Be new DM, hosting 2nd session

>be new DM, hosting 2nd session
>seems like a good group
>fighter gets wounded
>the chaotic neutral bard suddenly decides he is just going to party kill him when he's wounded
>only reconsiders when he realizes the fighter has AC20 and could one shot him on any damage roll above a 2
>this is before they've even entered the first dungeon

What the fuck is that.

The guy playing the bard is the only person in the group who has played before and this was a completely out of the blue decision. Everyone thought he was kidding but the next day he off handedly mentioned "yeah i really was going to kill him" while we were playing Magic. One of the other people in party was there and told him they would have all killed him. I told him I the clouds would part, the sun would shine bright and he would be vaporized by a solar flare.

He didn't have any kind of in character explanation, this is the level 1 party so no one even has loot at all. Why would you just try to ruin a session with 4 other new players by just saying "lol i kill the fighter"?

>while we were playing Magic

Welltheresyourproblem.jpg

>Chaotic Neutral
The "I can be an ass and get away with it because ROLEPLAY" alignment.

why can't anyone handle pvp? roll a new character cry babies!

Some people are shitty people. That's seriously all it boils down to. They see a cooperative game as a competition they need to win and so act as though everyone else is a rival to be torn down.

I'd advise that you talk to this person. Tell him that team-killing is not acceptable and if he pulls that shit again, ask him to leave the game.

Sit him down and tell him it's not okay to kill other players. He may argue that he should be able to, but the simple fact is that it's not fun for you to be killed by your teammate.

> Allowed the CN alignment
> Allowed PvP

You brought this on yourself. Next time you'll know better.

I already talked to him about it and he more or less just said "oh yeah that would suck if they all killed me" as though that is the only negative to his plan.

My main headache here is that this guy has apparently played a few campaigns before so he should absolutely know better. He's the one who pushed for our group to even play in the first place. I still have no explanation beyond "i unno, i figured that was my best chance?" for why you would just try to crash a campaign after putting that much effort into making it happen.

>2nd session, not even in the dungeon yet
lol no wonder everyone was just itching for SOMETHING ANYTHING to happen

Some people are just fucking idiots

I honestly did not expect PvP to even be a possibility, much less a non-evil aligned character trying to kill a lawful neutral one for no reason beyond "he was wounded, i thought i could take him"

The first session ran long just getting everyone set up and on the same page. They had a couple encounters en route to the actual dungeon and everyone had a good time. He decided to do this during the first encounter that almost killed two party members in the middle of the fight.

Does he just not get roleplaying? Maybe he's played with some shitty DMs who encouraged that sort of thing so that's how he thinks it's supposed to work? Maybe he's only ever played Paranoia, and thinks all systems are similar?

Just ask him why his character (Very specifically not him) would have reason to kill his ally.

Talk to him and if he doesn't change, kick him. Just because he's played a bit doesn't mean he knows better. He probably has a basic idea of the rules now and believes that he can start doing whatever he wants and bully the other players.

This

What the issue with Magic?

>I told him I the clouds would part, the sun would shine bright and he would be vaporized by a solar flare.
You're a fucking terrible DM. Using "lol rocks fall" is absolute bullshit. If a character can murder another character, and does so, and it is within his alignment, then it has to happen. You're being a shit GM cock-blocking it because you're a pussy who can't think of a creative way to handle the situation.

Hell, if it wasn't and they had no valid justification I'd just change their alignment.

This guy is right.

>changing characters' alignments because you're too butthurt and controlling to allow players to do what they want
Your fault for allowing the alignment.

What creative way do you have that doesn't involve denying your precious player agency?
Maintaining harmony at the table and preventing needless idiocy > player agency when the player uses it to do dumb shit.

If you insist on using alignment and cant even justify your actions based on the alignment you gave. Then yeah you change.

>newfags don't know about Pelor the Burning Hate.

OP, decide if he fits your idea of the game, make sure to reconcile that with what the players want (in terms of options) and lay it on the table.

This is why session zero is so useful. If you know you don't want wanton PvP you should bring it up.

Additionally, group fighting leading to actual blows can be interesting, so long as both players are understanding of the circumstances. And there's nothing wrong with a fight ending with a pulled knockout type blow, either.

Again, it requires the assent of all parties in order for it to be fun.

>My main headache here is that this guy has apparently played a few campaigns before so he should absolutely know better. He's the one who pushed for our group to even play in the first place. I still have no explanation beyond "i unno, i figured that was my best chance?" for why you would just try to crash a campaign after putting that much effort into making it happen.

He probably pushed you into running a campaign because no one else in the area will play with him. If he's an experienced player who acts like that, then he's a That Guy and will be nothing but a cancer to your game.

To be fair, user, I don't know too many players, experienced or not, who think that randomly murdering other pcs in a explicitly cooperative game is a good idea.
D&D has always been about the team, maybe dysfunctional team, but a team nonetheless. The guy in OP was an outlier, and since no one else was in for it, clearly everyone else understood the premise.

D&D is not a competetive game. Congrats on getting me to deliberately bite onto a sharp piece of metal, though.

>Playing CN.
>Immediately tries to murder other players.
>Openly states he'd do it again if he had the chance.

You know he only chose CN because he couldn't play CE right? Because it clearly seems that way. Assuming you're like most DMs and don't allow players to play NE or CE characters.

>What creative way do you have that doesn't involve denying your precious player agency?
Have there be clues as to his death? or that the rest of the party one shots him and he dies? It happens. Then let the OOC happen as you want.

Then don't use alignment? I fail to see your complaint. You let him play an evil aligned character then got mad when he did evil things?

Piss off. That kind of DMing is bullshit and everyone knows it.

>To be fair, user, I don't know too many players, experienced or not, who think that randomly murdering other pcs in a explicitly cooperative game is a good idea.

Absolutely agree. Which is why I don't approve of any random PC on PC murder or even theft.

It would only work if both characters (and the DM) thought it was a reasonable outcome and would be okay with the outcome, however it finished narratively. An extremely rare situation.

>cn alignment
I wish chaotic alignments were "free sprited, disorganized, or independent" instead of "random and senseless"

My post implies the guy ain't evil.

>Have there be clues as to his death?
What clues?
The guy just said he waltzes up and sticks him, there is no clue or foreshadowing attached to that.
>that the rest of the party one shots him and he dies?
Which does not prevent the shitstorm, only allows it to blat all over the game.
>It would only work if both characters (and the DM) thought it was a reasonable outcome and would be okay with the outcome, however it finished narratively. An extremely rare situation.
It's not so rare, simply depends on the game and tone.
I've done it in Vampire games, 40k rpgs, and have prepared to do it in D&D. In all cases outside of Vampire, I exhaust all other options, give the other guy a chance to come to some manner of terms.
Hell, the last time I played a paladin, 2 of the party members tortured a prisoner I had brought in, in the jail we were at, while I was still in the building. I was away when it happened, but the DM told me about it later.
I pulled both pcs aside and told them that wasn't cool, and asked them not to do such things, lest we come to unfortunaties.
One pc apologized and we shook hands. The other got hostile and said no one would tell them what they could do, and I responded that I would pray for them. That player later left the game for unrelated reasons.
Then there was the damn heretek, and I still don't feel bad about that.

I'm in a similar situation where the guy who got us all to play is actually the worst player in our group. Every single one of us is new and even I can tell he's the weakest link. He just builds min/maxed power characters and refuses to even interact with the NPCs outside of yes or no. Then he goes full on dickweed in combat situations where he will just fire spells nonchalantly into groups with his friends in them. We're all trying to have some fun and get into this campaign our buddy is running, but this dick is just murder hoboing through it and taking advantage of our new GM. It's not fun and we're thinking about removing him from the sessions.

They're supposed to be free spirited independent people who act without regards to customs. But most people see chaotic and decide that it's time to be medieval Deadpool. I'm so close to disallowing chaotic alignments in my games. Even chaotic good players tend to be lolsorandum.

>I already talked to him about it and he more or less just said "oh yeah that would suck if they all killed me" as though that is the only negative to his plan.

Sociopath

Role-gaming is a team sport. Or at least it typically is. Players have an obligation to consider the impact of their character's actions on the health of the campaign. If something is extremely disruptive in an unfun way, you should not do it, and the GM is perfectly within his right to disallow it. If you don't like it, go find some other game to ruin.

I had a player that did something similar once, this is how I dealt with it.

>Guy roles a rogue with the intent of one day becoming an assassin
>As they are in their first dungeon, he starts passing me notes, saying that he wants to sneak up on X Player Character or attempt a sneak attack on X
>I take these notes and immediately show them to everyone
>Instead of saying no, I allow it
>He kills one PC, the other gang up on him, and he attempts to flee
>I allow him to escape just as the rules would allow naturally
>The game goes on, the murdered character doesn't even need to be rerolled, turns out he barely managed to survive with near deadly wounds
>The rest of the session is then trying to get him back to town and then reporting to the city guard when they get there
>The Rogue is hiding in the city. I give him a map of the town and ask him where he's hiding
>Rest of the session is then hunting him down and bringing him to justice
>Party us rewarded with gold for weeding out "a loathsome backstabber and a fool"
>Rogue gets mad that things went the way. Says that he was just kidding and wants to redo.
>He is arrested and put on trial
>As punishment, he is branded as a criminal and forced to undertake a quest to pay for his crimes
>The party is hired to go with him as guard to make sure he doesn't escape or do anything stupid.

Not only does this "punish" the player in a positive way, it's moderately realistic and it keeps the story moving.

Whats Paranoia?

Is that Melisandre? Pretty sure it is.

>SERVE THE COMPUTER. THE COMPUTER IS YOUR FRIEND! The Computer wants you to be happy. If you are not happy, you may be used as reactor shielding. The Computer is crazy. The Computer is happy. The Computer will help you become happy. This will drive you crazy. Being a citizen of Alpha Complex is fun. The Computer says so, and The Computer is your friend. Rooting out traitors will make you happy. The Computer tells you so. Can you doubt The Computer? Being a Troubleshooter is fun. The Computer tells you so. Of course the Computer is right. Troubleshooters get shot at, stabbed, incinerated, stapled, mangled, poisoned, blown to bits, and occasionally accidentally executed. This is so much fun that many Troubleshooters go crazy. You will be working with many Troubleshooters. All of them carry lasers. Aren't you glad you have a laser? Won't this be fun? There are many traitors in Alpha Complex. There are many happy citizens m Alpha Complex. Most of the happy citizens are crazy. It is hard to say which is more dangerous - traitors or happy citizens. Watch out for both of them. The life of a Troubleshooter is full of surprises. Stay alert! ~~ Trust no one! ~~ Keep your laser handy!

>Catch-22 meets 1984! Paranoia is an adventure role-playing game set in a darkly humorous future. A well-meaning but deranged computer desperately protects the citizens of an underground warren from all sorts of real and imagined traitors and enemies. You will play the part of one of the Computer's elite agents. Your job is to search out, reveal and destroy the enemies of the Computer. Your worst fear is that the Computer will discover that you are one of these enemies.

Some people are dicks, worse when you find out it's your friends. Two of my friends made sure my character died out of the blue, no ingame explanation at all just that the players were being spiteful.

Then they act like nothing ever happened but had the role been reversed then they would have screamed for me to leave the group.

THIS

>2nd edition
>Bard
>Fighter with AC 20
First of all, why did you let a multiclassed monstrosity into your game, BEFORE the first dungeon? And second, how the FLYING FUCK did the fighter get to 20? Was he flayed alive? A wizard has AC 10!
You sure you weren't playing Pathfinder?

2nd session, dumb dragon poster

You beat me to it.

Some players get bored and decide they want to fuck things up, not thinking there's any other point to storytelling or that the investment of their friends means anything.

A character's goals and motivations should define their Alignment stat. NEVER the other way around. If a player says "My character just wants to kill people for no reason lol" then choose a different game or kick them out.

found the chaotic neutral

I play CN as someone who dosn't care for the laws and isnt going to help out random's for no reason. CN is what most people play their PC's to be anyway.

magic itself is just another overpriced TCG
but the players are usually some of humanities worst

Thing is my DM's encourage PC killing and they are working on bribing me to kill a pacifist PC in one of their games