Doing it without the express permission of the other players is being a **** and is unacceptable.Watch your language friend.
If people get THAT upset about in game actions go play a nonroleplaying game.
This may shock you, but I often use the word "dick" when I'm not upset. :-)
RESOLVE IT IN CHARACTER.
Personally, I think "what kind of game are we trying for? co-operative or player-vs-player or anything goes?" is an out-of-game question to ask. Specifically, a pre-game question to ask.
I had a rogue who skimmed from the group. I handled all the appraisal, selling, and distribution of excess loot (as I had the skills and contacts to move stuff). I kept track of the party fund. When it came time to hand out gold, people would get a bag of 1,500 GP, rather then the 1,513 GP, 2 SP and 6 coppers that should have been their fair, mathematical split. Everyone knew I took a little off the top to keep the numbers even, but didn't care, in character or out. I handled all the player-side bookkeeping for the game and took a little extra for my trouble.
In a game I'm playing now we have a similar situation. Our rogue will put in the extra leg work to sell things with historical/special value to interested parties, rather then just dumping on the counter of the local blacksmith/magic mart. She gets a higher price, and pockets most of it. The party still gets the normal "book" value, or above, and she gets a bit of extra spending cash. It's not enough to blow the WBL guidelines, so it's all good. We don't ask what price she actually got; she put in the extra work and gets rewarded for it.
She does tend to pocket keys without telling us, but opening locked doors is part of her job.
(Fixed that rogue/rouge thing for you)
So, way back in 2E, I played in a Greyhawk game, in which all of the characters came from lower class backgrounds, we had no Cleric, and our Wizard couldn't be bothered to deal with "trivial" things like keeping account of our finances. It fell to my character, a former street-thief, prostitute, and drug addict, to handle the accounting. Why? Because she was "good with sums and had contacts in the moneychangers guild." Both of those things were true - she was incredibly good with sums. She had contacts in the moneychangers guild. She could add up our loot quickly, knew exactly who go to in order to get it changed out into larger coin, or gems, or in one case a box full of gold bars (we had to pay a ransom). Plus, she could get it done quietly.
She was also skimming 10% off the top of everything we ever looted, 10% off of everything we sold, and kept it up through pretty much the entire game. At first she did it because she didn't trust the other party members, and was afraid that if they found out about her addiction and tried to hurt her or kick her out because of it, she could just run away with her nest egg and be set for a while, until the money and drugs ran out. After the party got her cleaned up and sober, she kept doing it because she had convinced herself that having a "safety net" was essential - there wouldn't always be mercenary jobs for the group to take. It was simply a good idea to have something around for a rainy day, right? Eventually she figured she could justify it because no one had noticed it before, so why should she stop now?
In the end, none of the other party members (or their players) ever really noticed. The GM would hand me a list of what we'd found, give a rough description of the type and amount of coins ("Several hundred gold pieces, a few gems about the size of your thumbnail, a gold plated stein..." - Never "You find five hundred fifty gold pieces, six gems worth 50gp, and a stein worth 75gp" - that was all left up to post-game notation), and the party would leave me to do the "leg work" during roleplay downtime.
I have to say, my group was exceptionally big on keeping Player-Knowledge-Metagaming out of things - they all knew she was a flower-smoking-junkie, but not a one of them used it in character until the Fighter stumbled upon her, high as a kite and feeling no pain, behind the blacksmith's shop with the smith's son and four of his friends. A couple of the players suspected that I was having her skim, but never had any proof due to the way that the GM handled loot assignation. When all was said and done, a couple of them were surprised that it was "only" 10% that got skimmed, and wondered why I never tried for more.
The point of my little story is that, honestly, this is not that big a deal. It's a game. If people are getting bent out of shape in the real world about this, then it's time to find a different game. Seriously.
Is there a witch or wizard in the party? Wait till he sets his bags down (like at night) then turn him into a squirrel. Sift through his bags. Then return him to his normal form when you find incriminating evidence. or make him your new familiar. ;-)
Is there a witch or wizard in the party? Wait till he sets his bags down (like at night) then turn him into a squirrel. Sift through his bags. Then return him to his normal form when you find incriminating evidence. or make him your new familiar. ;-)
Just kill him with your arcane spells and tell him it was something your character would do...
Doing it without the express permission of the other players is being a **** and is unacceptable.Watch your language friend.
If people get THAT upset about in game actions go play a nonroleplaying game.This may shock you, but I often use the word "dick" when I'm not upset. :-)
RESOLVE IT IN CHARACTER.Personally, I think "what kind of game are we trying for? co-operative or player-vs-player or anything goes?" is an out-of-game question to ask. Specifically, a pre-game question to ask.
I don't care what you do or say in your private or professional life but this is a public "PG" forum. I'm just saying that you crossed that line.
I respect peoples opinions against this playstyle but bare in mind that baring playstyles in general can leave out plenty of memorable roleplaying experiences.
I don't tell players what they can and cannot. I just provide consequences. In tgs specific instance it should be the other players providing consequences. My players are allowed to attack and kill one another if they wanted. But they don't. I play with a mature group of people who understand that consequences are the ultimate police.
Is there a witch or wizard in the party? Wait till he sets his bags down (like at night) then turn him into a squirrel. Sift through his bags. Then return him to his normal form when you find incriminating evidence. or make him your new familiar. ;-)Just kill him with your arcane spells and tell him it was something your character would do...
Sounds like in character resolution to me. ;-)
No rogue should be suprised at being watched closely until the party trusts them. Kender need not apply. That said, I see a lot of marooning and shooting in store for for some characters (see below).
Yar ! A band of pirate rogues me mates and I may be, yet, if'n ye join our company, ye shall be bound by the articles, the code. The ones that apply be noted below.
II. ...but if they defrauded the company to the value of a dollar in plate, jewels, or money, marooning was their punishment.
II. If any Man shall offer to run away, or keep any Secret from the Company, he shall be marooned with one Bottle of Powder, one Bottle of Water, one small Arm, and Shot.
III. If any Man shall steal any Thing in the Company, or game, to the Value of a Piece of Eight, he shall be marooned or shot..
IV. If any Gold, Jewels, Silver, &c. be found on Board of any Prize or Prizes to the value of a Piece of Eight, & the finder do not deliver it to the Quarter Master in the space of 24 hours he shall suffer what Punishment the Captain and the Majority of the Company shall think fit..
Most of my adventuring groups are more strict than pirates, so ...
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
We had a husband and wife who were doing the 'skimming' (first time skimming being defined as a box of gems worth 300 GP for our first level characters) The cleric noticed and Shadrach figured it out (hint, when your psychic warrior is working as a bouncer for room and board, and your cleric is sleeping in the free room and board in the temple, while your rogue and wizard rent out a townhouse and buy goodies, it doesn't take a 14 int to know something's up.)
Unfortunately we lost the rogue's player to a heart attack before this 'issue' could be resolved, but the cleric and I had different viewpoints.
Cleric: Well I'm Neutral good, so I'll use this information to lead her to repent or turn her over to the authorities.
Shadrach: I'm LE and I'll use this information for my benefit at the most oportune time.
When we were talking about that campaign later, her widow talked about how they were worried about Shadrach 'doing something' because he was LE (not because they were stealing from us).
Husband: Well we had plans to blackmail Shad, we saw he would figure it out eventually.
DM: Well Matt had already hired the thief to toss your place-
H: Wait, he did that?
DM: And was going to report her to the thief's guild, and was going to let that other crime boss know that the moll his rival was dating was underage under Greyhawk law, and he was the one paying your 'free butler', and would have left her behind in the collapsing temple if not for DM fiat, and he was locating the two rogues you stole the gems from originaly and...
H: Um... we didn't know any of this. *turns to me* You were planning this all?
Me: I told you, Shad is me with all the safties off.
As someone else said, when you travel with people who kill for a living, upsetting them isn't the best course of action.
1) Any rogue entering rooms alone and out of the view of his team, is fairly brave and most likely DEAD if he keeps doing it.
2) Any rogue in a room with 3 other people, successfully stealing an item is very masterful, and deserves whatever he gets. There are opposed rolls for this sort of thing.... just raise your perception and sense motive!
3) Rogues shouldn't be able to steal anything "large" without a negative to their Sleight of Hand check for hiding an object on their person. <-- this includes huge amounts of gold for selling items.
Pfffft. Forget the rogue. In our party it was the mage we had to watch who was caught stealing from the party....
So it's OK when the rogue does it because that's what's rogues do, but not OK when the wizard does it ?
It all gets back to "Why is my character adventuring with this other character ?" If I couldn't trust you with something relatively unimportant like money, why should I trust you with something vitally important like my survival ?
I respect peoples opinions against this playstyle but bare in mind that baring playstyles in general can leave out plenty of memorable roleplaying experiences.
I don't tell players what they can and cannot. I just provide consequences. In tgs specific instance it should be the other players providing consequences. My players are allowed to attack and kill one another if they wanted. But they don't. I play with a mature group of people who understand that consequences are the ultimate police.
If your players enjoy this playstyle that's great. I don't think anyone here is saying that "skimming" behavior should be banned even if everyone in the group is fine with it. Everyone's having fun. There are no issues that need to be dealt with OOC.
Your comments imply to me that you think everyone should "RESOLVE IT IN CHARACTER." If that isn't fun for the group, why should they?
Your comments could also be read to imply that your players are mature and those how don't "RESOLVE IT IN CHARACTER" aren't.Are your mature players allowed to quit your group when they stop having fun? Because that's the ultimate consequence. If people aren't having fun they'll stop playing.
Actions taken in character should be resolved in character. Bottom line.
If it is a common theme for a specific player to steal from the party using every character he plays, that is not an in game problem but an out of game problem.
Players are free to leave my game any time. If a player can't separate in game and out of game actions I encourage it.
In essence your assumptions regarding my implications are accurate.
|
So it's OK when the rogue does it because that's what's rogues do, but not OK when the wizard does it ?
No it means everyone is up in arms about the rogue possibly doing it. But its more annoying when the party mage goes and pockets magic item or three or money when your not looking. Oh boy did the fireworks start then.
It all gets back to "Why is my character adventuring with this other character ?" If I couldn't trust you with something relatively unimportant like money, why should I trust you with something vitally important like my survival ?
Yup, thats one of the arguements when he got caught....
Is a Rogue “skimming” treasure as he finds it “Role playing” or is he stealing from his adventuring companions?
If you have a player doing this, is this something you need to take care of as a GM?
How about if you are a player and another player is doing it? How do you deal with this?
And what if you are playing a rogue who is “Skimming”? does anyone have the right to tell you how to “role play” your character?
What do you all think? Thank you.
The first answer may well be both. Yes he is stealing from the group. Yes he is roleplaying. But I place a caveat on both. He isn't stealing if he is the ONLY ONE risking anything for the treasure. For example, the characters happen across a ruined chapel with a strongbox that is obviously trapped. The trap is the only danger. If the group waits outside while the rogue faces it alone. Then the treasure and experience should be his alone. But if that box was guarded by bandits that the group had to face together than he would be stealing if he took the treasure even if he alone disarmed the trap. The same for a fighter if he faced an enemy alone while his party retreated. He would get the rewards alone. The caveat on roleplaying depends on how the player defined his character's personality and alignment.
As for the rest... you need to sit down as a group and decide as a group rule if that is ok. If it is ok, then handle it in character when you find out. If it isn't ok, then remove the player from the group if he does it again.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The first answer may well be both. Yes he is stealing from the group. Yes he is roleplaying. But I place a caveat on both. He isn't stealing if he is the ONLY ONE risking anything for the treasure. For example, the characters happen across a ruined chapel with a strongbox that is obviously trapped. The trap is the only danger. If the group waits outside while the rogue faces it alone. Then the treasure and experience should be his alone. But if that box was guarded by bandits that the group had to face together than he would be stealing if he took the treasure even if he alone disarmed the trap. The same for a fighter if he faced an enemy alone while his party retreated. He would get the rewards alone. The caveat on roleplaying depends on how the player defined his character's personality and alignment.
So if the Rogue is reduced to 0 Cha by a pack of Lahamu and the party drags his comatose butt around for the rest of the night while the player plays the Fighter's cohort, the rogue shouldn't get a share of the treasure?
If the party hacks their way through the temple of Doom with the rogue hiding in back, then the rogue disarms the vault door, he's entitled to everything in the vault?
Huh?
One of the biggest problems with adventuring parties is "Why am I traveling with these people?"
If someone steals from you, and you know it, barring some extreme circumstances, you're going to take back what was stolen if possible and never associate with that person again, possibly because they are now in jail. Or dead, depending on the type of person you are.
You can generally do without having an insane Kender (yes, redundant, I know) or a character of another race who acts like a Kender in any party.
If the characters actions spring from out of character causes, you can't resolve it in character.
RESOLVE IT IN CHARACTER. The player of a shady character should understand, except, and embrace the consequences of those actions without other players crying about it.
+1
This has everything to do with my other posts. If a character can not differentiate between in and out of character s/he shouldn't be playing a roleplaying game. If this is the scenario than the player needs to have a sit-down. But if the character is genuinely playing his character (and according to alignment) as a GM I would prefer it to be resolved in character. This also helps to settle feelings of ill will between players. Embracing the role, and fate, your character has chosen is more rewarding than real life friends coming to blows.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is a Rogue “skimming” treasure as he finds it “Role playing” or is he stealing from his adventuring companions?
If you have a player doing this, is this something you need to take care of as a GM?
I join my voice with other posters: roleplay or not, being a jerk is being a jerk.
'findel
So if the Rogue is reduced to 0 Cha by a pack of Lahamu and the party drags his comatose butt around for the rest of the night while the player plays the Fighter's cohort, the rogue shouldn't get a share of the treasure?
If the party hacks their way through the temple of Doom with the rogue hiding in back, then the rogue disarms the vault door, he's entitled to everything in the vault?
The rogue gets a full share of the treasures the Lahamu were guarding. If the Lahamu was one of a series of guardians for a sunken cave, the the rogue gets full share for anything found in that cave. If the party leaves the caves behind and heads up into the forest where they encounter Driders as a wandering group for example then no I wouldn't award the rogue any of the treasure from the Driders.
As for the second question, the Temple of Doom is one location and all of the various encounters and traps are guarding the place, so NO most certainly he wouldn't get everything in the vault... In fact he is lucky he came forward to open that vault door for the group because if he hadn't then really he wouldn't have done anything to earn anything the whole time.
I hope that clears up any misunderstandings.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I respectfully disagree. As a GM I say, if a player's concept of his thief is to steal wherever he can, even if it is from his companions, so let him do it. It doesn't matter if it's two gems or half the treasury."I'm just roleplaying my character"
What a pathetic excuse. We've probably all run into this scumbag, who thinks that he can steal from the party and call it "good roleplaying".
So as long as it fits the "character concept" then it shouldn't be discouraged out of character?
What if my character concept is a seemingly normal rogue who is planning a mass murder-suicide the next time the rest of the party is asleep?
Would you discourage that concept? Awww...but I'm just "roleplaying my character!"
Some concepts stink, and should be either discouraged, or preferably outright made unavailable by the GM.
Setting parameters for character concept is always the province of the GM. Concepts that involve backstabbing the other characters, whether literally or metaphorically, are a good way to spoil everyone else's fun, a real jerk-move.
Good analogy Treantmonk.
I honestly chalk this up to disruptive player actions. If the player is playing a devotee of an evil deity that practices mass murder suicides then yeah I guess he is totally acting in character.
Then its up to the GM to creatively save his campaign and it sounds like a crusade against said deity is where the campaign should shift its focus to.
(Even if that is a sad and realistic action)
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
One thing I forgot to add...
The 'rogue stealing from the party' should be brought up out of character and resolved if it's breaking the first rule of the game.
Everyone Has Fun
If Bob is getting angry because Dan's wizard is stealing from the party, and Mary is getting tired of calming Bob down and explaining why Bob's cleric can't just 'not heal' Dan's wizard because it would be 'out of character' then Tim the DM should sit down with Dan, privately or publicly because it's keeping everyone from having fun.
And yes, this can include if Dan hides behind the 'it's my character concept' argument that Tim explains the next city they go into it's the 'city's justice concept' to subject all adventurers to 9th level strength divinations and follow up by casting multiple feebleminds on mages who steal from their party members because it puts wizards in a worse light.'
Mature players won't need that hint.
And of course PCs have that 'player character' hat on. Come on. If a cleric of Saran-wrap is adventuring with a Taldoran noble in Taldor, the noble's player is not expected to report the cleric to the authorities. (Nor should the cleric be expected to walk around with her holy symbol emblazoned on her shield). Now would it be 'in character' to do so? Yes. But again, the mature player will rationalize it. To use my previous post, Sela (the cleric of St. Cuthbert) logically should have let the LG church know about the thief, but Kim (the player of said cleric) decided that the more 'table friendly' route was to try to persuade her the wrong of her ways.*
*
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I hope that clears up any misunderstandings.
Yes it does.
I just have a different PoV then, as opposed to thinking yours is mind numbingly stupid based on if you'd agreed with my examples. :-)
To me things don't always happen in a vacuum. To use your ruin example; are the party travelling to/from somewhere as part of their quest? If the party magus is on watch, and is able to slaughter a bunch of goblins w/o waking anyone, he'd not even be out there at all, except for the adventure. If the party sends the rogue into the ruin, the rogue doesn't know that shadows won't rise from the floor, and he's relying on the rest of the party to come calling (especially the cleric) when he screams like a little girl.
So, to my point of view, the rogue is sharing the risk when he's picking that lock, or when he's scouting out 60' ahead because he's the one with the stealth and the dark vision. He knows* if things go south his buddies will rescue him.
Think of the show Leverage. Suppose there was a mission where they didn't need the muscle. He's still going to be there 'in case things go wrong' shouldn't he get part of the reward? (assuming there was a reward besides satisfaction in that show.)
*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've recently run into this "problem" in one of my groups. The rogue in question is a little on the insane side, being both a kleptomaniac and a pyromaniac
In the end, the Evoker extorted more money from the rogue than he had pulled from the group, and he stopped stealing. It also made for an awesome and intense roleplaying moment when the Evoker told the rogue to pony up or he would blast him into oblivion.
What I'm trying to say here, is that in-character solutions work for this sorta stuff. Yes, he was stealing from the party, but it almost had dire ramifications once and in the end, he didn't gain anything. It contributed a lot to the atmosphere of the group.
Is a Rogue “skimming” treasure as he finds it “Role playing” or is he stealing from his adventuring companions
While it may be roleplaying, it is definitely stealing.
If you have a player doing this, is this something you need to take care of as a GM?
I would not allow a player to skim an item unless 1) the group agreed that the amount was minor enough or the circumstance special enough that they didn't mind or 2) there was a good story reason for it and the player would be making amends later.
How about if you are a player and another player is doing it? How do you deal with this?
If it's socially feasible, tell the player that what they are doing is bad for the game. If that's not feasible, go to the GM.
And what if you are playing a rogue who is “Skimming”? does anyone have the right to tell you how to “role play” your character?
Yes, the GM and other players definitely have the right to tell you that you've broken the social contract of the gaming group.
My gaming group has a very strict "No PvP" rule. You don't attack, steal from, deceive, or abuse a party member. Occasionally there's a short-term exception to this for very good story reasons, but it's quite obvious to all involved that any harm will be repaired in the long run.
At what point are you stealing from the group?
Are you stealing from the group if you swipe some gold from a chest before the guardian is defeated?
Are you stealing from the group if you swipe a Necromancer's magic amulet before he runs away or is killed?
At the point you take treasure thats "in the way" of the group.
If the rogue goes into a room noone else can enter and opens a locked chest its still the loot of the group.It doesn't matter who strikes the killing blow or who is able to kill someone. Maybe only the wizard can defeat an ancient ward placed onto a treasure room. But its still not his because its a group game and everyone is contributing their abilities to achieve it.
On the contrary if the Rogue decides to set off for himself in the night and breaks into some stores during the night while they are in the city its not stealing from the group because the group per se has nothing to do with it. Although they might still oppose it because it might fall back onto them if he gets caught...
I think whats stealing from the group and whats not is pretty obvious with a human level intellect.
Just take it the pirate way. You are a member of a pirate ship. Then try to think about what would be stealing from your comrades and what will ultimately get you shot. Suddenly people seem to have the right "scent" for whats stealing from your group...
When the rogue in my campaign wanted to steal from the party members I told him that it would be ok, but I also said that there would be severe consequences.
When he told the group, "I have to go away for a few minutes to sort some things out in the Inn." (Translation "I am going to rob you guys blind")
My DM response was: "Okie dokie, Roll bluff, and I need the others to roll sense motive."
The party cleric caught him in a lie and his attempt was foiled, with no consequences to the thief.
He tried it one more time and got caught by the party wizard who noticed that his magic items were gone. A quick Detect magic later and the wizard got his items back. (It is somewhat hard to hide the fact that you have every magic item that a player has ever collected in your backpack when the backpack glows with magical energy.)
Then the wizard passed me a note.
NOTE: I cast Feeble Mind on the rogue for stealing my life savings. How evil is that?
My reply: That is justice, harsh justice but justice.
With this unknown illness befalling the group's rogue they passed a caretaker 100g and left the now mentally deficient rogue with the caretaker, to drool the rest of his life away in a corner.
(At low levels, Blindness can just as easily affect the rogue, good luck getting it cured.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So do you (Sleep-walker) make the PCs share all loot? Including loot gained from side quests and the like?
What if a character takes a trait that allows him/her extra starting gear? Or takes a bonded (I.E.free masterwork)item?
I guess I don't run a "fair" game. I rely on my PCs to make it fair.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I never realized I played in such hardcore games, but after reading this thread I feel like most people play games with way, way more training wheels than we do.
Just the idea that the GM should enforce the idea of no intraparty conflicts seems so ridiculous to me that the first couple times I read it, I assumed y'all were being sarcastic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I never realized I played in such hardcore games, but after reading this thread I feel like most people play games with way, way more training wheels than we do.
Just the idea that the GM should enforce the idea of no intraparty conflicts seems so ridiculous to me that the first couple times I read it, I assumed y'all were being sarcastic.
We always had that rule but it never had to be enforced... because players always fairly shared the loot...
I allow, and even expect, that rogues built as thieves will attempt to skim off of the top when it comes to treasure, that's part of what the class can do after all. I generally leave it to my players to handle in character, with multiple perception checks for every sleight of hand attempt the rogue makes if this is a constant thing it will get found out soon, while if it is a once in a blue moon, picking the right spot kind of thing it doesn't really hurt the game in my mind.
So the rogue who is willing to invest a lot into sleight of hand can get a few extra coins, a gem or two, maybe even a potion or piece of magical jewelry, what's the problem with that? If you are playing with friends or at least friendly associates a few dozen or hundred gp difference in character wealth isn't going to cause out of character problems, and a rogue who pushes his luck will get caught and dealt with by the other characters soon enough.
Still, if the other players all feel that the rogue's thievery is hurting their fun, then it's time to go to the DM and the rogue's player, explain that his character's actions are infringing on their enjoyment of the game, and ask him to tone it down. Offer him alternatives, pick-pocketing NPCs, or keeping his frequency of skimming down but still letting him do it once in a while, something like that, and see what he and the DM say.
I never realized I played in such hardcore games, but after reading this thread I feel like most people play games with way, way more training wheels than we do.
Just the idea that the GM should enforce the idea of no intraparty conflicts seems so ridiculous to me that the first couple times I read it, I assumed y'all were being sarcastic.
+1
Wholeheartedly.
I allow, and even expect, that rogues built as thieves will attempt to skim off of the top when it comes to treasure, that's part of what the class can do after all. I generally leave it to my players to handle in character, with multiple perception checks for every sleight of hand attempt the rogue makes if this is a constant thing it will get found out soon, while if it is a once in a blue moon, picking the right spot kind of thing it doesn't really hurt the game in my mind.
So the rogue who is willing to invest a lot into sleight of hand can get a few extra coins, a gem or two, maybe even a potion or piece of magical jewelry, what's the problem with that? If you are playing with friends or at least friendly associates a few dozen or hundred gp difference in character wealth isn't going to cause out of character problems, and a rogue who pushes his luck will get caught and dealt with by the other characters soon enough.
Still, if the other players all feel that the rogue's thievery is hurting their fun, then it's time to go to the DM and the rogue's player, explain that his character's actions are infringing on their enjoyment of the game, and ask him to tone it down. Offer him alternatives, pick-pocketing NPCs, or keeping his frequency of skimming down but still letting him do it once in a while, something like that, and see what he and the DM say.
So you are fine with Fighters pressing money and Clerics charging money for spells they cast?
And he can get the reward for his skill investment by stealing from NPCs, just the thing the skill was designed for.
Ok, I have had some experience with this. As a GM I have had one player in recent memory who when playing a rogue pocketed some "extra" loot.
This along with a lush and well written background made her character clearly a hard bitten street thug with desperate aspirations to move up in the world.
She when joining the adventuring group discovered a chest with about 400 gp in it. She was separated from the rest of the party at the time so she quickly pocketed about 50 gp.
To her this was a lot of money, however she also knew that taking much more might have been easily visible.
So, this behavior continued to the tune of 50-100 gp per treasure haul/sale, due to the fact she had the deal-maker trait and was the only party member with appraise.
She stopped around level 3 due to the fact that as she put it "At first I thought these were just like everyone I have known, willing to do anything to get ahead. Now I know what is like to trust and have friends."
After that she never took anything again.
We all knew the whole time, however the characters had no idea due to her inventive and successful subterfuge.
No one was ever bothered or disturbed, and it is still laughed about now even when her Neutral Good Deava Bard finds treasure.
I guess TLDR however to make a long story short that "Stealing" from the party is in general a very anti-cohesion activity, if handled properly and with real role-playing, not just using the cry of "It's RP." to justify being a jerk it can be ok.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I allow, and even expect, that rogues built as thieves will attempt to skim off of the top when it comes to treasure, that's part of what the class can do after all. I generally leave it to my players to handle in character, with multiple perception checks for every sleight of hand attempt the rogue makes if this is a constant thing it will get found out soon, while if it is a once in a blue moon, picking the right spot kind of thing it doesn't really hurt the game in my mind.
So the rogue who is willing to invest a lot into sleight of hand can get a few extra coins, a gem or two, maybe even a potion or piece of magical jewelry, what's the problem with that? If you are playing with friends or at least friendly associates a few dozen or hundred gp difference in character wealth isn't going to cause out of character problems, and a rogue who pushes his luck will get caught and dealt with by the other characters soon enough.
Still, if the other players all feel that the rogue's thievery is hurting their fun, then it's time to go to the DM and the rogue's player, explain that his character's actions are infringing on their enjoyment of the game, and ask him to tone it down. Offer him alternatives, pick-pocketing NPCs, or keeping his frequency of skimming down but still letting him do it once in a while, something like that, and see what he and the DM say.
So you are fine with Fighters pressing money and Clerics charging money for spells they cast?
And he can get the reward for his skill investment by stealing from NPCs, just the thing the skill was designed for.
That's not quite the same thing, but I'd allow it(especially the mercenary fighter) if my players didn't veto the new character. I would also allow wizards who cast their spells when they feel it is appropriate rather than at the insistence of the party, characters being "a little slow" to defend others who they may have in character rivalries with, a cleric who refuses to heal someone who worships a god his is violently opposed to, and a whole host of other potential conflict points if they come from in character instead of out of character reasons and they don't disrupt the game.
The key is just to play with people who want to have fun and not be jerks. There are multiple characters who can pull off this same sort of skimming or self-serving behavior: the thief pulling the wool over the eyes of the party and helping themselves to a small nimble fingered bonus, the bard who negotiates the price of a gem up and "forgets" to mention to the party that he got a better price when it comes time to split loot, the wizard who shrugs and says he can't find anything magical in the pile of treasure then taking the plain gold ring as part of his share, the cleric(depending on the deity) who tells a rival character that he hasn't memorized that necessary spell today and leaves the character with a disease or curse, or the wizard who firmly tells the party he is out of useable mystical energy when he has a last spell or two held in reserve to save himself in case of an emergency.
Any of those characters could be excellent additions to a party of adventurers so long as the people playing them are not jerks. It is only when the game becomes a competition between players, or the in character conflicts become out of character, that there is an issue. In either of those cases, if the other players in the game feel somebody is ruining their fun and come to me(the DM) we'll hash out what changes to make to the disruptive character. So far I haven't had any complaints about the minor roguish skimming that has happened with characters, and pretty much the general response among my players has been chuckles and reminders to the rogue that their perception skills will win out eventually.
|
I never realized I played in such hardcore games, but after reading this thread I feel like most people play games with way, way more training wheels than we do.
Just the idea that the GM should enforce the idea of no intraparty conflicts seems so ridiculous to me that the first couple times I read it, I assumed y'all were being sarcastic.
+1
Wholeheartedly.
Not every gaming group is people who know each other well or at all. And even those people who know each other well can break down into intraparty conflict over things.
Hell, I have two brothers at my table, a married couple and on a rotating basis other handfuls of people with unique and varied relationships. Some of these people communicate well, others don't. Add stress, varied in game objectives, etc. Even groups built with solid unifying principles can slide into player on player tension that can effect a game.
Bully for you if you are never in a place to ever have to intercede. (And I mean that. I know that sort of sentence could come across the Internet as coded sarcasm, but its not my intention) But some groups need an impartial party to step in sometimes to say "hey" and guide things on a better course.
How much is he going to manage to skim, really? Enough for one potion over character wealth by level?
|
|
At what point are you stealing from the group?
Are you stealing from the group if you swipe some gold from a chest before the guardian is defeated?
Are you stealing from the group if you swipe a Necromancer's magic amulet before he runs away or is killed?
Any time you are taking without their knowlege and consent treasure that will go to the party.
Not only stealing but being dead weight in the fight
not if you immediately tell the party you got it and properly decide how to award it.
The "roleplay" theives should be "roleplay" thrown from the party or killed, depending on party inclination.
|
|
It's not about "hardcore". It's not about "training wheels". It's not even about "fair". It's about playing the way the group wants to play and not letting one player force everyone else to change that.
*nods* Our group of six plays nice with each other, we work together- not mess with folks side stuff- bard wants to be a noble, barbarian works for the druid, clerics building up a church and orphanage, etc... Then along came another player, whom was playing a theif/charlatan...of the clerics faith. Which was fine to a point, as he was on the run for some jsutified murder of a nobleman. But it was unacceptable when he starts mocking the clerics work and actively trying to wreck it. Which was then fixed when the barbarian was holding him by his ankles over a cliff while the head party cleric was having a nice conversation with him.
The player dropped out shortly after. Some folks dont want to place nice.