Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Gizzard" data-source="post: 85167" data-attributes="member: 527">I had mixed experience with Evil in the campaigns I have played in.&nbsp; First, I had a character with a similar concept to your Cleric, a 2E Cleric who worshipped the god of death and gradually became more entranced by necromancy.&nbsp; He wasnt really concerned about his actions in this life; he generally hung out with the Thief and backed the Thief up because it was the expedient thing to do rather than the moral thing to do.&nbsp; (Actually, I was a bit surprised to take some random web &quot;alignment test&quot; for this character and have him turn out NE; he always just considered himself a pragmatist.&nbsp; But I guess thats the definition of NE -- &quot;Me first.&quot;)&nbsp; Anyway, if the rest of the party is LG or NG then a NE faction is going to be a constant irritant.&nbsp; In character, both factions have to ask themselves why they would continue to adventure with people who's goals exactly oppose their own.&nbsp; You can invent some crazy series of pressures to keep the party together; but two different adventures with our group ended with two different parties splintering apart.&nbsp; That can be bad if your gaming group takes the in-character infighting personally.&nbsp; (And its hard not to if you are butting heads with the same people every game session.&nbsp; Human nature.)On the flip side; I ran a sucessful LE campaign where everyone was an Orc.&nbsp; There was a rigid dominance heirarchy, co-operation was actually very high because you do what the bigger Orc tells you to do or recieve a butt-kicking.&nbsp; Nowdays, I attribute the sucess of this campaign to the strong &quot;Law&quot; component and the disaster in previous ones to the &quot;Neutral&quot; and &quot;Chaos&quot; factions.&nbsp; Maybe thats too simplistic, but its my working theory for now.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :-)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Gizzard, post: 85167, member: 527"] I had mixed experience with Evil in the campaigns I have played in. First, I had a character with a similar concept to your Cleric, a 2E Cleric who worshipped the god of death and gradually became more entranced by necromancy. He wasnt really concerned about his actions in this life; he generally hung out with the Thief and backed the Thief up because it was the expedient thing to do rather than the moral thing to do. (Actually, I was a bit surprised to take some random web "alignment test" for this character and have him turn out NE; he always just considered himself a pragmatist. But I guess thats the definition of NE -- "Me first.") Anyway, if the rest of the party is LG or NG then a NE faction is going to be a constant irritant. In character, both factions have to ask themselves why they would continue to adventure with people who's goals exactly oppose their own. You can invent some crazy series of pressures to keep the party together; but two different adventures with our group ended with two different parties splintering apart. That can be bad if your gaming group takes the in-character infighting personally. (And its hard not to if you are butting heads with the same people every game session. Human nature.) On the flip side; I ran a sucessful LE campaign where everyone was an Orc. There was a rigid dominance heirarchy, co-operation was actually very high because you do what the bigger Orc tells you to do or recieve a butt-kicking. Nowdays, I attribute the sucess of this campaign to the strong "Law" component and the disaster in previous ones to the "Neutral" and "Chaos" factions. Maybe thats too simplistic, but its my working theory for now. :-) [/QUOTE]

Verification