Playing a halfling, want to be more mean than normal. How do I go about this?

[Nichwee]

RULE 1 of playing a bad character: NEVER CROSS THE PARTY. You're evil, not stupid. You understand the long-term value of allies vs. the short-term value of stealing their possessions.

In fact, a token evil teammate can be very valuable to a party - Sometimes you need to make a decision where there is no morally right answer, like when you need to kill innocents to stop a plague from spreading. Or when you need to lie, cheat and steal to get the right information. This is when the goodie-two-shoes are held back by their moral codex, and the anti-hero is free to act.

Quoted for truth. Our party had an evil guy (ex-rogue guild leader, now on the run) who decided to sell his help to the "mission" we were assembled for, in return for safety after we were done.

He was a right gowt, but he supported the party as best as he could without risking his neck too much.
And at one point he came in very handy as he butchered/desecrated the corpses of an "enemy camp" we had hoped to sneak past (but ending up fighting) so as to throw blame on in-fighting amongst the "loosely allied tribes". The whole time my Good character was busy throwing up behind a bush in response to the gore.
It was quite a memorable moment for the party tbh.

 

[The Red King]

In fact, a token evil teammate can be very valuable to a party - Sometimes you need to make a decision where there is no morally right answer, like when you need to kill innocents to stop a plague from spreading. Or when you need to lie, cheat and steal to get the right information. This is when the goodie-two-shoes are held back by their moral codex, and the anti-hero is free to act.

Remember: The only way for evil to stay ahead is to be smarter than the good guys.

So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

 

[Wednesday Boy]

Bah, humbug.

Johnny Bones, my FTR/TH, was the one who suggested the party Wiz be used as bait fior mountain lions (the plan worked), and who shoved the same Wiz through a wall of flame to show the party where it was safest.

And decades ago, it was someone else's thief who stole indiscriminately- in AND out of the party- and put the party in jeopardy. But he was shielded from the others by MY PC, his thrall/bodyguard, the gentle giant Bear (whose story has been told often on these boards).

It's HOW you're a bastard to partymates that matters.

I think it's how your fellow players feel about you being a bastard to partymates that matters. One player might tolerate or enjoy the dynamic of Johnny Bones being a bully towards their character but for another player it could spark unwanted conflict in-game and/or out of game.

 

[The Red King]

I think it's how your fellow players feel about you being a bastard to partymates that matters. One player might tolerate or enjoy the dynamic of Johnny Bones being a bully towards their character but for another player it could spark unwanted conflict in-game and/or out of game.

I have an all evil campaign going on right now. A few months back, a PC played a Dijin who had become Half-dragon by stealing the heart of a Dragon and fusing it to himself. He had been working covertly for the rest of the Dijin to open a permanent portal to his plane so the Dijin could take over the Prime Material with the help of a flaming comet. (This would have been very bad for the rest of the group, his plans were to keep them as pets.) When the plot was revealed - keep in mind this IS an EVIL campaign with players that are playing openly EVIL PC's- the players had a fit. One younger player said he diddnt want to play in "this kind of campaign". Once they calmed down, they fought together to save the day, but wow was I surprised to have them react so badly to the evil outsider doing something evil.

 

[Rannan]

So is it pretty disruptive for the group to all be aligned as good wit the exception of an evil character? I just wanna roll evil or unaligned so I'm not bound by anything, I can just do whatever I want and not worry about moral implications or my diety forsaking me. That's one reason I thought to roll evil, but then I have to consistently be evil, whereas if I'm neutral I have a choice between being evil or good any time I feel like it.

 

[The Red King]

Then it sounds like you just want to be True Neutral.

Serve yourself or throw in with the group, whatever seems good at the time, right?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I think it's how your fellow players feel about you being a bastard to partymates that matters. One player might tolerate or enjoy the dynamic of Johnny Bones being a bully towards their character but for another player it could spark unwanted conflict in-game and/or out of game.

True, true- and also that I did nothing that permanently harmed another PC.

Bear wound up dead fighting for his buddy/boss, but it was epic, so again, it was cool.

But if the in-party victim(s) aren't cool with it, yeah, it will be a problem.

 

[Rannan]

Then it sounds like you just want to be True Neutral.

Serve yourself or throw in with the group, whatever seems good at the time, right?

Basically yeah. Whatever benefits me the most at the time, but I wouldn't cross my group because in the long run it wouldn't be good for me. I just might go against their wishes or what they think is best, because what's best for them may not be best for me. That might even fall under chaotic neutral.

 

[mkill]

I have an all evil campaign going on right now. (snip)

Here is a tale from my all evil campaign...

I once DMed an all dark elf campaign, and one PC decided to steal an item that belonged to the house. Too bad, he also had the "slave" disadvantage, while several other PCs were nobles of said house. They promptly caught and executed him.

Obviously the player brought that upon himself. Crossing the party can also backfire when everyone is evil

 

[mkill]

So is it pretty disruptive for the group to all be aligned as good wit the exception of an evil character? I just wanna roll evil or unaligned so I'm not bound by anything, I can just do whatever I want and not worry about moral implications or my diety forsaking me. That's one reason I thought to roll evil, but then I have to consistently be evil, whereas if I'm neutral I have a choice between being evil or good any time I feel like it.

Who said you need to be consistently evil? That's the great part - good has to be consistently good, and will get in great trouble for evil acts, while evil will often commit "good" acts to further its evil agenda. After all, how else do you keep a positive reputation in public? How else do you undermine good-aligned organizations? How else do you win someone over to the dark side if you never do them favors?

And even better, evil can always fight other evil for supremacy, while good gets in trouble for fighting other good guys.