PKing between PCs; do you allow it?

[TheGM]

I have allowed it exactly once, after many warnings to the character who was clearly going to die from it that they needed to knock it off. I'm not certain that even with a good, story-driven reason I would ever allow it again. I do not allow evil PCs, and I frown upon CN - which is "do whatever I want" alignment IMO.

A low-level paladin run by a player that had never run one in any of my games came to life accusing all sorts of powerful people of all sorts of things (her mother was killed while working with other powerful characters, the child came into the game pointing fingers at these PCs).

Because of who her mother was, she knew whom the powerful were, and knew many of them personally. She caused ruckus that she lost her paladinhood, but still didn't shut up, accusing legal rulers of being murderers and usurpers, calling a trial that she demanded trying to condemn a high-level Paladin a "monkey court" when it didn't rule her way, on and on.

Finally, said high-level paladin declared "You have crossed the line. Prove your accusations on the field of honor. Combat to first blood." True to the rash actions of the character from day one, she replied "No, the fight will be to the grave."

So I allowed it, though it pained me. Needless to say, the 15th level paladin wiped the floor with the 4th level paladin. At the end she held her final blow and said "yield and this can be over", and the 4th level paladin (fighter at this point) replied "No. Do it if you have any honor". She did. With a crit.

The high-level group was not thrilled with the high-level paladin, she still takes garbage for it. The character is semi-retired over it. Didn't turn out well for anyone.

 

[Romnipotent]

now days I'll allow it but if another player cant handle the idea then I'll talk to them about it. Its not personal, its a game, and sometimes you get double crossed.

 

[ThirdWizard]

To my knowlege, I can't remember ever telling a player that no, his PC won't be doing that, unless under charm/domination. And, I don't think I ever will.

 

[demiurge1138]

I don't have a no PK policy, because it usually doesn't come up, at least with the people I play with nowadays. Back in the old dark days, it came up more often than I'd like, although once it was actually fun for all involved, even the one getting killed (in a kobold campaign, two of the players conspired to get a third, who had been obnoxious to them, convicted for heresy and treason). The only time PKing has come up for a few years now is the character who actually went insane with paranoia, thanks to the manipulations of the yugoloths, so he was put down to protect the rest of the party. And the guy who's character got killed was alright with it and rolled up another character. The game went on.

Demiurge out

 

[Numion]

Not anymore. I did allow it in Cyberpunk games and WHFRP, but not since I started DM 3E. There might've been accidental killings in D&D, but nothing intentional.

Cyberpunk had both accidental and intentional. Misfires + explosives ..

 

[wingsandsword]

I'd never tell a PC "No, you can't do that", but I'd hope it would never come to that.

When organizing games, I don't allow Evil PC's, strongly restrict CN PC's to people I know can play them responsibly (i.e. not CE with a pretense of neutrality), and I try to ensure that the character concepts are compatible. I discourage it strongly, and unprovoked PvP is a quick ticket to an Evil alignment and thus NPC status (suddenly turning on and assaulting with lethal force a travelling companion is a pretty evil act).

I've seen PvP in a game, and been the victim of it, and it rarely goes well. PvP can break up games, damage friendships, and create strain in what's supposed to be a fun activity. It goes particularly poorly if the GM is actually favoring one PC. Now, in rare cases it actually fits the genre, like in a vampire game, but it's generally a bad thing in D&D.

 

[clark411]

I don't allow it anymore.

In an Exalted game I ran, players were all paranoid from previous WW experience and went on an arms-race Charm wise to try to become powerful enough to fight off other PCs if need be. The plot, the natural development of the characters, and just about all the fantasy of it was quickly whittled down to "I must protect myself, keep as much info I learn private as possible, and be ready to strike down my friends at a moment's notice."

In almost every DND game I've seen PC death in, the newly-departed's replacement was typically geared and designed to kill the player character who killed his predecessor. Typically, getting back meant more than moving on, and there's no surprise to it really. If you waste 9 months of someone's play, it either rears up and bites you in the rear, or you get to take the "and I'll kill anyone who gets in my way" stance. Where's the fun in that?

Double-crosses, political / social backstabbing, and general prankery are fine in my book, but actually ending the story for a character is a big, serious, No No now.

 

[DonTadow]

I tried my best to allow it in the first campaign I ran. I wanted the PCS to get the essence that they could do anything... boy was that a mistake. They spent most of the first session making rolls against each other, bluffing each other, attacking each other and in one case killing each other. Part of it could have been the matiruity of the players but I still have banned it for the most part.

ON a VERRRYYY rare occasion I allow a character to attack one another but the situation has to merrit it (and not talking compulsions). Case in point, thel ast session a new character was to join the pcs as a guide through the thick murky farplane invested elf lands. The PCs had been attacked by strange beings, so when they see this ordinary human strolling through the forest as if she owns it they attack her, pin her down and nearly mind rape her. (of course as the dm I thought this was going to go a heck of a lot different, maybe some "hey who are you")

We had 3 rounds of combat before they raelized she meant no harm. I consider stuff like that adding flavor but I obviously wouldn't let a character die in any situation as such

 

[MonsterMash]

Only in Paranoia or Toon, never in a serious game.

 

[Inconsequenti-AL]

Never again! (exceptions: Paranoia, some cyberpunk type games)

IME, it just leads to bad feelings.

The only time I've seen it work well was when 2 players agreed OOC that they were going to try and kill each other... led to a tense but captivating session. But that was a strange campaign and they were odd players.