PKing between PCs; do you allow it?

[Arnwyn]

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.

Yup. That explains my feelings on the matter.

So yeah, in theory, I "allow" it. However, I do discourage such actions.

(It has happened in the past, but many many years ago. I don't remember why - some disagreement of some sort.)

 

[painandgreed]

As a GM, I metagame it at the beginning of every campaign I run. I ask them if they want a cooperative game or an anything goes game. In a cooperative game, metagaming is allowed as far as trusting the other PCs and when they meet a new PC in an inn or on the road, they trust him and he can be trusted. No PvP is allowed and even stealing from each other is frowned upon. Even then, if the plot develops to the point that players want to go against eachother and both agree to it, I let them. That's the key, it must be consentual. In "anything goes" games, it means just that and all the players thoughts and motives are their own and backstabbing and betrayal are possible. "Anything goes" games don't happen too much in D&D but happen alot in Vampire and Cyberpunk type games.

 

[Quicken]

Wow. I can't believe so many experienced DMs here ban it outright!

So I'll say YES YES YES!

Some of the most memorable games I've been in have involved a player killing a player. It's never been because that player was a jerk (or even the character). Sometimes it's been because of outside influence (a threat as often as magical influence). And it has been rare. But everyone still talks about the drowning of a fellow party member by our one armed fighter even though no character witnessed it. The players in my group are too mature to take it personally.

 

[danzig138]

Sure, I allow it. I'd say probably 10-15% of character deaths in my games are a result of PCs killing each other. Sometimes it's accidental (fireball, etc), and sometimes it's not. I have noticed that the more high tech the available gear, the more likely someone is to kill one of the other PCs. I don't know why.
I don't counsel my players against it. Somtimes their characters aren't compatible, violence is often the result when you have violent, incompatible people working together.
Oddly, I've found the few times when I've had all or mostly evil parties, less PC v. PC killing going on. But the evil characters had a lot more smaller evil - scheming to screw each other out of treasure and the like.

 

[Glyfair]

Everyones just keeps playing his character and refuses to budge because that is not what his character would do.

Honestly, I think this might be the number one attitude to ruin campaigns. IMO, some of these players need to realize that gaming is a social activity and such choices should be made considering the best thing for the game as a whole.

That doesn't mean you should act out of character. However, you should try to avoid characters where this sort of development is likely. Also, if something like this comes up in a game and you decide it would be in character for you to attack another character (or do something that would lead up to it), you should consider if there is something else your character might do that won't lead to this situation.

Of course, sometimes this sort of thing is appropriate. The aforementioned Paranoia is the perfect example. That's the name of the game. Also, I'm sure some people prefer D&D games that run something like Paranoia games. Just be sure to warn any potential new players to expect that.

One thing I've noticed is that inter-character conflict tends to come at two levels in RPGS, either completely mild or homicidal. I can name a number of examples of characters who are constantly at each other throats in fiction but, when push comes to shove will defend the other person. I think in an RPG, the two players would need to plan from the beginning to have this sort of relationship. I don't remember ever seeing it though.

 

[kigmatzomat]

One thing I've noticed is that inter-character conflict tends to come at two levels in RPGS, either completely mild or homicidal. I can name a number of examples of characters who are constantly at each other throats in fiction but, when push comes to shove will defend the other person. I think in an RPG, the two players would need to plan from the beginning to have this sort of relationship. I don't remember ever seeing it though.

It happened to me in the first non-hack'n slash campaign I was ever in. I had an LE assassin, another guy had a CG ranger; our characters got on like nitroglycerin and a paint mixer. I can remember at least two different times where our characters were in each other's faces when some threat wandered up, the two of us slaughtered it, and we went back to bickering. IIRC, the characters died shoulder-to-shoulder in a glorious TPK. (Okay, there wasn't much glory since the rogue's greed destroyed the plan but we took down about twice as many guardsmen and evil monks as anyone had expected.)

We did figure out we had to tone it down a bit as the in-character bits were starting to intimidate a few other players. That or it was the Sybil-like personality shifts.

 

[Belen]

Never! I would not play in a game where it happened and I would dissolve any group where it occurred. That is not the point of playing D&D. The point of playing D&D is cooperative play.

 

[the Jester]

I don't think, as the dm, it's my job to tell the pcs what to do, but rather to tell them what happens because of it.

I've had entire two-party pc battles, where the group was split into an evil party and a good party. So yes, I allow it.

 

[Mercule]

Sure. Why not? As a DM, I absolutely, positively never involve myself in treasure division, PC conflict, or the like. That is, so long as it remains in the realm of being "in character". If it becomes an issue between two players, then I'm all over it.

The last time there was a PK, I think, was over a decade ago. One PC screwed over a the remainder of the group with questionable morals. They gakked him. Problem solved. In general, though, the groups I play with don't enjoy that style of play, so everyone is pretty well self-policing.

 

[ForceUser]

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

That is incredibly passive-aggressive. I find that an open and honest discussion is the best way to resolve conflict.

With regard to evil PCs, I will say this. I removed the alignment system from my homebrew. Act however you wish, but evil actions have evil consequences.