D&D General D&D doesn't need Evil

[Mort]

OK, so what's the context?

Given the rest of the adventure, situation etc. It will help the DM determine how the NPC fits in and how she approaches the PCs. Eg. provide some context for the NPCs role in the adventure.

And it doesn't even matter that or if two different DMs view LE differently. As long as each HAS a view of the alignment v- it will help them contextualize the NPC within the adventure.

 

[Scribe]

Also it would be funny to have an alignment axis that went:

Objective Good
Subjective Good
Neutral
Subjective Evil
Objective Evil

I look at it.

Structured Selfless
Freeform Selfless
Neutral
Freeform Selfish
Structured Selfish

Thats mostly how I personally 10,000 feet 'define' the various alignments.

 

[Oofta]

Sidebar but I'm curious how a concept I like to explore would work in your campaign.

I'm a struggling farmer. I have to work all day to tend the farm and support my wife and 12 young kids. I will do anything to protect my family. My buddy Steve, who happens to have powers involving life and death self me a death I durance policy. When I die, Steve will raise my body and allow my wife to use me on the farm to keep the family cared for. We all think it's a practical solution.

Is this evil?

I use a lot of "did it for the cause" undead in my campaigns. Guardians in mummy tombs aren't there because some evil guy forced them to. They gave their lives to eternally guard their leaders resting place willingly.

3e used to have non-evil undead (I believe they were instead called undying???) and I always felt like that was something that would happen in a world with pragmatists populating it.

I don't play D&D to discuss philosophical questions so I don't care.

 

[Lanefan]

Again, that’s baggage you’re bringing, the topic is “D&D doesn’t need evil,” not “D&D shouldn’t have evil.”

To me those read as two steps in a sequence. First, convince people that D&D doesn't need evil. Once that's done it's a very short jump to starting the argument that it shouldn't have evil.

Some are perhaps trying to forestall the second argument by opposing the first one.

 

[Lanefan]

Sure.

Say the PCs are in a dungeons and meet a Izouna, a LE mage. That's the info you get on her. How do you RP Izouna?

If that's all the info I'm given I'd be annoyed with the module writer; as I-as-DM then have to do the work of coming up with her stats, level, and spell list.

But assuming all the stats are provided: LE tells me if she gives her word on something she'll keep it, she probably values power and takes careful note of who outranks who (and by extension, where she fits in the pecking order). Her level and power (including availability and-or power of allies), relative to the party, will determine her approach: if she thinks she's in a position of power she might haughtily offer a bargain (which ends up in her favour, of course); while if she's clearly outgunned she'll have a getaway plan in place and use best tactics to defend herself while escaping. Location makes a difference as well: if the encounter is set in her home or lair her approach will be different than if she's met in a tavern or in the wild.

Howzat?

 

[Malmuria]

General question: how do you design interesting antagonists for your campaign? I'm not talking about random encounters, but individuals/groups/monsters that have a more sustained presence and influence over your campaign, and that the PCs must contend with. For example, the 5e DMG, in providing tables to help fill out motivations and goals for NPCs and villains (pp. 74, 90 and 94), does not primarily talk about good vs evil but suggests a lot more details and context to answer the questions, "what kind of evil? Evil for whom?"

To borrow language from another thread, I think antagonists that are evil-for-evil sake can be good zero-dimensional villains and perfectly valid for having fun. But if you want antagonists and a world that is more 1-dimensional or even 3-dimensional, you will need more than simply an alignment axis to detail the various factions, npcs, and plots going on.

 

[Malmuria]

I find this book mostly useless, but this chart (p. 90) is maybe relevant for this discussion

 

[Oofta]

To me those read as two steps in a sequence. First, convince people that D&D doesn't need evil. Once that's done it's a very short jump to starting the argument that it shouldn't have evil.

Some are perhaps trying to forestall the second argument by opposing the first one.

Personally I don't really see much of a distinction. Why ask if it's needed if not to "prove" that it should be eliminated? If my wife asks me if I really need that old sweater, it's not a philosophical question. She really just wants me to get rid of it otherwise she wouldn't ask in the first place.

 

[Oofta]

General question: how do you design interesting antagonists for your campaign? I'm not talking about random encounters, but individuals/groups/monsters that have a more sustained presence and influence over your campaign, and that the PCs must content with. For example, the 5e DMG, in providing tables to help fill out motivations and goals for NPCs and villains (pp. 74, 90 and 94), does not primarily talk about good vs evil but suggests a lot more details and context to answer the questions, "what kind of evil? Evil for whom?"

To borrow language from another thread, I think antagonists that are evil-for-evil sake can be good zero-dimensional villains and perfectly valid for having fun. But if you want antagonists and a world that is more 1-dimensional or even 3-dimensional, you will need more than simply an alignment axis to detail the various factions, npcs, and plots going on.

Sometimes they're just evil because I don't expect them to directly interact in any meaningful way, sometimes they start as "just evil" and get additional fluff because of events. Occasionally I'll put a lot of thought into it, but most of my real thought and effort goes into the higher level organizations and forces in play. Of course if Evil Inc needs a boss, that boss will be developed in light of Evil Inc.

I normally don't spend too much time on any PC [edit]NPC[/edit] initially because I never know what's going to be relevant. It all just depends on what the group latches onto and pursues.

 

[Lanefan]

I normally don't spend too much time on any PC initially because I never know what's going to be relevant. It all just depends on what the group latches onto and pursues.

Did you mean to type "NPC" here?