No PvP vs. Stealing loot

[Jd Smith1]

1) Congrats! You've learned something new today: My existence.
2) Everything is about me. You just don't realize it because I don't generally make it known.
Now you know, and knowing is half the battle.

Actually, I'm pretty sure you're just a bot.

 

[Shiroiken]

While every group I've played with has allowed PvP, I think the assumption of no PvP is that the game is fully cooperative. If theft is allowed, how would a PC get their loot back? They can't attack, since PvP isn't allowed. This would encourage super greedy characters that all have slight of hand and stealth.

One thing that I thought about is gifts. Gifts should not be considered loot, since they are directly meant for a single character, even if that means they gain "more" than everyone else.

 

[DwarfHammer]

Stealing loot and pvp is so high school or amateur.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

But... but kender!

 

[Lanefan]

While every group I've played with has allowed PvP, I think the assumption of no PvP is that the game is fully cooperative. If theft is allowed, how would a PC get their loot back? They can't attack, since PvP isn't allowed. This would encourage super greedy characters that all have slight of hand and stealth.

Well, there are ways of defending one's possessions.

My favourite is a non-destructive but noisy and incapacitating glyph on warding on one's backpack.

One thing that I thought about is gifts. Gifts should not be considered loot, since they are directly meant for a single character, even if that means they gain "more" than everyone else.

There's a character in the game I play in who, around in-game Yule every year, reverse-pickpockets gifts (often potions) into the possessions or pocketses of those she likes.

The rest of the year she now and then rearranges everyone's possessions (to no net gain for herself) just for the hell of it.

 

[Lanefan]

Stealing loot and pvp is so high school or amateur.

I'll willingly plead guilty to the charge of being amateur.

It's not like I'm a professional at this.

High school, however, was a rather long time ago...

 

[John Out West]

I think part of the contract of "No PvP" should include "All the Player-Characters like each other enough that they would not steal or hurt each other." I would add into each of their backstory reasons that they like one another, or even life-debts.

I can think of a few of instances of PvP where it was necessary. Mage burns down the fighter's home town (Accidentally or through negligence), the fighter knocks him out, sows his eyes and mouth shut, and locks him in the dungeon.
The players find the genie that grants one wish and then leaves forever: Every single player fights to get the wish.

PvP should enhance the story, is the point there.

Ooh, one thing I've been doing lately is having players roll "Calm Checks" when they do something that is typically considered "Wrong or Evil." This is typically cannibalism or torture, but can also be things like Stealing from Friends. If the character fails, I tell them that "They've bitten off more than they can chew with this one," as they become visibly shaky and nervous, and may even come with a loss of sleep during a rest. They become distracted when doing similar checks for a short time, and i try to remind them of what they did often. Players can typically mitigate this by taking the "Deranged" flaw, but that comes with its own problems.

Hope that helps.

 

[Nagol]

Well, there are ways of defending one's possessions.

My favourite is a non-destructive but noisy and incapacitating glyph on warding on one's backpack.

There's a character in the game I play in who, around in-game Yule every year, reverse-pickpockets gifts (often potions) into the possessions or pocketses of those she likes.

The rest of the year she now and then rearranges everyone's possessions (to no net gain for herself) just for the hell of it.

Nagol, my M-U/Thief reverse pickpocketed gifts all the time and would become outraged if accused of it.
"Don't blame me! We must have camped too close to the faerie kind last night!"
"We spent last night in a temple."
"Maybe the god's spirits like you?"

 

[Blue]

I was torn on voting for the When the rogue is taking the risk alone, anything is okay (looting while scouting, etc.) option. On one hand, I agree with the idea that if a player takes on additional risk towards their character, there should be additional reward. On the other hand, I find standing by that opinion encourages negative behaviors in my thief players, where they deliberately leave the group behind to race forward and take loot for themselves.

This is insightful - on one side you have what seems correct - they took the risk by themselves so should be able to reap the reward by themselves if they want, vs. the thought that it will encourage a style of play that you don't want at the table.

I think I personally would go with your second part - don't having it so not to encourage racing ahead. But that's just a personal preference, not any bigger truth.

 

[aramis erak]

Group agrees no PvP during Session 0, and the characters are doing party loot. What level of "rogue steals loot" starts to impinge on that? Any stealing at all? Taking treasure the party (likely) wouldn't get? Taking loot from creatures the party defeats? Pickpocketing the party? It's all okay because PvP is explicitly combat?

This really is hypothetical, no need for advice on how to work it out.

The moment one deprives others of their share, one is engaging in PVP, because, in the postulate, one has agreed to the sharing. More correctly, one is being a jerk and a liar, and is genuinely acting against the other players as much as the character is working against the other characters.

I've booted players for that.