When PCs go "Swiss"

[Desdichado]

Its a tricky situation, making a stand against your 'Hitler with halo' will cause friction between you and your players, but you must look at the fact that the behaviour is effecting all of the group to a much larger degree than making a stand will to the individual.

That seems to be a bit of a jump. Why do you assume that it is causing friction with the other players or that his behavior is effecting the group? Nothing he said indicated that, and in fact, it strongly hints to the opposite when he said that there is no alignment restriction, and he might as well just play Chaotic Evil and he certainly could do so.

 

[Henry]

As others have said - he IS chaotic evil. If you want to cover your backside, make some notations of his actions (what you gave us is fine, with place names and situations included on your notes) and keep them aside. As far as he knows he's True neutral - DARNED few people go around in life acknowledging themselves as Evil. However, from now on, any situation he enters into where alignment is a factor, he reacts as Evil. detect evils note him, Forbiddance effects on good churches will burn him, holy weapons shun him, unholy weapons react well to his use, etc. It doesn't have to be overt - he'll eventually be upset that you are trying to "take over his character" but just tell him it's what's happening, and if he argues, remind him of little Timmy he killed, Vander the shopkeep whose life he ruined, the town guard he killed whose family starved, etc.

I'm not even touching Rule Zero - You're not even doing anything outside the parameters of the Player's Handbook flavor text!

 

[Yair]

Is he having fun? Are the others players enjoying his evil escapades or are they as anguished as you are? Would it be more fun for you as a DM if he were to act True Neutral or changed his alignment to Chaotic Evil?
It seems to me from your post that you don't really mind him doing all these evil things, you just don't want him to stay TN in the process. If that is the case, and if you think the other players feel the same, I suggest talking it out before the next session. Tell the players that given the actions of their characters (who supposedly stood by while he was doing all his evil acts, and still aid and support him), you think a change of alignment might be in order. Explain this is just a rules-effect, changing alignment just makes sense rules-wise and opens up some interesting opponents/options.
I wouldn't sneak it on him by surprise, and will try to reason with him before using my authority as the DM.

If you or some of the other palyers don't like playing with a villain, you have a much more serious problem on your hands. In this case I would suggest talking to him in private before the next session, and saying you don't want to DM an evil campaign. If he protests that he isn't an evil character, offer to either have it voted or to institute alignment-point rules. Choose an alignment ruleset that works in "magnitudes" - to gain Good points, one would have to make Good acts on the order of magnitude of the past evil acts, lesser acts just don't count. (That should resolve the problem of slowly raising the total back to Good through minor inconsistent acts, and would also help to make alignment changing acts rare enough that any arguments over it are not common.)
If you reach an impasse, boot him.

Either way, you've got some rough waters ahead of you. Good luck.

 

[carpedavid]

I'll echo the "he's Chaotic Evil" statement - at least as the PH describes the 9 alignments. However, since alignment is one of those topics that people have widly differing interpretations of, I'd suggest you sit down with your group and discuss how alignment works in your game world before taking any other action.

It's entirely possible that he's ignorant as to how you are treating alignment in your game (which is nobody's fault, it's just something that needs to be addressed). It's also possible that he's interpreting True Neutral as the alignment that allows him to do whatever he wants - it's a common misconception, because players think that it means that they don't really have to "pick" good or evil, law or chaos. They don't realize that, as the alignment system is layed out in the PH, neutral is the alignment of "balance", not "extremes."

Just remember that, as DM, you are the one who actually decides what the universe thinks a character's alignment is. Spells, creatures, and items don't care what the player has written down on his character sheet. If you can make the players aware of what rules the universe uses to determine their alignment, then you should be able to avoid any arguments.

 

[Vraille Darkfang]

And here I thought some player fell victim to the infamous "Polymorph to Dairy Product" Spell

First,

Does EVERY character he makes act that way? If so, he's basically playing the same thing over & over. (Not that is bad, some people tend to enjoy playing one character race, class, alignment, over any other). Or, does each characcter have its own manner of "nuetrality" as the player wrote down.

For instance, does one character kill children, but would never hurt an old person; while another kills old people yet gives children candy? Look for methods to his madness from one character to another. If you see different patterns emerging, he may be playing more sophisticated characters than you realize.

As for his Ture Nuetral Alignment. Not by the PHB. He's acting evil. Alignment Options for what you've described.

Chaotic Nuetral (DM option): Some DM's rule the insane (or certain types of insanity) as CN. Characters commit evil acts, but are not trully evil, since they are incapable of realizing their actions. (The philosophy of insanity is widely debated today and views vary widely from one individual to another, so this alignment option can open a can of wyrms if all players doen't agree about the criminally insane being CN).

NE: IF he isn't going out of his way to kill children of butn down random buildings, he may be NE instead of CE. If he kills the children cause their "in his way" or burning down the building because they wouldn't serve him, or its run by an elf, or any of dozens of reasons. He may be evil, but he may lack the chaotic tendencies of true CE.

LE: A stretch here. Most of what you describe has little Lawfulness associated with it. Unless he's performing his acts of murder and destruction to some religious or personal code (if he is, make sure you have it write it down & give it to you).

CE: As most people here state. CE is most likely what he's playing. As you described, lacking further details, I'd call him CE. If the player has a problem with that, read the CE alignment description in teh PHB & list off how is character mathces the CE stereotype to a tee.

As an option, you Could have his character as CN with evil tendencies. But it sounds like he slipped over to full CE a long time ago.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Something similar happened in a game in which I was a player, except they used Chaotic Neutral and the "I'm Chaotic" excuse to cover incredibly evil acts. It was a 6-person party, and I was a Neutral Good enchanter, there was a Paladin whose player was a bit barmy, and so he did nothing to help me, and then there were four evil characters disguised as Neutral. Campaign highlights included one time when the Bard sang Inspire Courage for the enemies, causing them to just barely hit the injured paladin and take him to -11 on the last round of combat. The Fighter, in retaliation, grabbed the Bard by the throat and ripped out his tongue, then sliced off his fingers, saying, "You'll never use your music for my enemies again." Then the Druid threatened to massacre an entire village of innocent folk and the entire party, and the Rogue decided to burn a caravan of food that we had taken from the bad guys and I wanted to give to the starving peasants. He refused to listen to reason, even after I roleplayed a conversation and rolled a token Diplomacy check ("I'm a PC, I can ignore whatever you roll") and then when I Charmed him, he said that it was against his nature not to burn the food and called for an opposed Charisma check, which he won. Then I had to Dominate Person him to get him to stop...

They also decided to become dealers in narcotics when they found some lying around in the enemy stronghold...needless to say, they didn't trust each other to distribute treasure, so they gave it all to me, and I realised that it would be an evil act to support their evil with treasure, so I gave them as little as possible and donated the rest of their shares to charity. and they never noticed. Wondering why I was even adventuring with them? Prophecy DM fiat.

 

[Squire James]

Tell him his actions have changed his alignment to CE. If he argues, tell him he can keep his N on his character sheet if he wants to, but the game rules is treating him as CE henceforth. Then tell him that your notification of alignment change is a courtesy, and that the standard from now on is to note alignment changes in-game (i.e. the paladin frowns at you, Order's Wrath starts hurting a lot, etc.).

 

[Plane Sailing]

I would follow Henry's excellent suggestions.

Cheers

 

[threshel]

Chaotic Nuetral (DM option): Some DM's rule the insane (or certain types of insanity) as CN. Characters commit evil acts, but are not trully evil, since they are incapable of realizing their actions. (The philosophy of insanity is widely debated today and views vary widely from one individual to another, so this alignment option can open a can of wyrms if all players doen't agree about the criminally insane being CN).

From personal experience, this is a potential Pandora's Box. I had some players who resisted alignments; they wanted to play self-interested characters with no accounatbility. They used the "CN equals crazy/unnacountable" to create characters they thought were outside the alignment system. In other words, they could do anything, and their CN alignment would prevent any alignment shifts.

The biggest negative reaction I got wasn't from a player whose character I shifted to evil, but from one who, after I had recited a litany of selfless acts and told him his character was Chaotic Good, argued with me for over an hour. His main arguement was essentially CN equals unnaccountable.

*sigh*

I don't play with that group anymore.

:\
J

 

[Yair]

Wondering why I was even adventuring with them? Prophecy DM fiat.

Actually, I'm wondering why you are playing with the players