attitude unless all of the other players make the same complaints. It's hard to get people to change if they don't see anything wrong in their behavior.
I've been involved in a similar dispute recently when one player objected to another player looting and not sharing with the party. The objecting player threatened to drop out of the group. I found it unreasonable that she should expect the other players to cater to her opinion, and I think that's true in this instance as well.
I dislike letting a player conflict show up through character action. I think it's inappropriate for the cleric to do anything until the character is aware that there is something objectionable going on. The cleric's player shouldn't be asking for extra Spot rolls to catch the rogue looting, nor should the cleric's player threaten the rogue with any consequences unless the character has good in-game reasons to suspect the rogue of dubious behavior.
If it's really bothering the cleric's player then that player should talk to the rogue's player. But as long as the rogue's player isn't doing anything outrageously obnoxious then maybe the cleric's player should just get over it. What does it really matter if your imaginary characters don't have equal amounts of imaginary loot?
A lot can be said about newbie players... and that everyone makes mistakes the first time out... but I'm still going to rant here...
Crothian said:
It seems like the players are the ones with the problems. He's just running the game he thinks people will enjoy and some of them are. But the players are not all on the same page and they need to talk it out. Talking to a group should not solely lie on the DM's shoulders, the cleric should be talking to the other players if she feels they are hoarding things.
I so strongly disagree. I agree that the problems stem from the players, but the GM allowed this mess. The GM didn't encourage the players to work as a team, nor discourage the players who were stealing from the party. The GM didn't discourage players from lone-wolfing it...
Now he's got a mess on his hands, because everyone thinks it's cool to pull a Crowley...
Aliester Crowley... "Do what that wilt shall be the whole of the law..."
Does anyone seriously expect the player who isn't having any fun to then try and curb the actions of the others, when the GM is sending the clear message that he either condones it, or is impotient or unwilling to stop it? Then hides behind the claim that it wouldn't be fair to everyone if he did do something about this?
First and foremost this is a game, and the players look to the GM to guide the game and set the tone. If players are taking advantage of other players, at the cost of the others' enjoyment; and the GM does nothing to discourage these actions, then that goes a long way to tell the player... "Well, they are having fun... if you don't like it...suck it up... or leave..."
I believe that the DM sets the tone, and should make sure that everyone at the table is having fun, having their turn in the spotlight, and getting what they want from the game. With no sense of nepotism. There doesn't need to be actual just the hint of it for players to start resenting the others, the GM & the game.
Now, if this was the kinda game that I was looking to run... or people were looking to play in... then I would make sure that everyone knew what kinda game we're playing up front... say to the people getting victimized... "Well... OOC you know your getting screwed over. Do you want to step up to the plate or what?" But not all players are coming to the table expecting to play a free-for-all game. Some are expecting to play a game where there is teamwork, and honesty, and fairness. I absolutely hate it when one party member (usually the rogue/thief) starts screwing over the other players because they weren't expecting it...then that player usually starts getting all pouty because they got caught and have to pay the price.
Should the player say something? Certainly. Are they going to? Probably not, because it looks like the GM is condoning the actions of the greedy players. Like others have mentioned, the GM needs to take control and responsibility in the game. The only way this is going to end is if the GM doesn't do anything about it, is the game is going to fall apart, players are going to leave and friendships are going to be strained. Sooner or later, these players mess up and everyone finds out what they are doing. That's when the gelantious cube hits the fan... Just because my character doesn't know your stealing/cheating, *I* do. Is it a player issue? Is it a character issue? It is both.
Mishihari Lord said:
This is not at all the DMs fault. The DM should not tell players how to play their characters, period. If the players aren't cooperating, if someone isn't having fun, they need to work it out among themselves.
So, who's fault is it when the players start resenting each other and the game implodes in on itself? You just keep telling yourself it's not your fault, and stay an inch or two out of kicking distance. Mankind has got to know his limitations.
I take issue with the fact that the other players don't get spot checks if the rogue starts getting light-fingered. That is the purpose of a spot check! Do I noticed the chest in the corner moved? Spot check! Do I notice that the wizard in the party is a doppelganger, because he doesn't have his familiar and staff with him? Spot check! Do I notice the rogue pocket that object he took from the enemy's corpse? Spot check. -- Even if the GM needs to roll is secretly... fine...but he should be doing it EVERY DAMN TIME, because the rogue is trying to be secretative about it! If the DM isn't doing rolls for it... he's cheating the players and playing favourites with the rogue. Sooner or later, the rogue is going to roll a 1, and the cleric is going to roll a 20.
If the GM isn't going to do anything to rein this game in... then I'd tell the GM... "Well, my character is going to start being selfish and self-centered, because the other characters are too. No quarter asked, none given. My character is now suspecious as to why the other characters are much more experienced and wealthy than my character... I'm going to start paying close attention to the other characters... during my watch at night... over several evenings, my character takes a complete inventory of their stuff. Also, I'll talk to the wizard/sorcerer privately about this, and see if they want to help. Nothing better than a good conspiracy"
If I was playing in such as game, I'd be coup de grâce'ing the other players while it was my watch at night, once my character found out that they were stealing from me. "What?! Evidently you want this to be a game of everyone for themselves... my character is good... he fights evil... your character is stealing from me... your evil. Period. Roll up another character. Oh, and make sure it isn't some 'revenge' character, hmm'kay? You chose to play it that way, you lost. Get over it. Now, give me your character sheet so I can see what magick items I have now. Oh yeah, how much XP to get for killing your thieving hide?"
Just because your a rogue doesn't mean you get to steal from a fellow player. Unless we're playing a PKing game. Tell me that up-front, so you don't get a head-start.
That's a good idea about searching during a heal. After all, we are talking touch range.
Oh yeah... print out this thread and give it to the GM... Tell him Imagicka calls him a wussy!
A little story about a player who didn't really care about 'party' game-play...
[sblock]This reminds me of a situation I was in a couple of years back... We had a player who's played a kender who stole from one of my characters... I had his character arrested and executed. Or he stole from the party (being light-fingered and slipped the occational extra bobble into his pocket... until he slipped up once and paid for something with a gem we didn't know he had, which brought all sorts of questions.)
Anyway, this guy stopped playing rogues and stealing from the party, only to play a barbarian. Only because the GM got tired of it, and EVERY player would say "My character doesn't trust rogues, he watches him closely, especially when he's checking the corpses."
He made his character out to be a guide for our party, where we had to pay him a gold piece every week or month (something like that). He didn't want to share in any party responsibility. He didn't even fight in combat situations, just stood back and let things happen. He'd fight if someone was threatening him..."I'm not with them! I'm just traveling with them!"
Since the GM was stingy, it was pretty advantageous for this character, because of party expenses... inns... taverns... he didn't have to pay any...and we had to pay him a daily wage on top of that.
We didn't have any party treasure for months and months of gaming time, and had gained 3-4 levels. Pretty soon I and the other players finally raised the issue with the GM. Next session... party treasure!
So, we're there dolling out the magic items, and the barbarian's player says, "So, where's my cut?"
I reply, "Oh, yeah... I almost forgot!"
I mock/roleplay reaching into my coin purse (dicebag) and pull out a gold piece, "There you go! There is your payment for the month. Tell you what! If everyone here agrees, we'll even give you a share of the money we found. But your not part of the party, you don't get any magical items."
He sure soon enough joined the party after that. Responsibilities and all![/sblock]
I'd point the players toward something like This pirate code of conduct. Historically, outlaws who stole from other members of their band were frowned on:
If any Many shall steel any Thing in the Company, or game, to the Value of a Piece of Eight, he shall be marroon'd or shot.
Law-abiding folks would presumably be even rougher in the punishment.
And anyone who allows a scofflaw to join the band is likely to be extra-vigilant. Consider conducting surprise inspections. Cast detect magic before entering a dungeon and count the auras on each character; cast it again after a dungeon and count. If someone has more auras than they should, cast hold person now, and ask questions later.
