Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="T. Foster" data-source="post: 1911354" data-attributes="member: 16574"><p>I voted #3 but I'm really midway between #3 and #4 -- I'd probably allow an evil character unless I thought the player was too immature to handle it responsibly or was going to try and deliberately wreck the campaign (by, say, killing all the other PCs). I run very "old-school" dungeoncrawl-oriented campaigns in which (IMO) the characters' motivations are largely neutral -- true they're killing bad guys and thus at least indirectly helping to keep 'civilization' safe, but their motivation for doing so is largely selfish -- wealth and increased personal power. From this perspective, evil characters (whose motivations are more wholly selfish) don't necessarily fit in with the group ethic any less than good characters (whose motivations are more wholly altruistic). Both will probably come into conflict not only with each other but with the neutrals as well, as the campaign progresses. IMO those sorts of conflicts, as long as they're handled maturely by the players (i.e. actual PC on PC violence is kept to a minimum), make for great role-playing and character development fodder. I'd love to see two high-levek characters, one good and one evil, who were once adventuring companions (when they were low enough level that their mutual survival depended on cooperation) but are now deadly rivals and enemies -- especially if I could find a way to once again force them to work together against an even greater threat!</p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification