When PCs go against the "archetype"

[Coldwyn]

Easier said than done. It's a strange world where money isn't useful.

You could switch to an abstract system, like, for example, in rogue trader.
If looting a "very tiny amount of wealth" from corpses doesn´t improve the "moderate amount of wealth" the PCs already have, it should stop that behaviour.

@Topic:

When most or all of the players deviate from the basic premisses set for the campaign, it seems it is time to rethink these premisses. When your players are having fun the way they play, I think the gm should accept that and modify the game accordingly.

 

[jbear]

Easier said than done. It's a strange world where money isn't useful.

That's a big topic right there. A wiser man than me said: "Money is the root of all evil."

If money and gaining things is the primary motivation you use to hook your PCs into stories, they are already standing on a slippery slope before the game begins.

Treasure being gained by other means than robbing, pillaging and murder, is an interesting option. Initial Gear the PCs already carry (their 'normal old longsword' for example) refluffed initially as Non-magical hierlooms they have inherited via their backstory or hooks into campaigns/adventures . As the PC gains levels the weapon/object begins to 'awaken' and increase in power. And so the need to remove the boots from the dead is somewhat eleveated. But if this is going to be the chosen method of treasure distribution, then I think you have to let the PCs know they don't need to thieve and murder if it doesn't fit in with their character concept. You need to say explicitly that You, as DM, will make sure they have access to their fair share of 'rewards' appropriate to their level via more noble means. Otherwise, where are they going to find 'cool stuff'? Either on the cold cadavers of their enemies or hidden in some hard to get to corner of the world with a horde of monsters to hack through standing in their way.

Most of the players in my campaign are unaligned, self-declared ruthless mercenaries who do not take prisoners. The 'good' characters assure that their death is swift and painless. Here I think you have to take into account the fundaments of the world that one lives in, in order to begin to define good, evil and appropriate. On the few occaisions they have crossed what I considered a line of 'appropriate' character behaviour, I've pulled them up on it and asked them to justify their actions considering their professed worldview.

But in anycase, why can't characters be like people? Changeable, coloured with many shades and contradictions. I am everthing I am and I'm the opposite of it too. I have days when i'm more like the me I aspire to be, the me I imagine in my head, the ideal me, and other days when I'm something totally different. And those swings can happen quite quickly, influenced by something as basic as my hunger levels. Imagine the state of my psyche if I woke up on a daily basis with dry blood beneath my fingernails and dragonhunting on the mind.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Treasure being gained by other means than robbing, pillaging and murder, is an interesting option.

Treasure and XP are the main way D&D characters get a "high score," so controlling what actions get these rewards is a very effective way for the DM to control character actions through positive reinforcement.

The noble crusaders get XP and treasure from acting chivalrously toward maidens.

The mercenaries get XP and treasure (though you'd probably want to stay away from actual gold) for ale and whores.

The explorers get XP and treasure for going into an unexplored hex on the map.

The anti-heroes get XP and treasure for making folks nervous and lurking in shadows.

Some of those may strain some credibility, without a plot device for them (why do I get a magic sword for whoring around? shouldn't I just get herpes?), but you might be able to link them through a gamist system without hurting verisimilitude much (mechanical reality: the less gold you have, the more treasure you gain in the dungeon -- the dungeon puts you at a new baseline, and if you still have gold left over, you're not going to get that much on the mission).

 

[TarionzCousin]

Easier said than done. It's a strange world where money isn't useful.

Segue to 4E Dark Sun in 3... 2... 1....

"Ceramic Pieces"? Seriously? Are those in 4E Dark Sun.

Okay, end threadjack.

My real answer is "Know your players." You should be able to predict what they are going to want to do. If not, quiz them ahead of time. Ask them "What are some elements that you want in the next campaign?"

 

[Remathilis]

Interesting so far,

The second obvious answer (behind DM establishing carrots & sticks) is to make sure your players WANT to play the game you're running. That can be the most jarring; since nobody wants to here they're "grand idea" is cr@p.

To point, a long time ago, I played in a game where everyone was a humanoid living on the Borderlands (near said infamous Keep). The idea was supposed to show the "monsters" point of view on things, and kinda felt a little "D&D meets the Horde". However, a number of us (myself included) couldn't grok to the idea of being a monster-adventurer, since the game felt schizophrenic; were we the "bad guys" or just "adventurers in funny suits"? In social situations, it felt like the former (hated and despised, we took out aggressions on humanity) but in dungeons, it felt blase (we were no different than standard D&D characters, just with less racial-based options).

The game took its final turn toward death when the Keep sent a group of adventurers to wipe out the Caves of Chaos while we were on a mission. We opted (in true monster fashion) to seek revenge. However, after a daring midnight storming; we found our own characters conflicted. There were some who wanted to rape, pillage, and plunder like the infamous D&D monsters we were, while others found the idea of killing women and children abhorrent (even as a monster; the minotaur druid was especially horrified).

The game died that night. In the end, we didn't want to embrace the trope of "bad guys" OR "mistaken anti-heroes".

 

[Starman]

That's a big topic right there. A wiser man than me said: "Money is the root of all evil."

Actually "the love of money is the root of all evil."

 

[LostSoul]

Easier said than done. It's a strange world where money isn't useful.

That's true, but that doesn't mean it has to be useful in the game. If you're playing 3e or 4e and you can't buy or make magic items with gold, gold is a lot less useful to your average PC.

That rule change would stop people who want to play noble adventurers from playing against the trope.

And if you do the reverse - gold can buy anything, monsters can all be bribed, all you need to make a magic item is a hunk of cash - and then "hide" the gold behind social taboos instead of secret doors, you'll start seeing other tropes.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The second obvious answer (behind DM establishing carrots & sticks) is to make sure your players WANT to play the game you're running. That can be the most jarring; since nobody wants to here they're "grand idea" is cr@p.

Yeah, it can't be said enough about making your intent very clear, and talking with your players about it.

Which is part of why my first response is just to roll with it. I don't usually have much of a personal investment in my D&D games, so if someone wants to play mercenaries, even though I set out to do heroic knights, whatever, now you're mercenaries.

The game died that night. In the end, we didn't want to embrace the trope of "bad guys" OR "mistaken anti-heroes".

Yeah, I think this goes with the "being clear" thing. Archetypal stories and examples from pop culture can get people into the character very easily, but if the group is confused about what the game is supposed to be like, it can fizzle or feel awkward really fast.

If your DM introduced a "Slaughter Score" for killing innocent people, perhaps the intent would be obvious. Likewise, if they introduced a "Sympathy Score" that rose as you made friends over your hideous appearance, that would make the intent more obvious.

 

[ExploderWizard]

We've all been there before...

We set up expectations for a campaign: rough-n-tumble explorers, daring swashbucklers, epic heroes out for Queen and country, grim anti-heroes out for vengeance, gritty mercenaries adventuring for gold and glory (and ale and whores). We're seeking a tone, a theme, a certain feel to the campaign...

...and it doesn't survive char-gen.

Sure, your PCs may be rolled-up according to a specific list of choices, with a books-worth of campaign background to go off of. But once the adventure is afoot, the tone changes. Those noble crusaders search every last corpse for gold fillings and prefer to shoot first (at ambush, if possible) and ask questions later. Or those gold-and-glory PCs who should be dirt poor by next session carousing and wasseling have instead opted to pool their resources into buying magical items, a keep, or some other long-term investment. Or those explorers who spend 20 minutes "taking 20" on every. single. door. Or those anti-heroes are WORSE than the villains they face!

In short, what happens when the PCs abandon the tropes of their world and play according to "smart" play; using tactics like overwhelming force and guerrilla strikes; budgeting every gold piece, killing prisoners, or triple searching every 10' square for traps. Such tactics are smart AND effective in normal play, they're just the anathema to the genre of fantasy your seeking!

(and that doesn't even touch the wrong-genre adventurer; IE d'Artagnan on Hyborea).

Interested in hearing some stories.

The fundamental thing to remember is to reward the type of activities that you would like the game to focus on.

D&D at it's core rewards the acquisition of treasure, accumulation of power, and the direct activities which lead to these things.

If the game rewards engaging foes of ever increasing difficulty, with magic goodies and loot that make doing so easier (or even possible in some cases) then expect players to get really good at doing that.

If acting heroically with honor is the primary behavior that you would like to drive the game then make sure the best in-game benefits are gained from such actions.

Make demonstrations of courage and honor the highest rewarded thing in the game. Loot and magic items should have only a minimal impact on character power and effectiveness in the game world.

The typical D&D reward system primarily rewards results almost to the exclusion of the means. Smart and ruthless play is the most effective path to those rewards and players know that. Asking that they abandon the most effective means of obtaining in game rewards gains them what exactly?

Change the rewards and the means by which they are earned and play will either follow that lead or the players will not enjoy the experience being offered.

 

[pawsplay]

Well, system matters.

Not enough to stop Superman in a DC Heroes game from refusing to cooperate with a directive of the US government, taking out two fighter planes with his heat vision, and heading to South America to build his Empire of New Krypton. Just for instance.