Taken over the whole spectrum of gamers, RC's got it right. There are a lot of people out there who use an evil alignment as an excuse to turn the game into a bad ripoff of Saw. And there's another point I don't think anyone has touched on; some players can't stomach what other players will do when they're playing Evil. They're just not comfortable with the really dark stuff; deliberately inflicting pain to extract information, killing innocents because it's convenient, etc.
There's really no need to put someone through that if they're not emotionally set up for it; this is an heroic fantasy game and it just sits better with some players to be *fighting* that kind of shit rather than condoning it. Getting face-to-face with some really nasty stuff that the DM tells them the bad guy is doing gets them fired up to whup some Evil ass. It's very different when they're constrained willy-nilly to be *in* Team Evil and asking them to lay the smack down on some dude who's going around healing sick children and giving homes to stray dogs. The motivation just isn't there.
Yeah, some people revel in the opportunity to play without regard to moral strictures and do it well, but lots just go completely off the deep end and other players can't handle the fallout. I've had to deal with one girl in tears after a session because of what the other players were doing... and I don't blame her because they really were going overboard. I generally steer clear of allowing evil-aligned groups these days unless I'm *really* sure of the players.
I've had fun playing evil characters, and I've run a very successful mixed-alignment city-based campaign where all the characters worked for what amounted to a Mob boss and were thus more constrained by all the things they were permitted to do within the "code" than they were by moral boundaries in any case. That worked really well; not least because the people they were doing bad stuff to were *also* bad guys, just on a different team. They didn't pick on innocents, partly because you've still got to operate in the wider world and word gets around in a town, but mostly because the majority of decent upstanding citizens in a city just *don't get involved in that sort of thing*. They also don't usually have stuff worth taking, and if they do you can generally just pinch it without any risky unpleasantness.
That campaign worked really well and everyone had fun, but it's a rarity for an evil game to work out that well in my experience.
And don't even get me started about Mr. I'm-Going-To-Play-A-Secretly-Evil-Character-And-Shaft-The-Other-Players-Out-Of-The-Blue...
*D&D 4ed*
Moderator: Moderators
-
SunTzuWarmaster
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 948
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Currently in an evil campaign on a plot for world domination by uniting the evil clans of each city to overthrow the more benevolent leaders. Also, capturing and selling their souls to the underworld to protect from resurrection/after-death communication by the 'goodly' clerics. It's a casual group, little character depth, but on the whole it has been fun to slowly turn the world towards evil.
Meh. I'm kinda burned out on evil after a guy in the last group I was in unfailingly played some sort of psycho.
In the d20 Modern game, his character was a serial killer who'd bash people's heads open on stuff and spent all his time describing 'his sinister and/or creepy smile' and throwing around lines that amounted to, 'Ooh, I'm only barely stopping myself from killing you, be afraid of me, wooOOoOOoo'
And then another game, the part was supposed to be good-aligned, and he was playing a Dread Necromancer who'd kill a few people in a crowd to give himself zombies.
In the d20 Modern game, his character was a serial killer who'd bash people's heads open on stuff and spent all his time describing 'his sinister and/or creepy smile' and throwing around lines that amounted to, 'Ooh, I'm only barely stopping myself from killing you, be afraid of me, wooOOoOOoo'
And then another game, the part was supposed to be good-aligned, and he was playing a Dread Necromancer who'd kill a few people in a crowd to give himself zombies.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
-
the_taken
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 830
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Lost in the Sea of Awesome
My only inspiration to play 4e. And my new .sigTalisman wrote:Evil Cleric: "Taste the power of the Hand of Vecna!"Koumei wrote:Pelor is now the god of good harvests. Forget "Law, Good, Sun and OWNING YOUR ASS", now he just throws some grain at undead. I know Vecna lost his hand and eye (twice, in fact), but for Pelor to lose his balls?
Good Cleric: "Oh yeah? Fear the might of the Balls of Pelor!"
I had a signature here once but I've since lost it.
My current project: http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=56456
My current project: http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=56456
That one is seriously annoying. It was refreshing to see Mr. I'm-Going-To-Play-A-Secretly-Good-Character-And-Help-The-Other-Players-Out on one occasion. Very refreshing.Amra wrote: And don't even get me started about Mr. I'm-Going-To-Play-A-Secretly-Evil-Character-And-Shaft-The-Other-Players-Out-Of-The-Blue...
Don't forget the players that play like Belkar from OotS, violent psychos, and call it chaotic neutral; and even get offended when it's called evil.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
-
RandomCasualty2
- Prince
- Posts: 3295
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm
Yeah, that's how vampire tends to go, and it's really cool. The problem with D&D is that eventually if you get evil characters, some of them may just get sick of having their friends hold secrets against them and decide to either torture them to get the information, or maybe just outright kill them. Unlike vampire, when you're doublecrossed by the Ventrue, you can't just go kill him (at least not without getting in severe trouble). So often times, you just plot and plan to get him back later. In D&D, that's really not the case, because it's a lawless wasteland most of the time, and generally nobody is going to question you if one of your companions has an unfortunate "accident".SphereOfFeetMan wrote: I have to say though, the most fun games I've ever played in were with an evil party. In my experience there is much more opportunity for roleplaying. Most times with good/neutral parties, it is just Team Party vs Team Dm. With evil parties, there are varied/conflicting motivations, goals, secrets, espionage, planting false information, secret identities...all just within the context of the party. When you add Npc's into the mix, it gets really interesting.
It is really fun when players each have multiple secrets (and motivations), and each Pc only shares some of their secrets with other party members as needed...and oftentimes they are not the same secrets. In such situations, it basically encourages or forces players to roleplay with each other as if they were roleplaying against a Npc. Devious, misleading, but ultimately needed for an alliance towards a common goal.
It often strains my suspension of disbelief as to why the evil PCs continue to work together when they don't trust each other. I mean eventually they reach the one doublecross that pushes them over the edge and the party falls apart. Either that or the PCs adapt a "Team PC" attitude, where for whatever reason, they just don't kill or torture other PCs, despite torturing and killing any NPC that happens to get in their way.
I mean, I find that you can do varied agendas and stuff just as easily with a group of neutrals, only because they are neutrals, they generally aren't going to end up killing each other. Yet, there can still be a variety of personal motives mixed in, assuming there's some depth of character. The main advantage of a good and neutral party though is that you can have a few inexperienced roleplayers in the bunch and it doesn't send everything to hell the way it does with an evil group.
I can see how a properly run evil game might be fun to play, I certainly enjoyed Vampire, I just find it really difficult to achieve in D&D, given the lawlessness of most settings, and how politics just aren't as important in Vampire.
But I really tend to include a lot of moral quandries in the campaigns I create, so I think an evil group would miss out on most of that and be pretty bored. A lot of times, the good characters tend to be on different sides of what they should do in any given situation.
I've never really liked the evil campaign because it usually means the DM has to throw more evil stuff at you to stick in your craw. I mean, just because you are evil doesn't mean you'll let someone sack your hometown or start killing the young girls in the city (especially if there is a reward in it for you).
The key to the evil campaign is to draw strict limits. For example, being evil doesn't mean that you don't see the value in pretending to conform to society or that you don't have some moral framework. Some of the best characters in DnD have been evil, bu they were evil and worked with a group and there was reason behind their vices (I'm looking at Raistlin, Cyric, Artemis Entreri, and others in that vein).
Players that want to go wild on your campaign just don't make for good times. PCs can be evil, just not insane.
The key to the evil campaign is to draw strict limits. For example, being evil doesn't mean that you don't see the value in pretending to conform to society or that you don't have some moral framework. Some of the best characters in DnD have been evil, bu they were evil and worked with a group and there was reason behind their vices (I'm looking at Raistlin, Cyric, Artemis Entreri, and others in that vein).
Players that want to go wild on your campaign just don't make for good times. PCs can be evil, just not insane.
-
Username17
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
A player asking to play an Evil character should send up alarms. The same alarms that are sent up by a player asking to play a character who is Chaotic Neutral. Not as loud obviously, but alarms nevertheless.
If someone wants to play a Chaotic Evil character, you should probably tell them to go fuck themselves.
-Username17
If someone wants to play a Chaotic Evil character, you should probably tell them to go fuck themselves.
-Username17
I've had a character who was CN. But that's because the personality he developed after a couple of sessions.
He wasn't bad, honestly. If anything, he was slightly ADD. He forgot the occasional important fact for his plans, did slightly weird stuff to amuse himself (like killing someone and then spending half the night getting the blood stain out of the floor with soap, water, and pumice because his cover job was a servant), and was working for a Good goal by, basically, murdering every semi-important person working for the bad guys. On the other hand, he was all for watching the backs of his allies.
He wasn't bad, honestly. If anything, he was slightly ADD. He forgot the occasional important fact for his plans, did slightly weird stuff to amuse himself (like killing someone and then spending half the night getting the blood stain out of the floor with soap, water, and pumice because his cover job was a servant), and was working for a Good goal by, basically, murdering every semi-important person working for the bad guys. On the other hand, he was all for watching the backs of his allies.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
-
angelfromanotherpin
- Overlord
- Posts: 9745
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
It's probably a wide exception to the general rule, but I once ran a game where all three of the PCs were Chaotic Evil, and it totally rocked. It helped that the interpretation of Chaotic was neither random nor insane, but merely a general disdain for outside rules and authority; and the interpretation of Evil was 'me first,' but they were all able to grasp the value of other people's lives in contributing to their goals. The group dynamics functioned very well, and even if they did wind up taking most of their adventure hooks from the game-world villains, the specifics of what they were doing were not that different from what Good characters would have done.
Hell, they actually spared more people than most parties I've seen played, because they didn't go in with the idea that the opposition needed to die as a given. Picked up quite a few recruits that way, though they also regretted their mercy more than once.
I have played with many people who were not actually interested in playing the game so much as they were interested in disrupting the game. Psychotic assassins and asshole paladins both used their alignments as a pretext for essentially wasting everyone else's time.
Hell, they actually spared more people than most parties I've seen played, because they didn't go in with the idea that the opposition needed to die as a given. Picked up quite a few recruits that way, though they also regretted their mercy more than once.
I have played with many people who were not actually interested in playing the game so much as they were interested in disrupting the game. Psychotic assassins and asshole paladins both used their alignments as a pretext for essentially wasting everyone else's time.
Whenever one of the players wants to be evil, I always tell him that there will be consequences for his actions if he screws up.
Normally, this was not a problem, except that one player always enjoyed playing Christian Priest stereotypes, so getting the group to work together may impact somebody's character concept.
Normally, this was not a problem, except that one player always enjoyed playing Christian Priest stereotypes, so getting the group to work together may impact somebody's character concept.
-
SphereOfFeetMan
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
True. At the beginning of a campaign, it is useful to create reasons why the Pcs have close ties to one another. This is the case for parties of any alignment. Just because you are evil doesn't mean you can't have strong ties. Since Dnd is so malleable, you can create whatever reason you like for these alliances. Subjectively, these reasons can also be much more interesting than a super-powerful organization that says "Don't do that."RandomCasualty2 wrote:Unlike vampire, when you're doublecrossed by the Ventrue, you can't just go kill him (at least not without getting in severe trouble). So often times, you just plot and plan to get him back later. In D&D, that's really not the case, because it's a lawless wasteland most of the time, and generally nobody is going to question you if one of your companions has an unfortunate "accident".
Also, as I said before concerning evil Pc's, they can be morally mixed. A particular Pc's evil nature might not include betrayal and murder.
Heh. I played my first evil Pc after being informed that the new campaign was going to focus on an evil party. I had already statted up my character before learning of this, ironically it was a LG halfling Paladin. I made a new evil Pc, and that campaign turned out to be the most fun gaming experience I had thus far.FrankTrollman wrote:A player asking to play an Evil character should send up alarms. The same alarms that are sent up by a player asking to play a character who is Chaotic Neutral. Not as loud obviously, but alarms nevertheless.
If someone wants to play a Chaotic Evil character, you should probably tell them to go fuck themselves.
Last edited by SphereOfFeetMan on Tue Jun 17, 2008 11:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity.
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Only once did I propose killing off another PC. Mostly because the player wanted to leave the game anyway.
The DM said he'd rather not take that path, however. Instead, he created a TPK encounter. That was just as good, because there was way too much testosterone in the room. It was good that the game ended.
I still use my priestess as an example of Evil that doesn't go stupid or screw things up - the fact that even evil people have a moral and ethical structure, it's just that certain things might be okay that other people don't consider okay. For instance, Hitler still had morals, he just had morals that allowed for genocide. Some might argue those were really crappy morals. I'd agree.
Frank: You have a demotivator or lolcats picture for any occasion, don't you? I'm just trying to remember what it was that you first decided would be represented by lolcats as the best explanation.
We were hauling his character's comatose body around (as we had stabilised him but had run out of healing aside from items), and my suggestion was this (note that it was said by a half-dragon chef):
"Everyone. We will now rest. Here. That useless elf might die if an ant bites him, so we need a death watch. At all times, someone is going to keep an eye out for predators, and make sure he stays stable. Try to bring him around if his condition worsens. I don't care enough about him to disrupt my sleep, so I'm taking the last watch. Besides, I can cook breakfast. Those fey we killed have good eating on them."
In the morning:
"Wake up, everyone. Here, I cooked a thick stew for breakfast. Eat up, as I have bad news, and a good meal helps brace against bad news. Unfortunately, during the night, the elf died. I tried to save him, but death came too quickly. I have disposed of the body in as respectable a way as possible out here, but still, we should remember him as he lived.
...so, who liked the stew?"
"Everyone. We will now rest. Here. That useless elf might die if an ant bites him, so we need a death watch. At all times, someone is going to keep an eye out for predators, and make sure he stays stable. Try to bring him around if his condition worsens. I don't care enough about him to disrupt my sleep, so I'm taking the last watch. Besides, I can cook breakfast. Those fey we killed have good eating on them."
In the morning:
"Wake up, everyone. Here, I cooked a thick stew for breakfast. Eat up, as I have bad news, and a good meal helps brace against bad news. Unfortunately, during the night, the elf died. I tried to save him, but death came too quickly. I have disposed of the body in as respectable a way as possible out here, but still, we should remember him as he lived.
...so, who liked the stew?"
I still use my priestess as an example of Evil that doesn't go stupid or screw things up - the fact that even evil people have a moral and ethical structure, it's just that certain things might be okay that other people don't consider okay. For instance, Hitler still had morals, he just had morals that allowed for genocide. Some might argue those were really crappy morals. I'd agree.
Frank: You have a demotivator or lolcats picture for any occasion, don't you? I'm just trying to remember what it was that you first decided would be represented by lolcats as the best explanation.
So, does 4th Edition have any redeeming qualities?
I picked up the MM in my FLGS, and noticed that the monsters had levels. Are they operating on the HD=CR=ECL now? Could a 10th level Ogre Brute be effectively on par in a group of 10th level adventurers? If so, then it would probably be enough incentive for me to try the new edition out.
I've always wanted to have a monster character.
I picked up the MM in my FLGS, and noticed that the monsters had levels. Are they operating on the HD=CR=ECL now? Could a 10th level Ogre Brute be effectively on par in a group of 10th level adventurers? If so, then it would probably be enough incentive for me to try the new edition out.
I've always wanted to have a monster character.
Umm...if you like...well there's...shit...there is something, I will get back to you on that...oh the...no it's not DnD. It's DnD fast play rules made full scale.Jerry wrote:So, does 4th Edition have any redeeming qualities?
No they are not operating on that, look at the hp of solos and elites. They make battle last and extra extra long timeI picked up the MM in my FLGS, and noticed that the monsters had levels. Are they operating on the HD=CR=ECL now? Could a 10th level Ogre Brute be effectively on par in a group of 10th level adventurers? If so, then it would probably be enough incentive for me to try the new edition out.
Well just be prepare to take it without any lube.I've always wanted to have a monster character.
Thanks for your input, Leress!Leress wrote:Umm...if you like...well there's...shit...there is something, I will get back to you on that...oh the...no it's not DnD. It's DnD fast play rules made full scale.Jerry wrote:So, does 4th Edition have any redeeming qualities?No they are not operating on that, look at the hp of solos and elites. They make battle last and extra extra long timeI picked up the MM in my FLGS, and noticed that the monsters had levels. Are they operating on the HD=CR=ECL now? Could a 10th level Ogre Brute be effectively on par in a group of 10th level adventurers? If so, then it would probably be enough incentive for me to try the new edition out.Well just be prepare to take it without any lube.I've always wanted to have a monster character.
What's up with the "hiccup" post, though?
Edit: Even if it doesn't capture the feel of previous D&D editions, can it still be fun to play?
Last edited by Jerry on Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:54 am, edited 2 times in total.
Jerry, yes it can be fun to play. Just be prepared to have long battles at higher levels. Ridiculously long battles.
The hiccup was an accidental double post correction.
The hiccup was an accidental double post correction.
Koumei wrote:I'm just glad that Jill Stein stayed true to her homeopathic principles by trying to win with .2% of the vote. She just hasn't diluted it enough!
Koumei wrote:I am disappointed in Santorum: he should carry his dead election campaign to term!
Just a heads up... Your post is pregnant... When you miss that many periods it's just a given.
]I want him to tongue-punch my box.
The divine in me says the divine in you should go fuck itself.
There are some ideas that you can mine out of the shit and clean off for something else. Like rituals. I like that water breathing is something you can just do and not care about.
The gp cost = character power thing needs to go, but the idea that you can do one off shit and not have that impact things that actually matter is good. Because really, greater magic weapon > water breathing. Its simply not on the same scale.
I'm toying with the idea of using a hybrid system from a bunch of different sources, and the basic idea of rituals I'd actually take, after ditching the cost for a <ritual materials bag> or whatever, and changing the casting time to 2 minutes. Things like animate dead and dominate <X> could easily be rituals. Fucked up and wrong in combat, but good as a 2 minute casting time ritual that makes the spell largely unusable during a fight, but something you need for good stories. Because really, if you break into the Frost Sorceress' mountain fastness as she seals herself off behind a Wall of Ice, commands her minions to attack and starts in on the Fimbulwinter ritual, you've got a fun thing going. The party has 20 rounds to battle their way through her frost giants and winter wolves, and stop the ritual, before it dooms the entire kingdom for a hundred years. Thats the kind of scenario I want to lay down in front of players... and frankly 4e doesn't let you do it. You can't get through the fight in time, wall of ice requires a move action to simply walk around, and rituals just aren't on combat time, even if you can hit them up with handwavium.
The gp cost = character power thing needs to go, but the idea that you can do one off shit and not have that impact things that actually matter is good. Because really, greater magic weapon > water breathing. Its simply not on the same scale.
I'm toying with the idea of using a hybrid system from a bunch of different sources, and the basic idea of rituals I'd actually take, after ditching the cost for a <ritual materials bag> or whatever, and changing the casting time to 2 minutes. Things like animate dead and dominate <X> could easily be rituals. Fucked up and wrong in combat, but good as a 2 minute casting time ritual that makes the spell largely unusable during a fight, but something you need for good stories. Because really, if you break into the Frost Sorceress' mountain fastness as she seals herself off behind a Wall of Ice, commands her minions to attack and starts in on the Fimbulwinter ritual, you've got a fun thing going. The party has 20 rounds to battle their way through her frost giants and winter wolves, and stop the ritual, before it dooms the entire kingdom for a hundred years. Thats the kind of scenario I want to lay down in front of players... and frankly 4e doesn't let you do it. You can't get through the fight in time, wall of ice requires a move action to simply walk around, and rituals just aren't on combat time, even if you can hit them up with handwavium.
On the evil subject...
Evil isn't the same thing as psychopath, just like CN isn't the same thing as Loony. So it really depends what people are talking about. If its evil= kill everything, you, and most of the rest of the people at the table probably won't have a good time. If evil means sinister and self-serving goals, it can work. Evil doesn't have to mean you can't have plans, don't have use for people and doing things that actually benefit others are verboten.
The thing about mad-dog killers is everybody else can and will get together to put them down.
Evil isn't the same thing as psychopath, just like CN isn't the same thing as Loony. So it really depends what people are talking about. If its evil= kill everything, you, and most of the rest of the people at the table probably won't have a good time. If evil means sinister and self-serving goals, it can work. Evil doesn't have to mean you can't have plans, don't have use for people and doing things that actually benefit others are verboten.
The thing about mad-dog killers is everybody else can and will get together to put them down.