Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RangerWickett" data-source="post: 3527581" data-attributes="member: 63">The NPCs are present to give some flavor to the setting, and for those GMs who like to have something to do when the players start talking for hours at a time, and who like to have an in-game method of providing exposition. None of them are necessary for the plot, though I'd like to think that their presence won't be detrimental, since they're working alongside the PCs, not trying to be in charge.This depends on whether by evil you mean, "Is self-centered and wants what's best for him," which in my mind is the natural human state, and thus is neutral (the 'evil tendencies' come when you're okay with hurting others to get what you want) or "Takes pleasure in causing harm to others, whether it benefits him or not," which is actually closer to the official D&D take on evil.When I originally ran what became the campaign saga, I didn't use alignment, but I told the players to have characters who would get involved. Three PCs were fleeing because they were magic-users, and one was going to Lyceum because he saw the war as an opportunity to make a lot of money, by betraying Seaquen if it came to that. One was willing to betray his allies to save himself, and ultimately did at the end. I would have pegged him at True Neutral. One was looking for money and eventually was swayed by the plight of others in the war, turning from Chaotic Neutral to Chaotic Good. One was looking to find a purpose for himself, and determined that the world had tipped too far toward suffering, so when he did good deeds it was for the sake of balancing the scales. He was Lawful Neutral. There was only one good guy, a gnome whose life sucked, and who wanted to make sure others didn't suffer like he had, which made him pretty much Neutral Good.Then later on the group was joined by a former inquisitor who really was an evil person, but did it by taking advantage of weaker people. Since the PCs weren't weak, he wouldn't hurt them, and their goals lined up with his, because he wanted revenge against Leska for trying to kill him.The thing about the War is that most of the people involved are neutral. They have national affiliations and personal goals, but they're not fighting for ideals. They're fighting for safety or security or to promote their nation. In such a conflict, characters just need to have a reason to be opposed to Ragesia, since Ragesia is a threat to them. They don't necessarily have to want to save the day, just save themselves.Evil characters (and I mean selfish, not "bwahahaha I love to cause pain") will likely see the war as an opportunity to get power, and the Torch of the Burning Sky -- the recovery of which drives the plot for several adventures -- is one of the most powerful items in the world, if you have an army with which to take advantage of it. Really, the only motivation you need is not wanting to be killed by Ragesia. With that basis, any adventure -- even one with 'heroic' goals -- can be justified as a way to ensure the PCs are safe from Ragesia.</blockquote>

Verification