Post/Author/DateTime	Post
lesliweird 12-30-05, 02:38 PM	I'm probably going to end up DMing soon, and one of my players is practically vibrating with the desire to play an evil cleric. This makes me a little leery of the proposition, but he's really pushing hard for an evil campaign. Now if I give them a base and some ammount of power which they could lose (along with their lives) if they start playing chaotic stupid (hey, if they want to be evil, I see no reason I shouldn't be as well), it seems like it could work in a way that doesn't devolve into random murder, and it might be kind of fun, but it's alway seemed like parties where people weren't at least half good don't seem to last long. I know personally the few times I've played evil the novelty of it has worn off pretty fast. I plan to talk to all my players and see how they feel about it, but I'm not 100% sure I could make this work. Any tips? Advice? Words of encouragement? Warnings? Anectdotes?
Lord Ian Stark 12-30-05, 02:43 PM	Well much like the Kender post on here, it all depends on the players to make it work. The majority of the time it will fail because thier alignment gets in the way of the adventure. Make the PC's have to work together. Otherwise they probrably won't and will end up tearing each other up from within.
Myrdinn 12-30-05, 02:49 PM	I've never played an Evil campaign, but my players and I played a set of three Evil adventures as a one-off thing. Our Tiefling Warlock captured a group of kobalds which he enslaved, our juvinile Green dragon razed sevral villages :evillaugh and we were wanted in two countries. The party was evenually hunted down and killed by knights. Bloody Do-gooders! ;) Evil campaigns are fun as long as they are handled properly.
HerbalTea 12-30-05, 02:54 PM	Well much like the Kender post on here, it all depends on the players to make it work. The majority of the time it will fail because thier alignment gets in the way of the adventure. Make the PC's have to work together. Otherwise they probrably won't and will end up tearing each other up from within. But that's incredibly fun to watch! After preparing for eons, there is nothing like seeing the very people that are the reason for your hard work completely and utterly destroying each other! Unless of course you are planning to have them tossed around by some manifestation in the near future, in which case you probably should devise some cunning way to prevent them from locking horns.
Leibel 12-30-05, 02:56 PM	It depends on the players - if they see an evil campaign as an excuse to backstab it will fail(this can happen to good and neutral campaigns too). Personally I would say judge your players and their ability to avoid backstabbing and try to make it LE where Law counters the backstabbing tendancy of evil.
the burrfoot 12-30-05, 02:58 PM	I 'm going to be running an 18th level evil campaign soon. The PC's are going to be working for a Duke of Hell. If any of the players in the party decide to be chaotic evil what will the Duke think of this in terms of the Blood War thing? Would he still recruit the PC or would he brutally murder him on sight? What kind of threats could i come up with to make them do as the Duke says? What is the motivation of evil PC's what can I do to manipulate them?
the burrfoot 12-30-05, 03:01 PM	not to steal your parade starter of the thread :( sorry i didnt realize until i posted. So you can use some of the suggestions for your evil campaign to ok?
imperialjunkie 12-30-05, 03:03 PM	Evil sucks. I've never played in or DMed an evil campaign, and I never will. The closest I've ever gotten to playing an evil character is in the Knights of the Old Republic video game. I tried the obligatory follow the Dark Side. Near the end where you have to kill some of your party members (including the juvenile blue chick) I leaned back and said, "This sucks. I don't like being evil." Then I quit the game and played a regular Light side Jedi again. I suppose that you can just have fun wantonly killing stuff if your focus is combat. But roleplaying wicked and vile deeds just isn't right in my opinion. This probably sounds wierd, but I think that there's something very spiritual about roleplaying. When you 'take on' the personality of an evil person and then act out evil stuff it does something to you. Or it reveals something about you. That's my opinion.
lesliweird 12-30-05, 03:16 PM	Actually my plan, if it came down to an evil campaign, was to make them all nobles (maybe some elite servants, but mostly nobles) of the same house. That set up means they have resources and a little clout to get away with being jerks, but they can't do anything atrocious anonymously and they still have a patriarch/matriarch who will actively work to prevent them bringing shame to the house or attention to their elicit dealings. I think at least once in that scenario I'd like to have them framed for something they didn't actually do, so that they have to clear their names and win back over the populace or other noble houses.
HerbalTea 12-30-05, 03:17 PM	Evil sucks. I've never played in or DMed an evil campaign, and I never will. The closest I've ever gotten to playing an evil character is in the Knights of the Old Republic video game. I tried the obligatory follow the Dark Side. Near the end where you have to kill some of your party members (including the juvenile blue chick) I leaned back and said, "This sucks. I don't like being evil." Then I quit the game and played a regular Light side Jedi again. I suppose that you can just have fun wantonly killing stuff if your focus is combat. But roleplaying wicked and vile deeds just isn't right in my opinion. This probably sounds wierd, but I think that there's something very spiritual about roleplaying. When you 'take on' the personality of an evil person and then act out evil stuff it does something to you. Or it reveals something about you. That's my opinion. That is a very interesting and consistent view, Imperial.
Dig 12-30-05, 03:32 PM	Evil doesnt work for me, They end up getting killed or killing each other. its a waste of time. seeing I only game once a week I want my game to be productive and directional. but on the other hand Being CE doesnt mean you kill farmers on sight, you might however see the daugther and raper her then kill the family if they discover you in the act. being CE dont mean you walk in to town and set it ablaze, run around rubbing you hands together. you might however find a unattended baby steal it and sacrifice it to whom ever your evil god is. John Wayne Gacy was CE if you can apply this to real life, and he was on the outside a normal person.
Molimo 12-30-05, 03:42 PM	Evil sucks. I've never played in or DMed an evil campaign, and I never will. The closest I've ever gotten to playing an evil character is in the Knights of the Old Republic video game. I tried the obligatory follow the Dark Side. Near the end where you have to kill some of your party members (including the juvenile blue chick) I leaned back and said, "This sucks. I don't like being evil." Then I quit the game and played a regular Light side Jedi again. That was a pretty unnecessary spoiler right there. Evil campaigns can work fine as long as you keep your PCs from killing each other (which shouldn't be hard unless you're DM'ing 8-year-olds) and as long as you aren't trying to railroad them. Part of the fun of an evil campaign is the vast variety of options that the players have open to them that aren't available in a good campaign; as long as you keep those options open, it can be a great campaign.
Asmodeous_IX 12-30-05, 03:44 PM	Im running one myself and getting the party to work together takes some.............. work to say the least. Mainly let them know that working as a party and co operating will make them all ritcher and more powerful in the end... ah Greed my favorate sin
imperialjunkie 12-30-05, 03:57 PM	That was a pretty unnecessary spoiler right there. Was it really? Let's take a look. I plan to talk to all my players and see how they feel about it, but I'm not 100% sure I could make this work. Any tips? Advice? Words of encouragement? Warnings? Anectdotes? Notice OP's question (emphasis mine). Notice that my post included my advice (Don't play evil campaign), warning (I think it is unhealthy), and anecdote (my Knights of the Old Republic experience). I think that my post was thus appropriate given the request by the OP. Yes it was a spoiler, because I think that playing evil games is...well... evil. And I think the only reason you find it 'unnecessary' is that you don't agree with it. That's fine because it is your opinion. But your opinion does not restrict me from expressing mine within the limitations of the CoC. Have a good day. :) Edit: It's not my intent to be offensive or condescending at all. I just have strong opinions on this element of D&D and I share them from time to time.
Latro 12-30-05, 04:04 PM	I played in an evil campaign once and for as long as it lasted it was great fun. The party consisted of a cleric/dreadlord (?), rogue and monk/shadowdancer (me) all of lvl 12. I had about every feat/skill/item that was related to being stealthy and a ring to create a zone of silence when needed ... nobodu could here you scream when this shadow was slowly strangling you :D We were hired by some evil overlord type to stir things up in some goody-goody city of the opposition. I was an "outside resource", hired from an evil mercenary monk-cult thingie ... which ofcourse meant I was also worling on the hidden agenda of my order while doing the mission. Every night the shadow I had created would murder another family or person, create shadows of them and order them to hide in their own cellar or attic until the time was ready. ... I never thought up a suitable grand finale because we stopped playing before "the time was ready". Too bad, it was great fun walking behind people while hiding in their own shadow. We worked great as a group too.
Abulafia 12-30-05, 04:20 PM	It might be worthwhile to probe the player's reasons for wanting to play an evil campaign. A 'good' campaign can offer plenty of carnage, and a more mature 'neutral' campaign can offer a lot in the way of moral ambiguity, rejection of authority, and player-versus-player conflict. If the player wants to play an evil campaign so he can be a depraved sicko, torturing children, murdering innocents . . . I don't know, man. I'm kind of on imperialjunkie's wavelength there. Last year, my regular group thought it would be fun to play an evil campaign. Fair enough, I thought. I created a campaign world and we started rolling. There were all the usual elements, with an evil twist: little towns of decent people (to conquer and ruin), foul beings of darkness (to serve), and good and noble causes (to squash). After our fourth session, wherein the team kidnapped young women from town and delivered them to a demon for unsavory purposes, everyone (me especially) lost their stomach for it . . . and rightly so.
Cathon 12-30-05, 04:30 PM	I'm currently playing in an evil campaign that's kind of interesting. We are all playing evil humanoids. The way I play it there is simply no such thing as a moral decision. All decision are practical influenced by personal prejudice. One of my characters is the party cleric. He will heal the others, but generally in whatever order he thinks is most useful for his own survival. If he burns a scroll healing someone, he expects them to reimburse him for the cost of that scroll. My characters are lawful evil, and they are under orders to work with the others in the party, so it is pretty easy for them to stick together. The cleric even healed everyone in the party when they'd all dropped except him because he thought his chances of survival were better that way. To my mind, for an evil campaign to work there needs to be a reason for the party to work together and rewards for doing so. It helps to have some organization, BBEG or religion for the party to work for, too. This provides a good reason for the PCs to be working together, and if they break away from the organization later on, their former masters hunting them down is a good reason for them to stick together in self defense afterwards. In general replace any mission requiring the party to do something for the common good with the motivation, you will die horribly if you don't do this one thing. If the party ever gets powerful enough to be top dogs, than expect them to conquer, split the spoils of victory, and rule their own little evil realms, retire characters.
Vaalingrade Ashland 12-30-05, 05:12 PM	If the players' understanding stems only from Disney and the BoVD, then no, no its not. If they have common sense instead, then it can be an interesting and rewarding experience.
Good Agnostic 12-30-05, 05:18 PM	Booooo! Boooooo Evil! Booooo!
Azezel 12-30-05, 05:54 PM	There seeems to be a fundamental flaw in the concept of Evil some people in this thread are employing. That is, that an Evil party will only work together through compulsion or selfishness. Now, firstly, let's not forget that compulsion and selfishness can motivate Good and Neutral characters too, but that is not our point. Just because a PC is Evil, does that mean he has no friends? Can't an Evil party be bound together by friendship as strongly as a Good party? Alignment is the average of a PC's actions. An Evil PC is generaly cruel & selfish, but not all the time - amongst his friends and loved ones (and almost all Evil PC's will have some of these, no matter how black his heart) an Evil PC is likely quite a personable, even generous and kind chap. Even if this is not the case, an Evil PC can be motivated by forces other than coersion and greed.
Lord Ian Stark 12-30-05, 06:36 PM	Yes it was a spoiler, because I think that playing evil games is...well... evil. And I think the only reason you find it 'unnecessary' is that you don't agree with it. That's fine because it is your opinion. But your opinion does not restrict me from expressing mine within the limitations of the CoC. LOL Imperial, I think he's talking about spoling the end to the KOTOR game ending if you're evil with killing the characters. Not your D&D opinion. To me a game doesn't really need to have spoilers hush sush when its been out for a couple years already. :D
smoker 12-30-05, 06:51 PM	Running an evil campaign is cake with the right players. The same can be said of running a good game. If you have the right players, everything works out well. If you have played V:tM or V:tR, then you all ready know how to run an evil game. What has to change is your process of running the game. Evil games make more sense if you are plotting and scheming, rather then killing the monster of the day. Thus, you need great roleplayers, not minature war gamers. smoker
potlessrainbows 12-30-05, 07:59 PM	I haven't read everything here but if you are wanting to run an evil game just make sure you have a VERY good understanding of the rules because it can me VERY hard. Im running one now and we are having a good time but i would NEVER recomend it to a new DM. have you DMed a game before this?... i just wouldn't reccomend it for your first campaign. If you have never been a DM before all the reading in the world isn't enough to teach you everything you will need to know. however if this isn't your first game a a DM then i would say yes it can be worth it just be careful and dont forget to have fun. :schemes:
potlessrainbows 12-30-05, 08:02 PM	Actually my plan, if it came down to an evil campaign, was to make them all nobles (maybe some elite servants, but mostly nobles) of the same house. That set up means they have resources and a little clout to get away with being jerks, but they can't do anything atrocious anonymously and they still have a patriarch/matriarch who will actively work to prevent them bringing shame to the house or attention to their elicit dealings. I think at least once in that scenario I'd like to have them framed for something they didn't actually do, so that they have to clear their names and win back over the populace or other noble houses. I think this sounds like a lot of fun though... if you really want to run an evil game you could always give them a way out if you all decide evil isnt working for you... you could have a paladin come along and offer them redemption or something along those lines
Vangerdahast 12-30-05, 10:25 PM	Very well put Azezel: evil people also have friends. Think of corrupt politicians or even of great "evil" RL figures. They also have their share of personal bonds and are even capable of affable good acts. Alignment does NOT dictate behavior; it´s behavior that shapes Alignment. For an evil group that works together, look at Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. Tommy, Lance, the lawyer and the old cowboy dude are all evil (OK, maybe the lawyer is TN) and yet work together. Lance does backstab Tommy... but only after many adventures; and only because opportunity presented itself. And the lawyer and the cowboy never do backstab Tommy.
imperialjunkie 12-31-05, 12:37 AM	LOL Imperial, I think he's talking about spoling the end to the KOTOR game ending if you're evil with killing the characters. Not your D&D opinion. To me a game doesn't really need to have spoilers hush sush when its been out for a couple years already. :D Oops. Yeah. Well the game is so old now that I couldn't imagine me spoiling anything. O well. Sorry for any of you out there who are just now getting KotOR. :D
Arak the mighty 12-31-05, 01:03 AM	I suppose that you can just have fun wantonly killing stuff if your focus is combat. But roleplaying wicked and vile deeds just isn't right in my opinion. This probably sounds wierd, but I think that there's something very spiritual about roleplaying. When you 'take on' the personality of an evil person and then act out evil stuff it does something to you. Or it reveals something about you. But aren't all those things the DM does on a game by game basis? The DM plays as the Orcs, the Goblins, the Black Dragon, the Pit Fiend, the bloodthirsty murderer, and more. You know why I ran an evil campaign once not so long ago? I wanted to be the "good guy"! I wanted to be able to go into combat with a Solar. A Treant. A Couaxtl. The Paladin. THe good guy. Because for most of my 19 years of DnD, I've been the axe murderer. But I don't think that says anything about my character.
Siarrent 12-31-05, 01:31 AM	I have to side with Arak on this one - to make an archvillain really work you have to understand him. He's not Random Human Wizard #777. You know how he thinks. You know his diabolical plans. It can get tedious. Still, you are not that character. Playing the "good guy" can be extremely fun now and then - your "archvillains" don't have to skulk. Anywhere. Churches hailed by the populace, superior resources, and generally better cohesion. Really, the DM virtually has to roleplay evil creatures at some point. It's the bread and butter of traditional campaigns. After all, playing the Paladin who kills... other... Paladins... is rather strange. For both players and DM.
DerHauptman 12-31-05, 02:02 AM	:whatsthis: I am with Vangerdahast, Very well put Azezel: I have said the same thing on the forums when people state that evil parties/games are always a recipe for disaster because evil people will always plot and scheme against each other. :gah: :teach: I have run and played in several mature "evil" games and they have been some of the best experiences in my time gaming (almost 30 years). The games can bring out some great moral conflicts and RP opportunities that inspire the good sessions. The games are easy to run..."what are your group and individual goals?" boom instant motivation. No need for the rescue the maiden, save the world situations. The players can do what they want; they can determine the course of the game. You just give them the world to do it in. They are the ones with the schemes this time. With that in mind (as we have all played the good heroes) there is no end to the people who want to thwart such plans. :teach: As for sticking together, especially at low levels, it's the world against them. There are not a lot of safe havens if the activities become known. They need each other for mutual protection. The warrior needs the wizard and the cleric because he can't just bop into the magic shope and church to get healed anymore or buy that sexy enchantment for his axe of doom. The rogue can forge their papers and make some disguises so they can elude the forces of good. The warrior can protect them and tech them the feats they need if you do the training bit. That’s just the necessity part. :teach:As for my title part, they can be brilliant childhood friends who had to turn to crime in the streets again out of need, but have it bloom into great friendship even love. I mean love and friendship is the real motivators for heroic acts; most people will go to great lengths to protect each other (heroic deeds) if they love each other. Some of the greatest love there is can be between soldiers in war. That's why we fight, not for some fat ass in the HQ. We die for each other. If you read the citations for Hitler’s SS and the KGB or any other organizations capable of committing horrific crimes (genocide etc.) they read the same as the selfless acts of those on the righteous side of the causes as well. The members of these "evil" organizations love each other and respect them enough to sacrifice for them. They will commit genocide in one moment together and even pull out gold teeth to line their pockets in the morning and then sacrifice themselves for the "good" (benefit if you prefer) of their cause. Isn't sacrifice one of the core themes of the "good" person in D&D? :teach: They may have family and friends whom they love and who love them in return, and alas, they may not. However, if they do you can rest assured they will defend/protect them in the most brutal and efficient manner they have at their disposal. :teach:They may, like the Wicked Witch in OZ even love her minions so much she will go to great lengths to provide for them. She did give them tough love but it was love nonetheless. :lightbulb: If you are having some problems keeping you evil party on track and such just give them a reason to keep together. I’m not a fan of a BBEG who will kill them if they don't, but rather that together they will be able to escape the good guys for another day alone each of them gets a neat little necklace in the town square. The BBEG who will do nasty things to them is railroading IMO, just as bad if not. :lightbulb: If that doesn't work research some award citations from the SS, KGB, or any other type secret police or really "bad guy" army units or organizations. Clean them up a bit and get some of our own Medal of Honor stuff and read them all together and ask them what cause the guys were fighting for. MY guess is none of them will (if sanitized for locations and stuff) will be able to tell the actions of the bad guys from the good. :lightbulb: Explain to them that they may indeed be "bad" (even the activities of criminal organizations - like Crips and the Mafia types) or commit acts of unspeakable acts in the name of their cause but in the end they are comrades, buddies, partners and friends who may love each other enough to make the ultimate sacrifice for one another. Just my 2 Coppers, DerHauptman - Out! Hope that helps for perspective. Evil (bad) people are not devoid of human emotions, they love, appreciate, feel joy, along with envy, hate and greed.
Dragonspirit 12-31-05, 03:15 AM	When you 'take on' the personality of an evil person and then act out evil stuff it does something to you. Or it reveals something about you. Often, a DM has to act out the role of evil characters. I hope it doesn't reflect poorly on me that I have to (or that I rather enjoy it). Just because a PC is Evil, does that mean he has no friends? Can't an Evil party be bound together by friendship as strongly as a Good party? He can have friends, but no he is not bound together as strongly as a good party. Ultimately, evil is the promotion of selfishness about all else. An evil character will keep friends as a means to sate his own desires, not to an ends of themselves. His friends represent opportunities, nothing more or less. Now, there are ways to play an evil character intelligently. They don't have to hack up their party members at the first opportunity. But they don't act heroically for their party members either. They should have no qualms about selling out their party members for advantage.
Latro 12-31-05, 04:29 AM	... They don't have to hack up their party members at the first opportunity. But they don't act heroically for their party members either. They should have no qualms about selling out their party members for advantage. Ever saw the movie "Natural born killers" ? :cool:
imperialjunkie 12-31-05, 10:07 AM	Often, a DM has to act out the role of evil characters. I hope it doesn't reflect poorly on me that I have to (or that I rather enjoy it). I hear what you're saying, and I've thought of that. Again, this is all of my personal reflection on roleplaying. I think there is a difference for me when I play and when I DM. When I DM, everything still feels 3rd person. I don't at all feel like I'm taking on the persona of a NPC. Yes I speak for them, but I almost feel like I'm in the same place as the player- observing. But whenever I play, there is a much more intimate connection between myself and the character that I have created in my mind. I have to spend more time thinking through their thoughts, actions, and reactions. There is a relationship there that goes way beyond the connection I have with NPCs when I DM. Maybe because it is time spent focused on one character. I don't know. That's why I'm so leary of running evil games and why I wouldn't play in one. I take playing and roleplaying very seriously and it would be tough for me to be evil with out it affecting me. I made some strong comments, but some of them are more specific towards kids who only want to be evil so they can rape and murder and act out in ways that they feel powerless to do in real life. That's where it gets out of hand in my opinion. I know that there are mature players who can handle it maturely without it being a reflection on their personalities. But I think we should be careful. And I base that on my serious and high estimation of the power of roleplaying.