It's funny precisely because it's so close to the literal truth.
Sure. But what does that have to do with playing fictional characters in deliberately cliched fictions?
Evil or not?
- Thread starter Kzach
- Start date
Michael Silverbane
Adventurer
I allow or disallow evil characters in the campaigns that I'm running based on the flavor that I'm looking for in the campaign, and what the group wants to do, and who I'm playing with. I also generally attempt to discourage disruptive behavior and intra-party combat (not conflict, just combat).
As long as someone's behavior at the table doesn't offend or distract others at the table, and as long as they can come up with a reason for their characters to engage themselves in the adventure that I plan to run, I do not care what they do.
Also, I enjoy playing evil characters myself, so it would be a bit hypocritical of me to deny someone else that same option.
One thing that I like to do, when playing an evil character, is to attach them strongly to someone else in the group. one of my favorite characters of all time, an evil wizard, was attached to another of the PCs in this way. They had both apprenticed with the same master, and had become fast friends.
When the DM asked me, why are you adventuring with these people, I pointed at the other player and said, "I'm going to help him."
As long as someone's behavior at the table doesn't offend or distract others at the table, and as long as they can come up with a reason for their characters to engage themselves in the adventure that I plan to run, I do not care what they do.
Also, I enjoy playing evil characters myself, so it would be a bit hypocritical of me to deny someone else that same option.
One thing that I like to do, when playing an evil character, is to attach them strongly to someone else in the group. one of my favorite characters of all time, an evil wizard, was attached to another of the PCs in this way. They had both apprenticed with the same master, and had become fast friends.
When the DM asked me, why are you adventuring with these people, I pointed at the other player and said, "I'm going to help him."
Another important distinction is Evil in the context of what you, the DM and the player believe is evil, and what the D&D system believes is evil.
Just certain spells change your alignment.
By the rules, a perfectly Good PC who just casts these spells will become evil.
A character who acts Good, or who desires to save the world... but who animates the dead, uses Summon Monster to conjure devils in combat, and so on, is totally legal in that context between DM and player, but the system says his alignment is evil.
Just certain spells change your alignment.
By the rules, a perfectly Good PC who just casts these spells will become evil.
A character who acts Good, or who desires to save the world... but who animates the dead, uses Summon Monster to conjure devils in combat, and so on, is totally legal in that context between DM and player, but the system says his alignment is evil.
I also think it's a bit silly to assume that Evil characters wouldn't want to save the world.
Remember, if the world is destroyed, that evil guy is dead too. His motivation certainly isn't "But all the puppies and rainbows will be destroyed!" but instead "Hey, my stuff is here. And I have aspirations to achieve. You aren't ending that prematurely." Besides, he might want to shanghai the power that the World-Ender is using.
Remember, if the world is destroyed, that evil guy is dead too. His motivation certainly isn't "But all the puppies and rainbows will be destroyed!" but instead "Hey, my stuff is here. And I have aspirations to achieve. You aren't ending that prematurely." Besides, he might want to shanghai the power that the World-Ender is using.
Lord Mhoram
Hero
Absolutely.
The fact that we have a steady group, which has been together for something like 17 years really helps.
We know each other's tastes, likes and dislikes, so starting up new games tends to work out okay.
More than anything else, good gaming is knowing your group and good communication before the game begins.
Jeff Wilder
First Post
I don't allow Evil PCs. I'm just not interested in DMing the kinds of behavior that makes and maintains an Evil alignment.
On the topic of disruptiveness, I think the CE "I kill and maim whatever the hell I want cuz I'M EVIL YEAH" is just as disruptive as the "You shall only do the utmost of good or I will smite you/throw a big stink" of Paladin's Lawful Stupid.
Not to mention the question of "So, do we kill the baby goblins?" has been around for decades.
And personally, I see the "I'm going to burn the village down for fun" evil just the same as "Teehee, I'm a kender and I'll play a kender like kender are!" They're both done for the sake of being annoying/disruptive, and alignment doesn't matter when it comes to the player.
Personally, I dislike alignments. I hate how they are treated in the game. But in the more philosophical point of conversation, as opposed to what Evil means in game terms...
"Evil" is a very fluid thing, IMO. From fiction and TV, we have Dexter, a serial killer who stalks, kidnaps, and then kills people - only his victims are murderers who cheated the legal system or otherwise evade justice. In "The Professional", a contract killer takes his 12 year old neighbor under his wing and protects her after her family is killed, and he goes well out of his way to protect her. Elaith Culnober is an utterly ruthless elf, however he has a sense of duty, and cares so much about getting his ancestral sword to accept his daughter. Then there's Marv, from Sin City, who stalks and kills anyone responsible for the murder of an innocent woman whom he loved. Even Magnito, who has a legitimate point, merely goes about it in an utterly unreasonable manner.
Evil can simply be "Good intentions, bad methods". An evil party could be utterly loyal to the members, but be ruthless and unflinching to anyone that crosses them. It could simply be "efficiency"; anyone that surrenders is killed, to avoid retribution in the future. And it can be simply "I dabble in evil powers or bad things"; raising the dead, taking surrendered enemies as slaves, etc.
I personally see LE as the Mafia. That totally works in a group dynamic; the "Family" is loyal to eachother, or at least follows a principled code. It also follows tyrant behavior; "I will protect you, as long as you follow my strict rules. Betray me, and I will do horrible things to you." NE is moral-less, opportunistic, and utterly mercenary, but can still function in a group.
And really, I have been wanting to play a little anti-hero game for a while. Either focusing on rising through the ranks of a Thieves Guild, or re-inacting "Prison Break"; the characters are in prison: Break out, evade capture, make your way in the world.
But then, I have a distaste for very Heroic fantasy. Being an adventurer just because "You are a good guy" isn't my thing (except in one campaign circumstance), and I don't like "Let's save the world" plots, at all. Improving the world, sure, but stopping the apocalypse is... boring, to me.
I only have two rules as far as this goes, and it applies to all alignments:
1) Do not disrupt. No betraying party members, no mass carnage "Just because". No deliberate plot disruption.
2) You must have a reason to adventure with the party, you must have a reason to stay with the party.
Not to mention the question of "So, do we kill the baby goblins?" has been around for decades.
And personally, I see the "I'm going to burn the village down for fun" evil just the same as "Teehee, I'm a kender and I'll play a kender like kender are!" They're both done for the sake of being annoying/disruptive, and alignment doesn't matter when it comes to the player.
Indeed.
Personally, I dislike alignments. I hate how they are treated in the game. But in the more philosophical point of conversation, as opposed to what Evil means in game terms...
"Evil" is a very fluid thing, IMO. From fiction and TV, we have Dexter, a serial killer who stalks, kidnaps, and then kills people - only his victims are murderers who cheated the legal system or otherwise evade justice. In "The Professional", a contract killer takes his 12 year old neighbor under his wing and protects her after her family is killed, and he goes well out of his way to protect her. Elaith Culnober is an utterly ruthless elf, however he has a sense of duty, and cares so much about getting his ancestral sword to accept his daughter. Then there's Marv, from Sin City, who stalks and kills anyone responsible for the murder of an innocent woman whom he loved. Even Magnito, who has a legitimate point, merely goes about it in an utterly unreasonable manner.
Evil can simply be "Good intentions, bad methods". An evil party could be utterly loyal to the members, but be ruthless and unflinching to anyone that crosses them. It could simply be "efficiency"; anyone that surrenders is killed, to avoid retribution in the future. And it can be simply "I dabble in evil powers or bad things"; raising the dead, taking surrendered enemies as slaves, etc.
I personally see LE as the Mafia. That totally works in a group dynamic; the "Family" is loyal to eachother, or at least follows a principled code. It also follows tyrant behavior; "I will protect you, as long as you follow my strict rules. Betray me, and I will do horrible things to you." NE is moral-less, opportunistic, and utterly mercenary, but can still function in a group.
And really, I have been wanting to play a little anti-hero game for a while. Either focusing on rising through the ranks of a Thieves Guild, or re-inacting "Prison Break"; the characters are in prison: Break out, evade capture, make your way in the world.
But then, I have a distaste for very Heroic fantasy. Being an adventurer just because "You are a good guy" isn't my thing (except in one campaign circumstance), and I don't like "Let's save the world" plots, at all. Improving the world, sure, but stopping the apocalypse is... boring, to me.
I only have two rules as far as this goes, and it applies to all alignments:
1) Do not disrupt. No betraying party members, no mass carnage "Just because". No deliberate plot disruption.
2) You must have a reason to adventure with the party, you must have a reason to stay with the party.
Last edited:
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
I don't ban Evil.
I have a boarder ban on any PC that is disruptive or won't work with the rest of the party.
This means that usually evil is off the plate, but it isn't always -- someone with a clever idea that happens to be evil is just peachy. I don't kibosh character ideas very easily, but anyone who just wants to kill other PC's and farm beets for their life is a character concept that just doesn't play well.
I have a boarder ban on any PC that is disruptive or won't work with the rest of the party.
This means that usually evil is off the plate, but it isn't always -- someone with a clever idea that happens to be evil is just peachy. I don't kibosh character ideas very easily, but anyone who just wants to kill other PC's and farm beets for their life is a character concept that just doesn't play well.
Hussar
Legend
Speaking of inspirations for evil groups, look at Joss Wheedon. Firefly is a great example of evil characters working together.
Mal kicks an unarmed prisoner into the intake of a jet engine to prove point. Has every intention of blowing Jayne out the airlock for betraying him. In the Serenity movie, takes a mentally challenged child, over the wishes of her guardian, into a highly dangerous situation simply to increase the chances of his own survival. Mal works pretty well as an evil character. The fact that he is also a smuggler, completely mercenary, and has no real problems breaking the law anytime he wants pretty much cements it for me.
Then, you have Jayne. NE to the core. Completely self absorbed. So long as he has money, women and food, he's happy and will do anything he can to get any of the above. My favourite quote goes something like this:
Mal: Why didn't you betray us?
Jayne: The money wasn't good enough.
Mal: So, what happens when the money is good enough.
Jayne: Well, that'll be an interesting day won't it?
While Jayne does betray the group at one point, he realizes it's a mistake and his loyalty to those who have helped him overcome his natural tendencies to go for the money. But, otherwise, yup, NE. Not in the "I eat puppies and wear baby seal fur coats made from baby seals I have personally clubbed to death" way. But in a totally self absorbed, selfish way.
Mal kicks an unarmed prisoner into the intake of a jet engine to prove point. Has every intention of blowing Jayne out the airlock for betraying him. In the Serenity movie, takes a mentally challenged child, over the wishes of her guardian, into a highly dangerous situation simply to increase the chances of his own survival. Mal works pretty well as an evil character. The fact that he is also a smuggler, completely mercenary, and has no real problems breaking the law anytime he wants pretty much cements it for me.
Then, you have Jayne. NE to the core. Completely self absorbed. So long as he has money, women and food, he's happy and will do anything he can to get any of the above. My favourite quote goes something like this:
Mal: Why didn't you betray us?
Jayne: The money wasn't good enough.
Mal: So, what happens when the money is good enough.
Jayne: Well, that'll be an interesting day won't it?
While Jayne does betray the group at one point, he realizes it's a mistake and his loyalty to those who have helped him overcome his natural tendencies to go for the money. But, otherwise, yup, NE. Not in the "I eat puppies and wear baby seal fur coats made from baby seals I have personally clubbed to death" way. But in a totally self absorbed, selfish way.
Similar Threads
