"It's a game, I didn't realize there would be -consequences- to my actions" said in an offensive tone, is a player response I have gotten before.
In my current campaign, which started just recently, about 5 sessions in or so, I currently have 3 evil characters. This despite requesting that no one play evil characters, explicitly saying, I would prefer noone be evil. I hate to tell people they can't play their character concept, though, and since evil doesn't automatically mean idiotic evil as I have had some evil characters that were phenomenal assets to the group, and yet this time. . .
So far the 1! good character has prevented TPK's from the guards only through sheer luck rolling a 20 on diplomacy, merely getting the party permanently banned from that location (and then me having to replan stuff but whatever right? Its not like players appreciate the work DM's do anyways). I <3 that player's character, which is my main consideration trying to think of ways to not TPK them in game, otherwise there would already be a new party. . . anyways.
Part of it does seem to be other DM's affecting how players expect to interact with the world though. One of the evil characters pulled his sword on an escort (after often threatening the escort earlier, among many others) and starting a fight because of it while they were being taken to a meeting. The player seemed genuinely puzzled next session and commented "in X's campaign everything always ends up in a fight no matter what we do."
Then again, so far everything he has done in my campaign causes a fight as well, cause attacking people generally causes a fight.
