PC Rogues stealing from other PCs

[Hari the Monk]

I have a quick question? Is it considered robbing the party if one of the rogues and the bard are scouting ahead, and they find the treasure and keep a small portion of it (no more than one item, usually)? We always coughed up all the rest of the 'loot' when we returned to the party (I was the bard, btw). And if they asked, we told each other that we'd cough up any extra that we'd 'kept'. Strangely, they never asked.

However, later in that campaign, the other rogue, who's player had some personal friction with me for one reason or another (I called him on cheating on a dice roll), attempted to rob my unconcious body after a fight. A scuffle between him and my rogue accomplice ended in her death.
After my bard awoke, I asked the paladin what had happened (he had witnessed it, stunned that a partymember would attack another), and the killer-rogue tried to 'bluff' me into believing that the paladin was lying to me about it. Yeah, killer-rogue ended up leaving the party, and his player left the group, shortly thereafter.

Back on topic, my accomplice and I had an unspoken (In character, anyway) vow that we wouldn't actively rob the party members. We might skim before we reported back in, though .

 

[Omegium]

We have had some situations like that in our games.

We are a group of 7 players, and all very good friends for 5 years now. We have some players who tend to play evil, or at least as they call it "neutral with evil tendencies". And we had some in party stealing, and fighting.
The problem with stealing is at least that the players almost always know there has been stolen, since it is difficult to remove equipment without their knowledge, and they often also know who the thief was, even if their PC doesn't. And people tend to get very creative on reasons why their PC does know it, or the PC is going to take actions what are not really metagaming, but it a question if the pc would have done it normally. (you are not going to prove any way).
My experiences with the stealing and killing is that you should prevent it, since it can even hamper real life friendships. In our party some players tend to work together against another, who is a bit weaker on defending against their talks and evil plans. In our group the players who want to play evil are always the same, and somehow the target also almost is the same one. And when a group is based on friendship like ours, you can't just break up or kick out some players. This was the part of DMming I hated the most: playing police agent, solving the ingame fights of my party and making sure everybody had a good time. Myself I tend to play easier chars for the dm, just good aligned and trying to play the game. but not everyone does.

 

[Terwox]

Eh, I've rarely had in-party stealing turn out for anything good. So I try to avoid it... unless, of course, the character has a good reason to steal it. If it's the player wanting more loot, well, then, I probably would just say no.

And agreed, if you want to mess w/ party members, play WoD. I love wod, and all the PC-PC violence that goes on, but I like the team aspect of D&D as well, and try to keep it like that. Of course, some is always fun, but I don't try make it as much of a point as I do with WoD.

 

[Rook]

I rarely see rogues actually stealing (e.g. pickpocketing and such) from party members. I definitely wouldn't prevent any party rogue from getting thrashed by the other members of the party if his thefts were uncovered. The players know this. The slightly more subtle point that comes up is indeed when characters (usually the rogue) take a 'little extra' from the treasure before presenting it to the party for later division. This happens reasonably often, although most rogues I've dealt with are smart enough to only skim the best stuff. They're also usually not stupid enough to hoard magic items that would be better in the hands of another character, so the other characters don't get a chance to find out about it. I don't punish for this, although if the other characters were to somehow find out and be upset, I again wouldn't prevent any punitive actions. Hasn't come up, though, since rogues in the party *do* seem to end up as the party treasurers and most of the time all of the party is present for the "big hauls", so the rogue can't do much skimming.

 

[DnDChick]

What is "Calling Alignment?"


Wulf

I guess Im the only one who uses the phrase. Sorry!

"Calling alignment" is something I do very rarely as a DM, and only when a player wants to have his character do something that is drastically opposed to his alignment. I dont force the player NOT to do it, as that hampers player freedom, but I do remind the player of their characters alignment and urge them to roleplay in the alignment they chose.

Too many breaches of alignment like that and I will consider chancing the characters alignment.

This can be hard to do because there are varying opinions of how to interpret each alignment.

 

[Henry@home]

...Too many breaches of alignment like that and I will consider chancing the characters alignment.

This can be hard to do because there are varying opinions of how to interpret each alignment.

This brings up a good point, DnDChick. In my games, I strive for a standard that is in the new PHB, that seems to work rather well. If a player flagrantly violates his or her alignment more than three times, I secretly change it without them knowing. It may say, for example "chaotic good" on their character sheet, but if they have been murdering peasants or secretly robbing orphans, in my notes, for detect evil spells and the like, they will register as "chaotic evil" - and the only way they find this out is by actually checking. It leads to some real surprises when they try to pick up a good-aligned magic item or if they have to pass a portal or forbiddance spell.

Also, just to have evidence, after the game, I make sure to write up full examples of these alignment violations, just in case I am called on it. It's better to hve an audit trail.

 

[Oogar]

I tend to use the same policy that I use for inner party aggression. I learned in a campain gone bad, that I really don't want players to be after each other. It makes it too hard to get anything done. So up front before character creation I try to tell people "If you want to play a character that does not work well with others, or a character that might Abuse, attack, or rob his companions, please do not play it in my campain". I suppose that it is a bit heavy handed, but I really don't have the time or patience to waste on that kind of crap.

If they really want to play someone who is like that, well, they can just find another game for it. I have often wanted to play a bit of Evil, but I have never been drawn to a character that would be a disruption to the party. And I would never want to play my Evil character in a group with a paladin. It just wouldn't be fun after a few little "moments".

Sorry, just wanted to play with Red.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

"Calling alignment" is something I do very rarely as a DM, and only when a player wants to have his character do something that is drastically opposed to his alignment. I dont force the player NOT to do it, as that hampers player freedom, but I do remind the player of their characters alignment and urge them to roleplay in the alignment they chose.

Too many breaches of alignment like that and I will consider chancing the characters alignment.

You're being too kind. I might do this for a paladin or monk whose alignment is key to their class-- but never as a general rule.

What the player has pencilled onto his character sheet is irrelevant. I don't let the players wantonly scribble down new magic items or arbitrarily choose their own stats, why would I let them decide what alignment they are?

Actions define alignment-- NOT the other way around.

It sounds like you're onto that for the most part, but again I say you're being too kind. If the player wants to play a chaotic and/or evil character (not that I think stealing from the party necessarily qualifies) then let him do it.

The party will sort him out.


Wulf

 

[Thaumaturge]

Just wanted to mention that rogues are not the only ones who can steal from party members. Fighters, Mages, anybody can steal from the party. Rogues are just the best at it. Of course, if everyone is eyeing the rogue suspiciously the mage will have an easier time stealing things.


Thaumaturge.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

The Rogues aren't the ones we have to worry about in our games. The ****ing Sorcerer in our party is the darned thief around us! The ****er ****er came across a room stashed to the ceiling with gold and platinum coins in the last game session. He came and got us to help carry it, but only after he had taken a share of about 75,000 gold pieces for himself first. However, he was so slick about it, that our PC's never found out, and we all split the rest - with him included.

The party Monk/Rogue was practically beside himself, because he the player knew it, and his character didn't and there wasn't a darned thing he could do about it. Talk about irony!

He got over it, especially since we all came out fairly well at the end of that adventure - but I have a strong feeling that if the sorcerer needs any combat assistance from the monk next game, he's going to be paying him by the round for help.

3 ponts the 1st two having nothing to do with the quote above.

1. I put down actively discourage it. My only role playing rules for games I dm are: 1 its a team game play it that way, and try to make a character who works under that assumption. 2 no rapes 3 no over the top psychotic crap like torture for fun, killing for amusement. The last two I find personally objectionableand incredibly childish and I don't want to play or run those types of games. The 1st one just can cause party conflicts, which I generally avoid until I'm sure of everyones roleplaying maturity.

2. Isn't it weird the difference a name makes. I remember crying out against these very actions in 2nd edition. 90+% of the responses were he's a thief, they should steal from the party, and party members have no real right to get upset about it because they knew what they were getting into when they let a htief join the party. Personally I always thought the thief was just a person with a certain set of skills, and not necessarrily a thief, others now seem to agree when the class is called rogue.

3. My comment on Henry's post. Is about the 2nd paragraph where the player knew it but the character didn't. I really hate that when it happens why because eventually it reaches absurd levels of enforced blindness because supposedly your character doesn't know it. For example in a game I played in the party thief.wizard litterally had millions of GPs at his disposal I had around 50,000 gps, eventually we caught him taking more than his fare share while pocketing a large ruby. Aparently my guy has to assume that this was the 1st time and he'll never do it again instead of being able to put 2 and 2 together.(there were plenty of other clues which I couldn't capatalize on as well because I might be letting player knowledge in) Letting players know this while their characters don't criples that characters acitons, that are forced to play dumb and that really sucks. My house rule has been if you want to do something secret, pass me a note. If you don't pass a note and instead say,"hey I'm taking some extra gold for myself before the party shows up." Then mysteriously you actually said out loud "hey why don't I take some gold before the party shows up." And your voice carried miles if need be.