Party Infighting?

[Kae'Yoss]

I've seen it happen. Mainly in badly run evil campaigns (where people think that just because they're evil they have to plan to kill each other all the time), bue sometimes in non-evil campaigns. Even the nasty version. Although the latter usually happened because someone did abysmal roleplaying.

 

[Inconsequenti-AL]

I'd say it depends on the system...

I really don't like (serious) infighting in DnD - IMO, the game is set up such a way as to require teamwork. If the players are at each others throats, I find they get little done and tend to be ineffective. I'm viewing this as really serious disputes, where the PCs either fight or screw each other over. On the other hand, bantering and friendly abuse just add to the game.

If I see it happening, I'll try to steer the players in another direction. Possibly have an outside event interupt them... or just an out of character 'play nice' kind of comment.


For some other systems, I'd say it's par for the course and it wouldn't be the same game if the PCs didn't plot against each other. Paranoia, Vampire and Ars Magica really spring to mind as examples of those type of games.

Our last Ars Magica game worked out very nicely. 6 PCs and a number of topics to disagree about... mostly Pagan religions, overthrowing kingdoms, consorting with a Demon, and the Crusades... A mixed bag with plenty of room for squabbling. Was fun, found certain people allied over certain issues, but were bitter enemies over others. The way their system is set up, mages are forbidden from killing each other - so it was basically a lot of plotting, backstabbing and theft going on. Kept trying to engineer the death of the demon consorting wizard, but he just wouldn't die. Definitely felt like a tower full of selfish and powerful wizards!


Think FreeTheSlaves, has hit the nail on the head about what separates a 'friendly' argument from something worse. Whether the players like each other out of character!

 

[The_Universe]

Just out of curiosity...

Do you find that it happens often?

Yes.

As a DM, do you try to stop it? Encourage it? Penalize it? Reward it?

I try to penalize such behavior as soon as it crosses a very low level of tolerance, because....

In your experience, do RP conflicts cause OOC conflicts? Do OOC conflcts cause RP conflicts?

Yes, RP conflicts have caused a number of OOC conflicts, despite the inherent ridiculousness in such things, and vice versa. Essentially, at some level, gaming groups inevitably devolve into a grim parody of the bickering clique of hot chicks from your high school, stabbing each other in the back repeatedly for minimal gain unless conflict as a whole is kept tightly under control.

Some groups can operate as a well-oiled machine from square one - they coordinate and have fun, supporting eachother's ideas and plans with the kind of friendly bickering you might expect from people who work well together. This type of group puts on a *show* of RP conflict, a sort of tongue-in-cheek nod to buddy action comedies.

Other groups agonize over their individual characters, and wring their hands with the effort of simulating real emotional conflict, treating the game as a repository for angst and unrequited longings that they have in real life. Any attempt to focus on the group over the individual is met by fierce competition for abilities and talents, as well as a general grasping for the desired spot of "group leader." These are gamers whose interests are entirely focused on themselves, and only concerned with their companions to the degree that they can support their personal fantasies. This is the kind of group where RP conflict has to be stamped out immediately before it burns the whole thing down.

I've encountered both, and infinitely prefer the former. Unfortunately, I think it's a lot easier to find the latter.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

snip...

You said what I was going to, but much better than I would have.

 

[Falkus]

I've only been in two campaigns where there was any infighting. The first one was a campaign where I was playing a paladin, then the DM decided to allow somebody to come in and play a blackguard. Conflict was inevitable. The second was a campaign that I have tried my best to excise from my memory.

 

[The_Universe]

You said what I was going to, but much better than I would have.

Glad to be of service, though I wish my commentary was less well-informed.

 

[Charles Rampant]

I've only been in two campaigns where there was any infighting. The first one was a campaign where I was playing a paladin, then the DM decided to allow somebody to come in and play a blackguard. Conflict was inevitable.

That appears to be amazingly shortsighted on the GM's part. Those characters would kill each other at first sight, no questions asked.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I've only been in two campaigns where there was any infighting. The first one was a campaign where I was playing a paladin, then the DM decided to allow somebody to come in and play a blackguard. Conflict was inevitable.

Ah, a textbook case of SDS. How were the two of you introduced? "So, this is Jack, the Paladin, who is forbidden by his god to work with evil persons, and here is Joe, the Blackguard, who is obviously evil and proud of it."

 

[Odhanan]

As a player, what's more important, role-playing, or maintaining the party?

IME as a player it will depend on the game. If I play Vampire: The Masquerade, a lot of the game (if not the whole chronicle) is made of character interactions. So there, role-playing is more important than a "party of PCs". By the way, outside of the concept of playing characters within the same cotery/pack, the fluff of the Vampire game isn't about "party spirit" but about SOBs backstabbing each other for power.

In D&D, however, the party is supposed to at least have some form of cooperation. Of course, PCs can disagree and argue within the party, but fundamentaly, D&D is a game of cooperation. My take there is to favor role-playing first, but always keep in mind that sooner or later as players we'll have to come up with a common ground which can help us go on as a party. The implosion of a party should be a ground-shaking element in D&D, something that would have tremendous repercutions in a campaign. Sure, it is possible (and certainly may be enjoyable if done well) to play a D&D game a la Vampire, but that really isn't what the game was designed for.

In your experience, do RP conflicts cause OOC conflicts? Do OOC conflcts cause RP conflicts?

IME, very rarely. You should as a DM be very clear and very strict about this: what happens in the game remains in the game. What happens in RL remains in RL. In any case, if it occurs, warn your players this isn't fair game. Try to get players to talk about these issues outside of the game. If this absolutely cannot wait, stops the game session altogether and solve this problem. Act as a mediator - do not take sides. Try to work towards the solution rather than feed the problem.

 

[Barendd Nobeard]

In my "1st ed. converted to 3.5" game, I nip it in the bud immediately. That's because three of the players are 10 years old.

In my Call of Cthulhu game, I pretty much let the players do whatever they want. None of them are 10 years old, but if one of them occasionally acts like a child the other players generally slap him down pretty quickly.