Player Versus Player Conflicts - RPG Philosophy

Having two or more Player Characters attack or try to kill each other can quickly sink your TTRPG session. I don't allow CvC at my table... except for when I do.

A heartfelt thank you to my 227 Patrons for their continued support in making this channel possible.
______
CHECK OUT MY NOVELS

If you enjoyed my stories, please leave a rating or review on Amazon, Audible, and/or Goodreads
__________
MY PUBLISHED RPG ADVENTURES


__________
GOT DICE?

__________
SHIRTS!

__________
FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER
I mostly ramble about movies, tabletop roleplaying games, and random other things as they occur to me:

__________
I HAVE A PODCAST

__________

As an Amazon and DriveThru RPG Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases from those websites.

#ttrpg

00:00 Intro
02:31 Keep It Between PCs
03:39 Appropriate Time & Place
05:12 Keep It Non-Lethal
06:56 Unless They Deserve It
08:32 Rivalries
09:07 One-Shots
09:25 Campaign Finales
11:27 Conclusion

[QuestFriend]

In our Vampire the Masquerade LARP, which is full CvC, we have a rule that if you take an action that leads to the death of another character you owe the player dinner.

[ThatMusicWriter]

For her very first one-shot, my wife handed each of the players a note. For most of the players, it was some nonsense to make sure that everyone was reading for the same amount of time. But for one (randomly assigned) player, it informed them that they were secretly working for the villain and would reveal themselves (and turn into a giant bug) during the final battle. It was a blast.

[JWK]

On the time and place issue, one common rule on pirate ships in the Age of Sail was that all disputes between the crew had to be resolved on shore (usually by blade). This ensured that conflicts between the crew didn't get in the way of anything important or dangerous. A rule like this makes a lot of in-world sense for adventurers, shadowrunners or similar freelance violence-producers.

[mattfrandsen]

Sometimes you get the opposite problem. My Paranoia games are never as fun because the characters all work together too well. Instead of backstabbing and betraying each other like proper Alpha Complex citizens.

[Raven.flight]

One of the best rivalries I had was when I played a photojournalist and another player played a live tv journalist, and we both set to disparage the others work, when both of us actually were jealous of the other because ‘they were the real journalist’

It was a great session.

[Danmarinja]

My most spectacular campaign ended with two characters fighting. My players had all failed a (really low) save to avoid turning evil, and two of my players began biding their time until they cleared the throne of Hell from the final boss, then turned to each other and fought one another to the death. Loved every second.

[johnnysizemore]

Seth you if you make the video you should call it "The Mini-Sub Incident" you could use the Resavore Dogs opening or something and have the Gang help you on it...

[ericwhite]

Yeah back in D&D 2E my group had a problem player that the DM just refused to deal with to the point where I just started DMing my own group and the entire group minus those two jumped over. He played a Wizard/Transmuted Specialist and once he got to Lv 9 learned the Stoneskin Spell which back then lasted forever until dispelled of chipped away (the spell absorbed and negated up to 10 physical blows that struck you weather a arrow, sword, or pebble didn't matter) He would cast it when awaking in the morning and keep 2 more mimoriesed and would pretty much us it to bully the party into doing whatever he wanted to do. We'd need to hit him 10 times before dealing damage all the while he's blasting us with lightning, magic missiles, and other combat spells we just couldn't beat him. Then 1 player joined and Wizard pulled his crap or her but unfortunately for him, she used to play a Wizard so she knew that spells weakness so when the duel started on her turn she kneels down grabs a hand full of pebbles and throws the whole handful at look on that asshole's face was priceless

[PersonalityShaman]

There are a lot of great PbtA games that are perfect for exploring dramatic CvC situations. For example, I just can’t imagine playing Pasion de las Pasiones or Cartel, without ever escalating CvC tension.

In games like Urban Shadows or The Veil, there is a lot of potential for a conflict between characters, but if you don’t like this style of game, you can easily play these games as a more traditional ensemble or just simply explore different character arcs in one city.

A game addressing tense group dynamics really well is Bite Marks. It’s about playing a pack of werewolves and most of the game procedures and mechanics examine power and belonging dynamics in their relationships - challenging the alpha, dominating others, provoking emotional spills in other characters). You have to build close connections to have access to amazing pack actions, but the systems of the game are always putting those bonds on the line…

Outside of the PbtA family of games - Trophy Dark (more modern Gauntlet game) and Mountain Witch (more old school Forge game) are both great games about trust and betrayal between PC’s.

And I know, I know - this channel is dedicated specifically to trad games and trad gaming, but I thought “hey, maybe somebody wants to check a different flavor of play and check those more indie solutions to “character conflict” at the table” :)

Good content! Keep it up :)

[kevingriffith]

I've recently been in a game where I worked with the game master to make a PC that was secretly working for the bad guys and honestly I had a ton of fun with it. One thing I stole from Matt Collville that I really think helped a lot is that when my character's villainy was revealed, I symbolically handed my character sheet over to the game master, basically saying "This isn't my character anymore"... because if you're going to make a character that is likely to turn against the party, you kind of have to accept that there's only one way for their story to end. It's not like the game master is going to suddenly start playing a separate, solo campaign with just your character, after all.

[kingduckie]

Title for the War Story, "Scuffle in a Submersible" doesn't give it away too much and alliteration even if you're cheating a bit is always nice

[TheCrypto]

This is such an important thing to cover and I'm glad someone is doing it. In my current group we have about 3 different CvC things going at once (with my character being the reason for 2 of those..), but we all understand that no player is upset with another. We've been playing for years since college, and we've always done our best to make sure the other player knows its not US that is having conflict it's the characters.

For examples. One CvC conflicts is my character (Lucland) with my best friends (Kaseon); the parties goal was to stay in a city for a couple days to quick rest up from a recent major event and then travel to Kaseon's parents for some actual downtime and rest. My character took a job with his former guild (he's a former hired killer for a rouge guild) that requires the whole party that extended our city stay for a couple days for a huge payout but without asking literally anyone else in the party. Obviously that's caused some conflicts with everyone, but Kaseon was the most severely hurt, feels very betrayed and it's going to be a serious thing to cover at a later date post job. My best friend and I are still best friends and we game together almost every day without issue, because we communicate clealry its not him and I. It's Lucland and Kaseon.

Second example: another friend who's character (Samira) is in a romantic situationship-thing with Lucland, is constantly getting into spats and arguments with Lucland because to be frank they're both toxic, broken people that are just trying to survive and used to being hurt by literally everyone. We, the 2 players fucking love it, we have fawned over these 2 dip shits and their complications for weeks because they're such a clusterfuck. The characters fight quite a bit, but we still fawn over them as players.


The last example: our wizard bladesinger (Vannan) decided to fireball something completely irrelevant and uncessary as we (the entire party) were desperately trying to leave a bad and getting worse situation. The party is very pissed about it, the players thought it was hilarious.

I ramble alot, but I like videos like this that address persistent issues in TTRPGs and potential ways to go about handling it. Too many stories end up on CritCrab (love that guy so much) because players couldn't separate game issues from real life.

[laboratoryrack]

A Kult video and a RPG Philosophy video in less than a week? We don't deserve you Seth. =D

[thebolas]

Re: Mini-sub grenade time

Everyone knew what the ending of Titanic was going to be, but still went to watch it in droves. As long as the story is fun I wouldn't mind knowing how it was going to turn out.

[enterchannelname]

What I did, when one of my players said their character would fight the party and then run, I said "Great! If someone is fighting the party, I'll control them. If you really want your character to backstab, then I, as the DM, will manage them from now on, and consult you about their behavior". This character went on to be a reocurring nemesis for the players.

I like this rule because it allows for characters to live out their realistic goals, discourages CvC if people want to keep controlling their characters, and doesn't put players into conflict as the DM I'm expected to have characters who fight the party.

This approach also facilitates evil characters, as if the character is just there for convienece, once the adventure is over, I can offer to have them turn fully murderous and have the player roll up a new character

[mrmaat]

CvC is like BDSM - all parties must be informed, trusting and enthusiastic as well as communicative. When done right it can be amazing but if done wrong, it can end a campaign or even friendships. These are some helpful guidelines.

[rack_focus]

"why you don't use a grenade inside of a mini sub" has the same energy as "i didn't ask how big the room was, i said i cast fireball"

[DreadMerlot]

You didn't consider the holodeck solution. Cross between duel and lethal combat. An opportunity for characters to duke it out in some illusionary setting, but using all their powers. Maybe they find a magic altar that allows two (or more) characters' minds to be transported to a dream arena, in which they must fight to the "death."

[ronaldsmith]

Great video as always.
I've tried a separate, but related, circumstance you might find interesting.
We were starting a new campaign. There were 3 players that would be able to attend every session, unless there was some emergency, but there was a 4th player who would only be able to attend intermittently, perhaps less than half the time, and usually without being able to provide any advanced notice.
I was going to have a recurring villain in the campaign, so I asked the fourth player if he would be interested in playing the villain. He agreed, and I informed the other players what was up. Then, whenever the 4th player was able to show up, so would the recurring villain.
The campaign went well, though we never finished it (I forget why). The villain player would tell me his villainous plans, and I would have his underlings carry out his plans as best they could when he was not present. Then when he did show up his minions would fill him in on what had happened in his absence, and apologize to him for their failures, or brag to him about their successes (only happened once). He would then be in charge of the minions for that session.
Since all the player's knew which PCs were friends and which were enemies, everything went smoothly.
I've never had a chance to do that again, and I wonder if it would be workable if there was a full time villain PC.

[kylehart]

I think an in-character betrayal built up over multiple sessions can be brilliant. Some great moments can come from being stabbed in the back by someone who *literally* took an arrow for you. But for me as a GM the stipulation is the player has to privately discuss it with me beforehand, so it can't be forced, it can't usually be done easily, and the motivation for doing it must be greater than the general good of the party from that character's perspective.