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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MG.0" data-source="post: 6695512" data-attributes="member: 6799436"><p>You can come up with all sorts of reasons. Evil and good when it comes to players does not have mean EVIL and GOOD in the over the top sense. Perhaps the paladin has been friends his entire life with this person whom he wants to redeem? People can have opposing world views without being enemies.    No, I insist that the players work out disagreements over what they want to happen, out of character. Once a course has been decided that everyone can get behind, then the in-character events unfold. If the players can't agree then we have a problem. Almost always, there is a reasonable compromise that can be reached and is believeable in-game. It is only the completely inflexible, unyielding players that are a problem. Once they realize I won't tolerate that at the table, everyone settles down and enjoys playing.     Character vs. character battles are fine...so long as all the players involved agree they want to. Anyone who simply attacked another character under the premise of "that's what my character would do" is looking to cause problems and wouldn't be in my game for long.     Motivation isn't the issue, annoying other players is. If a rogue insisted on stealing treasure the party had just won, they are being disruptive. I don't care how you try to spin it as character development, I'd let the party find out and kill them. Either the player would eventually figure out that crap won't fly with me, or they'd leave the game. I'd probably give them a chance to figure it out.</p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification