"I look inside!"
"I open it!"
"I take it!"
OMG! Shurely everyone has shared a table with one of these players. "ME FIRST!" and "I go through the gnoll's sack!" are exclamations, while the rest of the party is either recovering from combat. the trapped door, or even talking to major npc's.
I end up secretly wishing for their early death or opening the wrong box before its over...
Eh. From a DM's perspective I kind of like that guy.
Someone has to trigger all the traps.
Quote from: tanstaafl48;605552Eh. From a DM's perspective I kind of like that guy.
Someone has to trigger all the traps.
That I find very soothing! Carry On!
Cursed Magic Items are your friends.
Quote from: languagegeek;605585Cursed Magic Items are your friends.
In one AD&D 2e game, we were using the Cardmaster Deck to do a random dungeon crawl...one of my players was playing a Mage to intimidate a superstitious Beastman PC into letting him have a necklace they had just found that was registering as magical through Detect Magic.
He put it on, and the Necklace of Strangling (I believe is the proper name for it) made short work of the Mage.
We had "that guy" in one of our old 2E games: the halfling rogue with sticky fingers. The gig was up when our mage cast detect magic and noticed a very strong aura emanating from that little runt. A short time later the fighter and the barbarian were holding him upside down, shaking out all the stuff he'd pilfered. A whole bunch of gems, jewels, and about half a dozen magic items he hadn't told us about fell out of his cloak and onto the floor....
We let him live.
Yeah. For a while I ran The Enemy Within with a group, that included a really diehard D&D treasure/xp-hunter who really didn't get neither Warhammer nor basic in character play. It didn't matter much, that he was aiming at becoming a knight, his character was looting and searching, high and low, through gutter, in the pockets of rotten mutants and if something was glinting in the sewer.
Strangle? no.
Stop playing with? Yup.
Oh yeah, we used to call those guys "creekers", crack peekers. They'd investigate every crack and crevice looking for stray coppers.
I also know his cousin:
"You captured one of the guards alive, and now he's tied up."
"I cut him."
"... and that's how you can get past the sentries - finishes the captured guard."
"I slit his throat. What? He already talked, we have no further use of him."
"The low-ranking crewmembers of the spaceship are a bit hesitant, not knowing how to deal with the fact that you have just killed off all the officers."
"From now on, you're working for us. Yes, for free, be thankful we're letting you live. I grab one and start cutting his fingers off until they comply."
And to answer the thread title, no. Not the PC.
I confess...as a gm, I punish players like that.
For example, a player once captured a pirate captain and tortured the captive to learn the location of a treasure hoard. Once the pirate realized the pc had no intention of letting him live, he told the pc a false location full of deadly dangers instead of the real treasure. The pc then cuts the pirates throat.
Right after that, the pc learns that there was a huge, HUGE bounty for that pirate. Alive.
I reward players for creativity, not "I kill it! I kill it"
When I ran the Night Below campaign, I had a couple egregious looters in the group. Their greed caught up with them when they ran into a patrol of Derro in the Underdark. They were so busy looting the fallen Derro that they let two get away. Big, big mistake.
The Derro alerted the Mind Flayer/Derro strongpoint further down the passageway. So the next day when the PCs came upon the strongpoint, it was a slaughter. In a bit of poetic justice, the PC who had started the looting was the first killed, his skull cracked open by a mindflayer, his brains sucked out in full view of the party. Cue Aliens-style panic. TPK of a 9th level party.
Quote from: Bill;605669I confess...as a gm, I punish players like that.
For example, a player once captured a pirate captain and tortured the captive to learn the location of a treasure hoard. Once the pirate realized the pc had no intention of letting him live, he told the pc a false location full of deadly dangers instead of the real treasure. The pc then cuts the pirates throat.
Right after that, the pc learns that there was a huge, HUGE bounty for that pirate. Alive.
I reward players for creativity, not "I kill it! I kill it"
+1. Freakin' classic, LOL! :)
I have less trouble with Looters in my Star Wars games, than with Murderers.
My favorite being the player that decided he could throw an Imperial Officer into the airtight sensor-baffled Smuggler Compartments for a couple of days.
He raised a shitstorm when he found the corpse in there the next day (suffocated), till the other player reminded him I said "airtight" when he threw the guy in there.
"Why didn't you get the guy out then?!?"
"Because my character didn't know you threw him in there!"
I have a dual-classed Looter/Murderer personality in my game: my 12-year-old nephew. Even though he's from the in-law's side he's frighteningly reminiscent of how I played D&D at age 12.
Thus far he has:
- Nearly gotten the party slaughtered by causing a wild boar stampede through them ("You see Wild Boars on the trail ahead." "I take out my bow and shoot one!" - this was with his ranger for crying out loud)
- Gotten himself killed by arrowing a Gas Spore
- Constantly steps on other party members' treasure gathering. Other player: "We're searching the bodies for coins." Me: "You find...32 silver pieces and..." Him: "I TAKE SOME OF THOSE COINS AND HIDE THEM WHEN NOBODY'S LOOKING!"
Right now, "midterm exams" are underway and the regular gaming group is playing Tomb of Horrors. They have just defeated the gargoyle with the 100-gp-gem necklace (which, thankfully, did survive the disintegrate spell that dispatched the gargoyle)...and the nephew is poking around looking for "stuff" where the gargoyle stood.
It should be interesting when the group finds the gargoyle statue that will destroy the gemmed necklace, but give the party a gem of True Seeing in exchange.
Yes, I have occasionally felt like strangling these types of players, but probably not as often as the rest of my players do.
RPGPundit
Quote from: Premier;605666I also know his cousin:
"You captured one of the guards alive, and now he's tied up."
"I cut him."
"... and that's how you can get past the sentries - finishes the captured guard."
"I slit his throat. What? He already talked, we have no further use of him."
"The low-ranking crewmembers of the spaceship are a bit hesitant, not knowing how to deal with the fact that you have just killed off all the officers."
"From now on, you're working for us. Yes, for free, be thankful we're letting you live. I grab one and start cutting his fingers off until they comply."
And to answer the thread title, no. Not the PC.
... I know him also ... that was dead on
Quote from: Haffrung;605690When I ran the Night Below campaign, I had a couple egregious looters in the group.
Good ol' Night Below. If I recall correctly, it had a pretty bait'n'loot situation build in. Something like:
"Ok, you've befriended these friendly gnomes but... nearby they have these ancient and holy burial chambers/caves, that are just packed with valuables and magic items. Yes, they're you new, and only, friends.... but c'mon, you wanna loot, don't ya?"
Quote from: DKChannelBoredom;606010Good ol' Night Below. If I recall correctly, it had a pretty bait'n'loot situation build in. Something like: "Ok, you've befriended these friendly gnomes but... nearby they have these ancient and holy burial chambers/caves, that are just packed with valuables and magic items. Yes, they're you new, and only, friends.... but c'mon, you wanna loot, don't ya?"
I am a huge fan of Night Below. I can't pinpoint why, but its in my top three modules of all time.
Quote from: Novastar;605785I have less trouble with Looters in my Star Wars games, than with Murderers.
Thugs with lightsabers is one of my biggest pet peeves, especially when they try to justify it. Let's just play something else.
Pete
Quote from: pspahn;606072Thugs with lightsabers is one of my biggest pet peeves, especially when they try to justify it. Let's just play something else.
Pete
I also hate Paladins that are cold blooded killers.
Say hello to your new class Mr. Fighter.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;605791I have a dual-classed Looter/Murderer personality in my game: my 12-year-old nephew. Even though he's from the in-law's side he's frighteningly reminiscent of how I played D&D at age 12.
Many of my early D&D games had players like this. (Especially players which were around my age at the time).
To top it off, some campaigns basically resembled a D&D version of the movies "Crank" and "Crank: High Voltage", or the video game franchise "Grand Theft Auto".
Quote from: DKChannelBoredom;606010Good ol' Night Below. If I recall correctly, it had a pretty bait'n'loot situation build in. Something like: "Ok, you've befriended these friendly gnomes but... nearby they have these ancient and holy burial chambers/caves, that are just packed with valuables and magic items. Yes, they're you new, and only, friends.... but c'mon, you wanna loot, don't ya?"
One of the cool things about Night Below is it really puts the spotlight on diplomacy. Learning how to make and keep allies is crucial. So there's lots of scope for tension and drama if some of the PCs are more ruthless and greedy than others.
Quote from: Bill;606050I am a huge fan of Night Below. I can't pinpoint why, but its in my top three modules of all time.
It's a fantastic combination of sandbox and epic adventure, and sadly overlooked. If it was published for 1E (or even 3E) it would rightly be regarded as an absolute classic, and a template for how to design an epic adventure without railroading.
One of the most impressive aspects of the Night Below is how early encounters with bandits and goblins train you for the kind of diplomacy and subtlety you'll need to overcome the much more powerful underdark forces later in the campaign. The second chapter is a bit grindy, but the opening chapter on Haranshire is pretty much a model in how to create a dynamic sandbox. And the third fulfills the promise of the Drow series in showcasing all the coolest elements of the underdark.
Quote from: Haffrung;606098the opening chapter on Haranshire is pretty much a model in how to create a dynamic sandbox. And the third fulfills the promise of the Drow series in showcasing all the coolest elements of the underdark.
Indeed - it's one of the best experiences I had, as a new AD&D gm. We quickly got tired of the dungeonering in the second book, but some of the players from back then, still brings up NB once in a while. And for some reason, I can still remember, that one of the Haranshire rangers was called Kuiper.
Absolutely, I've had problems with this kind of player. The thing is, the system is often set up to reward this kind of behavior. You scrounge copper pieces from every beggar you come across and you trade them in for a magical sword.
I've addressed it by talking with players before hand about what kind of game I want to play. Most of the players are happy with a 'minimal looting' kind of game. Instead of pulling weapons off the bad guys, they know that they'll get to earn an awesome item via quest. It's more fun, but some players have more trouble than others ignoring glittering piles of change next to the goblin's dead bodies.
Effectively, players know that they'll end up with gear appropriate for their level even if they leave everything behind - as such, there's not much incentive to loot everyone.
Back in the day when I played AD&D 1E, party PCs usually dealt with grabby PCs like that.
Quote from: Bill;606074I also hate Paladins that are cold blooded killers.
Say hello to your new class Mr. Fighter.
Werd, total disreguard for class and character is a big turn off for everybody.
Quote from: Kaiu Keiichi;606216Back in the day when I played AD&D 1E, party PCs usually dealt with grabby PCs like that.
...and we had all kinds of fun doing it. :D I don't usually approve of PC vs. PC conflict, but in these cases I have to make an exception.
In my last english Albion game (the final one until April) we have a young guy playing a Cleric (he's usually playing "dark lone wolf" type characters and is having a seriously hard time processing in his adolescent mind how a "lawful" character should be played, much less how he can be badass without being "daaaaark"). He's one of the guys who always rushes to try to loot first.
In this case, they had just finished winning a pivotal battle; at a moment when even the queen are her young son the prince were present; and no sooner is the battle won that the kid declares that he's running to the town to loot it.
I let him, of course, and so he misses out on the Queen arriving and rewarding everyone else who was actually there. He got a 2000-shilling ring out of his looting, while the rest of the PCs got knighthoods, titles, offices; he could have had his pick of almost anything after the group had been essential to the Lancastrian victory, and he blew it because of his greedy small-minded rush to find treasure in the cheapest way possible.
We'll have to wait till April to see if he learned his lesson.
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPundit;606393In my last english Albion game (the final one until April) we have a young guy playing a Cleric (he's usually playing "dark lone wolf" type characters and is having a seriously hard time processing in his adolescent mind how a "lawful" character should be played, much less how he can be badass without being "daaaaark"). He's one of the guys who always rushes to try to loot first.
In this case, they had just finished winning a pivotal battle; at a moment when even the queen are her young son the prince were present; and no sooner is the battle won that the kid declares that he's running to the town to loot it.
I let him, of course, and so he misses out on the Queen arriving and rewarding everyone else who was actually there. He got a 2000-shilling ring out of his looting, while the rest of the PCs got knighthoods, titles, offices; he could have had his pick of almost anything after the group had been essential to the Lancastrian victory, and he blew it because of his greedy small-minded rush to find treasure in the cheapest way possible.
We'll have to wait till April to see if he learned his lesson.
RPGPundit
Excellent! But willl he learn?
Quote from: Looter Guy;606280Werd, total disreguard for class and character is a big turn off for everybody.
Well, I have met quite a few players that literally can not comprehend what 'Lawful Good' means.
As in, Good does not mean "What is Good for my selfish ass"
or, "Lawful means I obey written laws just because"
Lawful AND Good...epic fail by a few players.
Quote from: Bill;606508Excellent! But willl he learn?
I don't know; teenagers are famous for not learning lessons the easy way.
RPGPundit
Quote from: Bill;606512Well, I have met quite a few players that literally can not comprehend what 'Lawful Good' means.
As in, Good does not mean "What is Good for my selfish ass"
or, "Lawful means I obey written laws just because"
Lawful AND Good...epic fail by a few players.
I think this is a problem with the D&D alignment system in general. It's not always immediately clear to everyone, in the same way, what any given alignment means.
I think it's better to hand a Paladin or Cleric a set of religious principles they are supposed to uphold, and the things their god considers a sin. This communicates a very clear expectation of behavior.
While not a perfect implementation, I though Palladium was on the right track with its alignments, as the description of the alignments explained them in terms of what kinds of behaviors a character of that alignment would have, which better informed role playing those characters.
Guidlines can be very handy.
Once the 'obvious' has been declared: "You are a champion oif all that is Good and Right; protector of the weak, light where there is darkness, hope when all seems lost".....then I let the player do what they please, and have the environment respond accordingly.
If a Paladin is not acting very paladinlike, his divine power could fail, and the npc's in the setting would react appropriately.
As a rule I dont tell a player how to play their character.
Paladins and clerics being the trickiest I suppose.
Quote from: Bill;606615Guidlines can be very handy.
Once the 'obvious' has been declared: "You are a champion oif all that is Good and Right; protector of the weak, light where there is darkness, hope when all seems lost".....then I let the player do what they please, and have the environment respond accordingly.
If a Paladin is not acting very paladinlike, his divine power could fail, and the npc's in the setting would react appropriately.
As a rule I dont tell a player how to play their character.
Paladins and clerics being the trickiest I suppose.
There's a difference between telling a player how to play their character and expecting a player to embrace the premise of the character and thus the internal reality of the game world by extention. I find players who refuse to do that, even when said premise and game world has been slowly, carefully, clearly explained to them, are problem players that are best to divest one's self of rather than try to "fix" them through in-game consequences.
Someone who says they want to play a paladin then goes around slitting throats and generally being a psychopath is probably in that category.
Quote from: Doctor Jest;606620There's a difference between telling a player how to play their character and expecting a player to embrace the premise of the character and thus the internal reality of the game world by extention. I find players who refuse to do that, even when said premise and game world has been slowly, carefully, clearly explained to them, are problem players that are best to divest one's self of rather than try to "fix" them through in-game consequences.
Someone who says they want to play a paladin then goes around slitting throats and generally being a psychopath is probably in that category.
True.
I tend to be slow to remove players. I am soft hearted.
Quote from: Doctor Jest;606609I think this is a problem with the D&D alignment system in general. It's not always immediately clear to everyone, in the same way, what any given alignment means.
I think it's better to hand a Paladin or Cleric a set of religious principles they are supposed to uphold, and the things their god considers a sin. This communicates a very clear expectation of behavior.
While not a perfect implementation, I though Palladium was on the right track with its alignments, as the description of the alignments explained them in terms of what kinds of behaviors a character of that alignment would have, which better informed role playing those characters.
good idea and noted
The problem with things like alignment and paladins in D&D is paladins are based on medieval Christian lore. But how is the Paladin of a wrathful storm god supposed to behave? Why would his code of behaviour map to that of Christians? What if your world has nothing analogous to Christianity?
Quote from: Haffrung;606770The problem with things like alignment and paladins in D&D is paladins are based on medieval Christian lore. But how is the Paladin of a wrathful storm god supposed to behave? Why would his code of behaviour map to that of Christians? What if your world has nothing analogous to Christianity?
No, Paladins are based on Holger du Danske in
Three Hearts and Three Lions.
Holger was very, very human. As was the Saracen paladin who adventured with him.
I've never expressed violent fantasies against players who constantly loot.
Players who loot from the party, on the other hand...
Quote from: thedungeondelver;606836No, Paladins are based on Holger du Danske in Three Hearts and Three Lions.
Holger was very, very human. As was the Saracen paladin who adventured with him.
As with explainign all things you have to pick a parallel everyone understands sadly telling a 14 year old that the paladi should be based on Holger du Danske aint going to get you very far...
Saying
Lawful Good is like Captain America - the perfect Paladin
Chaotic Good is like Batman
Chaotic Evil is like the Joker
Lawful Evil is like Hitler
Lawful Neutral is like Judge Dredd
Chaotic Neutral is like the Hulk
I give you Neutral Good and Neutral Evil are tricky maybe but most teenagers get that Captain America doesn't slit throats or carry the bulk of the gold off for himself, doesn't punch orphans in the face or cheat at poker.
Quote from: Looter Guy;605537"I look inside!"
"I open it!"
"I take it!"
OMG! Shurely everyone has shared a table with one of these players. "ME FIRST!" and "I go through the gnoll's sack!" are exclamations, while the rest of the party is either recovering from combat. the trapped door, or even talking to major npc's.
I end up secretly wishing for their early death or opening the wrong box before its over...
This guy is what Rot Grubs were made for.
Quote from: jibbajibba;606853I give you Neutral Good and Neutral Evil are tricky maybe but most teenagers get that Captain America doesn't slit throats or carry the bulk of the gold off for himself, doesn't punch orphans in the face or cheat at poker.
Awesome!
Quote from: jeff37923;606855This guy is what Rot Grubs were made for.
Rotgrubs sound great, and I am also fond of cursed magic items.
The problem is when you're talking about a young player who thinks captain america is lame.
RPGPundit
It's been my experience that sometimes the PC who is always looting involves the party ending up with a net gain in xp.
Quote from: Haffrung;606770The problem with things like alignment and paladins in D&D is paladins are based on medieval Christian lore. But how is the Paladin of a wrathful storm god supposed to behave?
I think it's fine to have a different set of principles for various gods for your game. This is the exact tack that Hellfrost takes for its various gods. The important thing is that the player understands what is expected of him as a holy warrior of the faith. As D&D originally just left the whole religion question fairly open, it defaulted to an idea of good and evil people were generally familiar with. Settings sometimes modified this, as did campaigns.
Everything is open for the GM to interpret for their setting. They just need to clearly communicate that to their players.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;606836No, Paladins are based on Holger du Danske in Three Hearts and Three Lions.
Holger was very, very human. As was the Saracen paladin who adventured with him.
That's where the word Paladin comes from, but the implementation since OD&D comes more from the Christian Militant Orders. It was explicitly stated that this was the case in Dragon Magazine in the 80s.
Quote from: jibbajibba;606853As with explainign all things you have to pick a parallel everyone understands sadly telling a 14 year old that the paladi should be based on Holger du Danske aint going to get you very far...
Song of Roland was required reading when I was in High School.*
Why does everyone cite 14 year olds as the problem anyways? Do people really have that many young teens in their games?
Quote]
Chaotic Good is like Batman
Is it? That seems open to debate. Which is the problem with alignment systems, really, the standards are often largely subjective.
http://writingiseasier.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/batman-alignment-chart.jpg
At this time, through curious circumstances, I do have a 15 year old in one of my groups; but his 50-year old father is just about as bad when it comes to loot-mania.
RPGPundit
Quote from: rpgpundit;607342at this time, through curious circumstances, i do have a 15 year old in one of my groups; but his 50-year old father is just about as bad when it comes to loot-mania.
Rpgpundit
lootstravaganza
I find the "Murder-Hobos" colloquialism to be an apt representation of the current party running through the Hommlett of my game.
Kill everyone, and dig through all the turds to find some silver pieces.
Quote from: Doctor Jest;607171Song of Roland was required reading when I was in High School.*
Why does everyone cite 14 year olds as the problem anyways? Do people really have that many young teens in their games?
Is it? That seems open to debate. Which is the problem with alignment systems, really, the standards are often largely subjective.
http://writingiseasier.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/batman-alignment-chart.jpg
Yeah but its my table right.... if i think Batman makes a good Chaotic good paradigm then.... well I will cite batman and I can even say Chirstian Bale Batman. to be specific. And when the player makes decisions Batman would make I will nod my head and think yup that suits Chaotic good for me.
If you prefer to pick spiderman, or Blondie from the good the bad and the ugly then fine .... but pick something the subject of your advice has actually encountered and is fond of.
As for Pundit, I reckon after Avengers although a few might think Capt was a bit crap they get what he stands for, they grok him if you will.
This really isn't difficult. You are just setting some behavioural norms for players unable to grasp the abstraction of Alignment. Players get what would the Joker do? More than what does CE actually mean.
Quote from: Blackhand;607447I find the "Murder-Hobos" colloquialism to be an apt representation of the current party running through the Hommlett of my game.
Kill everyone, and dig through all the turds to find some silver pieces.
TSR did implicitly encourage that style of playing by including treasure for every farmhouse. I know most of the times I ran or played in Hommlet, looting the village was high on the agenda. And the local NPCs seemed statted out not as potential allies, but as protectors of the gold-rich villagers against rapacious PCs.
Quote from: RPGPundit;607147The problem is when you're talking about a young player who thinks captain america is lame.
RPGPundit
Captain America is my Hero.
Ok, I admit that sounds lame to many people.
But the character is what I wish I was.
Quote from: Blackhand;607447I find the "Murder-Hobos" colloquialism to be an apt representation of the current party running through the Hommlett of my game.
Kill everyone, and dig through all the turds to find some silver pieces.
My personal distaste of 'Murder Hobo Characters' is more about weaker ties to the setting than the fact they are evil.
Harder for me to care when a pc wanders the world killing and stealing. Boring.
I want pc's that build a town in the frontier, fend off sinister monsters, and engage in political intrigue.
I don't care for 'random jack the ripper with no ties to anthing'
Quote from: Bill;607545My personal distaste of 'Murder Hobo Characters' is more about weaker ties to the setting than the fact they are evil.
Harder for me to care when a pc wanders the world killing and stealing. Boring.
I want pc's that build a town in the frontier, fend off sinister monsters, and engage in political intrigue.
I don't care for 'random jack the ripper with no ties to anthing'
Yeah, what tough call do you make when everyone chooses Chaotic Neutral as their alignment? Restrict alignment? I let the players play the game they want, but I run the game I prepared.
I try to avoid playing or running games with the 9 point Alignment system, when I can. It sucks ass.
If the PCs act like bandits, then treat em like bandits. But have a talk with the players after the game and tell em, "hey, I'm not into running a game about bandits. Can you guys play characters who I find somewhat entertaining and sympathetic?"
In my current group we not only loot everything and even occupy some of the dungeons. The last dungeon we completed was underneath the house of the city's new lord mayor, who ended up being a monster disguising his nature with a magical suit. We used the suit to impersonate the mayor and "sell" his house to our party and then "retire to travel". We're not above going back to dungeons to haul out interesting fixtures whenever possible. We're more pro-social than typical murder hobos, and have numerous friendly contacts in our hometown. We're more like a murder-HGTV crew. It's important to note that we don't try to backstab or steal from each other, and so far the DM seems pretty chill with our desire to pry out everything, nailed down or otherwise.
To me the looting aspect of play has one foot in the metagame. I'm only irked by the loot happy players at my table because there isn't even a chance at a single post-combat quip even once before he's got his notepad out after having declared his instantaneous looting, asking which items glow, identifying them, et cetera.
How much gold came off that gnoll, and what that potion he was carrying does is largely a games mechanic discussion and brings me out of the part of the game I'm interested in, which is roleplaying my character.
I've never once read a book, or watched a movie where the characters after having come out of a fight victorious ravenously fall upon their defeated foes rifling through their pockets and then divvying up the coins.
It's just jumping on every opportunity to write something down as an improvement on your character sheet and it's really obnoxious.
Quote from: Wolf, Richard;608028To me the looting aspect of play has one foot in the metagame. I'm only irked by the loot happy players at my table because there isn't even a chance at a single post-combat quip even once before he's got his notepad out after having declared his instantaneous looting, asking which items glow, identifying them, et cetera.
How much gold came off that gnoll, and what that potion he was carrying does is largely a games mechanic discussion and brings me out of the part of the game I'm interested in, which is roleplaying my character.
I've never once read a book, or watched a movie where the characters after having come out of a fight victorious ravenously fall upon their defeated foes rifling through their pockets and then divvying up the coins.
It's just jumping on every opportunity to write something down as an improvement on your character sheet and it's really obnoxious.
Being focused on loot is alien to me. I remember driving another player crazy when my character gave away a fortune in gold to buy the freedom of a street urchin.
Sure, its nice to find treasure, but for it to be something you pounce on like pack of hungry dogs is annoying.
Gold is pretty slim in my current game. It's compounded by the fact that I'm enforcing training in AD&D 1e: that is, 1,500gp x Current Level x Weeks of Training.
After five weeks of grueling through the adventure around Hommlett...no one player in the party has enough to advance to 2nd level.
It's becoming an issue. The group is mostly CN, though there are a few CG individuals.
Quote from: Blackhand;608082Gold is pretty slim in my current game. It's compounded by the fact that I'm enforcing training in AD&D 1e: that is, 1,500gp x Current Level x Weeks of Training.
After five weeks of grueling through the adventure around Hommlett...no one player in the party has enough to advance to 2nd level.
It's becoming an issue. The group is mostly CN, though there are a few CG individuals.
Temple of Elemental Evil campaign?
Are the CN characters really CN, or are they CE and in denial?
They are motivated mostly by greed, but they hold themselves up as "good guys" doing things "fairly"...even though it's not fair and sometimes fights get started when they could be avoided. CN is supposed to be the "wild card" alignment, and they generally use it to justify any sort of action, good or bad, depending on how they feel at the moment.
I think it's spot on for the alignment, even if tensions climb in situations. It's rare for a player to go "NO I'm not doing that my alignment says NO". Instead I get thoughtful articulations on why it's rationalized by the alignment in the moment.
Hell, they got along well with CE Zert, until they left him alone, at the entrance of the dungeon with all the goods and no backup. Then they went looking for him, but he's absconded. They'll probably meet him in Nulb, but there's only 1 member of that party still alive to remember his treachery.
And they are using Hommlett as the village it's meant to be, not slaughtering peasants for their trinkets.
The funny thing is that this kid is playing a Cleric now, and he's running him just like he did his Thief beforehand; and I can't get it through his head that there's something a lot more badass about playing a religious zealot with a violence fetish (something totally viable in the Albion setting, where there's fuck all to say that Clerics must be nice guy, just fanatical about enforcing the tenets of Law), than a pissant sneak who skulks around stabbing people and then loots bodies.
RPGPundit