Dealing with "Totally" trustworthy characters.


Advice


So, here's the skinny:
The party has, from a meta-gaming perspective, known that our Slayer has been hoarding items for weeks now, but most of our characters are not so keen on such knowledge—my character, which I am retiring, has known and tried to steer the Slayer towards, in some major way, sharing the loot with the party.—

So, last session we ended book 1 of Kingmaker, so I made it a point to say, "Ok, so all that stuff you've been hoarding is now getting distributed so everyone gets a fair amount of treasure." I assumed that the player was unaware that such actions are actually highly discouraged at any table unless everyone is in on it, so I gave the player a stern talking-to at the table to which none of the other players objected. I explained how any loot that is found is intended for the party, not just for the rogue to rush ahead, snatch up and bluff out of the party's hands. I explained that such actions are actually quite toxic to the party, and that by doing so the player is stealing from the group.

After this stern talking-to we redistributed the loot using a need/greed system based on the cost of items and more or less finished for the day. The player abstained from the after-party, as it was quite late.

In the after-party no one opposed this talking-to, but some voiced that maybe it was a bit mean. However, I'd been being nice about this toxic behavior for a while, so it was time to stop being nice about things and if I have to be mean to get my point across then that is fine if it is for the betterment of the group.

Now that we have regrouped, I'm making the, likely erroneous, assumption that the player's character in question has become "Totally" trustworthy in terms of not stealing from the group anymore. Therefore, I remind the party, fairly regularly I might add, that the player is "totally trustworthy!"

So, we just founded our kingdom in Kingmaker, and I'm curious as to what we should do if the character in question turns out to not be "totally trustworthy." My suggestions range from time in prison to frontier justice (Party says, "NOPE," and starts the hacky-slashy) to my new super-crafter just not making anything for the character.

My other idea was to make a necklace of fireballs, inscribe letters onto it to make it look like it spells something and then to put exploding runes on it and using a meta-magic rod to make 1/2 of the damage fire so it triggers the necklace. If the Slayer proves to be untrustworthy, we will likely find the charred corpse later. *rubs hands together.*

Basically no one finds the player's Slayer to be trustworthy, but with the talking to, surely the player understands that there are certain key rules among a party that shouldn't be broken. If the player wants to rob people not of the kingdom or the party, then by all means! Any ill gotten goods from that are entirely the player's characters, just don't steal loot that is intended for the party.

I mean, if we fight a huge boar, the loot in the boar's cave is obviously intended for the party. However, if the slayer sneaks into a different kingdom's city, sneaks into a bank there, cracks the vault and steals 3,000 platinum, then by all means it is the slayer's—as shall be the consequences when it turns out the bank has hired a small army of mercenaries to find and retrieve the gold as well as punish the thief.

I don't know, at all of my tables stealing from the party or hoarding loot instead of attempting to evenly distribute it or at the very least informing everyone of its existence, has always been banned. Mostly because it ends up with the party realizes the thief has all of the stuff and kills the character or the character gets retired leaving the party woefully poor for their level. Worse, this encourages people to retire characters and bring new ones in at higher WBL, meaning that older characters can have less than 1/2 the gold the new characters have and that, to me, is not fair to the people who have been playing characters from the beginning.

What are your thoughts on this stuff? Am I just a terrible person for attempting to ensure the feeling of fairness across the group, or should I just make a super charisma super wisdom character and rob the entire party blind only to retire the character in the possible future and take the entire party's gold with me?

The player in question is pointedly using the slayer's bluff to prevent the party from getting the magic items and treasure it deserves. To me, that is simply unacceptable. Don't steal from the people you're adventuring with. Though, the slayer is chaotic neutral, or, as I like to call it, the cop-out alignment where you accept none of the responsibility for your actions.

We shouldn't have to be policing the Slayer. It'd be easier to just kill the slayer, then kill every single chaotic character the player brings in until the player brings in a lawful or neutral character. I don't exactly want to do that, nor do I want to have to set character killing traps like the necklace of fireballs with exploding runes on it.

Thoughts?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Don't do anything about this in game. Tell the player that loot is meant to be equally distributed and if they cannot play well with the rest of the group then they are not welcome.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:
Don't do anything about this in game. Tell the player that loot is meant to be equally distributed and if they cannot play well with the rest of the group then they are not welcome.

Exactly. This is a meta-game problem. The player was breaking the group's social contract, at first apparently in ignorance. He's been informed. If he continues to do so, talk to the player. If that doesn't work, boot him.

Assuming that is the group social contract and not just yours. If others are okay with it and in particular if the GM is okay with it, then maybe it's you who have to adapt or leave.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, it's covered in the first two posts.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So is Slayer the new go to class for disruptive a+!*%!# everywhere, at least Rogues are underpowered so they're easier to kill if they become more trouble than they're worth :-D


What's the GM say? You've expressed the concern to the other players. I've played the klepto rogue in games before, but have always kept it to a very minimum (ie. one small item per session). After all, from a mechanics standpoint, it is extremely hard to steal items from a chest (doing it quickly before the party spots me).

How are you going to accomplish the slight of hand with that +1 longsword? Seriously? You're going to "palm" 20 pounds of silver coins before the party realizes? The GM might be giving the klepto a little too much lee-way. Keep in mind, for every 16 coins, that's a pound. Sure he can lie and say he's just really happy to see you, but unless he's got some giant blood in him, I think he just stole something.

The way I've usually handled this is I make my rogues make a sleight of hand check, and they grab the shiniest item that can be palmed. That usually amounts to about 5 gold or a single jewel (which might be 50g). It annoys me as a player, but when it comes down to overall loot, it shouldn't unbalance the party much.


thejeff wrote:
then maybe it's you who have to adapt or leave.

My adaption: Go Sorcerer/Rogue/Arcane Trickster build. Start outright stealing items from people, using disguise self to sell them to merchants in town, put my huge treasure hoard in a foreign account (Likely in Bevroy) and be completely untrackable and undetectable due to insane abilities.

If that is what they want to play, I can do it way better than any of them. After showing them why these social rules exist, they shall surely surmise that such actions are bad for the group.

I don't fear this, however, as it seems like it is an unspoken social contract already that we all, save the player, share.

I'd prefer to not be a jerk about it, since I could easily make a character that is uncatchable in-game while being overtly obvious about it in a meta-game sense.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Going tit for tat isn't going to help the situation at all, only make it worse


captain yesterday wrote:
Going tit for tat isn't going to help the situation at all, only make it worse

Yeah, but it'll be a lot of fun. If you're the only honest man in a group of thieves, then that isn't any fun! Instead, become the most cunning, effective and slimiest of them all! I mean, if this is going to turn into a game of who can be the king of thieves, I intend to be the best.

I don't really want to, however. Being the king of slime balls isn't a title I'd prefer. It honestly seems like the worst thing to do, but people only realize what is a bad and good idea through experience. I'm making a super-crafter to enable people to be the best at what they are.

Addition:
My current plan is this:
If the player's character turns out to still be stealing from the party, then I intend to pull the other players to decide what to do.
I'll offer that they do one of the following:

1) Tell the player that such actions are completely fine. At which point I intend to, if I keep my super-crafter, ensure the player is so godlike at what the Slayer is doing, in terms of sneaking items then lying about it, that they don't have a prayer of stopping it. I mean, they did vote alone without the GM, the offending player or me stopping them.

2) Give the player an ultimatum of some sort that is designed to stop the offending behavior, or suffer the consequence of being kicked out of the group.

3) Kick the player out of the group.

I'd rather this be a vote where I have no control over what happens, while also washing my hands of the responsibility of deciding what to do with someone. Either way, they'll make the correct, for them, the majority, decision.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Problems with a player need to be resolved outside the game.
Problems with a PC may have to be resolved outside the game too, if dealing with them in-character would prove to be too disruptive.
PvP is almost always too disruptive.


Well if they're all doing it..... when in Rome...

I was under the impression it was just one stealing and the others didn't want a big scene


captain yesterday wrote:

Well if they're all doing it..... when in Rome...

I was under the impression it was just one stealing and the others didn't want a big scene

Your first impression is the correct impression. I hope the behavior has changed, since if it hasn't the other players will have to vote as to what to do with the player in question. Depending on their choice, something will happen.

My current plan is this:
If the player's character turns out to still be stealing from the party, then I intend to pull the other players to decide what to do.
I'll offer that they do one of the following:

1) Tell the player that such actions are completely fine. At which point I intend to, if I keep my super-crafter, ensure the player is so godlike at what the Slayer is doing, in terms of sneaking items then lying about it, that they don't have a prayer of stopping it. I mean, they did vote alone without the GM, the offending player or me stopping them.

2) Give the player an ultimatum of some sort that is designed to stop the offending behavior, or suffer the consequence of being kicked out of the group.

3) Kick the player out of the group.

I'd rather this be a vote where I have no control over what happens, while also washing my hands of the responsibility of deciding what to do with someone. Either way, they'll make the correct, for them, the majority, decision.


Not to be super negative for a moment, but this isn't so much a bad player issue as it is an issue with loot-centric games like Pathfinder.

The dishonest loot hoarding thief is a totally legitimate character concept, and there are a lot of games out there where this kind of behavior would be totally acceptable as character advancement has much less to do with loot and other forms of material wealth than it does with the character's personal prowess.


Hark wrote:

Not to be super negative for a moment, but this isn't so much a bad player issue as it is an issue with loot-centric games like Pathfinder.

The dishonest loot hoarding thief is a totally legitimate character concept, and there are a lot of games out there where this kind of behavior would be totally acceptable as character advancement has much less to do with loot and other forms of material wealth than it does with the character's personal prowess.

So in other words...

When someone is stealing stuff that doesn't matter much from their friends, it isn't a big sticking point.

When they are stealing stuff that their friends' lives depend on, it is a big sticking point.

I wouldn't really call this a "problem". To pick an extreme example, playing a murderous psychopath who kills their friends is a totally legitimate concept if the system used allows for (almost) penalty free deaths. It doesn't mean that systems without trivial PC resurrection have "issues".

The problem is that the player is doing something that they know screws over other players, not that the system doesn't prevent players from intentionally screwing over other players.


The old adage about not taking a dump where you live comes to mind.

It isn't smart.

Talk with the player out of game. Post that, if he doesn't want to be part of the group, see about switching to the god of mercantile.

First, no, don't craft for him except at a raised rate. Say he gets 90% while the rest get 75 or at-cost. This is a great way to shift wealth back to you, where you can resdistribute. In addition, any spellcasting he receives, he pays for through NPC pricing to you, with additional "roaming costs" if you're in an inconvenient location, time of day, or in combat. Count your funds religiously so he can't bluff paying you.

Likewise, charge for any services. If he refuses, get him blackballed at your temple.

Nickel and dime him as a means to get your funds back, in other words. If he's robbing you once, you can balance the scales through fees, fines, and interest rates.

Don't forget the interest rates and additional "roaming fees."


Since most players don't actually care to track the minutiae of treasure and wealth, my group usually assigns one player/character as the banker. This usually ends up being the greedy guy. They're actually really good at tracking the fine details, and pooling all of the resources helps to make difficult purchases that the group feels aid the overall success of the party more than an even split of the treasure would.

These players tend to actually develop a sense of pride with their role as banker and become far more honest and meticulous. It also kinda helps them to play the role of wealthy guy that solves problems with money if that is how they like it.

It's also far more productive than calling the player a worthless thief out to screw the party.


Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
The player in question is pointedly using the slayer's bluff to prevent the party from getting the magic items and treasure it deserves.

Unless he for some reason have access to detect magic or has a really high Spellcraft: Stop telling him what's magic.


Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:

Well if they're all doing it..... when in Rome...

I was under the impression it was just one stealing and the others didn't want a big scene

Your first impression is the correct impression. I hope the behavior has changed, since if it hasn't the other players will have to vote as to what to do with the player in question. Depending on their choice, something will happen.

so wait, so you guys talked to him, told him to stop, and as far as you know has, BUT if he didn't and you find out you'll do....... what? rob him back? murder him? go all NC-17 over it?

where is this going to get you do you think? why can't you just assume he's stopped, if you know for a fact he hasn't then i don't see where doing as he/she does is going to bring any sort of resolution to the matter.

unless you just don't like the person in question and you're trying to get him kicked out, do the others feel as you do?

the vindictiveness in your posts is a little troubling for me, and makes me think theirs another side to this story........


This is a player problem not a character problem.

Don't become part of the problem.

Sczarni

I would inform player to stop doing it otherwise, he is risking his character being kicked away from the party or murdered, and not by me (GM). It's best to keep it realistic. What party would even tag along a thief who is stealing all the cash from them? Such thefts would be obvious above obvious.

Silver Crusade

Hark wrote:

Since most players don't actually care to track the minutiae of treasure and wealth, my group usually assigns one player/character as the banker. This usually ends up being the greedy guy. They're actually really good at tracking the fine details, and pooling all of the resources helps to make difficult purchases that the group feels aid the overall success of the party more than an even split of the treasure would.

These players tend to actually develop a sense of pride with their role as banker and become far more honest and meticulous. It also kinda helps them to play the role of wealthy guy that solves problems with money if that is how they like it.

It's also far more productive than calling the player a worthless thief out to screw the party.

Hmmm. Banker =/= worthless thief out to screw everyone else.

That's certainly not the universal perception.


captain yesterday wrote:
the vindictiveness in your posts is a little troubling for me, and makes me think theirs another side to this story........

I'm always somewhat vindictive if something is getting on my nerves, though I rarely act on it unless it gets to the extreme.

The other side of the story? The party hasn't screwed over this player in the past, however the player in question has made pointedly bad decisions in the past that have lad to the player's character's misfortune (the player had a previous character that ran off alone, getting separated from the party and then being killed while the party had no ability to find the said character) but we haven't been the source of the problem.

The point is: this player has a history of bad decisions. When we played second darkness, the first thing the player did was attack Saul in the Golden Goblins because...he had a key on his arm that could be used to unlock a box filled with 10,000 silver pieces? The player even went so far as to blame the party for not backing the, then cleric, up against Saul and his lackeys.

I'll offer that my, "vindictiveness," as you describe it comes from the fact that pretty much everyone but this person is acting towards the goal of on-the-table teamwork where everyone gets a fair share. I am going so far as to retire a character who is a badass—to take as a cohort later when it has been updated to using NPC attributes instead of point buy—to play a character that is almost entirely oriented towards buffing the party through crafting magical items and helping to make the kingdom as likely to succeed as possible.

Divvying out loot properly ensures that everyone stays about the same in terms of where they should be—and Kingmaker is already fairly low GP anyway—and it forms a sense of camaraderie. Our characters may not all always get along, but there is the simple fact that we must get along enough to support each other even if we are rivals or don't trust one another.

If you're stealing 5 gp, no one is going to notice. However, if it turns out that every single fragging time we find a magical item somewhere that the Slayer's appearance seems to have changed slightly and the magic item (That is worth quite a bit more than a simple 5 gp) has disappeared things start to get suspicious. However, since thus far the Slayer has also been allowed to use bluff, which is quite high I might add, to explain away the missing magic item then things start to become a problem. Eventually more things will go missing, and once the Slayer gets a bag of holding, it gets really easy to just swipe crap without it effecting one's appearance.

From what I can gather from the rest of the table the Player's behavior was sort-of funny at first, but also at least a little unacceptable, so they didn't punish it. As the weeks went on the behavior became more and more bold until the Slayer just wants to swipe anything that, "Isn't claimed by anyone ,yet." Yeah. Sure. Even though it is obviously intended for the group. Surely. Where is my disintegrate spell or, hmm, hold person in the middle of a fight. I mean, the Slayer is using In-Game mechanics that no one is going to be able to reliably overcome to support bad behavior, so I suppose fighting fire with fire can work.

The slayer is, to me, on a sort of probation. The player hasn't done anything bad to us such as what garnered the stern talking-to and the player isn't doing shady crap since, but I know the other players were beginning to become aggravated at the behavior. I'd rather lose one player than pretty much everyone else.

If the bad behavior continues I'm going to have to start acting on it. I'd prefer if it doesn't, since I kind of don't like feeling like the jerk who has to force things.

I'd rather the game progress in such a way that I get to fill the "Smart Guy" / "Mentor" role in the party that is so helpful and enabling that I become a rally point for the group. My previous druid character (retired into NPC-hood) was literally just that: the party didn't have the ability to reliably find food so I made a character that was godlike at finding food and surviving the wilds. Now that we are in the Kingdom building section of Kingmaker, I'm playing a character that through various means is godly at building up kingdoms and making everyone else extremely good at what they do.

I'd rather the player in question just, "get it," and not be a problem anymore. However, as to if this is the case is to be seen. I do hope it is simply a case of the player didn't know any better, and has realized not to do certain things since that would mean my job is done. If things continue to be bad, then leaving it to a vote by the other players will turn out to be how we'll decide if such actions are acceptable or deplorable.


I'll be honest I didn't read your whole post but I did get the gist of it, ouch sorry sounds like the GM isn't helping things, my apologies, sorry!


Do the same thing to the slayer as you would to anyone you know in real life: STOP ASSOCIATING WITH THEM.

If you knew someone in real life and then found out they were stealing from you, would you keep them around or continue associating with them? HELL NO! You would set the police on them and never see them again/kick them from your social circle.

I would assume your characters would feel similarly. Giving them a second chance would be MONSTROUSLY magnanimous.

Have your group of characters tell the slayer they are no longer welcome and if the character follows you, team up on him, make him unconscious, strip him bare and deposit him with the local law authorities for theft and assault. Make the player make a new character. If the new one does the same as the old then you KNOW it is a PLAYER issue and not a bad CHARACTER choice.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Dealing with "Totally" trustworthy characters. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.