Where have all the heroes gone?

[Tyler Do'Urden]

But this has got me thinking why is so hard now a days to find a game where the players want to be heroes not just powermad looters who use their power to further their own agenda and gods help the poor villagers. The other players have said the same thing that they to are tired of playing in a game filled with anti heroes.

Is it just in our area that this is common thing or is it more wide spread?

Wait a second...

...you're saying that the powermad looters who want to use power to further their own agenda... aren't heroes?

I'm afraid you're very confused.

The D&D alignment system is all screwed up; what it calls "good" is altruism and self-sacrifice, which, is not in of itself good. In fact, it leads to stagnation and is ultimately destructive, as it allows weak individuals to survive and pollute the world with their presence and the presence of their weakling spawn. What the game calls "evil", the deliberate inflicting of suffering and self-centered behavior, is actually what is "good", noble and heroic- it promotes the survival of the race, the improvement of race (through the destruction of weaker individuals), the acquisition of power (which is itself nobility), glory, and the establishment of the proper aristocracy of power.

It sounds like your Necromancer is, in fact, the only character that truly understands nobility and heroism. Hopefully the rest of the players (and their DM) can figure it out too.

 

[Elf Witch]

A little under half of the (large) group of Midwood players wanted to create antiheroes (although all of them are comic book fans, and it's safe to say they all enjoy old-fashioned heroes, too, when done right). The campaign eventually split in two, with the good guys staying behind in Midwood to save the barony (there's a lot it needs saving from) while the others are on the run from the law across the Tarsisian Empire.

If I can make a baseless assumption, was the necromancer a younger player, Elf? There's this whole "I have to be cynical because optimism is for suckers" thing that teenagers and young twentysomethings cling to a lot of the time that I don't find very often in older adults (or younger kids) unless they've had some "stuff" going on their lives.

No he is a man in is early 40s.

He always wants to play a character whose ultimate goal is to screw over the party in the end. Not all DMs let him do it but some have.

To date he has played a psionist allied with mind flayers who in the end turned the party over to have their brains sucked dry.

A drow follower of Arushnee who was really working for Lloth that turned out lovely as well.

He thinks it is cool role playing and so do some of the DMs they say it makes for a gritty game. I don't agree it makes for a lot of angry players. Its has gotten to the point that no matter what he plays in a game none of my characters will ever trust him. He could bring in a paladin and my character would be waiting for the betryal.

I have told him that I won't allow it in any game I run and that one of my house rules is that characters who go evil become NPCs.

 

[Henry]

The D&D alignment system is all screwed up; what it calls "good" is altruism and self-sacrifice, which, is not in of itself good. In fact, it leads to stagnation and is ultimately destructive, as it allows weak individuals to survive and pollute the world with their presence and the presence of their weakling spawn. What the game calls "evil", the deliberate inflicting of suffering and self-centered behavior, is actually what is "good", noble and heroic- it promotes the survival of the race, the improvement of race (through the destruction of weaker individuals), the acquisition of power (which is itself nobility), glory, and the establishment of the proper aristocracy of power.

It sounds like your Necromancer is, in fact, the only character that truly understands nobility and heroism. Hopefully the rest of the players (and their DM) can figure it out too.

That is definitely *yoink*ed for the speech from my next Big Bad Guy in D&D.

 

[SunRaven01]

I wouldn't mind, but so many of the players who just have to play an evil character are just really bad at it. They want to play that alignment as some sort of wish-fulfilment excuse to run off on a mad rampage.

I call this the, er, "Mean Poopy Head" problem. And -- honestly? -- in my experience, the people who play Evil as if it were the same thing as being poopy headed are usually poopy heads in real life too.

I have seen Evil done -- and done WELL! -- by players who realized that evil can be sweet, charming, and likeable. To be evil, at its core, means to be selfish. It in no way implies that you have to be an arrogant, homicidal, psychopathic jerk.

 

[Henry]

No he is a man in is early 40s.

He always wants to play a character whose ultimate goal is to screw over the party in the end. Not all DMs let him do it but some have.

This may not be the player in the other group, but it sure sounds like they have a lot in common; I'd bet they'd be a riot in the same campaign!

It may indeed be one he might want to sit out. Since you won't allow him his "fun" when he tries to implement it on the other players, he's going to be remarkably frustrated, and could possibly torpedo the campaign if he's of the mind to.

 

[Elf Witch]

I may be a do gooder, but adventuring is dangerous and specialized business. I expect to be well compensated for risking my life to rescue that prince. Just because some human wears a crown, it doesn't make him any more important, especially if I am an elf, dwarf, or kobold who isn't actually one of his subjects.

And all that being said, the king's own people down the road need more help fending off the goblins attacking their village. A village of 100 people I've never met is more important to me as a do gooder than one person. An unfortunate fact of do-goodery.

So Mr. King, explain to me again why I should leave those hundred people to fend for themselves and go looking for your one misplaced kid, who is probably in a much more dangerous place (if he wasn't, you would have sent your soldiers, and not called up me).

I have to disagree with some of this it really depends on what type of character you are playing and the setting.

If for example you are playing in a setting that assumes the divine right of Kings and you are playing say a knight then the prince's life is more important than any villager and asking for a reward before taking the mission is unseemly.

 

[Elf Witch]

This may not be the player in the other group, but it sure sounds like they have a lot in common; I'd bet they'd be a riot in the same campaign!

It may indeed be one he might want to sit out. Since you won't allow him his "fun" when he tries to implement it on the other players, he's going to be remarkably frustrated, and could possibly torpedo the campaign if he's of the mind to.

I just told my roommate that and she threw a notebook at me. I would repeat what she told me to tell you but it would really offend Eric's grandmother.

This is what I am thinking as well not to mention the ton of email I have gotten from the other players who really don't want to play with him in this campaign.

 

[sckeener]

The D&D alignment system is all screwed up; what it calls "good" is altruism and self-sacrifice, which, is not in of itself good. In fact, it leads to stagnation and is ultimately destructive, as it allows weak individuals to survive and pollute the world with their presence and the presence of their weakling spawn. What the game calls "evil", the deliberate inflicting of suffering and self-centered behavior, is actually what is "good", noble and heroic- it promotes the survival of the race, the improvement of race (through the destruction of weaker individuals), the acquisition of power (which is itself nobility), glory, and the establishment of the proper aristocracy of power.

what is this...the Atlas Shrugged version of hero?

 

[Tyler Do'Urden]

what is this...the Atlas Shrugged version of hero?

Well, my orientation is closer to Nietzsche than Rand, but Rand will do.

Take out the wanton cruelty part, and you've pretty much got the whole orientation of The Fated faction from Planescape.

 

[Drowbane]

Wait a second...

...you're saying that the powermad looters who want to use power to further their own agenda... aren't heroes?

I'm afraid you're very confused.

The D&D alignment system is all screwed up; what it calls "good" is altruism and self-sacrifice, which, is not in of itself good. In fact, it leads to stagnation and is ultimately destructive, as it allows weak individuals to survive and pollute the world with their presence and the presence of their weakling spawn. What the game calls "evil", the deliberate inflicting of suffering and self-centered behavior, is actually what is "good", noble and heroic- it promotes the survival of the race, the improvement of race (through the destruction of weaker individuals), the acquisition of power (which is itself nobility), glory, and the establishment of the proper aristocracy of power.

It sounds like your Necromancer is, in fact, the only character that truly understands nobility and heroism. Hopefully the rest of the players (and their DM) can figure it out too.

Spoken like a true servant of Lloth!

Time to die, fool!