Party Conflict

[Elf Witch]

After reading several threads on alingment issues and what has happened in my own gaming group I was wondering what others do about inter party conflicts? Does your group no matter what always stick together? Have you ever had party members kill each other and if they did how did it affect the players did it cause repercussions outside of the game? Is party conflict necessarily a bad thing.

 

[BiggusGeekus@Work]

Our group takes kind of a wussy attitude toward that. We don't permit evil characters and it is incumbent on the player to create a character that would tend to be in a group. We still get some pretty neat characters out of that. I'm playing a fighter/rogue that has already met the PrC qualifications for Hospitalar and Blackguard (well, I'm not evil, but alignments can always change). If I go Blackgaurd, I automatically become an NPC and build a new character.

As a result I have not been witness to an inter-party conflict in a couple of years.

 

[Arnwyn]

Our group has seen interparty conflict in the past, but I haven't seen much in-fighting for a few years. (Much to my - the DM's - chagrin. Inter-party conflict was a hoot to watch.) For the last little while players have been making better character choices and decisions to fit better in the party.

It has resulted in characters killing each other. Usually, though, the problems were discussed, and group consensus/compromise was achieved. It has never resulted in any repercussions outside the game (we're all reasonably mature).

As a DM, I kind of miss some of the in-fighting... (but the old phrase applies here: "be careful what you wish for"!).

 

[Elf Witch]

Our group takes kind of a wussy attitude toward that. We don't permit evil characters and it is incumbent on the player to create a character that would tend to be in a group. We still get some pretty neat characters out of that. I'm playing a fighter/rogue that has already met the PrC qualifications for Hospitalar and Blackguard (well, I'm not evil, but alignments can always change). If I go Blackgaurd, I automatically become an NPC and build a new character.

We do not allow evil PCs. And we all try and design a character that would work in a group. (No anti-social hates other but I am stuck in this group PCs) And we tend to design our characters to be more than just mercs out for gold. Yet we still end up with some conflict , like what to with goblin prisioners, baby kobolds things like that. Some of it is me I cannot stand doing things I know my character would not just because it is in the best interest of keeping gaming harmony. To me that takes the fun out of the game. If I play a paladin I am going to play the paladin lawful good and if that means standing up to the party over something I see as evil then so be it.

 

[Sanackranib]

party conflicts

even evil partys can work well togather, as long as there is a strong leader with back up who never shows weakness. that said I have witnessed many party conflicts (from all 4 viewpoints 1)started it, 2)envolved in it (didn't start it), 3) watched it but didn't get involved 4) DM watched it unfold or started it. not all players react well to having their pc get killed by members of their party, but some interesting stories have come out of some of those battles . . .

 

[the Jester]

As long as everyone can separate their real life from the game interparty conflict shouldn't cause too many out of game problems.

Just last night I ran a game that turned into a "battle of five armies" type of things, with the main group of pcs fighting with the forces of the beholder Red-Eye as well as another pc and his angelic allies; and all sides were somewhat against the rest... It was a very complicated battle, and it took all session to run!

The problem I have with interparty conflict is that it often slows down the campaign itself...

 

[Taren Nighteyes]

This last Saturday, we had a minor interparty conflict. One of the two druids in the party was assassinated by two of the other characters in the party for:

1) Failing to assist the party in a dire situation which resulted in two members biting the proverbial bullet and

2) Being generally useless.

It happens occassionally in my group, but not as often as it used to. (I booted a bunch of troublesome players a while back - complete a total unwillingness to work with others, regardless of alignment, race, and character class.)

Taren Nighteyes

 

[Forrester]

I've got enough on my plate without having to worry about characters trying to kill each other off. Interparty friction, that's fun -- I have some great stories along that line . But *serious* interparty conflict (i.e., the kind that could lead to combat) is straight out banned from the get-go.

Making the campaign so tough that the party knows that if they don't work together, they'll all die is helpful in that regard. Superordinate goal and all that.

 

[Elf Witch]

Re: party conflicts

even evil partys can work well togather, as long as there is a strong leader with back up who never shows weakness. that said I have witnessed many party conflicts (from all 4 viewpoints 1)started it, 2)envolved in it (didn't start it), 3) watched it but didn't get involved 4) DM watched it unfold or started it. not all players react well to having their pc get killed by members of their party, but some interesting stories have come out of some of those battles . . .

I also play with a different group in an evil alinged game. Everyone is either N, LE, NE and we have few conflicts and we work very well together but we all have the same goals and I know that once that goal is met or if someone really messes up the other will turn on them and take them down.

 

[eris404]

Our group has allowed evil PCs from time to time, but generally it hasn't caused much conflict. The players of the evil characters were generally excellent at disguising their motives or getting along with others in general.

Strangely, the most conflict we've ever had was a player who was supposedly playing a good-aligned character. Basically, he decided that his character had an obnoxious personality and that gave him license to act like an a-hole. For example, he would be contrary no matter what - if our party decided to go north, his character would go south on his own. Then, when the rest of the group would get fed up with him, he'd pout and say things like "This is how my character is. I was just role-playing."

We ended up confronting him out of the game as a group. All of us felt that his actions had seriously detracted from the game, and we explained this to him in a calm, civil manner. But, he felt that we had ganged up on him and thus no longer games with us.

I think that a party will stick together if the players can play well together, regardless of the character's alignments. We didn't set out to kick the trouble player out of the group (and I wouldn't recommend that anyone do that except as a last resort), but in the end it was best that he bowed out. I'm sure he's happier and I know our group is happier for it.