D&D 5E Evil parties that don't fall apart: ideas, suggestions, experiences?

[Afrodyte]

As fun as it can be to DM games where the good guys save the day, I do wonder what it would be like for the PCs to be ruthless, black-hearted scoundrels who would drown a box of kittens if the price or cause is right. What would be a good setup for an evil party that would not immediately devolve into in-fighting or disrupting the entire story?

Why evil characters? Because evil characters have plans. Evil characters have goals. Even if those plans and goals don't make sense (a la the Joker), evil characters aren't waiting around for things to fall into their laps. They are active characters, not reactive characters, and those are the kinds of characters I like best.

I have in mind something like Inuyasha's Band of Seven or this idea I had based on Inglorious Basterds. Even something like Magneto's Brotherhood of Mutants.

What have been your experiences? What worked or didn't work? What are some things you'd like to try?

 

[DEFCON 1]

Why evil characters? Because evil characters have plans. Evil characters have goals. Even if those plans and goals don't make sense (a la the Joker), evil characters aren't waiting around for things to fall into their laps. They are active characters, not reactive characters, and those are the kinds of characters I like best.

Not to derail the thread before it even gets started... but I feel like I should point out that if your players don't ever create Good characters that do all these things... I'd suggest that perhaps its because they themselves don't care about having ideas or plans or are fine with waiting for things to fall into their laps.

Good characters can have plans just as much as Evil characters do, and can and should be just as active. If this isn't happening in your games... you might want to find out from your players why this is, and whether its the types of characters they create, their particular preference in playing is to be reactive, or maybe even your particular style of DMing that perhaps isn't assisting them to do so? Could be any number of reasons moreso than they just have been playing "the good guys" and thus it doesn't happen.

 

[steeldragons]

First: Exactly what Defcon said.

Second: I have run a group that, a time or two, has wanted to run Evil characters. "I wanna be badass and kill stuff with no repercussions." "I wanna be a dark brooding [yes I know we don't have to be evil for this but it feels more "dangerous" if you are] sinister mastermind guy." "I wanna roleplay a psycho-/sociopath/PC with severe mental issues."

It's fun enough, usually become unnecessarily gruesome, and will (providing a modicum of humanity and basic sense of Right/Wrong) offend your moral and ethical sensibilities in some way or the other on a regular basis.

It will also, almost inevitably, fall apart sooner or later. Evil, even predominantly Lawful Evil, can not sustain itself because greed for power will always win out. Treasure allocation is a mess. PCs will have no (or few, becoming fewer with play) compulsions against attacking each other...out of bored if nothing else.

It can be fun for one-shots. It can be fun for short-term/a few sessions storyline: we're all minions of Big-Evil-Despot let's go conquer lands for him and claim riches for ourselves. We're on a mission to assassinate X. We need to stop the establishment of the new temple of Good Guy in Village-town and turn it to the service of Dark Lord. Stuff like that..."little" adventures. But your question sounds like you are looking for the possibility of "keeping things together" for a longer style campaign...

In my humble experiences, that simply isn't going to work.

 

[kiness]

Evil characters have motivations, fears, and aspirations like all characters. I had an evil character and was part of an evil party, and it was all about motivations. We would be hired by people that needed the job done regardless of the cost. We destroyed the undead attacking a town, not for the town, but for the loot inside. There are more powerful evil groups than the party, so in the interest of self preservation you have to work together.

The best character I can play anymore is chaotic neutral. When was the last time you got to whack an NPC that deserved it?

 

[Afrodyte]

[cut snippy post]

 

[Umbran]

As fun as it can be to DM games where the good guys save the day, I do wonder what it would be like for the PCs to be ruthless, black-hearted scoundrels who would drown a box of kittens if the price or cause is right. What would be a good setup for an evil party that would not immediately devolve into in-fighting or disrupting the entire story?

Well, the seeds of the party's destruction are right there - they would do very nasty things if the price is right. That includes turning on their current companions.

To work, you need a setup where they *won't* do just anything, where they *won't* shaft other party members if the price is right. The party needs some basis for loyalty for this to work reliably.

Why evil characters? Because evil characters have plans. Evil characters have goals.

Strangely, the good characters in my game also have goals and plans.

There is an old learned behavior that both GMs and players can get into, where Good characters react to whatever evil they see in front of them. A major typical campaign structure is to present an adventure with a target at the end, and good characters go after that.

But it doesn't have to be that way. Your typical Good character is gong to take a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach - they won't go stomping Evil until they know it is there. If the GM only presents short-term targets, you fall into the above structure. If, instead, as a GM you provide several *long term* targets, you'll generally see a change in approach on the part of the characters.

What have been your experiences? What worked or didn't work? What are some things you'd like to try?

Failure to present some unifying principle - be it an ideal, or threat of force, or something similar, Evil tends to feed upon itself. So, for this to work, you need to make sure that unifying principle exists, and that all the players have bought into the idea that their Evil must be outward-facing, rather than inward-facing.

 

[kiness]

Don't give up - the evil party we had was the most fun I've ever had gaming. If people come to the conclusion that I can still trust my evil 'known' party member over the 'unknown' evil NPC, it can be great. Picture a small weak gang fighting for turf in a modern era game. Mafia in a prohibition era game. The characters may need to be 'evil' to get the job done, but you're fighting greater evils. You can still be nice and good at times, such as protecting your village so that the locals like and protect you in return, because you're their money train and protector. Even bad guys need a safe place to sleep.

 

[kiness]

And in your off time you can be raising your army of undead.

 

[Afrodyte]

Well, the seeds of the party's destruction are right there - they would do very nasty things if the price is right. That includes turning on their current companions.

To work, you need a setup where they *won't* do just anything, where they *won't* shaft other party members if the price is right. The party needs some basis for loyalty for this to work reliably.

Strangely, the good characters in my game also have goals and plans.

There is an old learned behavior that both GMs and players can get into, where Good characters react to whatever evil they see in front of them. A major typical campaign structure is to present an adventure with a target at the end, and good characters go after that.

But it doesn't have to be that way. Your typical Good character is gong to take a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach - they won't go stomping Evil until they know it is there. If the GM only presents short-term targets, you fall into the above structure. If, instead, as a GM you provide several *long term* targets, you'll generally see a change in approach on the part of the characters.

Failure to present some unifying principle - be it an ideal, or threat of force, or something similar, Evil tends to feed upon itself. So, for this to work, you need to make sure that unifying principle exists, and that all the players have bought into the idea that their Evil must be outward-facing, rather than inward-facing.

Thank you for actually answering my question.

 

[Afrodyte]

Evil characters have motivations, fears, and aspirations like all characters. I had an evil character and was part of an evil party, and it was all about motivations. We would be hired by people that needed the job done regardless of the cost. We destroyed the undead attacking a town, not for the town, but for the loot inside. There are more powerful evil groups than the party, so in the interest of self preservation you have to work together.

The best character I can play anymore is chaotic neutral. When was the last time you got to whack an NPC that deserved it?

Could you tell me more about this game and how the characters managed to stick together rather than fall apart?