Now, I believe (based on the games I have been involved with) that an occassional evil character makes for a better world. If the character is well played and abides by rules set forth by the DM in advance.
I thought I would share with you some of what I have experienced playing an evil character in 1st edition Greyhawk.
Evil campaigns can be difficult, for all of those reasons discussed above. I have never played in a ‘pure’ evil campaign such as Way of the Wicked. However, the very first character I ever played in AD&D (a monk fellow by the name of Arminas) was Lawful Evil in a most good/partly neutral party; one that furthermore included a Paladin of Heironious in the ranks. Our DM (a great games-master named Steve Baker) and I sat down several hours before the game started and, as it was the very first time I had ever played D&D, we went over a few things.
He asked me to take a quick look at the book, and upon seeing the monk, I wanted to play one. No, I didn’t have to play him starting at 1st level, but Steve let him come in with XP one level below that of the players: 7th. This was back in the heady days of 1st edition, so he had me roll 3d6 in order—but, he told me since I wanted to play a monk, my stats would either what I rolled or the minimum allowed for the class. Well, between some good rolls and bumping scores up to the minimum, I had a really good character by the time we finished with THAC0 and AC and saves and my attacks and damage and hit points and all that jive.
And then he asked me what alignment I wanted to play. Well, I started to answer ‘good, of course’, but then I asked him what alignment do you think I should play? He got a grin on his face, and explained to me that the group was currently a quest for the Church of the Twins: a forced amalgamation of the clergy of Heironious (LG) and Hextor (LE). Half the party was good and devoted to Heironious; the rest was neutral, with a thief and a cleric of St. Cuthbert (LN). He said that any of the three alignments could fit, but that he would like to see a Hextorian join the party—if I was up to the task of playing it well. After which, he explained to me that Lawful Evil was a lot like Darth Vader.
Hey, it was 1986 and I was a freshman in college.
I jumped on it with both feet. We spent the next hour finishing up the details of the character (his height, weight, racial ethnicity [Arminas was a Suel], and bit of character background). I determined that Arminas was an orphan who had been raised by a local monastery in his home of the Theocracy of the Pale (which in Steve Baker’s world was run by the Hextorians, not the Pholtans! Take that you intolerant light-bringers!) as a ward of the Church of Hextor. His path was not that of the clergy, but instead that of a monk.
By the time I joined the party, Arminas had progressed to the point where he was a major trouble-shooter of the Church: in a very literal fashion (ok, ok, trouble-beat’em-‘til-they-cry-for-uncle-and-beat ‘em-some-more). And he was very religious. Oh, you should have the faces on the folks I would be gaming with that night when Steve introduced me—and my character and the Holy Symbol of Hextor that he wore openly around his neck.
And even before I could make my introductions, the Bishops (11th level NPCs) of Hextor and Heironious walked up, I handed over my holy symbol was released from my vows to Hextor. I then took vows to the Church of the Twins and received my new holy symbol (basically a combination of H's&H’s symbols). And the party was then told I was the representative of the new Church hierarchy. Well, they were pretty much rattled, and since Steve didn’t let us share our character sheets, they had no idea what level I was or what my stats were or what my alignment was (although they could pretty well guess the last!).
We loaded upon a sailing ship that was taking us across the Nyr Dyv to Greyhawk City. I was paired up with the LN cleric of St. Cuthbert and by the end of that first session had him terrified of me. See, Arminas used a kusari-gama (basically a sickle on the end of a 5’ long weight chain); and I practiced my katas in our cabin. Swinging that razor sharp sickle over and over again inches above the cleric’s nose as he lay on his bunk. And Steve was in on it as well! He loudly announced that since the ship was moving, I would have to take a -2 on my To-Hit rolls—and if I rolled a 1 or a 2, I would hit the cleric. (Before hand, I had told him I intended to be very careful and Steve secretly gave me a +4 bonus for doing so, but we didn’t the others!)
The player, not the character, but the player was sweating bullets, especially when I announced that I rolled a ‘3’. Steve smiled and asked ‘before or after the -2?’ And he began to breath again when I said ‘after’.
On the first night of our voyage, Arminas found the thief rummaging through his belongings. The thief turned around and held up a magical dagger that Arminas had been given by the Church—and announced that since he could better make use of it, it was now his. This thief was a real tough guy, played by a very good role-player with whom I was friends. I nodded, and asked him if he was certain he was going to take what was rightfully mine—and he said yep. What’re ya going do about it? Cry to the paladin?
At that moment, I was so happy that I had selected a Lawful Evil alignment. I let the thief leave with the dagger and then I made a plan. Next session, I shared it with Steve before the game began and he burst out laughing.
You see, for that edition, monks had speak with animals. So, I made friends with the rats, and the seagulls and the ship’s cats. I fed them, and I talked to them, and I convinced them that the thief was their mortal enemy. Within a week, I had managed to talk them into driving the thief out of his mind. When he went above the decks, the seagulls began to scream and flap around his face (and firing projectiles at him, the type of projectiles that came out of their rear, if you know what I mean). The rats chewed up his bedroll, his straw mattress, his pack, his spare clothing. The cat’s gave birth in the mess and sprayed his face at night while he tried to sleep.
And I? I began spreading a rumor throughout the crew that the thief was obviously cursed by the Gods—otherwise why would the animals be treating him such? Soon, he became a pariah. His food had rat droppings and cat urine in it; he couldn’t bathe on deck without getting covered in seagull guano. He couldn’t sleep. He couldn’t rest. My character literally drove his insane.
And then, I told him. I was protected from thieves by the powers of my Gods. And all of this was the result of a curse from him stealing from me. He begged me to lift the curse, and offered back my dagger. I refused, saying that he had wanted the blade and the blade he now had. He offered me his ring of protection as well, and I smiled and agreed to lift his curse. The very night before we docked in the City of Greyhawk.
Guy had a nervous tick about setting foot on boats ever since and never, ever stole from me again.
Several months later (and after I had gained a new level by defeating an 8th-level monk master, woo-hoo!), we were busy getting into the meat and potatoes of our quest. And we found that we had several prisioners who were not cooperating and answering our questions. We needed their information, but they wouldn’t talk.
Enter me.
I offered to get them to talk, and that divided the party along alignment lines. The paladin refused to hear of torture, but the many of the rest knew we had to get the info. Finally, the paladin extracted a solemn oath from me that I would not torture the poor saps. I agreed, having just seen ‘The Untouchables’.
Demanding absolute solitude from the rest of the party—except for my two closest allies (the LN cleric of St. Cuthbert and a N gnome illusionist), I revealed my plan. The prisioners were tied to their chairs, while the cleric and illusionist began to interrogate them. Then I came in, slapping them around a little, and taking out a sharp knife. They got holier-than-thou, and forced me from the room. So I went outside, and right on cue, the illusionist said ‘oh my god, the other prisoner is out back!’
I slapped the corpse around a bit, making sure that the chair could be seen from inside the hut. And then, I said, tough guy, huh. You don’t want to talk? You don’t want to talk! And I took out the knife, and began to cut away fingers and the dead man’s nose and ears—as the illusionist created the most vile high-pitched screams anyone had ever heard. And then, I cut out the corpse’s tongue and hacked off his head.
Drenched with blood, I stormed back in—and right on cue, the cleric of St. Cuthbert said, I ain’t gonna stop him, not now, not when he is filled with blood lust. And he walked out. So there I was, holding a severed head, and both of the prisoners began begging me to listen to them as they spilled their guts.
Now the paladin was mad as Hades and drew her sword on me, swearing to run me through for breaking my oath—when the gnome said ‘he didn’t torture anyone; hell, he didn’t touch a living soul once.’
And the cleric confirmed it.
It was the game that was perhaps the most fun-filled I have every played in. Because I remembered two very important rules for playing evil: don’t do it to your fellow players unless they really deserve it (and even then, keep it non-lethal), and always keep your word so they know they can trust you, even if they hate your character’s guts. By following those two simple rules I was able to play Arminas until he reached 14th level in ’94. And I enjoyed every minute of it, along with the people with whom I played. He never betrayed them, and he never broke his sworn word, although he was a right bastard at times. His evil he reserved for his foes that deserved it, not for his own companions.
And that, my friends, is the key to playing evil well.
Shortly after the Untouchables scene, Arminas’s group managed to find and recover the item we had quested for over the past year. Finally, we thought, we could return home to the Duchy of Tenh and kick the butt of one character’s uncle who had stolen the throne and exiled our buddy, a NG ranger. Boy, were we ever wrong.
Upon our return to Greyhawk City, we were arrested on charges of multiple murders. Needless to say, the entire party took turns staring at ME. I had to remind them that I had been with them outside of the city when these murders took place. Confident that things would get cleared up, we went into custody with the guards and suggested that they speak with Mordenkainen, who had dispatched us on the last leg of our quest.
Well, there we were, with all of our gear taken away (the guards were kind enough to leave us with our normal clothing, so we didn’t have to wear prison raiment) and we were tough enough and scary enough that the other prisioners left us alone. Mostly. Like I said, our paladin was a lady, and that seemed to bring out the worst in our fellow inmates. But, three dead attempted rapists later (have I said how much I enjoy playing a monk because he can’t be disarmed?), the rest of them left us alone. But, unfortunately, those three deaths would be added to our list of crimes (and man o man was the party mad that I didn’t just subdue the thugs; but hey, nobody rapes someone Arminas knows in front of Arminas—no one.).
We could have broken out, and our new thief halfling thief (the previous thief having died in the Cairn Hills) suggested that we do just that—but we pretty confident that Mordy would sort things out for us.
Next morning, we are taken before a magistrate and put on trial. The trial was short, sweet, and to the point, and they had witnesses that testified against us. We got more and more uneasy, but then Mordy was called to the stand and to our utter horror, he told the court he had never before laid eyes upon us—and left.
We weren’t allowed to testify; we couldn’t present evidence; we were railroaded into a conviction. And, of course, it didn’t help when I promised the magistrate that once we managed to escape, I would be finding out who framed us and would pay a special visit to his home to show my displeasure of this miscarriage of justice. We were found guilty of the crimes (which we had not committed) and sentenced to exile. That wasn’t so bad, was it?
It was.
Our counsel told us that we would be transported to the Isle of the Damned, a lonely island far out in the middle of the Solnor Ocean. The Isle was protected by a one-way teleportation barrier that extended far out to sea, and was surrounded by a massive storm that circled the Island for miles—and never quit raging. The waters were filled with were-sharks and sahuagin and razor-sharp coral reefs. It was a place where Greyhawk City sent those prisoners too dangerous to keep in its dungeons.
Now that was a horse of a different color. The guards came back into the courtroom, and all of us were paralyzed by magic, as they proceeded to brand each of us on the right shoulder with the glyph for murderer. Since Arminas had been so wise as to actually threaten the magistrate, they also burnt out his right eye. And then we were teleported away.
We reappeared on a sandy beach, all seven of us together (the ranger, the paladin, the halfling thief, myself, the cleric of St. Cuthbert, a half-elf druid/MU, and the gnome illusionist). And with us there was a crate. Opening the crate, we discovered several suits of studded leather armor, chain mail, an assortment of weapons, three holy symbols, and two spellbooks. And a parchment letter from Mordy.
You have my apologizes for the deceptions and for the trials which you must now undergo. It has come to my attention, however, that the final key in the grand scheme which you have been investigating lies upon the Isle of the Damned. While I am well capable of traveling there and retrieving the item, it would consume time that I cannot spare from other duties. I have chosen you to retrieve this item (followed by a long description of exactly what we were looking for). Once you have discovered the rod, journey to the ancient ruins overlooking the escarpment on the north face of the Isle. Within, you will find the means to escape the Isle and return to Greyhawk City. The portal will only function should one of your number possess the rod. I await your return—M.
The dirty rat. And at that point, the parchment burst into flames, so that we would have no evidence of the Archmage’s intervention.
NONE of the gear was magical in any way. So here we were, 8th and 9th level characters, trapped on this island and having to undertake yet another quest to gain our freedom. But we weren’t alone. Remember, the Isle of the Damned was Greyhawk City’s exile prison. No, it was filled with cutthroats and murderers and rapists and the worst of the worst criminal elements. And it was divided up into different gang territories.
We tried to get off (the Isle, stop thinking those dirty thoughts!) via magical means, but our druid/MU tragically discovered just how effective the teleportation barrier was when he attempted to cast that spell. He vanished and then reappeared—fused with his fox familiar. So, from that point on, our druid was a half-human, half-elf, half-fox druid/magic-user who had a bushy red tail, a fox’s whiskers, an elongated snout filled with sharp teeth, fur covering half his body, and a rapidly deteriorating mind! He was a hoot!
It took us two bloody years of campaigning to find that damned rod and make our way to the ruins!
Along the way, the paladin and Arminas (in character; as players we were good friends) found their relationship growing more and more strained; especially after we discovered the Eye of Vecna. And since I had an empty socket . . . well, you can guess what happened next. She was getting more and more agitated with how my particular brand of diplomacy went: if some bandit gang attacked us, they died. All of them, their heads impaled on stakes to warn the other bandits not to trifle with us; even those who surrendered.
She really had a problem with that. I pointed out to her that—unlike us—the other denizens of the Isle had committed heinous crimes and were sent here as justice. They were the real condemned criminals and their lives were forfeit under all systems of justice in the Flaness. And the rest of the party agreed, the more so after most of bandit gangs began to leave us alone. But then we found the Eye and I popped it into place.
And she immediately attacked me! Well, after the party restrained her, I began to taunt her, asking why she, a Paladin of Heironious no less, would attack a person who posed no threat to her, who aided her, who had not betrayed her? Who fought at her side, who had prevented her rape? Who watched over her while she slept? And attacked, with lethal force, no less, for making use of an item that would drive any other member of the group towards evil. I, Arminas said, am already evil, and I have no qualms about using this artifact to aid us in leaving this horrid, diseased, dirty little island in the middle of nowhere. Arminas asked her, where is the justice in your actions, Sonandra? What would the Archpaladin, the Valorous Knight, her own sworn deity, make of such actions by his champion?
And she—the player—was so mad that she blurted it out then and there. I don’t give a damn what He wants! I’ll see you dead, you evil scum!
And then her eyes went wide (the player’s) and she started to back-track, but Steve was having none of that. An Avatar of Heironious suddenly appeared in the stroke of a lightning bolt (gods not being subject to the teleportation barrier, after all) and frowned upon his champion, his paladin. Needless to say, he was not pleased. He lectured her, and he reminded her that I was just as much a part of the Church of the Twins as she was—and he told her that her actions required punishment. She was stripped of her power’s as a paladin then and there.
But then his stern gaze softened. And he told her that one transgression, even one of this magnitude, would not end his love for her. She would be given an opportunity to atone, to redeem herself in his eyes. And he told us what Mordy (that rat-fink!) had not: the ruins were protected by a band of vampires!
They guarded not only the portal, but an ancient sword, a holy sword. He then charged her to find and recover the sword and to dispatch the Undead—and if she was successful, he would restore to her those powers he had just stripped away. And then before he left, he turned a stern glare in my direction and chastised me for provoking her! Arminas merely bowed and said, forgive my Lord, I was unaware that simple speech was an adequate provocation for a lethal attack. And he frowned. Soon, he said, the Church United would find its usefulness at an end, and then I (Arminas) would be forced to choose the side on which I would stand. And he glowered: if you choose wrong, then my champion will end your evil ways.
And he left.
So, we would spend another year (in real-life) searching the Isle, and then assaulting the vampire stronghold in the ruins to earn our freedom. But that, my friends, is another story.
Sure, it could have been just as fun if I had played Lawful Neutral. But in that party, at that time, I think the tension created by my evil character and the rest of the group made the story Steve was creating work better. What about in your worlds? In your games? How do you deal with players that want to play an intelligent, thoughtful, evil character?
Master Arminas
Last edited by masterarminas on Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
That's an entertaining story, Masterarminas. Sounds like a lot of fun. Now, to answer your question...
I have only ever played one evil character - a female Drow witch (Dungeon #114 version) who served Lolth with eventual plans to supplant her as the goddess of the Drow. It was a party of friends in college and, as yours did, the DM for that group didn't allow anyone to see anyone else's character sheet (and we kept them extremely secret). Because this incarnation of the witch character class received bonus spells based upon her Intelligence score as a cleric receives bonus spells for a high Wisdom and because she was a Drow and a female one at that, she could cast a total of nine (9) spells per day at 1st level. None of us knew what level the other characters were. She had only 3 hit points and purchased two war dogs (Doberman Pinchers) to protect her. She could have been destroyed easily by any other party member in a single attack, but I played her as haughty, pretending that she was much higher level than she appeared. She demanded that the other party members worship her as a goddess and held an especial hatred for the female theif-acrobat in the party since her comeliness was almost as high as my witch's.
It was lots of fun, but several things applied that made it work. First, everybody was afraid of starting a fight they couldn't win because nobody knew how much power any other member of the party truly had. (I'm sure the DM let some players bring in characters that were already higher than 1st level.) None of us let the others know the full extent of our powers. (My witch never used her charming powers on NPCs unless she was alone, so the other players never knew just how dangerous those special spells of hers were to them.) As a result, we all focused, mostly, on gaining more personal power, which resulted in us acting like a disfunctional team. Secondly, our characters were all evil, so no one was in a position to get angry at another player for playing their character like a jerk. Believe it or not, I only agreed to play an evil character in that one party because I realized as a DM, my bad guys were boring. I wanted to try to understand why evil people chose to be evil so that, as a storyteller, my BBEGs would be more interesting.
I did play in two other parties (one low-level and one high-level) where I played a 'good' character and other players characters were 'evil'. Those had some fun situations, but they never ended well because evil inevitably betrays the good unless the good strike first.
You offered two rules for playing evil characters and making the adventure work, but it seems to me that those rules work only for Lawful Evil characters. How do you play a Chaotic Evil or Neutral Evil character that always keeps his or her word and never betrays a fellow party member? That would not be in keeping with the character's alignment. So, if you are correct, it can't be done with Chaotic or Neutrally evil characters. (Chaotic Neutral characters would be just as bad for the same reasons. )
In addition to being leery of evil parties from a player's perspective, I have no interest in DMing a party with any evil characters in it. Evil people are not heroes. To me, the game is about heroic individuals defeating evil to promote weal for all. Anyone that might find it enjoyable to pretend to promote woe (via murder, plundering, rape, torture, theft, the spreading of disease, etc.) is probably a little bit insane, in my book. I find no enjoyment in those things or in overseeing a game wherein such actions are the goal. So, no. I don't think evil parties work well at all.
Last night was game night. I was DM. Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan - not in the mode of tournament, but as a ruin in part of larger expedition to the Amedio. Updated to 3.5. Party - mostly evil, one true neutral, utilizing some features of Book of Vile Darkness and other sources. Players all adults, and it was they who decided their party composition at the beginning of the campaign.
ROOM 43, in which there is a pool that will transmute objects dipped into it a second time into gold (only for 20 minutes). One player plays his chaotic evil soulblade truly chaotic and rolls to decide what action his player will take. Puts his hand in the pool a first time and sees nothing happen. Second player has his neutral evil fighter/rogue put his hand in first, then to my surprise has the character dunk his head in the pool. This second character turns to solid gold as indicated in the module upon touching the pool a second time.
In light of all this the other party members begin dunking objects into the pool. The remains of a defeated black pudding are gathered/mopped up and dunked in the pool. A genuine discussion arises about dunking the druid's animal companion (an ape) into the pool. The player whose character was solid gold and presumably dead is not disappointed, but pondering the possible outcomes of a reincarnation spell / or coming back through create undead - the thought of simply raising dead/resurrection is not even on the table. He is viewing his character's death is an opportunity. Later of course the gold transmutation wears off (and I decide the effect on living creatures to be similar to a flesh to stone/stone to flesh so the gold character yet lives).
This party works because the players have played the game before, and in putting this party together they wished to do something completely different. Role-playing these villains is what is entertaining to them. Even the fact that their characters are shunned in civilized areas is appealing - because it is a new way for them to play the game. It is the player's who have decided their evil characters will cooperate toward their mutual advantage (though the chaotic one apparently changes goals with the dice).
The challenge as DM has been to have NPCs react to such villains in a genuine fashion outside of combat. Even if the party is keeping a low profile in a city, what should happen when a paladin walks by and detects the concentrated evil of the party though the party is breaking no law at the moment? Under what circumstances would a settlement allow them to remain? Even more intriguing to me has been examining the sort of settlements that would allow them to reside - whether slaver holds like Highport or the debauched cities of the former Great Kingdom.
Another challenge I have had is seeding distrust between the evil PCs. They are cooperating a bit too well, for a group of deceitful serial killers and death priests. I will be passing notes a bit more often to players - with sufficient red hearings.
Hello, all. Over on the pathfinder boards here http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz508x?Evil-parties-how-they-fail-and-how-to-fix-it we are engaged in a discussion about how evil characters within a party, or even an evil aligned party, can possibly function.
It was the game that was perhaps the most fun-filled I have every played in. Because I remembered two very important rules for playing evil: don’t do it to your fellow players unless they really deserve it (and even then, keep it non-lethal), and always keep your word so they know they can trust you, even if they hate your character’s guts. He never betrayed them, and he never broke his sworn word, although he was a right bastard at times. His evil he reserved for his foes that deserved it, not for his own companions.
And that, my friends, is the key to playing evil well.
What about in your worlds? In your games? How do you deal with players that want to play an intelligent, thoughtful, evil character?
Master Arminas
I agree they certainly add a new dynamic to the group and challenges for the DM. IMO, it is imperative the DM and the player playing are on the same page, otherwise the group goes south fast.
My "old group I have now" played predominantly good character types. The "new beardlings" (learned that one last night on Greytalk hehe) lean more strongly toward the CN LN N varieties. This has led to a "lackadaisical" philosophy about the "war" that the "elders don't have. So I have had to instill a "sense of responsibility" to restore "balance" in my CN LN bunch, because even Fharlanghn knows that the "balance" needs to be restored. Post war GH is decidedly darker (even more so in my campaign because it ravaged on for 20years) Funny how that tends to work even in our own world, the neutrals / liberals only get involved when its starts effecting them:grin:
SirXaris wrote:
I played a 'good' character and other players characters were 'evil'. Those had some fun situations, but they never ended well because evil inevitably betrays the good unless the good strike first.
Too true here as well, hence the birth of my "namesake avatar here" I was left by a party fleeing a black dragon. we were questing for the hand of Vecna, but at the time found the dragon... bad things ensued... the party fled, trapping me behind their enchantments along the way. I managed to survive (unbeknownst to the group at the time) by cutting a deal with said dragon (but that's another story). Needless to say I did manage to find the "hand" with the dragons aid, and through its corruption now have some "abandonment & revenge issues" (see Phill Collins Something in the Air for reference haha), that was my only thrust into playing a PC evil. I have, since those days almost solely DM'd and have since converted "Galen" to the Status of Sublime Nemesis for my PCs over the last 20yrs.
SirXaris wrote:
You offered two rules for playing evil characters and making the adventure work, but it seems to me that those rules work only for Lawful Evil characters. How do you play a Chaotic Evil or Neutral Evil character that always keeps his or her word and never betrays a fellow party member? That would not be in keeping with the character's alignment. So, if you are correct, it can't be done with Chaotic or Neutrally evil characters. (Chaotic Neutral characters would be just as bad for the same reasons. )
In addition to being leery of evil parties from a player's perspective, I have no interest in DMing a party with any evil characters in it. Evil people are not heroes. To me, the game is about heroic individuals defeating evil to promote weal for all. Anyone that might find it enjoyable to pretend to promote woe (via murder, plundering, rape, torture, theft, the spreading of disease, etc.) is probably a little bit insane, in my book. I find no enjoyment in those things or in overseeing a game wherein such actions are the goal. So, no. I don't think evil parties work well at all.
SirXaris
I have to agree with SirXaris assessment here, The volatility of a CE and NE PC within the group ( if mixed alignments) is too acidic and seems to consume the group rather than the opponents the DM can muster.
In closing, I would add, that the most powerful thing that separates the Good Hero from the Bad one is group unity. Its tough to keep that with an evil group if the alignments are done correctly. The dynamics of the extremes tend to eliminate the weaker or the competition in-order to advance leading to mistrust. Or to quote a wise "sage" "Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate; hate leads to suffering. The dark side are these. It is quicker, more seductive, not more powerful". The true power of the hero comes from devotion to the cause, and to his group. The group is often stronger than the pieces that make it up.
Well said, all. In answer to SirXaris (and everyone who agrees with him), I actually agree as well. Chaotic Evil, Chaotic Neutral, and (to a lesser extent) Neutral Evil are very difficult and challenging alignments that should be played only by a mature, experienced player. I, for one, have never played one of those three alignments. Never. Not since I started playing '86.
Lawful Evil is far easier to fit into a party, especially a party that is predominately good or neutral in alignment. And even that poses a challenge to both DM and all of the players at the table. But, if done correctly, it can be a very rewarding experience that intensifies the role-playing, while still having a group that can cooperate.
I've run and played in evil games at times since I started back in 1st Ed. Evil parties need some framework to make them work well together. Often for the ones I've been involved in this has been a thieves or assassins guild. The Horned Society worked well for this too, especially since there was very little data on them back in the 80's and they were centrally located. Any patron will do as long as they have some way of maintaining control and some way of rewarding the players.
The other way is a bit harder. An evil group left to it's own devices will often turn on it's own at the drop of a hat. Especially at lower levels where the fighter-types have a distinct advantage (and usually lower INT and WIS scores to play). Short term gains from taking out other members for their loot happen. But at some point a balance is usually reached where the characters are making enough money that capping each other for their gear isn't worth the danger of being a man down if one of their (often rapidly increasing number of) enemies hunts them down before I allow the replacement character to come in. Soon after that the group often starts to fragment socially, as the characters spend their down time apart more often (on their own schemes with their own minions), develop their own strongholds, and piss off even more people than they did as a single unit. They still come together to adventure and fight off their enemies but at this point it often goes into a very political play mode simply because they are too well know for their great villainy to operate openly and in a group outside a dungeon.
Usually a couple of them will finally come up with a grand plot for world domination (or something equally insane), talk (or more likely bribe) the rest into joining up, and then set into motion something truly awful. Which if you look at the powers arrayed against them in most cases has no legitimate chance of success. After all the plotting, set-up, and preparation they launch their attack...and so far every one has been defeated in the end by the NPCs Greyhawk can throw at a bunch of usurpers/genocidal monsters/Cthulhu summoners. Admitted, the one time we took over the Wild Coast for almost four years. Till the orcs, elves, and humans all decided we had to go. We probably could have kept on the Pomjar's good side, but there's this old ruined city on an island in a volcanic crater we REALLY wanted to rule from...
There is ONE big exception to the evil party=backstabbing rule. If all of them go LE and worship the same god they can get almost all the bennies of group cooperation and act like amoral monsters pretty much at will, especially against unbelievers. If your players do this watch out, because they are already plotting something massive. So either keep them very busy or try not to look surprised when they whip out their insidious master plan...
There is ONE big exception to the evil party=backstabbing rule. If all of them go LE and worship the same god they can get almost all the bennies of group cooperation and act like amoral monsters pretty much at will, especially against unbelievers. If your players do this watch out, because they are already plotting something massive. So either keep them very busy or try not to look surprised when they whip out their insidious master plan...
This makes perfect sense. I think history shows that Lawful Evil can cooperate with itself for a common goal. That doesn't mean it would be fun for me to play or DM such a group, but perhaps others might find it enjoyable.
I am reading Bernard Cornwell's The Last Kingdom. It is an historical fiction novel about the Dane's near conquest of England and Alfred the Great's eventual victory over them. It, and other books I've read like it, puts the attitudes of the vikings in a peculiar light from my modern ethical perspective. They are very loyal and loving to their own (in a rough manner), but have no qualms about pillaging, raping, enslaving, and slaughtering anyone not part of their Danish (viking) culture. This seems very Chaotic Neutral to me and may make for a fun campaign if all the players and the DM were interested in it.
While I've mostly played good characters, I did once play an evil character (Kalath, an elven ranger) back in 1.5e (a hybrid of 1e and 2e). He started out as lawful neutral, but the DM decided that my character's alignment should shift to evil after my character killed a group of commoners. In my character's defense, the commoners had led my party into an ambush by bandits--after we slew the bandits, Kalath went back to the commoners and killed them for their treachery. That was probably his most overt act of... morally flexible... behavior.
I took the alignment shift in stride, and played him up as extremely honorable (almost stereotypically samurai-like in that respect) and merciless to those that wronged him. Not that he couldn't be forgiving if the offending party was actually interested in seeking forgiveness. And he really never sweated petty insults--acknowledging such was beneath him. He was always a team player and would never think of betraying his fellow party members or other allies. He could be pretty ruthless (and occasionally acted as an assassin for his people), but he typically bowed to the other party members more-delicate natures out of respect.
I think the big thing is that I didn't play him as a 2 dimensional ZOMG...EVILLLE!!! cartoon. I let his culture and beliefs inform me as to who he would act. Really, it was a fun character.
The interesting thing is that during character creation my friend and I rolled the same exact stats (4d6, drop the lowest, placed in order). Because of the statistical oddity, we decided that our characters were twins. He wanted to play a grey elf, while I was going to play a drow-equivalent* (at my DM's behest, actually--so no Drizzt remarks) though, so we decided our characters were half-bloods of each strain, but his character used the grey elf adjustments from UA and I used the drow adjustments--explaining that our characters favored each particular strain. The explanation of our weird parentage was left rather... murky.
*In my DM's campaign there were no actual drow. Instead, the ghost elves, as they were widely known, were LN (with evil tendencies) that venerated an Archdevil. Instead of black skin, they tended towards a sickly pale greyish color and hair ranged from white to ashen grey. However, they used the same racial adjustments as drow in UA. The DM had created a really basic framework of lawful dark elves and where they lived. He wanted me to play one to flesh them out--and I really went all out with that, creating the deity/devil they worshiped, a back story and such. It was really fun.
...It was the game that was perhaps the most fun-filled I have every played in. Because I remembered two very important rules for playing evil: don’t do it to your fellow players unless they really deserve it (and even then, keep it non-lethal), and always keep your word so they know they can trust you, even if they hate your character’s guts. By following those two simple rules I was able to play Arminas until he reached 14th level in ’94. And I enjoyed every minute of it, along with the people with whom I played. He never betrayed them, and he never broke his sworn word, although he was a right bastard at times. His evil he reserved for his foes that deserved it, not for his own companions.
And that, my friends, is the key to playing evil well.
-EGG once said that Good does not equal Stupid. Neither does Evil. Evil is also not synonymous with Homicidal Maniac.
masterarminas wrote:
...Along the way, the paladin and Arminas (in character; as players we were good friends) found their relationship growing more and more strained...
...she—the player—was so mad that she blurted it out then and there. I don’t give a damn what He wants! I’ll see you dead, you evil scum!
-All in character is the key, I'd say.
BTW, I'll second everyone else's assessment: Neat Story!
Free_City_Assassin wrote:
...There is ONE big exception to the evil party=backstabbing rule. If all of them go LE and worship the same god they can get almost all the bennies of group cooperation and act like amoral monsters pretty much at will, especially against unbelievers. If your players do this watch out, because they are already plotting something massive. So either keep them very busy or try not to look surprised when they whip out their insidious master plan...
-I'm not sure that it even requires the same deity.
I've haven't done it, but I've toyed with the idea of a Scarlet Brotherhood based party, although I guess that their racial ideology would take the place of religion. I think the Scarlet Brotherhood book covers it well.
SirXaris wrote:
I am reading Bernard Cornwell's The Last Kingdom. It is an historical fiction novel about the Dane's near conquest of England and Alfred the Great's eventual victory over them. It, and other books I've read like it, puts the attitudes of the vikings in a peculiar light from my modern ethical perspective. They are very loyal and loving to their own (in a rough manner), but have no qualms about pillaging, raping, enslaving, and slaughtering anyone not part of their Danish (viking) culture. This seems very Chaotic Neutral to me and may make for a fun campaign if all the players and the DM were interested in it.
SirXaris
-The Cold Barbarians are generally listed as Chaotic Neutral (with a tilt to CE in Dragon #5-whatever in the language article), but the historical Vikings (who weren't necessarily typical Norsemen) would have been more Neutral with CE tendencies.
Azzy1974 wrote:
...While I've mostly played good characters, I did once play an evil character (Kalath, an elven ranger) back in 1.5e (a hybrid of 1e and 2e). He started out as lawful neutral, but the DM decided that my character's alignment should shift to evil after my character killed a group of commoners. In my character's defense, the commoners had led my party into an ambush by bandits--after we slew the bandits, Kalath went back to the commoners and killed them for their treachery. That was probably his most overt act of... morally flexible... behavior...
FWIW, I'd say that your DM screwed up. If the commoners deliberately led Kalath's party into an ambush and he killed them for their treachery, that wouldn't have tilted him into Evil. Chaotic perhaps, if there were some legal way of dealing with them, but not Evil. Of course, maybe there's more to the story.
Problem with an evil group is that you never really get stuff done. It's fun for a while and a great way to blow off steam (after say a long day at school or work). But what do you really accomplish?
My old groups used to be evil and we'd ride into towns and start fights, kill the townsfolk, animate their corpses, move on to another town and do it all again. We even had contests to see who could kill people in the most creative ways. We even came up with a thing called 'money for the poor', which consisted of our characters going into a town (equipped with girdles of giant strength, gloves of ogre power, etc) and when a beggar came up and said, "please...money for the poor", then we'd use our augmented strength to fling copper at the beggar and thus shredding his body to pieces.
After a while all this just got old. Even when DM's tried to rein us in and make us go thru an actual campaign we never finished because we'd backstab and steal from each other and then the players would get all pissed off at each other.
As a DM I run mixed groups of good and neutral, but no evil. Now there are times when a good or neutral player does an evil act (either voluntarily or involuntarily) and then there are reprecussions.
This adventure path might provide a good model for parties of cooperative evil PCs. I must admit that I do not own it / have not played it, but the reviews have been good.
The only time any evil characters have featured in my campaign is when one put on a helm of opposite alignment. The character was Chaotic Neutral, so he could have gone Lawful Good or Lawful Evil. Of course he went Lawful Evil. This fighter proceeded to be challenged by an upstart in the party. This event occurred while the adventurers were on a quest in the jungles of Hepmonaland in the service of a merchant consortium of the Iron League. Well, the newly Lawful Evil fighter didn't take all that well to the the upstart taking liberties with what he considered to be the long-standing group members' possessions when all but those two we laid out by a pack of weretigers. One thing led to another, and when they rest of the PCs were healed up enough to be active again, they found the upstart's beheaded body. Oops. No raise dead possible, and the cleric has just become 9th level prior to then adventure. Shucks!
The other PCs sort of reacted badly to that, and so sent the fighter back to the ship they had sailed on and told him to stay there- he was cast out of the party. The fighter's final words- "When we meet again, it will not be as friends." When the Lawful Evil fighter got to the ship though, he told the ship's captain that the rest of the PCs had been wiped out by feral savages who would likely be coming to attack the ship itself next. They should get the heck out of there. The Captain, being loyal to his superiors' cause, sent the now Lawful Evil fighter back into the jungle with a dozen hardened marines to look for survivors. Well, when they were a couple of miles into the jungle, the fighter attacked the marines and killed them all, being somewhat wounded by them in the process. He then returned to the ship by evening, running out of the jungle and yelling for the ship to make sail, as the marines were all dead and he had barely managed to escape an ambush by the feral savages. At this point the captain agreed, and reluctantly set sail for home, not looking forward to telling his superiors that the entire venture was a failure. The other PCs were now stranded in Hepmonaland.
But the captain needn't have worried, as only a few days journey north of Hepmonaland, his ship was attacked by a Scarlet Brotherhood man-o-war, and in the thick of the ship to ship fighting, our newly Lawful Evil fighter, who just so happened to have a good portion of Suel blood, did turn on the Onnwalian vessel's crew and did butcher a great many of them, including the captain. After killing few Scarlet Brotherhood fools who persisted in testing the obviously skilled Lawful Evil fighter, the Scarlet Brotherhood captain decided that perhaps here was a tool that could be made use of, and so took him on as a member of his crew.
The ship sailed back to Shar eventually, and it is there that things really developed. The Lawful Evil fighter became a part of a special "strike force", which in reality was just an adventuring party of varied specialists, just like any adventuring party is. However, as many adventuring parties merely wander about seeking adventure and do-gooding, this group had specific tasks that it was sent to accomplish. The group was composed of many non-pure Suel, and as such were seen as less than citizens and so expendable tools to be used. The group was headed up by three pure Suel- a Priestess of Wee Jas and two pure Suel twin brothers(a Monk and a Fighter). Rounding out the group were a dual-classed Fighter/Priest of Pyremius(Suel-Oeridian), a half-orc Assassin(Suel-Orc), a Wizard(Suel-Flan), an Invoker(Suel-Oeridian, and a diabolist), and the newly lawful evil Fighter(Suel-Oeridian). The blended blood was there for reason- to more easily mix into societies outside of Shar, and this they did with great skill.
The varied backgrounds of the individuals also resulted in there being a ton of tension among most of the group, and yet they were not actively seeking to kill each other. That was for a very good reason. They had all been to Shar and seen what the place was like and how it was ruled. Also, they had become somewhat aware of how far-reaching the influence of the Scarlet Brotherhood really was, and also knew rather well what fate traitors met with. As they were all effectively agents of Shar, contributing to the death of another group member, whether directly or indirectly, would be viewed as treachery and punishable by death, the group managed to function. Just more than half of the characters were NPCs, which made things more manageable, but the tension was still palpable. Lots of barking went on, but no biting. Only the three pure Suel were never screwed with by the others(for obvious reasons).
Eventually the group lost all but three of its members, as they were given the most heinous of missions to accomplish. Members of the team went on a few of the classic adventures, two being the Ghost Tower of Inverness(yes, the SB has the Soulgem in my campaign), and another being the Tomb of the Lizard King(that one turned out particularly great).
So, you can play an evil party that doesn't just gut itself, if they are given the right parameters in which to operate. This group was mostly Lawful Evil, but even Chaotic Evil and Neutral Evil groups could be made to function well, as there is one thing that every single evil individual fears- retribution from those they serve/those that are more powerful than they are. If the entire group is basically masterless, then issues are more likely to arise, but then the DM and players should know that and take it into account when considering running a group entirely made of of evil alignments, especially a group made up of character with differing evil alignments. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
Good players can play a evil character. I found in my many, many, many years of gaming, the better the player is, the more experienced the player has,he or she can play "the bad guy" with-in a group.
With new players, when their given the task of "your the bad guy" he or she will start a bar fight just because he's the bad guy, attack a guard just because he's the bad guy, and so on.
IMO, knowing your players and knowing how they play is KEY! If you can trust a player not to go around killing peasents at every turn, why not let him wear the black cowboy hat.
We have a NE Druid in my campaign. He's certainly got the party's back, but for years he operated under the delusion that as long as he murdered even(ish) numbers of both good and evil, lawful and chaotic types he was "maintaining the balance".
The final straw was his slaughtering of an entire settlement of Lawful Good creatures because he couldn't understand them and they objected to him invading their domain (in the shape of a black dragon...)? No problem right? Maintaining the Balance?
No. Wanton disregard for life. Alignment shift to evil. Yes. Playable? Certainly. He was still friends with the party and had their back, no problem.
I've played and seen played (but not DM'd) full parties of evil characters, a la a "gang". Works OK for dungeon crawls, or other adventures where good vs. evil isn't the main thrust of the plotline. An adventure specifically created with an evil party in mind is probably the best fit.
It gets a old pretty quickly though. Once you've had the opportunity to do all the things that have crossed your mind while playing other alignments, the thrill is gone.
I've seen parties with a single evil character; those usually don't end well. It's not that it doesn't produce some funny/interesting stories sometimes, but in my experience, it lessens the overall enjoyment of everyone else (non-evil) at the table. They didn't really want that experience going in, and often resent it. And character-wise, things almost always come to a head.
I suspect some people want to play an evil character because they see all these cool evil-aligned magic items that get destroyed, and think of how cool it would actually be to use them.
And as a final thought, an evil mage is only OK until he/she can cast animate dead. That spell can really wreck an adventure. _________________ The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed, in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a wide-spread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible. - Bertrand Russell
This thread is too long and my reply will no doubt make it longer for my current time constraints. However, please excuse me, I wanted to reply to it in order to bookmark it without adding it to my favorites.
I've been in and ran evil groups my entire gaming career and I want to come back to this thread when my time allows so that I may contribute.
Food for thought though; "Evil doesn't always have to show its face." _________________ Kneel before me, or you shall be KNELT!
One of the most memorable and long-lasting characters in my campaigns was a Lawful Evil fighter surrounded by do-gooders. As long as there was a goal needing to be accomplished that affected his interests directly, he could function. He was just a serious jerk 25 hours a day, but the long game was what kept the group dynamic from failing completely. The guy played his alignment beautifully.
Chaotic Good character, especially Elves, just drove him to distraction and longwinded rants like "You're a bunch of weak-willed, unmotivated, idealistic, harebrained simpering little girls crying about their feelings and the rights of people who just two minutes ago were trying to cut your heads off."
Dealing with Lawful Good was always fun for him. "You guys have it half right. There has to be order. There has to be a leader who leads and followers to follow. What you have wrong is that you think everyone is going to happily work together without some a carrot and a stick. You do the right things, you'll be rewarded. You do the wrong things and you get ejected from the group, and the ejectee knows too much about our business to be allowed to walk out alive. I have no time for debating some nonsense about conscience and morality because we have a job to do. Grab your gear and get prepared, because failure has consequences."
It was never easy. He pushed the other PCs (and players) pretty hard and deserved all the grief he got from them. Eventually, he fell to Lawful Neutral for reasons not of his doing, but he never stopped being a pompous jerk.
I have a 14th level Neutral Evil Mage/Warlock(Witch) from 2e. He traveled extensively with an all-good party. His best friend (and eventual co-ruler) is a priest of Heironeous. This worked well for us for several reasons.
Firstly, my character was not evil for the sake of evil. Too many players (and DMs) get wrapped into the thought that anyone who is evil has a sociopathic blood-lust. Evil can simply denote a tendency to selfish behavior or a general disregard for the absolute sanctity of all life. Jon Jon had no qualms about consorting with demons, devils, and other undesirable other-planar creatures to accomplish his goals. Torture was a tool like any weapon. However, he never committed any of these questionable acts in view of any "Good" characters. And while his goals generally leaned toward a neutral good outlook he wasn't above grabbing some personal power whenever possible.
Secondly, we were all dedicated to a common over-all goal; the security of our homeland. In any medieval style game land is equated with power and even (and especially) evil characters want to gain power/land. Although Jon Jon craved it he was never the type who wanted to "Rule the Universe" as a dictator/tyrant. He was content to be appointed Vizier and rule from behind the throne (he had magical studies to make time for).
Thirdly, and probably most-importantly, he had found a ring of mind shielding early on that allowed him to conceal his alignment. He became OCD about making sure it was always on and well hidden.
Most of the adventuring group never knew his true alignment and many (including the Heironean Priest) would have laid down their lives for him because he had proven his worth time and again. Fortunately we were never put into a position where he had to choose between his life and that of a "friend" because Jon Jon has no real friends and values his own life above all others.
I played him for two years through the boxed-set Night Below and he allowed us avenues of play that would have been almost impossible without him; mostly in the form of alliances with presumably evil NPC groups. Albeit their "helping" us had to be subtle and they couldn't be seen by the other party members.
Welcome to Canonfire! JonJon. That sounds like some workable advice on how to play an evil character in a good party.
Now, get over to the Welcome to Canonfire forum and introduce yourself properly so that Eastboro's sheriff, Natqaun, can have your name and location catalogued into Sir Xaris' black book of Greyhawk BBEGs.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises
)
