Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Alignment and Party Dynamics
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ptolemy18" data-source="post: 3835643" data-attributes="member: 24970"><p>The answer to both questions is the same: if the other people in the group REALLY wanted me not to play an evil PC, I wouldn't. </p><p></p><p>But this is just out of common courtesy, not out of any innate belief that inter-character conflict is bad.</p><p></p><p>Another aspect of courtesy is: I think on the whole, players and the DM should try to bend around other players' concepts. The game is supposed to be fun for everyone, and this also means that the DM should try to expand the game to make room for people's character types. Basically, I prefer games in which the campaign is built, at least to some extent, around the characters' backstories and goals. Obviously there are some people who prefer to play sort of blank-slate characters and just face whatever the DM throws at them, but I believe the best games are guided as much by the players' preferences as the DM's preferences. If the player says "I am on the run from an evil cult" then the DM should sit down and think about this evil cult (with the player) and figure out how to work it into the plot, and so on. Or if the player says "My character wants to become the King of Thieves" then the DM should try to figure out how the character could become the King of Thieves, while not taking the plot entirely out of the hands of the other characters. And if one of the other characters is a paladin who doesn't want the other character to become the King of Thieves in the long run -- and the two characters want to play this out as a real rivalry/conflict/battle -- that's drama!!</p><p></p><p>Obviously this has to have limits -- if you're playing a game set in a world without psions and somebody wants to play a psion, well, you'd better play a non-psion. And some other game setting might be "no evil characters allowed." But I think within the core rules, there should be the maximum amount of variety allowing the maximum amount of character concepts, including (among other things) games with inter-party conflict and "evil" characters, or games without inter-party conflict. </p><p></p><p>Of course, experienced gamers who want to add this sort of thing will know how to add it, I suppose.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ptolemy18, post: 3835643, member: 24970"] The answer to both questions is the same: if the other people in the group REALLY wanted me not to play an evil PC, I wouldn't. But this is just out of common courtesy, not out of any innate belief that inter-character conflict is bad. Another aspect of courtesy is: I think on the whole, players and the DM should try to bend around other players' concepts. The game is supposed to be fun for everyone, and this also means that the DM should try to expand the game to make room for people's character types. Basically, I prefer games in which the campaign is built, at least to some extent, around the characters' backstories and goals. Obviously there are some people who prefer to play sort of blank-slate characters and just face whatever the DM throws at them, but I believe the best games are guided as much by the players' preferences as the DM's preferences. If the player says "I am on the run from an evil cult" then the DM should sit down and think about this evil cult (with the player) and figure out how to work it into the plot, and so on. Or if the player says "My character wants to become the King of Thieves" then the DM should try to figure out how the character could become the King of Thieves, while not taking the plot entirely out of the hands of the other characters. And if one of the other characters is a paladin who doesn't want the other character to become the King of Thieves in the long run -- and the two characters want to play this out as a real rivalry/conflict/battle -- that's drama!! Obviously this has to have limits -- if you're playing a game set in a world without psions and somebody wants to play a psion, well, you'd better play a non-psion. And some other game setting might be "no evil characters allowed." But I think within the core rules, there should be the maximum amount of variety allowing the maximum amount of character concepts, including (among other things) games with inter-party conflict and "evil" characters, or games without inter-party conflict. Of course, experienced gamers who want to add this sort of thing will know how to add it, I suppose. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Alignment and Party Dynamics
Top