Quote Originally Posted by Vahnavoi View Post
Disruptive for what?

Fighting monsters and looting dungeons? Sure. You know what else is disruptive for that? Traps. Resource scarcity. The monsters themselves. Bluntly, a lot of people are under the misconception that a game being co-operative means there should be no obstacles nor friction to co-operation. That is really, really far from truth. In actual fact, a good chunk of co-operative games add obstacles and restrictions so that co-operation becomes more challenging - because co-operation itself is part of the challenge. There is no inherent flaw to one or more special roles existing to create mayhem in the group. It's a difficulty toggle: there's a choice between games that don't need those roles and co-operation is hence that much easier, and games that do need them and you need to watch your back as a consequence.

---



You are correct about public campaigns & I would have to amend my statement to cover them.

But, consider: typically rules for specific campaign are only added when basic rules DON'T include such rules. And it typically isn't necessary to add rules to ban something no-one ever tries - to the contrary, bans are often targeted at common things. So there are two possibilities:

1) player versus player, under basic rules, is possible and common

2) a lot of campaign holders decides to add a redundant rule for whatever reason.

I really hope that I'm simply misunderstanding you and you aren't in fact pushing that type of antagonistic behavior.

Character vs character conflict is fine, within reason, over roleplay decisions. But if someone tries to steal loot or pickpocket fellow players because "that's that my character would do," that's gonna become player vs player conflict with REAL QUICK. I would flatly not tolerate it as a DM or player. I don't even like splitting loot in character - break character, figure out what's fair, and move on.