how to create evil

[Bad Paper]

This tickles my RBDM bone, but unless your players are psychologists, you may not be able to make use of this in your game.

(conversation with Philip Zimbardo, for those of you who know who he is)

 

[Nifft]

Isn't it more about the meta-morality of D&D? That a bunch of guys will tend to fantasize about power and not particularly care for responsibility?

I mean, killin' things and taking their stuff... that's not exactly moral behavior. And D&D -- like all entertainment -- exists in no small part to stave off boredom.

Perhaps if prison guards (and the like) were able to express their power fantasies non-destructively, they'd be healthier. So, send your old 3.0e books to GITMO!

Cheers, -- N

 

[Mercule]

Hmm... I frequently use themes of corruption in my games. Your link was an interesting read, but I'm not seeing how it can be used to make a more interesting and entertaining game.

 

[lazarus1020]

My last campaign was based around a party of all evil characters working towards the goal of becoming the rulers of the world. It was a great idea and actually served to create a stronger sense of party loyalty than when they were good alighned. They killed all who stood in their way and even went to extremes to keep each other alive. I gave them a speech at the beginning about how the party were going against the beliefs of the rest of the populace and had only each other when things turned bad. It was a great campaign but unfortunately the party fell apart because of love. lol A long story but I think evil is the nature of man and makes for a very fun D&D game.

 

[TarionzCousin]

My last campaign was based around a party of all evil characters working towards the goal of becoming the rulers of the world. It was a great idea and actually served to create a stronger sense of party loyalty than when they were good alighned. They killed all who stood in their way and even went to extremes to keep each other alive. I gave them a speech at the beginning about how the party were going against the beliefs of the rest of the populace and had only each other when things turned bad.

Fascinating. This intrigues me. I like that idea and am glad to hear a story where the "evil" players didn't all turn on each other in their efforts to prove they were evil.

It was a great campaign but unfortunately the party fell apart because of love.

It figures. :\

 

[Alzrius]

This article would probably work better as inspiration for a d20 Modern game - D&D's alignment system isn't very compatible with the themes of situational corruption being described there.

 

[RobJN]

Back in my college days, I got to attend a lecture by Zimbardo on "The Nature of Evil." Fascinating, fascinating talk, if you're into that kind of stuff. The gist of the lecture at that point, though, was more of a focus on the lure of anonymity rather than the situation. He spoke mainly of the shuffling off of moral and social "norms" -- sort of an "everybody else was doing it" and "they'll never know its me" sort of deal. Each dangerous on its own, doubly so when mixed. I seem to recall, also, that he touched on the S.P.E. mentioned in the article, and the statement that monsters are not necesarily born but can be made seems quite familiar from that lecture as well.

He wrote (or maybe edited.. its been a while) the book i used in Psychology that semester.

Damn... should have gotten him to sign it.

Ok, maybe I'm not THAT big a geek.

Rob

 

[FireLance]

anonymity, conformity and boredom can be used to induce sadistic behavior in otherwise wholesome students

I blame the Internet.

 

[William drake]

This tickles my RBDM bone, but unless your players are psychologists, you may not be able to make use of this in your game.

(conversation with Philip Zimbardo, for those of you who know who he is)

The read was nice, but I’m now wish to talk about the Evil’s that can be brought out in game.

*and none of which should be used as a reason as to downplay what was allowed to happen there*

Ok, yes, evil is fun, but when I run my games I make sure that he party knows that there is a lot more to Evil than what is normally talked about in D&D. Have you every played World of Darkness...theirs is a very interesting system of good and bad. They have Sins, and a chart of humanity...and the more bad you do, the lower you go, but, the lower you go, the harder it is to do bad things and be effected by it so as to drop to the next level. So, for example...a thief will steal, but not all thieves will kill. Those who do, over time, may learn to kill when they steal, but won’t kill as for the job alone...i.e as assassins. And, those who are assassins may never steal from those who they’ve killed. Make sense? Now, in WOD there are those who are human...and they have a standard system of humanity, what makes them human, and what turns them into the worst of the worst, and like I’ve said...you don’t just become evil by doing a single bad act, what makes you evil is, infact, two things: One, did you feel bad about it? If so, you won’t do it again.*this is either a role, which means the player doesn’t want their character to feel bad about it, or just doesn’t know. Or, they say “I feel bad about it” and so then the player loss of humanity for a time period reflects their guilt* And, the second is: if you didn’t fill feel bad about it, will you do it again, and if so, you may become blind to it’s effects so that perhaps, later, you will beable to do worse things. And with ease. If this incline continues, by the end you are a monster, something no longer human....but it’s a long role, and most players stay within the one or two range, above or bellow what is considered the normal.

Now, there are codes....what YOU as a person feel is right or wrong, something that is outside of the normal opinion of justice and virtue, and within those codes, there is a set of governing lines that makes you good or evil. Think like, if a samurai went to England, I’m sure you can think of a few things that he samurai might think as normal, but the English would consider as evil: the beheading of serfs just to see if the blade is sharp. D&D doesn’t account for customs and social constraints and rules of morality...its just good, evil, neutral, chaotic or a mixture thereof. The DM makes those rules, but there are no set lists of things you can do and not due. Like, shouldn't evles and dwarves, perhaps, have their own opinions of good, evil and their understanding of justice. I mean, cultures are different...shouldn't the system reflect that.

Now, getting back to my point. I think most parties are good. To me, even an Evil party is a good party, they may do bad, or evil things, but I like to reserve EVIL...just for the enemy. I don’t think a party wishes to play what, in my mind, makes something evil. Evil is, to me, something beyond human, something just for demons and other powers beyond humanity. Now, people, can do evil acts, but humans have a conscious and whether they admit it or not, I think most people are effected by it, even if a bit, and if so, then they aren’t evil.
I’ve explained this in a group that I ran of EVIL characters...the players were Drow, and by the end of the game, most of the players no longer thought that the Drow were evil, to them, like myself, they just considered their social structure to be different from the rest, and so, they were seen as the evil force. However, they also knew that the Gods, to which the Drow were in service of, were EVIL, and there for, were more inclined to do greater acts of evil, and there for, likely to be come that which they worshiped...but this also went for all peoples because Men, in the D&D world, also have EVIL gods..and Gods, to me, are the only forces in the world which may know what true evil is in the sense that it is something totally against LIGHT. The party worked well together, and I had one member say to me, when the game was over “ya know, if we were really evil, shouldn’t we have killed each other at the end, for greed or power....” and I would say yes, EVIL doesn’t think, it doesn’t know to be smart and let some things slide...evil doesn’t learn its lesson, it is instinct and raw gut feelings that predate thought to a time when there was only action. So, yes, the party was greedy, and bad, and wished to plague its self upon the lesser people, but, if they were truely Evil, they would’ve done far far far far worse to the setting, rather than just control it and rake in the profits. At the end of the game, it would’ve been a killing spree..where it would’ve been to the last man standing, since there, just like highlander “can be only one” EVIL. Evil, is also afraid of itself I think, and to me, this explains some of Evil's charcteristics: when it sees its face in other things *other players* it seeks to drive it out so that it is alone, perhaps evil kills itself so that it doesn’t have to see its own face.


These are just some of the reasons why I’ve changed my gaming style to the sin, and morality rules and away from cutout alignment rules. There is no GOOD, and NO EVIL, there is only good, and bad...humans, without serious effort, can not reach the ultimates: Good and Evil. And once there, they are nolonger human, but something else.


Your thoughts.


Game On.

 

[Bagpuss]

(conversation with Philip Zimbardo, for those of you who know who he is)

Don't trust him he looks like the devil!

If you are going to study evil for a living, you might want to loose the goatee.

On a similar issue you should try and see "Five Steps to Tyranny (Why People commit terrible acts)" it was a BBC documentary, looked at the rise of Nazism in Germany and genocide in general.