Years and years ago I had a player who would do the "stop, drop, and loot" nonsense in the middle of a pitched battle. Though there was no official AoO rules in the days of 2e, I still had her attacked from behind (with bonuses) by an ogre magi as soon as she focused her attention on the fallen foe in front of her. She got mad, screamed unfair, and threatened to leave the game. She didn't, of course, but did start playing a little smarter.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, this could easily become an IC thing ... since this guy is taking more than his share, and not helping the rest of the team out, the other PCs could just say 'We're tired of your crap. Get lost' to the offending PC.
"Because our characters have gotten tired of this nonsense, and throwing you out is what our characters would do."
This needs to be done more often.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How much loot could a looter loot if a looter loots in combat?
Keep in mind the action economy of looting. It's something that most groups don't think about because looting is done after combat. It takes a move action to pick up an item, and that's per item (assuming the opponents don't just carry all their stuff in one big bag). It's only a free action for the rest of the party to yell "Get you a** back here and help us!"
At most this guy should only be getting a couple of items before combat is over and then it's up to the rest of the party to decide if they want to stand aside and watch this guy do all the looting.
Now imagine if after the battle the paladin or barbarian goes up to you "Excuse me Magus" (well the barbarian wouldn't say excuse me) "Why did you leave Fred's back exposed during that fight to check that body of the fallen mummy?" Harder to say "that is what my character would do" during that conversation.
Nailed it! I'm picturing a very angry Paladin indeed!
"But that's what my character would do"...
I've always loved that line for the implication that, gosh, the player would love to be less of a selfish little wanker, but he's powerless to avoid doing so, because the character he invented is simply too nuanced and realistic to do anything else: dealing fairly and politely with his teammates - multiple well-armed professional killers on whom his life could depend at any moment - would simply be too implausible!
Yes, yes and yes. Ha ha. If he is so powerless to change, the dm should take his sheet and replace his alignment with selfish wanker.
"Ok, it is official now, proceed."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think pretty much every good suggestion has been covered. Here's the ones I can think of, which in a lot of cases are duplicates.
- Have the characters deal with it IC.
- Have the group deal with it OOC.
- Temporarily have an NPC join the party that objects to the behavior.
- Have monsters attack him while he loots mid-combat, because someone bent over going through pockets is a far better target than the angry guy with the mace.
- Divide the loot after each fight.
- Have a party "contract" detailing how loot will get split.
- Ensure the bodies he loots always have the worst treasure, with the best treasure in a chest that needs unlocking using the key that just happens to be on the very last body to drop.
- Use treasure rooms rather than putting the majority of treasure in the encounter rooms.
- If you don't already use the encumbrance rules, consider using them. Then ensure he finds many, many copper coins.
|
Late to the thread, so I have not read all of the comments. If I repeat advice, sorry about that.
Taking too long to make a decision? Get yourself a small hourglass (2 to 3 minutes seems reasonable). Enforce it. Can't make a decision... "You delay. Next"
Looting in combat? As I think I saw someone point out, he's potentially making himself a target. Occasionally remind him of that with an attack or two.
Also, action economy... He could, at best, grab and pocket one item a round.
Finally, regardless of how the players feel, why would their characters even consider accepting this behavior?
I agree with TPark on timing - a move action to go to a body, a move action to perform a search, then a standard to pick up 1 item (or one pouchful of unsorted stuff), a move to store it. If they have multiple containers, I'd force separate searches (e.g. backpack, pouch, rest of body including weapons, etc.). In combat time, this could take forever.
Another way of keeping combat and noncombat actions from mixing is to have encounters that tie together, either in terms of time (and forcing your companions to take extra rounds to finish off the bad guys is bad), or in terms of triggers. He can grab the loot, but what traps/alarms is he setting off? A few times where there's no chance to heal between encounters and the rest of the group will enforce a 'no loot during combat' policy.
Someone I used to play with had a character that kept every cursed item we ran across. His feeling was that if anyone was going to loot his body (as he'd looted countless others), they were going to suffer for it.
Late to the thread, so I have not read all of the comments. If I repeat advice, sorry about that.
Taking too long to make a decision? Get yourself a small hourglass (2 to 3 minutes seems reasonable). Enforce it. Can't make a decision... "You delay. Next"
Looting in combat? As I think I saw someone point out, he's potentially making himself a target. Occasionally remind him of that with an attack or two.
Also, action economy... He could, at best, grab and pocket one item a round.
Finally, regardless of how the players feel, why would their characters even consider accepting this behavior?
He breaks from the pack! He goes for the loot! He looks down!
Ooooh! Snipers take him down, hard.
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=270442807
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Did the op ever mention the age of the player? Some of the descriptions of events gave me flash backs to.high-school.
Most of this has already been gone over. I have a few things to add.
1) Breaks away from combat during the final round or two to loot everything first. Every. Single. Time.
Add in a few Guardian Scrolls. He gets strangled a few times by the loot he's grabbing and he has no one around he help him out and he might change his tune.
2) Hordes scrolls, wands, potions and anything else. He won't sell them, and only very rarely uses this growing collection. *
This is a matter of perception. Some people have no issue with using consumables and others don't like to use them unless they 100% NEED to. Myself, I tend not to use/buy them and either sell them or keep them in a rainy day, break in case of emergency, case. This is the kind of thing I doubt you'll easily change. I know I'm the kind of player that'll still have the potion they found on their first adventure when they turn 10th level...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only thing I can think of (that hasn't been said)is going the "aliens" route.
"As you are rifling around in the creature/person's pocket something starts moving beneath it's skin, you think to move back but it strikes before you have the chance."
Obviously you can't have random people/monsters have creature's living inside their body, but you can have a small town with the problem which could teach him a lesson and also would show him that you aren't going to allow him to keep up poor behavior.
I know people don't like the idea of "punishing" players, but it's behavioral conditioning. People will get away with as much as you will let them get away with. If you show him that he can't keep doing it, he will stop.
I will say though that the best idea so far is to talk to the other players and ask why they are meta-gaming. When they ask how they are meta-gaming ask them if their characters would really let this guy leave them in the middle of the fight to collect and horde the loot that they collectively worked for and why they (their characters, not the players) are allowing him to ration loot that should be for the whole party. Have them explain in character that everything that is owned by the enemies that they defeat belong to the collective party and every person has an equal share of the loot. If he wants a specific item, the value of that item comes out of the rest of his share of the loot. I know alot of people don't like confrontation, but that is the only way to solve a problem, to confront it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In, oh, 1975 this scenario was fresh and new. Now it's not.
Nor are fighters fresh and new, nor mages throwing spells, etc. Agreed that thieves wanting to steal things is a pretty old concept, but not sure why that makes it any less valid than other tried and true character types?
I'm actually surprised at the number of people saying that the GM should tell the player that they are playing their character wrong. Most of the time the forums ring the "the player controls everything about his PC, the GM doesn't get a say" bell as loud as possible.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In, oh, 1975 this scenario was fresh and new. Now it's not.Nor are fighters fresh and new, nor mages throwing spells, etc. Agreed that thieves wanting to steal things is a pretty old concept, but not sure why that makes it any less valid than other tried and true character types?
I'm actually surprised at the number of people saying that the GM should tell the player that they are playing their character wrong. Most of the time the forums ring the "the player controls everything about his PC, the GM doesn't get a say" bell as loud as possible.
Generally they side with whoever they think is impeding fun. It is not about a GM or player. In this case a player is impeding fun.
It just so happens that GM's have the power to impede fun more than players do.
Oh, and he's not stealing anything from other PC's. He's just greedy with the loot and focuses more on loot than helping his party.
"Greedy with the loot" is stealing from the party. It doesn't matter that he isn't taking attended items from his fellow PCs. However, if the other players don't care enough about it do make serious objections, there's probably no reason for you do anything (the exception would be if you know they really hate it but are reluctant to challenge the player for some reason.)
As for the other PC's, they've complained a few times. One of the PC's died (the character was HATED inside the game, but the players loved it), so the Magus used up a scroll of reduce person on the corpse, then used a set of +1 Manacles on it's hands, then wore the corpse like a cape and threw it into the river after running around for a bit.
... and this character is Chaotic Good? I typically consider it pretty hard to get me to move peoples alignment, but even I'd give a warning that a change of alignment is in store for doing something like that. Even if the character was a total jerk, he still had family and friends who'd probably want to see him properly buried (if at least not mockingly worn as a cape before being dumped in a river).
Also, I agree with the majority opinion here. This is mostly an OOC issue, and an issue that the other players should be involved in. (Even if the players don't care, ask them if their characters would be ok with someone leaving their back exposed during a fight to go raid the corpses?)
In, oh, 1975 this scenario was fresh and new. Now it's not.Nor are fighters fresh and new, nor mages throwing spells, etc. Agreed that thieves wanting to steal things is a pretty old concept, but not sure why that makes it any less valid than other tried and true character types?
I'm actually surprised at the number of people saying that the GM should tell the player that they are playing their character wrong. Most of the time the forums ring the "the player controls everything about his PC, the GM doesn't get a say" bell as loud as possible.
Because they are no longer "thieves" they are rogues, and stealing from your companions is the act of a sociopath.
This is right in there with PvP, and the DM certainly has a right to tell the players "no PvP" and also "no evils" and stealing from your friends is evil.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm actually surprised at the number of people saying that the GM should tell the player that they are playing their character wrong. Most of the time the forums ring the "the player controls everything about his PC, the GM doesn't get a say" bell as loud as possible.
I see it as if I'm the DM and you want to be an ass in-character to all my NPCs or even other PCs, that's fine as long as you accept there are consequences (The town guards won't accept "I'm just playing my character so leave me alone" as an excuse to justify you murdering the inn keeper), but once you start being an ass to other players you crossed the line. Feel free to play your PC any way you like, but don't go out of your way to make the game less fun for the other real life people involved.
I'm actually surprised at the number of people saying that the GM should tell the player that they are playing their character wrong. Most of the time the forums ring the "the player controls everything about his PC, the GM doesn't get a say" bell as loud as possible.I see it as if I'm the DM and you want to be an ass in-character to all my NPCs or even other PCs, that's fine as long as you accept there are consequences (The town guards won't accept "I'm just playing my character so leave me alone" as an excuse to justify you murdering the inn keeper), but once you start being an ass to other players you crossed the line. Feel free to play your PC any way you like, but don't go out of your way to make the game less fun for the other real life people involved.
^This
You can play however you want until you start ruining the game for other people.
Because they are no longer "thieves" they are rogues, and stealing from your companions is the act of a sociopath.
I think stealing from your companions can cause a lot of problems OOC, and as such, the GM is free to say "No stealing from the other players." But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about characters, rogues or otherwise, stealing from NPCs.
The OP said:
Oh, and he's not stealing anything from other PCs. He's just greedy with the loot and focuses more on loot than helping his party.
I take this to mean he is pre-looting to lay claim to certain items that he finds, and the rest of the group is not confronting him on it. How loot is distributed among the PCs should be for the PCs to decide.
I see it as if I'm the DM and you want to be an ass in-character to all my NPCs or even other PCs, that's fine as long as you accept there are consequences (The town guards won't accept "I'm just playing my character so leave me alone" as an excuse to justify you murdering the inn keeper), but once you start being an ass to other players you crossed the line. Feel free to play your PC any way you like, but don't go out of your way to make the game less fun for the other real life people involved.
I agree with you 100%. If your character gets caught stealing from NPCs, those NPCs are going to react realistically. Generally by trying to kill your character, or reporting your character to the guard, etc.
Going out of your way to be antagonistic to the other players is a DB move. What exactly qualifies as such will be up to each group/GM to determine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because they are no longer "thieves" they are rogues, and stealing from your companions is the act of a sociopath.I think stealing from your companions can cause a lot of problems OOC, and as such, the GM is free to say "No stealing from the other players." But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about characters, rogues or otherwise, stealing from NPCs.
I take this to mean he is pre-looting to lay claim to certain items that he finds, and the rest of the group is not confronting him on it. How loot is distributed among the PCs should be for the PCs to decide.
The only reason to loot bodies while the rest of the party is fighting, is to keep the loot for yourself. That *IS* "stealing from the party".
As for the other PC's, they've complained a few times. One of the PC's died (the character was HATED inside the game, but the players loved it), so the Magus used up a scroll of reduce person on the corpse, then used a set of +1 Manacles on it's hands, then wore the corpse like a cape and threw it into the river after running around for a bit.... and this character is Chaotic Good? I typically consider it pretty hard to get me to move peoples alignment, but even I'd give a warning that a change of alignment is in store for doing something like that. Even if the character was a total jerk, he still had family and friends who'd probably want to see him properly buried (if at least not mockingly worn as a cape before being dumped in a river).
Also, I agree with the majority opinion here. This is mostly an OOC issue, and an issue that the other players should be involved in. (Even if the players don't care, ask them if their characters would be ok with someone leaving their back exposed during a fight to go raid the corpses?)
also, where was the Paladin during this (maybe it was the Paladin, which is the only scenario that I can see in this), because you've talked previously of having him fall for gambling. Surely letting someone wear a deceased companion as a cape and throwing the body in a river deserves a knock to the alignment, if something as simple as "he gambled, therefore fall" was grounds for punishment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In, oh, 1975 this scenario was fresh and new. Now it's not.Nor are fighters fresh and new, nor mages throwing spells, etc. Agreed that thieves wanting to steal things is a pretty old concept, but not sure why that makes it any less valid than other tried and true character types?
This is more like 'fighters attacking teammates' and 'friendly fire wizards'. You're screwing over your teammates. Not cool, not now, not ever.
In, oh, 1975 this scenario was fresh and new. Now it's not.Nor are fighters fresh and new, nor mages throwing spells, etc. Agreed that thieves wanting to steal things is a pretty old concept, but not sure why that makes it any less valid than other tried and true character types?
I'm actually surprised at the number of people saying that the GM should tell the player that they are playing their character wrong. Most of the time the forums ring the "the player controls everything about his PC, the GM doesn't get a say" bell as loud as possible.
Because they are no longer "thieves" they are rogues, and stealing from your companions is the act of a sociopath.
This is right in there with PvP, and the DM certainly has a right to tell the players "no PvP" and also "no evils" and stealing from your friends is evil.
Honestly, I would class stealing from the party as a form of PvP. It's still hurting the party for the character's benefit. Plus it breaks the most important follow-on rule of no-PvP games: Don't do things that logically should provoke inter-party strife or violence.
The only reason to loot bodies while the rest of the party is fighting, is to keep the loot for yourself. That *IS* "stealing from the party".Because they are no longer "thieves" they are rogues, and stealing from your companions is the act of a sociopath.I think stealing from your companions can cause a lot of problems OOC, and as such, the GM is free to say "No stealing from the other players." But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about characters, rogues or otherwise, stealing from NPCs.
I take this to mean he is pre-looting to lay claim to certain items that he finds, and the rest of the group is not confronting him on it. How loot is distributed among the PCs should be for the PCs to decide.
Yes it IS stealing from the PCs and by that cheating the other players.
Actually the only reasons why looting a downed opponent during combat, would be reasonable and acceptable is because the unconscious character/NPC has an item the party desperately needs or because the party is in a hot zone and needs to withdraw in the forseeable future.
For instance a banner bearer has fallen and you are charged by the commander to regain the banner and fly it ASAP or the battle is lost.
Or a Messenger is surrounded by enemies, falls and you desperately need that message.
Or the banner example in reverse, where the commander charges you to conquer the enemy banner from the enemy bannerwearer.
Or you infiltrated a tribe of enemies and are discovered and need to retreat and you manage to secure some loot from an enemy while retreating.
All situations where the looting is either a specific goal or an opportunity that will not be available again.
But the example given by the GM indeed reeks of trying to gain more then the rest of the party. And I think that confronting the player out of game is a good way of handling this. Off course I suggest a diplomatic approach as I assume that the goal is the have fun and keep playing together.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My personal opinion is that all loot should be divided up as fairly as possible among the party, with the exceptions of items which are obviously best suited for one party member (EG an item that responds to channeling goes to the cleric by default, for instance).
As a general rule I'm more inclined to let a fellow player have some nice kit which suits them perfectly, even if that means they're getting more loot than anyone else for that encounter/dungeon. However, that goes with the understanding that if we stumble upon something that I can use better than anyone then it goes to me. What goes around comes around, you know?
My personal opinion is that all loot should be divided up as fairly as possible among the party, with the exceptions of items which are obviously best suited for one party member (EG an item that responds to channeling goes to the cleric by default, for instance).
As a general rule I'm more inclined to let a fellow player have some nice kit which suits them perfectly, even if that means they're getting more loot than anyone else for that encounter/dungeon. However, that goes with the understanding that if we stumble upon something that I can use better than anyone then it goes to me. What goes around comes around, you know?
I agree, all adventures I play with groups, first determine what is looted and consider that party treasure and if we deem it neccasary we agree on who get's what and split treasure if needed. I prefer playing that way as I do not want to quarrel over a game and someone being to infantile to share the spoils.
Example: I play a ranger who now has acces to magic spells and we recently found a clerical wand with cure light at level 3. off course the cleric of the group is given this item so he can put it to good use, but I did mention that in case of an emergency I am able to use the wand as well (ranger magic is divine) and in case of dire emergency the party thief might even handle it. The cleric ask me if I wanted the wand in my inventory, but I explained that I just wanted to mention the option in case he goes down and we have to heal him or someone else. And mentioned he'd better not bury the wand in his backpack, because if we need it in a hurry we might not have the time to search for it. I suggested having it available like I carry a sword in a sheath at my belt. We all agreed that this would be nice (the GM was most likely happiest of all as he would now get an easyer opportunity to steal it).
1) Breaks away from combat during the final round or two to loot everything first. Every. Single. Time.
2) Hordes scrolls, wands, potions and anything else. He won't sell them, and only very rarely uses this growing collection.
1 and 2) Apply a buyout system to loot. Basically, all items he wants to keep are "bought" from the rest of the party. In short: he loses the sell price of the item in gold, and everyone else receives what their cut would have been if the item was sold. In the future if he sells it he gets the entire sell value in gold since the other PCs already received their money for the item.
This system, or similar systems, ensure that loot whores don't hold everyone else back. It also makes (1) a moot issue: if he loots everything then so what, he still has to pay for it to keep it.
The guy keeping the item does not get his "cut" since it is locked in the item he is holding. He doesn't receive any gold because when he sells the item he will get the cut then at that future time.
The equation is really simple.
Everyone but the guy keeping the item receives = Sell Value / # of PCs.
When guy keeping the item sells item he receives = Sell Value.
Then again by hoarding these items he is essentially stealing from the rest of the party. In many parties that is an offence punishable by castration and then death considering Adventurers are robbers who leave no one alive.
3) Refuses to even try out a digital character sheet. Then "forgets" to apply the effects of complex negative effects, and must be reminded to compute his load whenever he stocks up on loot.
You have 2 choices:
A) He is always in the heaviest encumbrance category with all of the penalties.B) You throw weight out the window and don't track it.
4) Has absurdly long turns, partly due to the paper sheet thing, but even in situations where there is only one choice, he will still spend 10 minutes deciding.
Implement a 30 second rule. Buy a stop watch. Time all of the players. At the end of 30 seconds they hold their action and the next person goes thereby moving the person down in initiative permanently. Give someone two chances to act, the first on their turn and the second later on. If they don't do anything on both they do nothing that round.
If someone is not present at the table due to peeing or for whatever reason just treat them as holding their action without the above stipulation and don't treat it as their first 30 seconds until they are there and ready to act. If they pointedly say "I hold my action" then also don't count it against their first 30 seconds since they made the decision to do so.5) Whenever another PC asks for a party item he's carrying, it becomes a debate about how much they really need it.
This becomes moot with the option for (1) and (2). Implement a loot system, and you'll find out how much he cares about those items.
6) Tried to take the The Wizard's Bonded Item., as it was introduced to the game, and everyone was told that item exists for the Wizard (since it was a PC dual classing)
Have him make a Will Save, DC 9000. If he succeeds (Nat 20) then instead of giving it to the person in question he feels so incredibly bad that he is fatigued until giving it up, but he also gains the Hedonistic Drawback until he gives up the item.
* He was away for a session, and another player controlled his character. The inventory was split evenly between the party, and resulted in the party not being absolutely crushed at Thistletop the next session.
I suspect he was or will be quite upset with this since he is essentially walking around with multiples of the money the rest of the party has.
So now you've got an idea of this Nagaji Magus(5)/Bard(1) and the player controlling him, what are some good teamwork building activities I can put him and his party through?
There isn't much you can do aside from implement the aforementioned loot system.
Basically don't resort to cheap tactics to force him to conform, but instead implement systems that protect the other players from his avarice. If he wants to make money on the party then he can play a crafter with spark of creation like everyone else. Aside from that being an adventurer is already stupidly lucrative.
Taking the Wizard's Bonded Item is not cool, man. It's worse than nicking the cleric's gold holy symbol and replacing it with a wooden one.
I think this guy needs to be taken aside and have the concept of 'no I in team' explained to him.
Barring that, put the group in problem-solving positions which are impossible to get out of without distributing some of the stuff he's hauling around because multiple effects need to be activated at once or something.
Use an egg timer &/or a small hour glass.