PKing between PCs; do you allow it?

[Yair]

Do you allow Player Killing in your campaign? How did the situation arise and how was it resolved?

Never.
I set up ground rules for each campaign when it begins. These ALWAYS include not killing/harming another player's character.
The only time a situation like this rose up is when a character was such an *biological part goes here* that the party tied him up. He ended up escaping, but the character was NPCid (though he never came back to haunt them). And I wouldn't allow things to go down that badly nowdays.

 

[Howling Coyote]

I don't like it (most of us don't), but nevertheless PKing is a pretty common thing in my group. Playing as a team just doesn't work in our group. It's just every man for himself, and if the others get it the way, "Too bad". The more our campaigns progress the more the rift between the PCs widen and the frequency of conflicts inside the group grow.

While severe injury is common and the loss of priceless equipment even more common, deaths from these conflicts are still pretty rear. But that's mostly because acting the GM either saves the situation by doing something trastic in game, or he just drops the campaign because he can't think anymore reasons for the PCs to be together without a bloodbath.

What really tics me in this that while all of us agree that PKing isn't a good thing, and we should act as a group, it still keeps happening in everyone one of our games. Everyones just keeps playing his character and refuses to budge because that is not what his character would do. Actually,the only time that PKing happened without a "good" reason in our group we kicked that player out from our group.

 

[HellHound]

Not in D&D. As people have said, in some cyberpunk games it is quite suiting. And of course, mandatory in Paranoia.

But having been the victim of two PKs in my gaming life, I outlaw them. Nothing more exciting than bringing your gaming gear to Titan Games & Comics III for a full day of game, arranging a ride home for when the store closes, and then having your character killed by two other members of the party before entering the dungeon.

Spent the rest of the day rolling up TMNT characters while everyone else gamed. :/

 

[HellHound]

What really tics me in this that while all of us agree that PKing isn't a good thing, and we should act as a group, it still keeps happening in everyone one of our games. Everyones just keeps playing his character and refuses to budge because that is not what his character would do.

Been there. Not to the PK level, but to the level it not being fun because everyone is sticking to the "that's what my character would do".

IMO, Its time to tell everyone to change their characters then. "If your character wouldn't work in a group, then he isn't allowed at my gaming table, have a very nice day, bye bye!" I used to see this a lot in CyberPunk and D&D games and I made the above statement a house rule for ALL my games. And it works. Make your characters playable or don't make them at all. make them willing to bend, able to change, happy to compromise and glad for the companionship of other PCs. Or get lost.

 

[Talmun]

I'm firmly in the "in theory, yes - in practice, most likely not" camp.

I did once have a PC who was in a secret organization and was ordered by
his superiors to assassinate another character, but I made sure that the
would-be assassins player understood that this was a bad order given by
NPCs who didn't understand what was going on. I also worked it so that
the rest of the party found out about the possible knifing about the
same time, the result: A big, completely in-character confrontation
where the whole party got everything sorted out and moved the plot along
several notches.
And no PC death.

 

[Joshua Randall]

Absolutely not.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

If it is for good in game RP reasons then yes I'll allow it if both the players agree out of game. When players just start have their characters randomly (or for out of game reasons) attack other characters I have to step in quickly to figure out something.

I remember in one campaign all that held the party together was mutual hatred of a villainous NPC after they killed him the whole party nearly wiped each other out fortunately they just managed to work something out.

In another game (I was a player in this one) me and another PC had just utterly failed wiping out most my character's entire tribe. I demanded that his character and the remainders of my tribe come with me and launch a suicidal attack against the enemy because there was no more point in living with dishonor. He disagreed with me. So we both decided there would be only one way to settle this (we were both really angry about alot of things in game) so we fought each other. Some of my remaining tribesman tried to help but we scareed them away and finished the fight, I came out the victor however one of the remaining tribesmen decided to kill my PC after the fight and seeing as I was at 1 HP I died too.

In another game one PC so grossly offended another PCs morales that they fought each other, and no neither of them were paladins or clerics.

Over all it's fairly rare.

 

[ARandomGod]

Allow it? I encourage it!

Which means, actually, that it very seldom happens. But I tell my players to play their characters, and if there's an in character reason to kill another character, I'll not only grant full XP for the killing, but I'll give a special reward too.

The one time it did happen it was very amusing. Both players had in their possession a one use instant kill item. Neither knew exactly what it did, of course... (the home-campaign I'm talking about introduces several very high powered magical items to first level characters, which they will theoretically learn to use throughout the game).

One of them DID know that he was holding an item that would certainly kill the other in one use. The other didn't even have a clue as to what he was holding (but it was his only weapon).

What happened? I had them roll their dice on the table. The attacker one, thought that he'd try to kill the defender without the special item first (as the defender looked to be asleep, he'd earlier Sensed Motive something was going on). The defender instead of making a retaliatory attack went defensive when he saw he was suddenly at 2 HP, the attacker then decided to use the item...

Result: One level two PC's body destroyed, and soul removed from the fabric of space time. One magic item capable of killing a god removed from the hands of the party... one party member aghast when he learned what he'd wasted on CR2 kill.

End result: No more inter-party conflict. They've learned that I won't 'mommy' them, I'll allow their characters to do whatever foolish thing they tell me their characters will do. The defender was indeed being an @55 originally.

In that same game they got an artifact evil sword. One with no ability to mind control, but it does occasionally ask for sacrifices. One's captured in battle are fine for it, but I've several times offered a special reward to the player if he did something nassty to another PC. So far it's been refused. If he took me up on the offer? I'd give out the reward, another PC would be dead (I'd offer something conciliatory to the player who just got killed), and we'd have all learned something about the character, he would have made a definite and strong character decision, one that everyone could see and appreciate. Not doing it? Also a strong character decision. And one that would be completely impossible for him to make if I were going to baby the players and protect them from each other.

I do tend to discourage evil PC's in my games. I state right at the beginning that I'll allow at most one person to start out their character as evil, and that I don't recommend it because most likely a PC WILL die eventually because of it. But I will allow people to become evil later. If the entire party wanted to evolve into fighting against each other, then that's an entire adventure plot or two I can use on their next characters, after these have killed each other off.

In the end I've found that it leads to PC's being more respectful of each other. When a player knows the GM will not allow inter PC conflict, he can do whatever he wants, and some PC's can become downright antisocial. When he knows the GM will not only allow player killing and player abandoning, etc, but he'll instead reward it, he knows that he HAS to be in good standing with the party members. As it should be.

If the players in my game all decided to "go evil", I'd go for that. In fact I've offered them several incentives to do so. Right now they're on a (spanning 20 total levels) quest to save the world. The being they're saving it from will definitely reward them well for switching sides. They could almost certainly RULE the world instead of saving it, if they went over to the "Dark Side". Strangely this has the most evil inclined in the group playing more good than ever. He's seen the dark side and, as he put it, "What's the point of ruling the world like that? I want to rule the world MYSELF, and I want to rule a good world."

His original character write up did actually include him being power hungry and with an ultimate goal to either rule the entire world or as much of it as he could. Now he's been given several opportunities, and he's turned them all down. THAT's character!

 

[kigmatzomat]

I allow it. I discourage it as a playstyle, but I allow it. It would be hard for me not to run some of my plots if I didn't. I like occassionally offering a deal with a devil to PCs. If they take it they may hit the point where they need killing. It's a result of player choice and consequences for their actions. They know they can go absolutely black evil if they want to but they also know that unless they get insanely powerful someone else will knock them off in short order.

It's part of what let's me have evil characters in the group. "Oh, I'm selfish and greedy and if the price is right I might consider selling you out. Of course anyone who could meet my price can hire scary assassins and would come after me next so odds are I won't do it. But I'd consider it."

 

[DaveMage]

I have never said that PCs couldn't do it, but if it ever did, I'd allow it, and then stop the campaign.