D&D General Would You Play This Theme?

[Snarf Zagyg]

I'd have to pass.

Enough evil in the real world. I kinda wanna play a game where evil doesn't win.

 

[Bacon Bits]

With my group I'd have no problem with this theme. We've done evil drow campaigns before, although, to be fair, even those campaigns were highly cooperative. It's just that our goal was to do something that would have a bad outcome instead of a good one. Our group isn't interested in intra-party conflict because we don't find it fun for more than a one-shot. It's quite exhausting and leaves you with a lot of negative feelings that last throughout the week. Just isn't fun. In general I wouldn't play an evil campaign for more than, say, a short campaign of 8 or 9 months. Even if the party is cooperating, it can begin to leave lingering feelings that bleed into your personal life. Soaking in distasteful things can leave you feeling distasteful. I'm sure some groups can do it perpetually, but I find it starts to wear on you.

As far as a non-drow in a drow city, that's pretty normal if the city is similar to Menzoberranzan. Any non-good races that live in the Underdark might frequent the location. Your game might feature a lot of racism or slavery to highlight the evil culture, but that takes a table willing to do that, too. Stereotypical drow cultures is also highly sexist.

 

[DEFCON 1]

If this was all we had to go on? No. Because from what I can tell, there isn't a theme.

What you gave us was a location and a few character build features. That's it. No story, no emphasis on what the campaign would entail, and no idea of what the PCs would be going for.

Saying a campaign is about evil drow in a Lolth dominated city is as unspecific of a campaign theme as asking "Do you want to play a game of a bunch of humans in Waterdeep?" I'd need a little more than that.

 

[Zardnaar]

It just says evil allowed, not required.
would you have accepted a good aligned character looking to bring down the Drow empire?

out of interest did anyone go that option?

I‘d give something like that a go if I could play a Neutral character and if I knew the other players personally.
I’ve never played in an underdark campaign but have always wanted to.

No it was evil themed good wasn't banned but yeah would have been hard.

 

[Zardnaar]

If this was all we had to go on? No. Because from what I can tell, there isn't a theme.

What you gave us was a location and a few character build features. That's it. No story, no emphasis on what the campaign would entail, and no idea of what the PCs would be going for.

Saying a campaign is about evil drow in a Lolth dominated city is as unspecific of a campaign theme as asking "Do you want to play a game of a bunch of humans in Waterdeep?" I'd need a little more than that.

It's been a while but the city was more Erelhu Cinlu vs Menzoberranzan.

Non Drow were allowed but had to be something like or s, Kobolds, duergar no surface races.

They were all members of the same house.

 

[Umbran]

Whatever I may be playing, I'm not interested in surrounding myself with protagonists who are intent upon making the world a nastier place.

 

[grimslade]

I did an evil campaign when I was young, but it always fizzled. It was very hard to really buy-in to the character. I have had evil characters in a mercenary-esque campaign, but it wasn't heavy evil and the goals weren't to actively cause harm. If you have a group that is keen to try, good luck. A group of Erelhu Cinlu citizens would be dark, and not just in the petty evil like Menzoberranzan, these are Drow that unleashed the Giants on Geoff. This is large scale chaos and evil. Not my cup of D&D, but again, good luck.

 

[Mannahnin]

As above, it requires a group of mature, trustworthy players.

The concept of making the PCs all members of the same house, so they have a strong baseline level of shared self-interest is a good one.

The last evil game I played had us all as members of the same noble house, and it worked well. Our PCs still had rivalries and competed, but worked well together most of the time and got stuff done. My PC eventually STILL betrayed the party, but it was in the final set-piece battle of the campaign, and it just added to the drama.

 

[Richards]

We're playing a variant of this idea in one of our 3.5 campaigns, in that it started in a Lolth-worshiping drow city. The difference is that we're all slaves to the drow: the party consists of a gnome cleric of Fharlanghn, a human sorceress, a dwarven barbarian, a dwarven fighter, and a lizardfolk. Over the course of the campaign we've been forced to go on surface raids and do a few things we'd have preferred not to, but we're currently involved in a plot to stop the drow armies from swarming up onto the surface to slaughter a city of good drow worshipers of Eilistraee. And there's a prophecy that we'll be involved in stopping a mad Elder God from destroying the world. (This might be hampered a bit by the fact that the sorceress is secretly worshiping the Elder God.)

Johnathan

 

[Eltab]

I don't think I want to play in an Evil campaign (because patterns persist through history of confusing alignments Chaotic and/or Evil with Stoopid) but I could be persuaded to watch a few sessions to see how it plays out.

I have thought a "Sith campaign" (LE lieutenants of an NE overlord) had more potential than CE'ing in the Classic Underdark.