Evil or not?

[Pseudopsyche]

I allow evil PCs, but I operationalize the good-evil alignment axis in terms of a character's natural impulse regarding a stranger. Good characters want to help strangers in need. Neutral characters mind their own business. Evil characters want to exploit strangers. Obviously, circumstances dictate the degree to which people act on their natural impulses. By my definition, society surely includes many evil people who obey the law only in fear of punishment or reprisal.

Note that even evil characters can have friends, family, and other loved ones for whom they might risk or sacrifice themselves. For an evil PC, I just ask that this group of trusted allies include the other PCs.

I only tolerate continuing conflict among PCs if the players map out the course of this conflict out-of-character. My group actually uses Firefly as an explicit inspiration for many aspects of our campaign, but I would only allow a character such as Jayne if his player gives him a reason to remain loyal to the team. "Near betrayals" would only be allowed if all the relevant players agree on the outcome. Otherwise, the improvisational nature of role-playing games (in contrast to the scripted nature of television shows) almost always causes character conflict to escalate into player conflict and hurt feelings, IME.

I do think I would have a problem with a PC who is chaotic evil, as defined in 4E.

Chaotic evil characters have a complete disregard for others. Each believes he or she is the only being that matters and kills, steals, and betrays others to gain power. Their word is meaningless and their actions destructive. Their worldviews can be so warped that they destroy anything and anyone that doesn’t directly contribute to their interests.

Even if a player managed to justify why such a character would remain loyal to the party, reining in the character's natural tendencies might hog too much of the spotlight. It's just too hard to imagine a chaotic evil character being a team player.

 

[Umbran]

I don't disallow evil characters. However, I discourage them, by making it clear to the players that actions have repercussions, and that I will not protect them from the results of their choices.

If you act like heroes, most of the time, you'll make enemies of the villains but the rest of the world will like you. If you act like a villain, everyone hates you.

 

[DandD]

I wouldn't classify the Firefly crew as evil. Just wanna-be hard-asses that fight against the so-called fascistic gouvernment of the union (which wasn't that fascistic, it seems). They're low-lifes and bandits, but I've not seen them killing a hostage woman or a child while during a bank robbing to intimidate other people. They classify as the bandits with a heart of gold, like Han Solo (who happened to become a goody-gooder by working with the Rebel Alliance and suceeding), just not as sucessfull as he was.

 

[Hussar]

I wouldn't classify the Firefly crew as evil. Just wanna-be hard-asses that fight against the so-called fascistic gouvernment of the union (which wasn't that fascistic, it seems). They're low-lifes and bandits, but I've not seen them killing a hostage woman or a child while during a bank robbing to intimidate other people. They classify as the bandits with a heart of gold, like Han Solo (who happened to become a goody-gooder by working with the Rebel Alliance and suceeding), just not as sucessfull as he was.

And this is why alignment becomes so difficult to discuss. So many people want to define characters they like as good.

Jayne throws his partner out of a flying ship, to his almost certain death, just so he can keep the money they have stolen. He is so evil, he cannot actually understand why another person would sacrifice himself to protect another. Jayne betrays his friends for money. Jayne, when meeting Mal, shoots his partner because Mal offers him a better deal.

In what way is Jayne not evil?

Mal, I could see the argument. Mal is more just bad assed than evil. He's pretty close though. Pushing someone into an engine air intake just to make a point is pretty close to evil.

I remember when people argued up and down, on these boards, that Belkar wasn't evil. It absolutely astonishes me how far people will go to defend a character just to protect that character from an "evil" alignment.

 

[DandD]

I do admit that my memory of Firefly is quite hazy and bad (and I'm not really a fan of that show), so I can't really remember what Jayne did (or who he actually was - I guess that black male mercenary, am I right?). Also, who did Mal throw into the engine air intakes? Was it some innocent bystander, a crime syndicate henchman, a traitorous dealer or an union soldier, or something like that? It does depend on the situation. I will agree that Mal (whom I only remember because of the Serenity-movie) is evil if he did that towards a hapless guy who didn't do anything wrong except being at this place.

That Jaye-fellow (if it's indeed that guy) on the other hand could be the Belkar of the group, just more into the money, instead of being a homicidal psychopath who'd go around with hookers while killing everybody in a harmless tavern brawl.

 

[Umbran]

Mal, I could see the argument. Mal is more just bad assed than evil. He's pretty close though. Pushing someone into an engine air intake just to make a point is pretty close to evil.

In that scene, the guy's death is pretty quick. He doesn't suffer. I don't see how shoving him into the intake is any worse than shooting him. And it isn't as if his victim didn't deserve it. A court of law would probably have done about the same.

The thing here is that Mal is fairly chaotic, and we sometimes mistake failure to follow procedure as evil.

 

[DandD]

So that guy that was thrown into the intake was an evil person? That sounds like it would confirm my view on Mal not being evil.

Punishing the evil guys swiftly won't make you an evil guy yourself (at worst, just a lawless one).

 

[Umbran]

So that guy that was thrown into the intake was an evil person? That sounds like it would confirm my view on Mal not being evil.

The guy (named Crow) is a a muscle-lieutenant for an organized crime boss. Definitely not a nice person.

In the scene in question - Mal and company have been hired by a crime boss to pull a train heist. The do so, but find out the booty is badly needed medicine. Mal and company give the medicine back.

Crow has been captured, and is tied up. Mal gives Crow the money the boss paid for the job, and says he'll stay out of the boss' way from then on. Crow rejects the offer, and says he'll be hunting down Mal and his crew. So, Mal takes the money back, and kicks Crow into the engine. Mal then turns to the *next* tied up minion of this boss, and makes the same offer...

 

[Rechan]

And this is why alignment becomes so difficult to discuss. So many people want to define characters they like as good.

It's not just that. The ol' "Is Batman LG, NG or CG" is a good example. Everyone has their opinion as to what "X alignment" is, and so the argument commences. Or hell, take James Bond for instance. Some can claim he's good, others he's evil, and each has legitimate explanations for each.

Human motivation, morality and psychology is a bit too complex to pigeonhole into 9 different categories.

(I've been involved in far too many "Why can't an Assassin be Good?" arguments to bother, these days.)

Mal, I could see the argument. Mal is more just bad assed than evil. He's pretty close though. Pushing someone into an engine air intake just to make a point is pretty close to evil.

To be fair, I think Mal did so to avoid a problem. The man he pushed into the jet engine just swore that he would track Mal down to the ends of space and kill him. Mal was in a position to remove the threat without any problem. It made his point, certainly, but it also removed the threat of a relentless villain.

Besides. In that same episode, Mal opts to return the medicine he stole from a sick village, rather than collect money for it. If he was Evil, he would've taken the cash and ran.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I normally discourage but don't ban evil PCs. I make it clear that if they mess up the party dynamics or betray the party, or otherwise become very disruptive I will smite the character. I think a well played LE can get along fien with most parties. The alignments I'm most leary of are NE, CE, and sometimes CN.

In my current game, it is an evil campaign, which was decided as a group from the start. 3 are NE, one is LE, and one of the NE PCs likes arson enough that he could slide to CE in time. I made it clear I wanted them all to be friends and on the same page, and will not tolerate backstabbing. They were made with a semi-shared religion (two worship a god that despises all the others, one being a cleric of him, and the other two generally hate all of divinity) so they have a fanatical bent to tie them together. I've also decided to keep their situation dire and force them to struggle bitterly to survive early on in the hopes it will cement some sort of team spirit between them out of necessity. My greatest difficulty so far has been their motivation. It really is hard to find things besides shiny rewards or negative reinforcement ("if you don't do this, you're dead"), so I want them to develop their characters more. Two players still have no backstory despite me requesting them for everyone, which just makes it harder to find thigngs to interest them.

As far as lines being crossed...I wouldn't want to actually facilitate someone's sick fantasies in game, but evil is evil. I entirely allow them to take captives to later rape, torture for fun, or whatever else they feel would be in-character. One believes everyone deserves the "honor" of dying in battle --whether they wanted to be a combatant or not. I limit how graphic things get to an acceptable level for us, and in turn let them know karma's a and they can expect some miserable experiences of their own. I enjoy the works of the Marquis de Sade and find the concept of even innocent-seeming people being capable of shockingly dark deeds fun to explore, so the current game has been good for that. As long as everyone is mature about it and comfortable, it's not a big deal, IME.