Two Guys Walk Into A Bar, A Necromancer And A Paladin...

[El_Gringo]

Figuring I could use the learning experience, I allowed the players use of evil alignments for our latest game. The party consists of a NE Fighter, CN Gnomish Rogue/Inventor, and a LE Necromancer. While the fighter has aspirations of becoming an assassin, the necromancer wants nothing less than to acheive lichdom and conquest of a small area/nation. The gnome just figures that his companions have the right sort of morals to help him acquire funds necessary for his experiments.

Surprisingly, they make a very scholarly team. Both the necro and the gnome seek out libraries and institutions of learning, albeit for infernal reasons. The fighter is very subdued, highly interested in tactics and strategies of war. All in all, the campaign of evil is going pretty well. Here's a little of what I've learned so far that makes the campaign successful.

1. Nothing is ever described as bright, cheery, or beautiful.
I've been careful in how I portray people. The friendly, portly innkeeper becomes the unkempt, unshaven old man who doesn't even care enough to hide his bulging gut under a shirt. An innocent child becomes a rotten brat who steps on your foot and then runs off. Towering buildings in a large city become tall monstrocities that choke the land and add more confusion to the urban sprawl.

2. There is no such thing as good and evil.
Well, not in an evil campaign, anyway. Let's examine one of the necromancer's goals. Conquer a small area/nation. You don't have to be evil to want to do something like that. A necro calls it conquest, a paladin calls it a crusade. Different packaging but same end result. The heart of every conflict becomes less and less good vs. evil and more about opposing goals.

3. Evil does not equal stupid.
Do paladins kill every commoner they meet if they register on the Detect Evil ability? Of course not. The same applies with evil characters. Evil survives by staying hidden in the shadows, never revealing its true intentions. Evil isn't murder, or thievery, or powerful magic. Evil is selfishness. The promotion of oneself or one's cause above all else. Unless you're playing a CE Barbarian with an INT of 3, it's very doubtful you go about killing and looting whenever you please.

Anyone else have some advice to share on running evil campaigns?

 

[wolff96]

Make sure that everyone believes in that last point.

Make sure that all members of the party have some sort of reason to work together that THEY come up with -- if it's DM fiat, they'll just resent it.

Make sure the whole party wants to play in a morally ambiguous game.

-----------------------

I've honestly had a lot more trouble with people playing Chaotic Neutral characters than I've EVER had with evil characters. I was in one party where I was a neutral good wizard and the thief was lawful evil. We ended up becoming the best of friends, though I was always trying to convince him to be more giving and he was always trying to point out to me the benefits of being selfish.

 

[Enkhidu]

This comes more from a players perspective, but it has always helped me when I play an evil character.

The most evil of characters often seems the most good (or at least the most harmless). An evil character will often do many things that others consider "good," albeit for their own twisted purposes.

For example, instead of burning down an orphanage, a truly evil character will sponsor it, if only to cull the ranks for suitable followers and/or subjects. That way they become respected members of society (making it easier for them to do dirty, underhanded things and get away with it).

It's always worked for me, at least.

 

[Orco42]

Evil does not equal stupid.
Do paladins kill every commoner they meet if they register on the Detect Evil ability?

Then you have not seen the paladins in my games.

I let players be any alignment in my games. In fact in my next campaign the only alignment I will not allow is LG.

It's not that I hate paladins, I just hate how some of my players pley them.

 

[Femerus the Gnecro]

Having played a long term evil pc in a campaign of 'heroes', as you can imagine I have a rather unique perspective on this issue.

Over the course of the campaign, it became pretty obvious to the other players that I wasn't entirely in line with their moral standard, but they accepted me as part of the group for a variety of reasons, the most prominent one being that I had saved all of them several times during the course of the campaign.

However, I also used them to further my own ends. In the end, I was even directly responsible for the death of a PC, indirectly responsible for the deaths of two others.

Basically, evil characters, as you pointed out, are mostly motivated by selfishness and a need for power. The only difference between this trait in an evil campaign and the same trait in a 'good' campaign is that the PC's can be honest about their wants instead of trying to justify their desire for power through weak roleplaying or blatant metagaming.

Evil games can be fun, provided they're run with evil characters in mind.

Good luck!

-Femerus

 

[Rashak Mani]

I would only advise to have no more than one chaotic evil character... or none at all... and at least one Lawful Evil character to help avoid over-chaotic groups. Chaotic groups are in my opinion worse to manage than evil ones. Evil has a purpose... chaos usually doesnt, not a serious one at least.

With adult players in my opinion evil groups have better definition of goals and purpose than most good groups have. Good guys get shoved around easily by so and so quest or helping people. I love my evil group... and more than once we saved and helped people more than the goodie group we are hunting. We have murdered, smuggled drugs and robbed... but we´re a civilized group.... at least when the smell of gold makes those barbarians calm down.

 

[trimeulose]

One suggestion provide them with information. Not the straight forward, "kill the evil wizard and bring back the captured daughter that is being held by him" I'm talking the subverted backwoods information that only a mastermind could put together.

Make sure that the Fighter/Assasin fights behind the scenes in 1v1 situations. Have him pick the fights, and try to make it seem as though he has the advantage (a decent bluff skill might have the fighter winding up in a trap). In the end it will hone his Assasin skills and mentality.

Have the wizard in the front, in a position of moderate power. Behind the scenes though the wizard should have the ability to manuever and manipulate. Using the Assasin to kill any physical limitations and obstacles.

The Gnome should tale the other two characters, and devise ways of using any waste on the "leftovers". Though he might not actually participate in the fighting or manipulating, he will use body parts to construct golems, and "old" gear as spare parts. He might not see the morals but he sees the benifits.

The group might work something like this, Wizard seems to be of moderate but no real power. Behind the scenes he uses his skills to make connections and gain favor for the "next high up" position. When the timing is right he turns to the assasin. The Assasin arranges an accidental death, and the Wizard accends to power. The Wizard the arranges for a puppet, the gnome, to take the real seat of power while the wizard appears to be a simple advisor with no real power. The assasin is recognized as the personal body gaurd. Of course it could go just about anywhere.

The main point is to give them the back story so that they can be more manipulative than confrontatory.

 

[Tyros]

Playing evil characters isn't so hard if the players can just remember three simple facts:

1. The party sticks together for mutual survival and allies. Don't kill each other. You'll need all the friends you can get.

2. Just because you're evil doesn't mean you can't function in society. You need society to feed off of. Don't be a homicidal maniac. If you have to kill, make sure you dispose of the bodies properly. Have some self-control.

3. Good people may have a weak way of thinking, but that doesn't mean they're stupid.

My DM recently quit running his FR campaign that we were running evil characters in. Not because we were running evil characters, he just didn't feel up for the challenge of DMing. Our group consisted of a human thief (CN), a 1/2 orc barbarian (CN), a human monk (L/E), and a human necromancer (N/E, myself). We started out 1st level, and my character (who was from Thay, didn't see that coming, did ya?) was ordered to acquire at least a dozen slaves and bring them back from Thay. I started out with a mother and child for my first two and had no money. The DM also started us out individually, not knowing each other.

Now, normally I DM all the time, but the advantage was that I had nearly zero knowledge of the realms. I can't remember what city he started us at, but it was at the other end of the sea. I had no idea if slavery was tolerated in any of these regions, I had no allies, and I'm a puny first level necromancer!

I had a great time, though. We're all adults, so I had to come up with a rational way to get everyone together and keep them together. Luckily the DM cut me a break and I met up with the Half-orc and the thief first. He was invaluable getting us together and the promise of riches once we got back to Thay kept us together.

The biggest difference I noted was that there was a lot less action and a lot more planning and scheming to accomplish our goals. There was not too much bloodshed (well, not on my part anyway), but mostly posturing and conning.

I think too many DMs are reluctant to run evil campaigns because the game is not as well set up for it and the threat of all the PCs killing each other off. But with a little player maturity it can be done and quite satisfying.