How much backlash is too much?

[Rechan]

I'm within my rights to have the town react this way, ya? It doesn't make me a jerk?

How dare you demonstrate being an evil murderer has consequences!

 

[Mouseferatu]

I feel like I'm pigeonholing the group into playing a game that won't be fun for them. I never know where to draw the line with what's allowed because I personally would be fine playing a game that only allowed the three core books and the PHBII, and I know that most people would not enjoy that.

The DM is also playing the game. In fact, the DM is devoting more time and effort to it than anyone else. You're supposed to be having fun, too. Otherwise, why do it at all?

As far as where to draw the line... The answer is, wherever you're not going to be comfortable with going any further. It doesn't matter how much the other players are enjoying the game. If the DM isn't, it's going to fall apart. If it's not fun, it's a job, and why do a job you're not getting paid for?

There are compromises. There are discussions. If these are friends, they'll accept you saying "Look, guys, I'm trying to be flexible, but I'm really not enjoying X and Y."

And if they're not good enough friends to work with you even that far, why would you want to hang out with them at all, let alone game with them?

 

[Quickleaf]

And now the PC Group and LG group will have to join forces, to defeat a band of demonically-infused undead monstrosities comprised of fallen comrades from both of their parties....

FTW! At which point does the undead PC screw everybody over?

It doesn't make me a jerk?

Clearly you haven't DMed many evil games. You are allowed to be as sneaky and rat bastard as you want to be. It's part of the appeal to that particular game style. IME when a group of players come to me and say "we wanna be evil", it's sign to me to put on my evil DM hat. FWIW, it sits next to my sandbox hat.

The five of us against you DM. Bring it. Let the smack talking and one-upsmanship begin. It's "gamism" at its finest. And it's a guarantee that the players want to muck with any "carefully laid DM plans" they sense.

I might be exaggerating a little, but these are IMO basic tropes of an evil game.

So the next time you find yourself asking "am I being a jerk?" pick a bigger weapon.

As a DM, I hate ruling that certain books or play styles can't be played. I feel like I'm pigeonholing the group into playing a game that won't be fun for them. I never know where to draw the line with what's allowed because I personally would be fine playing a game that only allowed the three core books and the PHBII, and I know that most people would not enjoy that.

I hope you can see how you put yourself in this situation where you're DMing an evil party and then posting about how you despise DMing evil games.

I also feel like it is simply my job as the DM to facilitate a good time for the party, and I don't feel like it will be fun for them if I don't let them play what they want.

Yes with a very important caveat: As a DM you have a greater amount of work to do for a game, so you have an equal or greater "right" to have fun. The best campaigns I've run and participated in were where the DM was having a blast. It became contagious.

Shoot, you've been playing with these guys for 20 years? I'm sure you guys can work out a middle ground.

Thanks for the ideas on how to handle the situation. The more I thought about it today, I guess the town is really more neutral-aligned and relatively impartial to what the numerous adventuring groups that come and go do so long as the locals don't get hurt. I feel like I can just cut them off from some basic services and force them to live in the wilderness and find somewhere else to trade their goods. I'm within my rights to have the town react this way, ya?

Of course you are, but I think your particular idea ("we won't sell to you") is off the mark. Why? Because the main contribution PCs make to settlements, especially evil PCs, is cold hard gold, and the peasants don't want to cut themselves off from that -- it would be like a city turning down the Olympics!. A good question to ask is what has the PC swordsage contributed to the town compared to the NPC paladin?

For example, the swordsage just dropped 5,000 gp at the local smithy, rents a luxurious room at the inn, and frequents the tavern and brothel. He and his buddies may have accidentally taken out the town's criminal kingpin for which the townsfolk are grateful for. Who knew?

The paladin has embodied the precept of Heironeous "duty to the people" by defending them from overwhelming evil, restoring stolen cattle from bandits, and exonerating a falsely accused man. Naturally, he donates heavily to the local temple and has friends among the city watch.

What does the town think of them?

Craftsmen, inn-keepers, brew-masters and whores are lining up for the PCs' business. The loss of the paladin was no big deal for them, as those paladins are always coming back from war with dirty halos, ready to make conflict where there is none.

On the other hand, folk further from the PCs money -- shepherds, farmers, the temple, guardsmen, and such -- are appalled and outraged. Here was a paladin who protected them, sacrificed for them, and was rewarded for it with a dishonorable death.

A more likely reaction from the town would be: The church condones the PCs and demands the local lord arrest and punish them - in fact, several guardsmen are more than eager to do so!

However, there are mixed reports of just what happened at the tavern.

A passing cleric says the PC stabbed the paladin in the back in cold blood (but he was looking thru a window), an off-duty guardsman claims the PCs started it (but he was drunk), two farmers swear the PC worked evil magic and teleported behind the paladin (but they're the same ones who were complaining about that so-called "vampire" last year), and the shepherd's son (who wasn't supposed to be anywhere near the tavern) is keeping quiet even though he admired the paladin.

The inn-keeper swears the accused PC is harmless as a fly, the brew-master says the paladin NPC started it, a whore claims the PC couldn't have done it cause he was with her, maybe a local craftsman offers to swear false testimony in favor of the PCs in exchange for the paladin's treasure?

The lord is nobody's fool. He's got to find a way to make both sides happy.

And the surest way to do that, for the lowest cost, is to prove the paladin wasn't as 'holy' as he pretended to be. IOW a spin campaign. Maybe this works in the lord's favor as it takes the power of the local church down a peg, something he's been trying to do for years. If the lord is brazen, he might try to extort the PCs for money to "clear their names."

As a plan B, if tarnishing the paladin's reputation doesn't work, is to get rid of the party as expediently as possible; the lord's preferred method for this sort of thing is to send them on a quest for "untold fortune" in the lair of the most deadly monster in a 100 mile radius.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

The game is supposed to be fun for the GM as well - if you aren't going to have fun running an evil game, then why do it.

I am pretty upfront that I want the good guys to win, and if the PCs decide to be evil, well, the good guys will still win. (Including one game back in 1979 where I ended up having the party doing the Tyburn stretch.)

The Auld Grump

 

[S'mon]

No attack rolls were called for for physically assaulting a PC? Did the players agree? If it were my character, I'd feel a little annoyed that my character was getting physically manhandled against his will, and not getting any sort of dispute resolution rules involved.



? Again, house rule that let him keep standing at that point, or arbitrary GM fiat?



Then why are you doing this? It seems like a bad idea to DM for a bunch of PCs you absolutely abhor.

Yes, how the heck is the nearly-dead, -1 hp Paladin throwing around the PC? And why is he even walking around with -1 hp, when paladins can self-heal?

This whole thing seems like a mess to me. If you were RPing the Paladin realistically he'd surely get healed up before confronting the evil PC.

 

[S'mon]

Thanks for all the responses, guys!

I feel as if I need to explain myself and running a group of evil PCs despite my reservations against it. There's such strong feelings about it!

1. As a DM, I hate ruling that certain books or play styles can't be played. I feel like I'm pigeonholing the group into playing a game that won't be fun for them. I never know where to draw the line with what's allowed because I personally would be fine playing a game that only allowed the three core books and the PHBII, and I know that most people would not enjoy that.
2. I also feel like it is simply my job as the DM to facilitate a good time for the party, and I don't feel like it will be fun for them if I don't let them play what they want.
3. I have played with this group ever since I've played, or rather DMed, DnD and I've known some of the guys for 20 years (ironically, those are the ones I'm most annoyed with). I don't have anyone else to play with, so I figure that DnD that maybe isn't as fun for me is better than no DnD at all.

Don't be a doormat! Doormat DMs make baby S'mon cry. Do you think the players will walk on you if you limit them to G & N aligned PCs? To limited sources? Have you even told them your preferences? IME most players will enjoy a game more if the DM is really enjoying it, DMing what he likes, even if they personally would have taken a different approach.

 

[S'mon]

For example, the swordsage just dropped 5,000 gp at the local smithy, rents a luxurious room at the inn, and frequents the tavern and brothel. He and his buddies may have accidentally taken out the town's criminal kingpin for which the townsfolk are grateful for. Who knew?

If the PCs really are pumping in thousands of gp to the local economy, especially in ways that don't simply involve purchasing magic items (luxurious rooms, high living, whores etc) then yes I think they should develop a significant base of support. IME though most PCs try to avoid spending any money on that stuff because they don't think it matters. Tight-fisted PCs should take the consequences.

I tend to think that a PC who murders a clearly LG Paladin in a non-evil town will normally be in trouble even then, though. If he can murder the Paladin he can certainly murder the local Lord and other powers-that-be. The Lord might try to broker a compromise if the PCs are very powerful - maybe paying of weregild, but typically IMCS he would have the PC arrested and executed, confiscating all his gear.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Don't be a doormat! Doormat DMs make baby S'mon cry. Do you think the players will walk on you if you limit them to G & N aligned PCs? To limited sources? Have you even told them your preferences? IME most players will enjoy a game more if the DM is really enjoying it, DMing what he likes, even if they personally would have taken a different approach.

That wasn't a doormat, just an immature Trapper, and that quilted ceiling? A Lurker Above. The chest? You guessed it, Mimic...

And my players tell me that I don't love them enough....

The Auld Grump, oh, and in the closet, a Cloaker and an Executioner's Hood....

 

[Herobizkit]

Actions have consequences.

Traditionally "Good" PCs act "Good" and confront "Evil", so people look up to them and want to support them when they can. PLAYERS expect this, and rightfully so.

"Evil" PCs generally act in their own best interest, regardless of how it may affect others. People will not want to support them, and the townsfolk will in turn request the help of "Good" people for support. PLAYERS still expect to be treated as though they're heroes and have everything handed to them.

Kill a paladin, alienate a town. No need to sugarcoat it. Think of those old spaghetti Westerns. Villains enter town, everyone runs, hides, locks their doors. No difference here IMO.

From the DM chair, very little changes. The PLAYERS now have to become more resourceful if they want their goods and services handled (by taking the necessary feats/skills, for example). If they turn on the town, then they turn on the town, a bloodbath ensues, and now the PCs have a ghost town in their possession... and people coming to investigate.

 

[amerigoV]

The more I thought about it today, I guess the town is really more neutral-aligned and relatively impartial to what the numerous adventuring groups that come and go do so long as the locals don't get hurt.

Get the "alignment of the town" out of your head. A heated encounter escalated to murder. The law does not care about alignments or even justice. The law is about keeping the peace. They will be hard on adventurers precisely because anything that gets "out of hand" can result in many townie deaths (that fireball may not kill the PCs or NPCs in a fight, but it will kill commoners with ease).

If there is a mega dungeon nearby, more adventurers (and Gold!) will come. The PCs are replaceable economically.

Besides, a Paladin that just closed a Gate to the Abyss is murdered by the one who opened it. That will make the Paly an instant martyr to that religion (we all know Paladin must have their deeds recorded and thus have a bard handy to spin the tale). There will be a horde of LGers flocking to this town to avenge the martyr.

It doesn't make me a jerk?

Basical rule - if the players are running evil PC, they gotta expect the DM to be a dick. Eventually, evil PCs will piss off the establishment of the area. From here on out, open your sessions playing the old Bad Boys theme from the COPS show and make the players wear "wife-beater" t-shirts (see 1min in). From this point, "Its On!"

COPS - Bad Boys - YouTube