Evil in My Game

[mythusmage]

if somebody wanted to go into a small village, poison the well, slaughter the animals, and rape the women, I would do nothing about it. The people of the village, on the other hand...

I don't use metagaming measures to enforce a code of behavior on the part of my players, I use in-game measures.

 

[the Jester]

Me too!

Actions generate reactions. Consequences drive my campaigns. There is a mostly-depopulated continent in my world that was depopulated by a horrible npc that was let loose by pcs. (Of course, you can always count on pcs to pull the mysterious lever/push the red, candy-like button/open the sealed door/whatever.)

So in your hypothetical example, the town may be entirely wiped out. Then the high-level paladin who GREW UP there hears about it and gets his high-level cleric pal to find out whodunnit, and they go do some high-level buttkicking on the responsible party of pcs.

Much better than just saying "You can't do that!"

Good may not always triumph but it ALWAYS puts up a fight.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I thought about that a good deal about this after I played in a game where the GM started out by saying that he had no preference for whether we played the most heroic character or the most vile creeps ever to walk the planet. It ended up spiralling in the vile creeps direction although since I left before it got too bad, I can't say for sure what happened.

After that experience, I decided this: I can handle evil PCs in game or metagame. However, I don't enjoy playing with evil PCs as a player. I would not enjoy playing with them as a DM either. They are vile, disgusting, and despicable. And none of that is fun.

So I use the metagame method for dealing with evil--I just said "I want to play a heroic campaign; evil characters are not permitted." That way, I don't have to endure an evil character's presence or even put up with him long enough to detail the gruesome death he richly deserves.

 

[Wormwood]

if somebody wanted to go into a small village, poison the well, slaughter the animals, and rape the women, I would do nothing about it. The people of the village, on the other hand...

That doesn't work when the PCs in question are high enough level that the villagers are unable to mount any resistance (assuming you don't stretch plausibility and have a cabal of "retired adventurers" in every fleaspack hamlet).

In my experience, the more care spent picking your players, the less time worrying about their characters.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

if somebody wanted to go into a small village, poison the well, slaughter the animals, and rape the women, I would do nothing about it.

See, I would have ended the game right at that last action and asked them to leave my house. After that, I would be sure not to invite that person back.

I make it clear from the beginning that evil characters are not an option- and while I encourage characters to evolve / change / grow with time- if a player feels their character is going to become evil, then it is time for that character to become a pc.

I want to have fun- such behavior would ruin my fun.

FD

 

[Dinkeldog]

I know, let's open another thinly veiled thread about the same thing that's been closed three times already After all, it can't wait until Monday.

Not.