Playing at Evil: Consequences of an Evil PC

[Sound of Azure]

Hi all,

I just wanted to post my thoughts, and was wondering if others have had similar experiences.

Had a pretty good session on Saturday playing my Palpatine-esque Sharran clergyman in my mate's game. My character, Father Zelkyr is decidedly amoral. He's outwardly an upstanding citizen of his new city (Waterdeep), but is constantly seeking to undermine the things that keep Waterdeep safe, depleting the resources of the good-aligned churches.

This session, he used some of his reward money to hire good aligned adventurers and sending them on magic item retrieval missions, and raids against nearby humanoids (and similar things). Overall, I'm having a ball of a time going behind my fellow PCs' backs, and manipulating them to suit Father Zelkyr's goals. Blackmail, misdirection, and obfuscation are his tools to further his dark goddess' goals, as well as increasing his temporal power.

Apart from the three vile spells that the Father has cast over the past two sessions, he hasn't really been doing anything evil, just self-serving stuff, and working against good people. Also, I'm finding some of the stuff that the other PCs are doing (except the neutral guy) somewhat objectional.

That's not to put my own character off the hook... he's everything I dislike about men in positions of power.

My feeling could be summed up as this: I find our characters reprehensible, and want them to have their come-uppance eventually. I fully intend to play him in character for as long as he survives, and am not about to play him stupidly, or suicide the PC. But eventually, I hope he fails. Is that weird, or what?

It seems different when I DM evil characters, because they are a foil for the (hopefully) heroic PCs to overcome. They're there to be defeated, with good (or at least a lesser evil) winning in the end. I don't ban evil PCs in my game, but I do find it very hard to root for them, or want them to succeed as much as I would a more "heroic" PC. I get the feeling that's unfair of me. :\

The guy who's DMing seems to be encouraging the more extreme of the other PCs' behaviour as being "in character". I guess it is, but I'm unsure about this level of control. I'm enjoying the game, an the plots that are coming up, but maybe I don't belong at this kind of game. It seems like a shame, as I'm able to pursue my PC's goals in a better fashion than I have with other DMs.

Hmmm. Anyway, thanks for letting me ramble on a bit and getting this off my chest.

 

[PallidPatience]

What sorts of random, evil, extreme things are the other PCs doing? Are their players just trying to be evil-offensive, or are they actually seeming to act in character? Are they playing "evil" or "insane"?

 

[Sound of Azure]

I guess it's a mix of the two. The player of the rogue is doing things in a similar manner to myself, mostly. He does randomly murder people from time to time, however. My main discomfort is the playing through the details of the actions (torture, and humiliating acts), instead of glossing over it.

I'm convinced that the fighter/sorcerer PC is insane though. He'd seem to be happy to go through down blowing things up and cutting down anyone that tried to stop him. He's got a talent for pissing off every female NPC we encounter too, but that's a seperate issue. Due to his actions, he's now Chaotic Evil...so maybe it is in character, now (he had Lawful Evil to begin with). His talking (openly!) on the streets about what he wants to do do these NPCs is a little discomfiting, to say the least. :\

All I know is that I'd happily see all of our PCs defeated at some stage. I feel slightly sad when ever we do something "evil" in game.

 

[PallidPatience]

Maybe that's really just not the group for you, then. I know I couldn't play in an "evil" group of crazies. In all honesty, all of you should have been destroyed by now, if your Sorceror is babbling about your evilness already. At the least, he should be dead, in Waterdeep of all places.

And if you can't enjoy the way you guys are playing, you probably shouldn't play that way anymore. Evil's not for everyone.

 

[shilsen]

I guess it's a mix of the two. The player of the rogue is doing things in a similar manner to myself, mostly. He does randomly murder people from time to time, however.

Randomly murder people? If he's doing it for no reason whatsoever ("I was in the mood" doesn't count), then he's not just evil but stupid. And stupid is a bigger problem than evil, since being evil won't necessarily get you killed, but stupid will.

My main discomfort is the playing through the details of the actions (torture, and humiliating acts), instead of glossing over it.

This is more of a personal taste issue. Maybe you should talk to the DM about it and suggest toning down the details.

I'm convinced that the fighter/sorcerer PC is insane though. He'd seem to be happy to go through down blowing things up and cutting down anyone that tried to stop him. He's got a talent for pissing off every female NPC we encounter too, but that's a seperate issue. Due to his actions, he's now Chaotic Evil...so maybe it is in character, now (he had Lawful Evil to begin with). His talking (openly!) on the streets about what he wants to do do these NPCs is a little discomfiting, to say the least. :\

Definitely sounds mental. Just one question - how is he managing to do all this in Waterdeep without getting killed?

All I know is that I'd happily see all of our PCs defeated at some stage. I feel slightly sad when ever we do something "evil" in game.

Sounds like an evil game might not be your cup of tea, even if it's a more intelligent take on it than some of your fellow-players have. Personally, I'm perfectly fine with an evil game, for a few reasons. I have a fair amount of detachment from my PCs, and tend to enjoy them all as allowing me to interact with an interesting world from a viewpoint at least partly different to mine (which also lets me play PCs whom I would loathe as people). So playing an evil character for me isn't any different from playing a villain in a play.

Plus I'm cynical enough to believe that every human being has capacity to do anything from the best to the worst actions possible, and it all comes down to personal choice. So however vile an action is, I know I could do it, with nothing inherent keeping me from it, but only my choice not to do so. And yes, i sleep very well at night

 

[Umbran]

My feeling could be summed up as this: I find our characters reprehensible, and want them to have their come-uppance eventually. I fully intend to play him in character for as long as he survives, and am not about to play him stupidly, or suicide the PC. But eventually, I hope he fails. Is that weird, or what?

I find it refreshing to see a player like this, actually. So few people want to play the "bad guys", and are ready and willing to take the fall. Most of the time, when I run into someone who plays evil, I find I'm dealing with someone who wants no consequences - they want all the benefits, but none of the detriments. A player who likes playing a villain in a classic manner (complete with losing in the end) is cool in my book

I don't ban evil PCs in my game, but I do find it very hard to root for them, or want them to succeed as much as I would a more "heroic" PC. I get the feeling that's unfair of me. :\

Hey, players are allowed to have preferences. So are GMs. The only thing that would be unfair is having that preference, but not warning those who play evil of it. I am pretty up-front about it in my games: I will allow you to play an evil character, but I will do absolutely nothing to protect you from the heroic characters while you do so. If you can't handle what the authorities or other PCs will do when they find out, don't play evil.

 

[Sound of Azure]

Randomly murder people? If he's doing it for no reason whatsoever ("I was in the mood" doesn't count), then he's not just evil but stupid. And stupid is a bigger problem than evil, since being evil won't necessarily get you killed, but stupid will.

Yeah, that's true. My character has a job on his list of "things to do" to remove the cause of the three strings of murders, thus raising his profile. We've eliminated two. The third is our own rogue, although my character doesn't know that yet. I'm not sure what he'll do if/when he finds out.

I would say that I over-stated things, there. 3 people were killed randomly. He's killed more than that, but these were contract killings, or members of a rival guild to him. They weren't random killings, just those in his way... although the Guard are treating them as related.

This is more of a personal taste issue. Maybe you should talk to the DM about it and suggest toning down the details.

Yes, that's probably true. I'm hoping it was more of a one-off thing (most of this happened in our second game). If not, I'll have a word with the DM.

Definitely sounds mental. Just one question - how is he managing to do all this in Waterdeep without getting killed?

Some hasty bluff checks on the good Father's part helped, explaining that the "poor lad is a little confused", and that his language skills were lacking, since he is a foreigner (the PC is Mulhorandi). Most people don't trust him anyway, since he looks similar to one of the Red Wizards.
As for getting killed, that could still happen. The city watch are looking for the so-called "vigilante killer" who murdered a prisoner in the stocks (who my character disabled and turned in to the watch).

Sounds like an evil game might not be your cup of tea, even if it's a more intelligent take on it than some of your fellow-players have.

Yeah, maybe. Part of the reason I posted this up was as a sounding board. It's an interesting game, and I'd be loathe to give it up over a taste issue I can correct. Hopefully the cloak and dagger, political aspect can come out more over time. If not, I might leave after all.

Personally, I'm perfectly fine with an evil game, for a few reasons. I have a fair amount of detachment from my PCs, and tend to enjoy them all as allowing me to interact with an interesting world from a viewpoint at least partly different to mine (which also lets me play PCs whom I would loathe as people). So playing an evil character for me isn't any different from playing a villain in a play.

Plus I'm cynical enough to believe that every human being has capacity to do anything from the best to the worst actions possible, and it all comes down to personal choice. So however vile an action is, I know I could do it, with nothing inherent keeping me from it, but only my choice not to do so. And yes, i sleep very well at night

Heh. I'm not losing any sleep, per se. I guess I'm mulling over where these ideas come from in my (and my fellow players') mind. What does it mean that I'm taking the role of someone like this? What does it say about me? Does it really matter since it's all imaginary (and hence, no consequences)?

Honestly, the most interesting part of my PC that I can see is that I'm playing a Heretic, of sorts. As I'm still discovering my own spiritual nature and beliefs, this is of huge interest.

Basically, it's the same things I consider with one of my usual characters, just something out of my usual experience.

As usual, I'm over-thinking things. Thanks for the input.

 

[Sound of Azure]

I find it refreshing to see a player like this, actually. So few people want to play the "bad guys", and are ready and willing to take the fall. Most of the time, when I run into someone who plays evil, I find I'm dealing with someone who wants no consequences - they want all the benefits, but none of the detriments. A player who likes playing a villain in a classic manner (complete with losing in the end) is cool in my book

Hey, cheers!

Hey, players are allowed to have preferences. So are GMs. The only thing that would be unfair is having that preference, but not warning those who play evil of it. I am pretty up-front about it in my games: I will allow you to play an evil character, but I will do absolutely nothing to protect you from the heroic characters while you do so. If you can't handle what the authorities or other PCs will do when they find out, don't play evil.

Ok, that is essentially what I do, also. That issue is one thing that led to many troubles in my old group. Being up-front seems to be the best way to clear up any confusion from issues like that. Bluntness does have its virtues (luckily).

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I've got a player in my Midwood campaign acting like this (well, arguably two). The character has already betrayed his community to the threatening kobold horde and has spent a lot of his time trying to get out of being caught for it, modeling his character after Baltar on the modern Battlestar Galactica.

It hasn't worked out 100 percent -- he and his friends are now on the run from Imperial soldiers, but they're now free to create new identities and start all over again. He does expect to eventually be hanged, I think, the fun is in how long he and his buddies can get away with being little crapweasels.

The campaign has split into two, though, as having half of them being good guys (including a paladin) was kind of an uncomfortable fit.

 

[Gold Roger]

DMing in a game that veered slightly into the realm of villainy some months ago I've found myself in a similar position and found that, no matter how much I pride myself on a flexible gaming style and as an accomodating DM, there will always be one thing I'll restrict in my campaigns and that is villainous PC's.

It's not even that I've got a problem with evil PC's, but there are certain moralic standarts I start to grow uncomfortable with if they are not kept by the "heroes". It's strange, since I'm not exactly a squeamish person. I can look at pictures of the thousands of victims of a nazi concentration camp without batting an eye and when I watched "Saving Private Ryan" with two of the players of that campaign they where morally exausted after it and I was utterly untouched. It's just the way I am, I guess.