|
And I have never wanted 2 characters dead as much as I want 2 of this group dead. And some of the group will be happy to not have to deal with their characters anymore either.
This isn't an issue with the characters. It sounds like it is an issue with the players. Assuming you don't tell the players that since their characters are dead they can't play anymore, what is going to happen to prevent their next characters from doing the same thing?
|
The things that immediately stand out ot me are:
Why aren't these characters dead already?
What's the hold-up?
Condolences on having such herp-derp players crapping on the others' fun, but yes, give them the rope to hang themselves with. If they @#$% and moan about "just playing their characters", tell them that you were just playing the world reacting naturally to them, like white blood cells would towards a disease.
And when they roll up new characters, they should have to give the surviving players' characters a legitimate reason to trust them.
Can't @#$%ing stand Stupid Evil.
Scratch that. The other PCs need to start killing or shunning the walking talking liabilities until the players take the hint.
This is why I ban evil PCs in my games.
Option 1. Kill them and loot their items (don't let the items remain in the group to cycle back to the players in question). Of course their next character my be just as bad. You could kill them at the start of a session and introduce their new character until the end but that may seem vindictive.
Option 2. Penalize evil. Not just make it hard for the characters to do anything (high law enforcement presence, lots of areas with protection from evil running, 'good' healing not working on them) but the players suffer too (reduced xp for a start, especially for being evil when CN or nicer is stamped on their character sheet, and the most evil has to make the tea/coffee/snacks).
cheers
Mark
Various discussion about evil PCs.
See, as a fan of evil PCs now and then, this really annoys me. Not the solution - you should kill their stupid asses - but the fact that people think they can get away with stupid evil And that so many people have never seen evil PCs played any other way.
See, as a DM, I have allowed evil PCs on several occasions, so long as they understand that they must also be a functioning part of a larger group. If they don't understand that, then I let the rest of the PCs kill them. I've never yet had to do the deed myself.
As a DM, my favorite evil player was a fallen Paladin. Started the game LG, but a series of unfortunate events convinced the character that honor was stupid and only resulted in good people getting killed. So, as a noble act, she decided to "do the dirty work" by killing evil with more evil. She went blackguard (to regain some of her Paladin abilities), took some rogue levels, and became one of the meaniest, evil slaying tanks I have ever seen. She'd use poison, ambush tactics, intentional misdirection, torture - the whole evil bag of tricks - in her darkly heroic quest to destroy those who would break the Law (still Lawful) or harm innocents. Her philosophy was that she'd dirty her soul for the sake of others, and damn, did she.
She was the quinticential antihero. The heroic party members worried about her, and the other characters (mostly CN) loved working with her. It made for good RP, without harming the game. One character (CG ranger) was working on bring her back to the light.
On the other hand, there's always the PC who wants to play a trator working for the BBEG. I've had that go well only once, when the PC in question couldn't actually go through with the murders, turned against his dark master, and helped the party defeat said BBEG. Most other times, it turns into a stupid PVP killfest that pisses all of the other players off.
Anyway, just saying Evil PCs can be really cool, so long as their players aren't being idiots. Which, of course, is often the hard part.
Maybe more than one character.
I'm the GM for this one.
Trying to make sure it is not just my own bias on -wanting- the characters to die that is coloring the set up. The evil characters have already done stints in jail for their actions, and nearly been killed by the other PCs for their actions as well. So its not like they don't know its coming, but. . .
Half the party (or so depending on who shows up) is evil. Some of them didn't start out with that listed as their alignment but refused to play anything that could remotely be called anything but evil (attacking innocents just because the bad guys were already dead as an example. Killing their source of information they are specifically there to talk with, because, well. . . no reason really).
So they accept a quest from the Thieves guild. Its morally grey as the thieves also help escaped slaves escape, as slavery is legal where they currently are. But the quest is to retrieve an item of evil. (Literally one with an evil aura and negative levels to good characters wielding it.)
There is also a schism in the thieves guild that they helped start, even though they don't yet know this, but attacking people during a diplomatic meeting doesn't usually make good friends. One of the thieves from the other faction within the guild has tipped off a powerful paladin about the item being retrieved.
The characters have encountered the paladin before, so they know he is in the area, and tough.
So far some of the characters have not managed to -not- start fights at inappropriate times. Hence the stints in jail, being banned from some major portions of the city, the schism in the guild from the players actions at a diplomatic meeting, and more.
So I am pretty sure the paladin showing up and demanding the item so that he can destroy it will cause problems; he had a somewhat confrontational attitude towards evil. And the evil characters are quite clearly stupid evil.
The situation just feels -so- right that I want some input to make sure my...
I think you need to be more assertive with your players, open the lines of communication and get everything out on the table. Tell them how you feel and what you think about the game. Handling this in-game seems a little passive-aggressive. If you allow certain elements in your game and then rig the game to destroy those elements (e.g., by targeting certain characters), people stop having fun. If the game the players find fun is not also fun for you to GM, you should definitely step aside. I think the most important thing is to have an open sit-down with the whole group. As Howie pointed out also, if you don't make yourself clear there is no reason to expect that the same problem won't recur.
|
|
STUFF
I'm going to put this out there - Are YOU having fun running this game?
I've had my fair share of screwball players in my time, but they quickly become aware that I run a game about heroes not sociopathic jerks. If your players, playing evil are ruining your fun then they aren't really holding up their half of the contract. Seeing as you put work into the adventures your write/run, they might want to play more appropriate characters.
Maybe chat to them about it?
If a player holds the game hostage saying: "I won't play if I can't play eeevil." Then shrug and say: "Well if you aren't having fun, you could always not come."
If a player says: "I'm just playing my character."
The response is: "You control your character, not vice versa. When your character is a jerk who causes problems for his fellow party members, by extension you're being a jerk who causes problems for his fellow players."
Anyway, it was just an impression I got from the post, feel free to disregard if I've misunderstood.