Forked Thread: What are the no-goes for you? - Evil campaigns

[Lanefan]

One of the groups I'm running now, though doing good deeds when looked at on a large scale (destroying evil temples, busting up slave rings, that sort of thing), ain't exactly a bunch of little angels once one looks at *how* these good deeds are getting accomplished...throats are slit, murder is done, trust is betrayed, "friendly fire" is sometimes well-aimed...

It's got to the point that when someone throws Detect Evil, I have to start my description with "Well, once you've got through the background noise coming from about half the party, you see..."

Lan-"the means justify the end"-efan

 

[Hussar]

Of course it can work with the right people and the right DM. It can also not work like any other style for some people.

My experiences have been mostly that they aren't all that different. People do the same thing in normal D&D just different motivation (kill things and take their stuff). Other times peopel want evil because they believe it gives them an excuse to do what ever they want with no reprucussions. There was one evil game I was in that we weren't actually evil. It said evil on the character sheets and we worked for an evil god but we didn't really do anything evil just the same old same old.

I like it when DM's say they want an evil campaign and we all agree on it. What worries me more is when a player suggests it because he's rarely thinking of the group.

That's an interesting point. D&D's default mode of play - kill things and take their stuff - is an evil campaign. That it says 'good' on the PCs' alignment boxes is irrelevant, they ain't nice people.

I agree with Crothian here.

One thing I noticed running Savage Tide AP for an evil party is that there really wasn't a huge difference in how things played out. Some of the details changed, but, over all, things aren't all that different.

I think one of the most difficult things in playing an evil party is coming up with goals for the group that allow the group to do evil things while achieving those goals. By and large, most sort of "stock" plot lines (save the princess, fetch the MacGuffin, whatever) are pretty much morally neutral. At one point I did have a player comment that he had kind of forgotten that the party was evil, since they had no reason to do anything "evil" in some time.

 

[Morrus]

I have no objection to evil campaigns, but they're not to my personal taste. I don't run them. I'd participate in an evil adventure; I'm not entirely sure an entire campaign could hold my interest - but you never know!

 

[wedgeski]

I respect groups that can pull off such a campaign, but for me, the whole idea is a no-go area. I can DM evil NPC's because they're there to be defeated or killed; they'll get their come-uppance.

I couldn't roleplay evil acts as a PC because, to me, a player character is an extension of myself in a roleplaying game, and I simply don't have the ability to disconnect myself completely from the actions I'm describing.

And by the way this is vehemently *not* a judgement on those who can and do enjoy such roleplaying... I simply don't have the wiring required for complete detachment, while others do.

 

[Hussar]

I have no objection to evil campaigns, but they're not to my personal taste. I don't run them. I'd participate in an evil adventure; I'm not entirely sure an entire campaign could hold my interest - but you never know!

This was the first one I've ever done. It's been a bit of an eye-opener really.

I respect groups that can pull off such a campaign, but for me, the whole idea is a no-go area. I can DM evil NPC's because they're there to be defeated or killed; they'll get their come-uppance.

I couldn't roleplay evil acts as a PC because, to me, a player character is an extension of myself in a roleplaying game, and I simply don't have the ability to disconnect myself completely from the actions I'm describing.

And by the way this is vehemently *not* a judgement on those who can and do enjoy such roleplaying... I simply don't have the wiring required for complete detachment, while others do.

One of the players made herself Neutral, so, I suppose technically, it's not an All Evil campaign. Basically, the Neutral character simply ignores/does not get involved when the evil characters start getting, err, ornery.

 

[Desdichado]

The problem with playing an "evil" campaign is that it's all about the alignment. Since alignment is a bit of a joke when it comes to describing real world behavior patterns, it often fails to work because people struggle to come to grips with what playing an "evil" campaign actually means.

In my experience, one of the best things to do to eliminate the "evil campaigns go down in flames" fiasco is to minimize or even eliminate alignment altogether. And then create a situation in which less-than exemplary characters would do well. It all comes together rather well without trying to apply a proscriptive label to it.

 

[thedungeondelver]

Since I inadvertently kicked off the forked thread...

Firstly, let me say congratulations to those of you who run "evil" campaigns successfully. Or play in them that don't turn in to the ridiculousness I've seen...

and that ties back in with what I said : I've heard of successful "evil" campaigns - it would seem, given the frequency with which they're discussed in this very thread, that they go on almost to the exclusion of "heroic" campaigns, but I digress...! But I have never seen an exclusively evil D&D campaign "work". I meaning me, seen meaning having been there as a player (do not DM them, do not want).

Every one, to a one, has been an exercise in juvenile sociopathy. I've sat back, said, okay, I'm playing Lawful Evil here, I'm going to be cold and calculating and follow strictures and guidelines and jesu cristo they're burning down the city around me and butchering children for no reason. That's always how it works out to a greater or lesser extent. And no, it isn't "well maybe that was their plan as they're playing chaotic evil and part of what..." no. NO. It isn't. Hasn't been. Ever. It's been "let's get as much blood on our hands and let's do the most horrific things we never get to do like killing children who annoy us and burning down churches and having a race to see who's more 'metal' (or is that 'mental')."

It's two hours of this, who (or I guess I should say what-) ever is DMing laughing during the whole of it, then getting around to "Okay the mission you've undertaken for the Evil Overlord is..." ...and then things cranking right back in to an overdrive version of NATURAL BORN KILLERS.

The closest I've come to one that actually worked was a CHAMPIONS game that involved one character who was a minotaur inadvertently summoned into the "normal" supers world, another who was a "failed" super-serum experiment who also happened to be a violent anarchist after bad experiences during the first Gulf War and subsequent experiments, and myself, a dangerous telepath/telekinetic type ala Tetsuo from AKIRA. That lasted about two sessions before it became "let's run amok in Disney". I left.

I don't like it when people play "good" characters and try to work out their creepy issues, but I think the sick factor is raised exponentially when people of that bent are handed the chance to play an "all evil" game.

(Conversely, some of the less-than-munificent types from Gary's games always sounded like a hoot - Sir Robilar, Erac's Cousin, etc.)

Sorry to carry on, just thought that needed some clarification.