D&D 5E How would you conduct an evil campaign?

[werecorpse]

I would disagree, a LE party who's goals align could reasonably agree to help each other to achieve their goals, sharing the spoils as they go along, without killing each other. That is the lawful part of their alignment. Now when one of the party is getting in the way of anothers goal, that would result in PvP.

A CG party on the other hand, I foresee MANY more problems with inter-party rivalries, just dealt with differently depending on alignment, the robin hood type character should happily steal extra share of the loot from the rich noble.

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

That's why I said "might" and that the "possibility" should be addressed. I'm not saying it can't be addressed. One way of addressing it is to give the party a common goal or better yet a common enemy but I've played in evil games before where at the end of a fight where the party just survived (ie two unconscious, two low on hit points) one survivor just killed the other then looted all three bodies. Especially in 3e where often PC's are large concentrations of walking treasure hoards. Campaign over.

Evil PC's are just more likely to be jerks to each other. So recognise this and set up a reason why if they do they suffer. Self interest is likely their motivation.

 

[hastur_nz]

I've been a player in an all-evil campaign, and the only thing we struggled with was ongoing Motivation...

Mostly, as players we were all really into it, as an experiment on a different kind of play style. No-one actually got especially "evil" in terms of behaviour, more just various different takes on "being evil". For example, one player took the classic "BBEG" role, tried to treat the rest of us like his henchmen, and it was great fun because we were all long-time mates and took it in good humour. We also had some classic moments where one or more of us would couple deception with random action, and all of a sudden talking to an NPC turned to cold-blooded murder (and then it went to "oh crap, we've got to hide the evidence!"). Which isn't neccesarily much different from the typical "murder hobo" style some people play with, but for me (player or DM), that's not our modus operandi. Certainly, we resorted to killing as our first choice, more often than not, as long as we thought we could get away with it.

Where the game actually fell down was with the DM... he struggled to transition from the typical D&D game, to providing ongoing motivations for our PC's to actually do anything much except randomly wander around a town then dungeons etc. So the game collapsed, because our DM felt he couldn't come up with decent motivations for us adventuring. Which was a shame, but yes he was struggling, he seemed to expect a typical D&D 'hero' campaign to be just as compelling for the 'bad guys'. In other words, he hadn't really thought it through, about what an all-evil campaign might need to be like, to succeed.

So... personally I'd suggest that you need two things:
1) 100% mature people who are invested in a good experiment
2) a DM who can help shape the campaign, with the players, providing good motivations for 'doing stuff'

For a one-off adventure, something as simple as "play the bad-guys" could easily be fun. For example: guard your dungeon from invading Heroes; assassinate the Heroes before they get to your Boss; stuff like that that flips the usual D&D trope on its head.

For an ongoing campaign, treat it like any other campaign - give your players a reason for their PC's to stick together (e.g. a common a Boss, Faction, Guild or Goal that they all share), then take note of their background and goals, and structure adventures that work with those. Evil isn't stupid, it just goes about its business in a different way.

So yes, being Evil might make the PC's jobs harder, and lead to more complications, but if you have mature invested players, there's no more reason for it to turn to back-stabbing as with any other campaign. The added level of complications, and hence Challenge, is exactly what mature people find attractive in an all-Evil campaign.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Put the PCs into a poker game where the chips are replaced with kittens.

 

[TallIan]

... One way of addressing it is to give the party a common goal or better yet a common enemy but I've played in evil games before where at the end of a fight where the party just survived (ie two unconscious, two low on hit points) one survivor just killed the other then looted all three bodies...

Evil PC's are just more likely to be jerks to each other. So recognise this and set up a reason why if they do they suffer. Self interest is likely their motivation.

A good party needs a common goal as much as an evil one. The difference between good and evil comes in when that goal becomes weaker than personal goals. A good party would just say, "so long, its been great." An evil party could also do that, but could also think along the lines of, "He knows me too well." or "What he wants conflicts with what I want." and that's when problems start.

Evil does not mean anarchist, there are perfectly good reasons for evil characters to work together without killing each other at the first opportunity.

 

[Quasadu]

Currently running an evil campaign - here is what we're doing (not necessarily what you should do, just what we're doing as an example of something that's working so far)

This is a Greyhawk campaign. The PC's are all members of an exiled House of petty nobles from the Great Kingdom. The heads of their house were executed, and they all fled together to the City of Greyhawk, where they heard about an opportunity for adventure in a little village called Hommlet. The campaign started there.

PC's are a Wild Mage sorcerer, an Assassin, an Oathbreaker Paladin (renamed "Oath of Tyranny" because he was never a good guy), a tiefling warlock (fiend/blade), and a War preist of Hextor.

The PC's all worship Hextor and are LE. They have taken down Lareth and cleared the Moathouse, made a name for themselves in Hommlet, hung out in Nulb for a bit, and are now exploring the Temple of Elemental Evil.

They don't care at all about protecting anyone from the Temple's evil plans. They just want the wealth and magic that the Temple forces have acquired for themselves. Their ultimate goal is to reestablish themselves, take by force, build a domain, and eventually return in triumph to the Great Kingdom and reclaim their birthright.

Along the way they have a few minor goals, like the cleric wants to sanctify the battlefiled at Emirdy Meadows in Hextor's name and build a shrine there. The warlock wants to find the Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth and claim Iggwilv's lost magical hoard. The assassin has a contract to kill a certain NPC (and might get more). The Wild Mage thinks there is a deck of many things somewhere hidden in the temple, and thinks he can control it. And the Paladin is trying to create an order of knights loyal to his House.

They know that they can leave Hommlet/Nulb & the ToEE behind whenever they want to pursue other goals - like I said they don't care a bit about what the Temple is doing. There are other irons in the fire and they know that they can go pursue those whenever they feel ready to.

As mentioned by others in the thread, we did sit down together and talk about what kind of evil stuff was OK to have in game and what we should just avoid touching on that might make the players uncomfortable. So far the most evil thing they have done is slaughter a bunch of helpless prisoners that they found in the temple because it was easier than trying to free them.

We also established the reason they are not likely to turn on each other - they are all devout in their worship of Hextor and are fiercely loyal to their House (and thus to each other).

We also decided that they had left secret coded messages behind in the Great Kingdom that only members of their House could understand, telling them where the PC's went. That way if someone dies they can be reasonably replaced with another member of the family who just arrived.

So that's what we're doing and it's going great so far. This is a group that's been playing together for a couple of years now, and most of them have been good friends for longer, and I think that's the most important factor that is making this work. The PLAYERS need to trust each other that nobody is going to try to wreck the game for anyone else and we're all going to be having fun together.

 

[Sunseeker]

Personally I would focus it on politics and intrigue, and steer the game away from killing. Lawful or Neutral Evil as opposed to Chaotic Evil.

I don't think it has to turn inward on the party either. Players could be perfectly fine being "frenemies" in different houses, guilds or whatnot, working alongside each other out of need and then returning to their respective alliances when the job is done.

 

[TheNoremac42]

I was recently reading over LMoP and I believe you could fairly easily rework the campaign for a villain's perspective. Maybe the PCs are working for the Black Spider or one of his underlings and have to keep the map from the heroes? Or maybe, instead of breaking up the bandits/gang, the PCs take it over? Different motivations, same outcome.

 

[Eltab]

OP:
There is a Sith Sourcebook for one of the Star Wars game systems that includes advice about running an Evil campaign. I recommend you read through it before you get too far into planning &c.

If the PCs have a patron who is too powerful for them to fight (even if they all gang up on him at once) who gives them jobs and expects them to succeed, also expects them to work together not fight each other, the campaign can be a stable experience.
Murder-hobos draw unwanted attention, so their patron will be telling them to keep a low profile - except sometimes when he WANTS a distraction from something else he is doing over yonder.

And do talk with the players before beginning, to set ground rules and discover what people are / aren't comfortable with.
Ex: If part of a mission involves burning down an orphanage with the kids inside, you could narrate the PCs watching the Fire Department from a safe distance; or you could re-enact every scream of pain and cry of fear from within the building, as heard from just outside a window. I'd go with the former.

 

[MechaPilot]

It is generally safe to assume that evil PCs may attempt the most vile things imaginable. Therefore, while setting boundaries for acceptable in-game content is always a good idea, it's of immense importance when running an evil group. Furthermore, it's paramount that you get player input on these boundaries, because you never know what real life horrors your players may have never told you about experiencing. And you definitely want to get this input on a confidential and individual basis.

With that out of the way. . . .



One of the very first things you need to do with prospective players for an evil-PC campaign is to evaluate how suitable they are. Are your players mature enough to not have their characters constantly lie to, cheat, steal, attack, or otherwise backstab other PCs just because "But, I'm evil. It's what I do."

TL;DL, make sure they won't take advantage of the "E" on their sheet to play a "chaotic stupid" d-bag.



The next item on the list is finding a way to make sure the PCs will work together instead of the group constantly tearing itself apart. The best way I've found of doing this is to involve the players. Have them come up with reasons why their characters are working together. When I played an evil character, she worked with the group because as a low-level PC she needed help to amass the fortune and magical goods she would need for her ultimate goal (building a temple in her own honor and attracting a cult to worship her). It also didn't hurt that she was endearing herself to the people she wanted worshiping her, that she was eliminating the evil competition, or that she was making a "good" name for herself that might deter heroes intervening against her.

 

[Draegn]

I played in an evil campaign once. The premise for keeping us together and not at each other's throat was that a citadel of good paladins and clerics were creating holy weapons that would kill us all. So we had to stop this. As icing on the black hearted cake the citadel also contained goodly holy artifacts that we could destroy or taint.