Neutrality Bites

[buzzard]

I agree with Ruin.

I DM an evil campaign because the players want to screw each other over.

I ran an evil (or rather mixed campaign, since there were good characters as well) campaign once. There was an important lesson learned. Unless everyone going in runs an evil character and expects to get screwed over, you will have ticked off players. I see no reason to be a referee for a backstabbing contest, so my policy is no evil characters.

Buzzard

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

I had a campaign once where the PCs were all evil and had to save the world! I didn't get to really play it but I keep it in reserve for future use.

The idea was that the PCs were pretty much the only people aware of a cabal of negative energy sorcerer hellbent on destroying the world (infusing it with negative energy).

If joining them is just too creepy and letting them win results in losing all the gold you invested in that luxurious brothel downtown, what do you do?

You enter in a campaign of extermination and destruction where torturing for information and collateral damage are fair game! You will not let those creeps destroy everything you hold dear (gold, alcohol, women and material confort)!

See, even evil PCs can be motivated to do the right thing (the wrong way). If you are going to be evil, be good!

 

[pontus]

The idea was that the PCs were pretty much the only people aware of a cabal of negative energy sorcerer hellbent on destroying the world (infusing it with negative energy).

If joining them is just too creepy and letting them win results in losing all the gold you invested in that luxurious brothel downtown, what do you do?

Pass a note to the main temple of the most powerful good religion saying "You deal with this!" and plane shift somewhere safer?

 

[Someguy]

My feelings go with the crowd...Or I am just a yes man...

Although blunt, Ruin. I wouldn't go as far to say that they suck, but the game is meant to be fun for everybody....I would love to play a gritty campaign, but my players really don't want to, so i don't...It isn't that much of a priority...as might you playing a agood campaign...but...YMMV

 

[Zerovoid]

What a bunch of whiners...

You all suck as GMs, BTW.

It's not about you, it's about everyone having fun. If they want to be Neutral, let them, and make up adventurers based on that.

I mean, with my party who are a mix of neutral and good, I don't go around writing adventures for a party that are a mix of neutral and evil, so why should you, Zerovid.

Plus, before you start whining about how it's "no fun" again, I should point out that I almost exclusively play NG and LG characters, like you, but I know my place, and I know how to have fun without forcing the players to cater to some ill-defined whim of mine that dictates that they must do good.

If your players are just messing with each other, only one person is to blame: YOU, the GM.

How to deal with it? Write adventurers that make them cooperate. It's not difficult. Read up on the prisoner's dilemma, for example. Put them in situations where they lose out by cheating each other. This doesn't force "good", but it means unless they choose group cohesion, they will have a harder time of things.

I've played with all Neutral groups who coordinated perfectly and never tried to screw each other over, who were Neutral because they weren't out to do Good, but to find their fortunes and so on. Morality and Neutrality are not incompatible, indeed, some moralities dictate Neutrality, and if the PCs are simply and genuinely Amoral, they're probably on a quick road to Evil.

So really, "must try harder" is the message. Make situations more complex and require teamwork, make your adventures more interesting and personalities more defined. Make you villians worthy of hate and disgust, not "Sephiroth"-style "Kewl", and maybe the players will actually want to be more involved.

If you can't do this, quit as GM and make someone else run it...

I'm sorry if you think I'm a whiner, but as someone pointed out, if I'm doing all the work, then I'll run the game I want to. I want to run an epic heroism campaign, not a "pissing off storekeepers for no good reason" campaign. I would never run an evil campaign, because I wouldn't enjoy it. I run the game that I want to run, and the players are free to play or not play in that game. I just wish they would have attitudes more like mine. Of course, I might actually find that this would lead to little conflict and less fun, but I'm not sure. Be careful what you wish for...

In the past, I've enjoyed it quite a bit when one person plays the scoundrel. It leads to alot of good inter-party roleplaying. But when everyone does it, then the whole purpose of the party changes. I usually run campaigns where the PC's just happen to get hired to do heroic things again and again. At least then we can all be happy with the game.

I'm quite familiar with AI literature, and I know what the Prisoner's Dilemma is. I actually meant to base a game around it when the PC's got captured some time, but I thought they would figure it out too quickly, and I would have to be careful to do it right.

I hate getting screwed over, and I don't want anyone else to get screwed over. Why should someone have fun at the others expense? Now, if someone secretly had an important evil agenda, then I wouldn't mind so much. Or if a long running conflict between two characters culminated in a duel or something. That would be cool and interesting. Watching everyone steal treasure right from under my character's nose because I didn't play a class with a good spot score, that's just lame.

Another problem is, properly roleplayed, many good characters would just leave a party like this. Alot of adventuring parties are just held together by metagaming, so this isn't really an option. I don't want to abandon my good character, and make an evil character.

 

[Psion]

Gee, Ruin, do you think you could be more of an indignant arse?

Ahem, anyways, my primary problem with N and (especially) CN characters is that they typically have a lack of motivation and thus are hard to realisitically work into the game. You can usually rely on a good character's altruism, or a lawful character's sense of duty. But CN especially is trouble with a capital TRUB.

Whenever a player plans to play a CN or N character in my game, the first thing I ask them is what their motivation is. Why would they hang out with this bunch. There are many valid answers as their are many motivations that can get you involved in an adventure that aren't necessarily good. For example, a character might be motivated by the thrill of adventure, by greed (too simple, though, if they pick this one I usually require a second), by a quest for knowledge, a desire to prove oneself in combat, revenge, etc.

 

[Rel]

A lot of the responses in this thread seem to be addressing the issue of the PC's screwing each other over by stealing and such. It strains my credibility too much to imagine that any character would remain in a group that continually stole his stuff.

But I would mainly like to address the first issue BLACKDIRGE brought up: Motivating the party.

Frankly, I wouldn't go out of my way to motivate them if they are that mercenary and care for little else but treasure. If there is a little girl crying in the street because bugbears captured her parents and they say, "What's in it for us." I'd respond, "Nothing at all except for the satisfaction of saving the lives of innocent people, the undying gratitude of the little girl and her parents, the admiration of the townsfolk and any tidbits of silver and copper the bugbears happen to have."

If they aren't motivated by any of that, I'd just fold the adventure shut and say, "Alright then, what is it your characters want to do." Maybe the would get the hint then.

This all has a lot to do with character creation too. If the characters have well fleshed out backstories, there should be some adventure hooks hidden in there somewhere. If you can motivate them for personal reasons, you're set. Even if you can't motivate every character with personal reasons, hopefully the others will see that if they go along and help out, the party members who have a strong stake in the outcome will return the favor at a later time.

Good luck.

 

[Particle_Man]

The DM is always right!

If you are the Dm, and you don't want to players to run non-good characters, there is a very simple solution:

Play hardball. All players characters must be good. That means all newly rolled up characters must be good, and all existing characters are magically transformed into good characters or become permanent NPC's. If they stray from their good alignment, they become NPC's and so the players must roll up new good characters.

One of two things will happen. The players will agree to your terms, or you will have to find new players if you want to DM a "good-characters doing good-deeds" campaign.

Frankly, when I Dm that is exactly what I do and I have had no problems with my players. I have not lost any players either. And according to my players I do NOT suck as a DM.

On the other hand, if you are ok with running neutral players, remind them that neutral is not evil, and that certain actions will lead them to become evil, and hence NPC's. Also, get them to tell you what motivates them beforehand, so you can design an adventure around them. (This is good advice for campaigns with good characters too, of course).

 

[Psion]

Re: The DM is always right!

One of two things will happen. The players will agree to your terms, or you will have to find new players if you want to DM a "good-characters doing good-deeds" campaign.

I pretty much run a "good deeds campaign". In the last two groups I have had, there have been one of more players who seem to ACT good, but are afraid to take a good alignment. I'm guessing that it is the "just in case they want to do something naughty" syndrome.

I am toying with the possibility of changing one of the character's alignment to good. Not sure though... it would put him out of his PrC's alignment requirement (his character is a ghostwalker).

 

[madriel]

Blackdirge, these guys are in this to have fun but so are you. I'm engaged to our DM so I know just how much work goes into a campaign. You need to have fun most of all, otherwise it's just not worth all the time and effort.

Give you players the option: your way or no way.

If all they want to play is neutral and evil players, let them find a DM who wants to play that way. I'd be surprised if you couldn't find yourself a new group of players who want to be heroes.

Our ongoing campaign has mixed alignments running from LG to LN. No true neutral or evil characters at all. My fiance's about to wrap up the campaign. The next campaign people will have a choice of three alignments: LG, NG, CG. The type of game he likes to run is the classic heroes out to save the world.

The DM has the final say. Always.