Campaign of Anti-Heroes

[LogantheBard]

I recently picked up the PF Advanced Race Guide, and my players read through it and immediately had several ideas for characters, but most of which are not your typical hero. They've decided they'd like to play a campaign of anti-heroes. Not necessarily psychotic depraved evil, but morally ambiguous, on the fringe of the law, and definitely not going to be motivated by "it's the right thing to do."

I've already laid the groundwork for the typical evil campaign pitfalls, no infighting, no rampant murder just because murder is evil. I don't want everybody to be Joker from Batman.

I'm thinking about starting them off as a Charlie's Angels type group, taking jobs from an unknown through a liason, working closely as a team, and their relatively content in that because the pay/adventure/opportunity/infamy is too good to pass up. How the party dynamic grows from there, I don't know.

My group make up so far is:
Half-Elf Treesinger Druid (I'm allowing the archetype for half-elf), who's playing basically like Poison Ivy. She has a desire to return the world to it's natural ways, before it was corrupted by sentient races.

Ratfolk Plaguebringer Alchemist-I'm pretty sure he's wanting to play this guy as an extortionist mad scientist type. "Give me that, or I'll put this disease in your water supply"

Goblin something - He wants to play a goblin who just wants to be accepted, and he's pissed off about the stereotypes about his race. But instead of working to prove the stereotypes wrong and be an upstanding member of society, he plays right into the fears of others, and is a typical dangerous goblin. "You think I'm going to hurt you? Ok, fine, I will!"

One to two other unknowns.

Anyone have any tips for running a campaign like this? Not necessarily evil, but definitely not rainbows and unicorns.

 

[Ahnehnois]

It really isn't as abnormal as it's made out to be. The archetypical D&D party is all about killing things and taking their stuff, which is quite antisocial even if said things are eeevil. Knights in shining armor with actual principles are really a small niche in D&D.

That aside, my advice is this: play it straight. Keep your opinions out of it. Don't punish the party because you don't like them, but don't let them run wild. Just adjudicate actions by what seems reasonable. If the players help someone, this may end up benefiting them, or it may not. If they harm someone, it may come back on them, or it may not. Set some parameters as to what will happen, roll some dice, and try to be as impartial of a DM as possible.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm thinking about starting them off as a Charlie's Angels type group, taking jobs from an unknown through a liason, working closely as a team, and their relatively content in that because the pay/adventure/opportunity/infamy is too good to pass up. How the party dynamic grows from there, I don't know.

Or try the Suicide Squad/Dirty Dozen trope- they've all had run-ins with the law, and doing missions is how they will serve their time and regain their freedom.

 

[[OMENRPG]Ben]

Most of my games are run with this kind of playerbase, so I'm quite familiar with it.

The one thing I've encountered is to ensure that the characters either have a strong connection and loyalty to one another or to a specific cause. If that cause is something as selfish is "getting rich", it isn't uncommon for the characters to backstab each other. This can lead to great drama, and if the players don't get too emotionally involved, it can lead to a great game. I've also seen it lead to a no-fun-no-win situation.

I think one of the easiest ways to make anti-heroes have an interesting motivation is to fill the world with difficult choices. Do they help the government defend off an invading army, getting paid in the process? Even if the government poorly manages its own defenses, or starves its people? Do they assist the conquerors? What if the conquerors plan on killing every first-born son to cripple the nation?

These kind of no-clear-option scenarios help antiheroes still have to make moral decisions, and then witness the consequences of those decisions. I agree that one shouldn't punish them for taking the selfish route, simply treat it realistically. There's a reason people are selfish, it helps them to survive dangerous situations. That makes trust between those you know (such as the party) all the more important and meaningful.

 

[Dioltach]

I recently had an idea, inspired by Joe Abercrombie's The First Law series: if the party consists of antiheroes, perhaps they should not really benefit from their adventures. At the end, they realise that they've been used for someone else's selfish goals. I'm not talking about short-term rewards like level-
linked treasure and gear, but their overall situation after they've been adventuring for a while. After all, it makes sense that if their selfish motives and lack of scruples are well-known somebody will try to manipulate them sooner or later and have fewer scruples about doing it themself.

 

[DaveMage]

Don't know if it helps, but the Skull & Shackles AP was pretty much made for these types of characters....

 

[Hand of Evil]

As always my soapbox...define what is evil in your games. This will tel the players what they have to do.

Also, don't confuse laws with lawful alignment, one is rules the other a code, many players characters break laws; arson, breaking and entering, selling of stolen goods, tomb raiding, some muggings, destruction of private property, etc.

The biggest problem with anti-heroes, they don't work well together. Work with the players on why they came together, let the players come up with something.

 

[Nytmare]

We had a really interesting evil campaign that ran for about 2 years. It was set in White Wolf's "Scarred Lands", which is a kind of post apocalyptic fantasy world set against the backdrop of the last scraps of the divine races pulling themselves up from the ashes of a 100 year war between the gods and their elemental, titan parents. Good and evil is a very serious "shades of grey" kind of thing in that game, and playing around with things on that end of the spectrum was really, really neat.

Each of the gods basically have their own pet nations/races/classes, and have sworn not to interfere directly in any infighting that might go on between their followers.

The players were all members of the militaristic nation of the LE god, who was, as you would probably expect, a god of war, domination, strength, undeath, and slavery.

It made for a really interesting game, and we tried really hard to focus on things from the point of view of their code of ethics, and a people who saw themselves, and their (albiet somewhat alien) beliefs as what was right and good.

You did what you were told, there was a strict chain of command, and system of punishment. Obedience is something to be forced not earned, and any one or thing that was weaker than you was dominated because that was what was "right." As a soldier, your greatest aspiration was to die having earned the recognition of your god so that he would raise you up, basically as a Death Knight.

They were the good guys, and everyone else had the wrong point of view and were going on about things the wrong way. People were happy (except for the enslaved halflings), and the nation as a whole was prospering and doing better than anyone else in the world. Granted a good part of that was because they were all floundering and separated, usually fighting monsters on one side, and this army on the other.

The PCs were racing to save the world from a cult of druids trying to raise up one of the fallen titans. They were plotting and planning and fighting against the "weaker" divine nations on one side, refusing to work "with" them when the right thing to do was to just storm in and take what you wanted. And all the while, they were tracking and hunting and trying to keep ahead of their common enemy before they brought the world to a horrible screeching end.

 

[Wednesday Boy]

The biggest problem with anti-heroes, they don't work well together. Work with the players on why they came together, let the players come up with something.

The one thing I've encountered is to ensure that the characters either have a strong connection and loyalty to one another or to a specific cause.

I couldn't agree more. It's something that I think you should do for every group, regardless of their moral compass. And collaborating on it ahead of time should let your group avoid imploding on itself.

 

[TerraDave]

As others have noted, this probably more the norm for D&D. I am still waiting to DM that really heroic party. Part of that is D&D, and part of that is the culture...people like James Bond or Dirty Harry more then they like Dudley Do Right. In "adult fantasy" anti-heroes abound, going back to Conan or Elric, with many more current examples.

In D&D, the "we will let you curs live if you explore this dungeon" has been used in, the giant series, ghost tower of inverness, and I think other classic adventures.