Okay so in the tabletop game im playing me and one other player are planning to kill off to other PC’s. What I need to know is do you guys think im in the wrong for this.
Now before you give your opinion let me explain myself. Me and the other player that I shall call Dave are planning something that to put it shortly is just a revolution. Now player 2 that I will call Mike has said that if we try to do this he will oppose us in any way he can, plus he’s been a jerk ic and ooc. The reason we wanna kill the other guy that I will call Billy is that he’s doing stuff like feeding my pet a god$@$m baby.
So am I the A-hole? Yay or nay?
It sounds to me like you’d be better served having a “the stuff that Other Guy is doing in-game is making me not have fun” rather than trying to enact some conspiracy to kill his character. Solutions to this kind of thing that are short of “talk to the other people at the table like an adult” tend to cause more problems than they solve.
If you’re interested in still playing with this group, have a frank “no more edgelord stuff” talk. If you’re not, then you should really just pull the ripcord and go.
8 Likes
Okay I just figured the whole. " I find that morally reprehensible" thing was a good reason to off him while we killed the guy we have to kill. But your suggestion is a better idea now that I think about that.
Yeah this is a classic case of “Your version of fun is interfering with my version of fun.”
1 Like
Assuming your character has an alignment that would allow you to kill off the characters and you have motive, I don’t see why not. Get 'em.
I have the motive and this system really does t have alignment but thanks for the advice
Personally, I didn’t feel like I had enough information.
But it sounds like IC strain is mostly coming from OOC problems.
4 Likes
Talk to the other player and try to work it out.
If that doesn’t work out, ask the DM/GM to step in if possible if the game is coming to a screeching halt because of this impasse
If the other player still refuses to give ground or is refusing just out of spite, talk to the DM/GM and ask if they’re okay with PvP.
If they are, arrange the assassination and do it in character. Talking to the DM/GM before hand gives them the chance to turn it into a story plot which can take the sting out of a character’s death and can also hammer home the point “Yo, knock it off.” that maybe hasn’t sunk in quite yet.
The party attacking each other is generally the last resort of a party at an impasse.
Mike sounds like he’s going against the party’s best interests if you’re staging a revolution (I am assuming against a corrupt, evil or despotic regime?) and he’s actively thwarting you just to be a butt, and Billy just needs to learn a harsh lesson that teaching creatures to enjoy the taste of humanoid flesh can have disastrous repercussions.
This seems like a thing that happens a lot in rp. But I’m sometimes I am little unsure of who’s “fun” is in the right, you know? Of course there are obvious clear cut situations, but like if the party is split 2 to 2… Which side has the right to say my fun is more important than yours?
Anyway. I’d say killing their characters would only create more drama. If you’re not looking for your game to implode I’d suggest talking to them OOC.
How would you react if someone tried to kill your character for what they believed were totally legit reasons?
If they’re being a jerk OOCly, that’s more than reason enough to tell the GM, “I’m done. This isn’t fun anymore” and explain why.
Update I decided to speak to my GM and ill give more context tomorrow im just really tired atm.
3 Likes
From what information has been provided, the offending player has been doing such things as feeding another character’s pet a baby. I don’t feel it’s unreasonable to be very uncomfortable with such states of affair.
Mm, baby is a fine meal indeed, but I can appreciate that not everyone shares the same culinary palette.
Seriously though. I get that some folks don’t share the same tastes… (heh… food pun)… in rp and sometimes their styles clash. I also get that some themes/topics might make players uncomfortable. And I especially get that folks can be intentionally disruptive just to troll. I am not arguing any of those points.
I am just asking who gets to decide who has the right to have their fun if both parties are roleplaying in good faith but with clashing characters/styles/alignments? (This is not directed at OPs situation just a general question I have often wondered.)
Just as an aside D&D particularly can have good and evil aligned characters often in the same party/campaign. It often leads to IC conflicts that can be quite fun… again playing in good faith with the rest of the players.
I kind of feel like if someone’s willing to feed someone’s pet a baby, they should know there will be consequences.
1 Like
Okay im back with some more context.
So for the record the reason we went with the whole revolution thing is because the government is corrupt as f*ck and actively allows people to live in poverty that they can fix.
Now for Billy. He has done creepy stuff like offering almost every female noc and unpaid internship where they wear a French maid outfit for some reason, I’ll admit while gross I was just being an A-hole.
Now for Mike. He almost always insults people’s interests OOC and just generally acts like a jerk ooc. But really besides telling us he will stop our plans any way he can he already asked me ICly to help kill bully’s PC. IMO this proves he’s willing to kill other PC’s and will if the rest of the party doesn’t step.
Hope my ramblings give a lil more context. Im tired af rn
1 Like
As stated earlier this sounds like a lot of OOC personalities and preferences clashing with IC consequences mixed in, which is a really unfortunate situation. I would have supported PK plans if they had been entirely IC but I’m not certain that anyone would be in the right here, given there’s OOC motive to the plans. Your DM has a lot of damage control to do, and it sounds like the group entirely needs to sit and have a talk before things get out of hand. Many players can take PVP attacks very harshly OOC, which can cause worse problems than there already are and ultimately lead to the campaign imploding, and I imagine if someone’s already behaving poorly OOC, they will try to defend themselves with the flawed “BUT IT’S ALL IC” defense, which is entirely too common among those who see no problem in creating player conflict IC simply for their own enjoyment OOC.
Yeah your right. He’s just such an annoying jerk I never wanna listen to him again.
I don’t understand why people can’t talk to each other like reasonable adults instead of letting the resentment fester and come to a head like a neglected zit
It’s pretendy funtime games, c’mon. Even if you can’t stand the guy, you’ve GOT to get that out in the open and see if it’s a level of dislike that’s going to completely disrupt the group dynamic.
I’m not backing either horse in this race
1 Like
Speaking for my own group, it’s a very simple system actually. You don’t get to do anything involving other peoples’ characters (and that includes pets, familiars, gear, etc) without that person’s consent beforehand.
So in the scenario “I feed Player X’s pet dog a live baby!”, in my group, that would basically be met with the DM flatly saying “No. No you don’t.”
You can have fail states for RP. “Lawl Random Interaction” has its place, but you respect other peoples boundaries. And rule number one on that front is you don’t mess with other peoples’ stuff.
3 Likes
I get you… But it also makes me wonder. Do you ever run into the issue of metagaming in that system?
I am playing a theif. You (not you, you… just you another player) have something I want. I tell you beforehand ooc I want to steal your stuff. You take extra precautions ic to protect your stuff that you otherwise would not have done had I not told you about my intentions ooc.