Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Chazbot 04-08-04, 02:31 AM	Fellow gamers, So ... ARE more players gravitating toward evil characters these days, or have I just run across some bad seeds lately? The last gaming group I played with was loaded with people who really, REALLY liked playing evil characters. One guy set up a torture chamber ... in his portable hole. [roll eyes here] Rather than shop for items, they'd just club the owner and rob the place. Matter of fact, when one of the players decided to quit the campaign -- to play more Diablo II, no less -- everybody besides me had their characters ... rape and torture the playerless character to death, utilizing the aforementioned portable torture hole. In a word: Ewwwwwww. Thank God I missed that session and didn't have to hear those weirdos role-play all that :censored: . (And yeah, I know: it's just a game. Nobody actually got hurt. But I'm not sure if the space between thought, word and deed is all that thick. And I daresay that even PRETENDING to rape, torture and murder somebody -- as part of a HOBBY, not even as, say, a professional actor -- is still pretty :censored: sick.) Now sure ... in the SHORT RUN, at least, it's EASY to be evil (until the cops/militia/Harpers show up). Why show mercy? Why pay for things? Why think of anyone else besides yourself? That's just so darn INCONVENIENT, you know. :-/ Again, decency and virtue make the game -- and real life -- more challenging. But I daresay that taking that challenge is a sign of strength, and that the path of decency is easier ... in the long run. If you have the patience for it. But the question remains: is anyone else seeing a rise in the number of people who play evil characters? And if so, what the hell GIVES? Too much "Grand Theft Auto III"? Too many guys mad at their dads for leaving the family? Too many guys not "gettin' any"? Or, again, is it just EASIER to play as evil? For me, much of the fun in D&D is the opportunity to take the role of a hero. So is this penchant for evil symptomatic of an ailing society, similar in tone (though obviously not in gravity) to Columbine? I mean, seems like when *I* was a kid (early '80s), geeks who got picked on retaliated by growing up and getting filthy rich. Now, it seems like an awful lot of 'em go :censored: and start building pipe bombs instead. Maybe there should be a government program: Dates for Geeks. ("A laid geek is one who's not shopping for C-4. So sleep with a geek, ladies: the life you save COULD be your own.") Anyway. Any comments here? -- Chaz [Please avoid using masked profanity! That's why we have the :censored: smiley! He's lonely if you don't use him! -- WizO the Hutt]
Zariell 04-08-04, 02:51 AM	Matter of fact, when one of the players decided to quit the campaign -- to play more Diablo II, no less -- everybody besides me had their characters ... rape and torture the playerless character to death, utilizing the aforementioned portable torture hole. In a word: Ewwwwwww. Thank God I missed that session and didn't have to hear those weirdos role-play all that sh*t. (And yeah, I know: it's just a game. Nobody actually got hurt. But I'm not sure if the space between thought, word and deed is all that thick. And I daresay that even PRETENDING to rape, torture and murder somebody -- as part of a HOBBY, not even as, say, a professional actor -- is still pretty f*cking sick.) ... ....... ....... ...:eek: I would run from that session in the fastest way possible.
Anthor Del Niera 04-08-04, 02:52 AM	Creepy and bad. Do you know self defense?
Winternova 04-08-04, 03:07 AM	In another thread, someone surmised that many people are only lukewarm about D&D, and the only way to keep them interested is for them to do outlandish, and 'evil' things, and this is a trend I certainly see in my own group. One of my players even admitted to me that it's hard to get into playing one of his newer characters because that character doesn't have the 'chaotic insane deathwish' style that his others do.
ImmortalBlueMage 04-08-04, 04:22 AM	I generally find that only newbs want to play Evil characters. They quickly grow out of it when they try it for a while and realize how unrewarding it is being the bad guy. But that's only my personal experience.
bahamut_0 04-08-04, 05:52 AM	Originally posted by ImmortalBlueMage I generally find that only newbs want to play Evil characters. They quickly grow out of it when they try it for a while and realize how unrewarding it is being the bad guy. But that's only my personal experience. This is exactly what's happening with my friend, who's just gonna start playing next week. He wanted to be CE, but I said no, you can't (That would screw up my campaign WAY too much), so he settled for NE. I hope he'll see the error in his ways, seeing as the first quest is for a Temple of Tyr :rolleyes:
Henchcritter 04-08-04, 06:20 AM	Originally posted by ImmortalBlueMage I generally find that only newbs want to play Evil characters. They quickly grow out of it when they try it for a while and realize how unrewarding it is being the bad guy. But that's only my personal experience. I, as an old geezer just love to play LE characters. To the original poster: ask yourself. In a world filled with cityguards, paladin orders and clerics dedicated to good gods, what happens if evil PC leave a trail of bodies to follow. Sure in D&D you don't have fingerprints, but you have divination magic so dead men do tell tales. Under a good GM, playing an evil PC is harder then a good one. A good PC is only at risk when adventuring, an evil one is always at risk. Any goof up you make will give the GM more rope to tie up your PC. And he has every right to, you agreed to that when you wrote the E on your sheet.
Thorak 04-08-04, 07:14 AM	I blame Sesame Street. No, seriously. Sesame Street tells us we're all 'special'. This leads to kids having the ridiculous belief that the world should somehow serve them, rather than the other way around. So they feel cheated and abused when they don't receive the 'special' treatment they so 'deserve'. They need a wakeup call; you're unique, yes. But everyone's about as 'special' as each individual grain of sand on a beach. No grain of sand is exactly like any other either, but there's nothing inherently cool about each one. My rant on society aside; this applies to D&D because the morals and laws of society are what these kids see as infringing on their 'specialness'. So, when they're playing an escapist game, they want to play with none of those restrictions, which means they wanna be evil. Now, that's not 'bad', in and of itself. Nor is acting like an evil psycho when playing your character. What's bad is enjoying it. If you're actually enjoying the feeling of 'raping and torturing' another creature, even fictionally, you should seek professional help. If you're enjoying the pretending to be evil and being as nasty as you can imagine, you're OK; you're not enjoying the acts themselves, but the escapism and imaginative work put into it. In the case of raping and torturing the PC who left; I'm sorry, that's borderline sick. If I were said player, I probably wouldn't be friends with those people any more, let alone play with them. Not because of what they did to my character, but because there was no reason to do so besides the chance for them to enjoy it for it's own sake. But it's definetely due to Sesame Street. It is a vile abomination that must be destroyed. Or at least they need to stop telling kids they're special, so when they get picked on they build a pipe bomb to teach those idiots a lesson, the ones who obviously don't understand how inherently special they are. Because being special means you're better than everyone else, so the rules don't really apply to you. If you recognize that you're just a cog in the machine, just one of the grains of sand making up the beach, you're a lot less likely to go nuts and try and make the other guys 'pay'; they're just a cog like you, with a slightly different task.
Sunrider 04-08-04, 07:16 AM	Anyone tried playing a campaign with two different groups at the same time, one the 'heroes' and the other the 'villains'? It gets rather interesting...
Henchcritter 04-08-04, 09:17 AM	Originally posted by Thorak My rant on society aside; this applies to D&D because the morals and laws of society are what these kids see as infringing on their 'specialness'. So, when they're playing an escapist game, they want to play with none of those restrictions, which means they wanna be evil. Now, that's not 'bad', in and of itself. Nor is acting like an evil psycho when playing your character. What's bad is enjoying it. If you're actually enjoying the feeling of 'raping and torturing' another creature, even fictionally, you should seek professional help. If you're enjoying the pretending to be evil and being as nasty as you can imagine, you're OK; you're not enjoying the acts themselves, but the escapism and imaginative work put into it. In the case of raping and torturing the PC who left; I'm sorry, that's borderline sick. If I were said player, I probably wouldn't be friends with those people any more, let alone play with them. Not because of what they did to my character, but because there was no reason to do so besides the chance for them to enjoy it for it's own sake.This is a game, some people play it very serious, others do it beer and pretzels. Which people here have never: burnt ants with a magnifying glass, cheered when a racecar crashed on TV, laughed at the idiots on Jerry Springer or stole a cookie from the cookie jar. If you entered no, you're a moral Ned Flanders. The truth is, most people like stuff in their head that is destructive. And there is no trouble with that. If everyone who burnt ants, cheers at racecars became was a real life sadist, everyone who laughed at the idiots at Jerry would became a misanthrope and everyone who stole a cookie was a thief, society would be in big troubles. Luckily people make a huge difference between thinking and acting. Sure, people raping and torturing the PC that left is very childish butt they'll grow out of it. Sure, I would leave such a group since it is too beer and pretzels for me, but I wouldn't call it sick.
Duke Viper 04-08-04, 10:03 AM	As a person who plays an evil charater, I feel obligated to tell you all that I do not just run through downs swinging my daggers and flapping my wings, trying to kill everyone in sight. I walk through like everyone else. I have done my fair share of vile deeds, and I have done my fair share of good deeds, so that I may in the future do more evil deeds. AKA I do good deeds, but the lesser of them. I kill if people :censored::censored::censored::censored: me off, they try to kill me, or they just look at me like "im better than you". I dont rob blacksmiths, I dont kills Inn keepers just so i sleep for free. So dont think all evil PCs are hack, slash, and burn everything in sight. Rape, tourture, and pillage. We have feelings too, and we have that little voice on our shoulder, sometimes more than one, or 2.
Sunrider 04-08-04, 10:24 AM	evil != demented evil != stupid evil != crazy Demented, stupid or crazy villains die even quicker than demented, stupid or crazy Paladins. Better to take the scheming, hidden path than the whack-everything-in-sight path. Take your lead from the Sith...
Sereno 04-08-04, 10:39 AM	Originally posted by Henchcritter This is a game, some people play it very serious, others do it beer and pretzels. Which people here have never: burnt ants with a magnifying glass, cheered when a racecar crashed on TV, laughed at the idiots on Jerry Springer or stole a cookie from the cookie jar. If you entered no, you're a moral Ned Flanders. The truth is, most people like stuff in their head that is destructive. Please don't start down this ridiculous road to senseless moral relativism by trying to say, "If you've ever done ANYTHING bad, you have no right to talk about the bad things others do." I can't really believe you think stealing cookies and laughing at Springer guests falls into the same category as roleplaying (and enjoying) rape and torture. Most sociopaths and serial killers start out torturing animals and enjoying the kick they get of having something helpless and under their control. It's one thing to merrily hack your way through hordes of 'faceless' orcs or other evil creatures ... it's quite another to go into the psychologically dangerous area of actually getting a kick out of the killing. Playing an evil character because you like the freedom of being able to do anything you want is fine ... playing one because you like imagining what it's like to really hurt people is dangerous. Sick ... really sick. Chaz, you should run like Hell from this group!!
Henchcritter 04-08-04, 10:51 AM	It's one thing to merrily hack your way through hordes of 'faceless' orcs or other evil creaturesMuch more dangerous then the torture and raping. In real history real people have been depicted as faceles evil, with dire consequences.
maven50312 04-08-04, 11:06 AM	Well, I play more towards a nuetral-to-evil vibe now, but that's just because I'm burnt out on good. I've played with a few DM's that insist on a good party, and I have no problem with that, but lately a new DM has let our party choose alignment. It's a nice change of pace. However, it isn't anywhere near rape... torture we've done but it was to extract information, not out of fun (although I'm sure some of my fellow PC's enjoyed it a bit too much). To each his/her own I guess.
Sereno 04-08-04, 11:13 AM	Originally posted by Henchcritter Much more dangerous then the torture and raping. In real history real people have been depicted as faceles evil, with dire consequences. My point was that they truly ARE faceless and evil ... designed to be that way by the rules of the game. D&D monsters AREN'T people. They *only* exist to give legitimate targets for the players of a game. A PC is supposed to be a "person" ... and doing horrible things to your fellow persons and enjoying it (!!!) is a sign of an unhealthy and unbalanced mind.
Thorak 04-08-04, 11:34 AM	Sereno, that was the point I was trying to make in my first post; it's less that they decided to torture and kill something in the game. I'd do that with an evil PC too. It's that they did so to a PC who left, apparently for no reason than because they could, which to me means that they did so just for the sake of the torture and rape. It's not like it was part of the plotline or something, where the evil and psychotic PC is going to torture information out of a captured enemy, or is going to rape a noble's wife as a means of revenge against said noble. It's one thing to imagine what an evil person would do. If you say "Now that I've gotten her alone, I'm raping that dastard's wife. She will feel my anger.", that's one thing, it's (decidedly evil) character development. If you start into describing how you're going about that, you're probably starting to enjoy at least the though of the act itself at at some level. Similarly, if you start doing things like that just because the oppotunity arises, you're enjoying the act itself on some level; if you didn't, you wouldn't bother. These are what concern me. It's not the playing a psychotically evil character. It's when you start enjoying what he enjoys that we get into the freaky stuff. When I'm plotting out stuff for storylines, I come up with fiendishly nasty things to do to people. And I think they're delightfully fiendish and nasty. But I don't use them for the sake of using them; if something nasty happens, there's a reason for it. Oh, and my earlier comments also apply to thieves who steal from party members. Sesame street is evil. You're not special. Get over yourself. Or seek therapy. If you get enjoyment out of even thinking about or imagining rape/torture/killing/etc, for their own sake, you need help. Before you take the next step and decide to act out a fantasy.
Sunrider 04-08-04, 11:49 AM	In order to be evil you don't need to be cruel or sadistic - such methods usually make you reviled and hated, while leaving you no closer to achieving your goals. Which is what an evil person is all about - working his or her goals with disregard for the well-being of others. Ruthless ambition and the promotion of the self is the hallmark of true evil. Nor does being evil mean you can't be honourable. That's what the LE alignment is for. That said, there's nothing stopping an evil character from being cruel and sadistic. But remember, every action has consequences, and (in-game) time spent torturing people could probably be better spent doing something else. And there's no need to graphically describe every action either, since the result is going to be pretty much the same - may as well just give a brief description and get on with the game. Then again, you have the players who insist on rolling HP damage, saves and everything else every time you stick a pin into someone.
DreamWeaver 04-08-04, 12:04 PM	You want to know why people are wanting more and more to play evil characters? I tell you why: FREEDOM I'm not talking about their freedom to choose to play it, etc... I'm talking about the freedom they feel to do something they know is horrible and, while their character might pay for it eventually, they (the player) never does. How many times have you come to a session mad for one reason or another, and during a combat sequence you get really vicious with your description of your attacks? Made you feel good releasing some pent up aggression? Sure it did! The trick with people playing evil characters is that they don't have to worry if they are roleplaying their character properly. Evil characters do evil things. What if you were mad when you came to the session, looking for a good combat sequence, and your DM had you in town trying to convince a store owner to give you the equipment at a cheaper price? A person playing a good character might want to rip the head off the storekeep (excellent way to release some anger), but he/she knows that doing so is totally against their alignment and, at later sessions when they don't feel so aggressive, might come back and haunt them. A person playing an evil character, however, could claim he normally would try to barter with the shopkeep, but something the shopkeep said pushed his anger button. Anyway, if these kind of "anger release" sessions become a consistent occurence, then you need to start checking with the guys. Maybe they would feel better doing something more adrenline pumping? A little football, soccer, bungee jumping?! They may either be bored but trying to stick with the game, or they may, as some have said, have a deeper psychosis. However, it is bad to simply jump to a general conclusion about these people because, hey, what if they are psychotic and don't like it being pointed out? Just a thought...
Sereno 04-08-04, 12:07 PM	Originally posted by Thorak Sereno, that was the point I was trying to make in my first post; it's less that they decided to torture and kill something in the game. I'd do that with an evil PC too. It's that they did so to a PC who left, apparently for no reason than because they could, which to me means that they did so just for the sake of the torture and rape. OK, we agree then. :D Originally posted by Thorak Sesame street is evil. You're not special. Get over yourself. Or seek therapy. If you get enjoyment out of even thinking about or imagining rape/torture/killing/etc, for their own sake, you need help. Before you take the next step and decide to act out a fantasy. Here, I disagree. The point of Sesame Street is not that YOU and YOU ALONE are special ... it's that EVERYONE is special. I think this is a positive thing as people with low self-esteem generally fall into victimhood. I also believe that this is partly responsible for the way the other children in my son's school treat him. He's disabled and in a wheelchair, yet the other kids DON'T make fun of him. And, many even go out of their way to include him despite the fact that he doesn't operate on their level. It was VERY different in my day (25-odd years ago); differences were *always* ridiculed. The message that EVERYONE is special and entitled to dignity is, I think, sinking in. Unfortunately, for Chaz, it's not sinking into everyone.... :(
Luminous Crayon 04-08-04, 12:10 PM	Originally posted by Sunrider Anyone tried playing a campaign with two different groups at the same time, one the 'heroes' and the other the 'villains'? It gets rather interesting... An interesting idea, certainly, but any time we start talking about running a single game simultaneously for two different groups, a lot of logistical problems are introduced.
Thorak 04-08-04, 01:07 PM	Originally posted by Sereno Here, I disagree. The point of Sesame Street is not that YOU and YOU ALONE are special ... it's that EVERYONE is special. I think this is a positive thing as people with low self-esteem generally fall into victimhood. I also believe that this is partly responsible for the way the other children in my son's school treat him. He's disabled and in a wheelchair, yet the other kids DON'T make fun of him. And, many even go out of their way to include him despite the fact that he doesn't operate on their level. It was VERY different in my day (25-odd years ago); differences were *always* ridiculed. The message that EVERYONE is special and entitled to dignity is, I think, sinking in. Unfortunately, for Chaz, it's not sinking into everyone.... :( Yes. We need to encourage acceptance of everyone as they are, not as we think they should be, like your son. However, the problem with the "everyone's special" message is that everyone isn't special. Because if everyone's special, then noone's special, because everyone else is too. What Sesame Street means to say is that we're all unique, and it is the differences that make us stronger as a group. But there's some 6 billion of us on the planet; nothing about you makes you 'special' unless you somehow rise above the rest in some way. I personally think it's this false expectation that you are 'special' and therefore destined for greatness that's causing a lot of problems, including school shootings. Because people aren't getting the special treatment they've been brought up believing they deserve. Uniqueness and acceptance are great messages. Specialness leads to unreal expectations. Because the word itself implies something 'better' than the rest, and the at least half of all people, by the laws of statistics, aren't, in whatever way you want to measure it.
Henchcritter 04-08-04, 04:52 PM	Originally posted by Sereno My point was that they truly ARE faceless and evil ... designed to be that way by the rules of the game. D&D monsters AREN'T people. They *only* exist to give legitimate targets for the players of a game. A PC is supposed to be a "person" ... and doing horrible things to your fellow persons and enjoying it (!!!) is a sign of an unhealthy and unbalanced mind. Nope, orcs are usually evil, which means 50% are. The generalization proves my point. Labeling a whole race as evil and cannon fodder is a really bad outlet. Normal people are born with tendencies to enjoy violence and evil stuff, even the bible agrees with that. So why act paranoid about it. The truth is society puts you up with rules and people you can't stand. Sometimes you are fed up and feel an urge to do something nasty against which bothers you. Nothing weird again, as long as you don't act on it, it's perfectly normal. D&D can be an outlet for that In teen society it's regarded cool to rebel against authority. So why not moral authority. Instead of a role-playing game, D&D becomes a contest who can rebel the most. The target becomes the society's ethics. In this case, doing the nastiest things 'in character'. D&D just became an outlet for rebellion. Many sociopath may start out with torturing animals, that doesn't mean that burning ants with the magnifying glass as a kid means your destiny is to become a serial killer. That argumentation is used against everything that is not kiddie sweet. The truth is people know the difference between Hollywood make belief, D&D make belief the images on TV and their own actions. I, for one enjoy playing evil characters. I pride myself on being able to think out nasty schemes and plans and to carry them out as long as it's in character. In real life I wouldn't dream of doing the stuff I 'do' in character. The truth is I like people too much for that but NPC's and even my fellow PCs are not humans. The alternative is more evil. Should we make playing evil PCs into one big guildtrip. We should have an evil character's anonymous board. Hi my name is Hench, I am an evilPCaholic. I play a chaotic evil rogue that did evil and enjoyed it. GMs are at worse risk then players since they put so much effort in good BBEGs . The only way to make a good BBEG is to enjoy that BBEG. Therefore all intelligent monsters should be taken out of the game. Even undead hint at humanoid necromancers. Therefore we should rename D&D oozes and vermincontrol, the game on which you can rescue peasants from vermin and oozes while thinking happy thoughts. The same should go for other pastimes. No more war games or shooters, from now on only platform, the sims and tertris. Sports should be especially taken care of. A sport that puts peoples from different towns into uniforms and encourages you to tackle the guy from the other town. This is clearly a ritual similar to tribal warfare. It is better to keep everybody under surveillance. Everyone who does not think happy thoughts should be shipped of to a psychiatric ward. D&D defines evil as hurting and oppressing others. We all have a dark side of our personality. You would be mentally unbalanced if you didn't have it. We each have free thought, the choice to do and enjoy evil and the choice not to do it. If we deny ourselves those choices we become Clockwork oranges, depending on Orwellian thinkstops. Then we would paradoxically do ourselves real evil and like I said I like people too much for that. D&D gives us a chance to embrace our whole personality, including the dark side, without causing harm to anyone. Let us enjoy that.
PhaedrusXY 04-08-04, 05:35 PM	Originally posted by Sereno Please don't start down this ridiculous road to senseless moral relativism by trying to say, "If you've ever done ANYTHING bad, you have no right to talk about the bad things others do."You know, not that I'm a Christian, but I think I remember a quote from a famous carpenter who said something very similiar to this. ("Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.") Now I don't know if you're a Christian, Buddist, Muslim, or Hindu, and this isn't necessarily directed at you, but it's amazing how much hypocrisy I see from the "moral majority", and how most of them don't even recognize when they're being hypocritical. And I disagree about Sesame Street being to blame for the world's current social pains. :D It's precisely when I start thinking I am just another insignifigant cog in a big, useless machine that I think "Why not go buy some C4? What do I have to lose, anyway?"
TheRedRobedWizard 04-08-04, 06:45 PM	Douchery. That's the only word that can describe those who are so focused on always playing "evil" characters. [[ NOTE: This phrasing could be interpreted as trolling/baiting. Next time, try saying this: "That's the only word that can describe being so focused on always playing 'evil' characters." That way, you're expressing a negative opinion about the action, not about the people. -- WizO the Hutt ]] Then again, I'm also of the belief that you can make fun of ANYONE for ANYTHING, ever. This also includes yourself, your parents, grandparents, Winston Churchhill, Jesus, Carl Sagan, Naomi Judd, and every other poor schmuck that has ever walked, rolled, or flown the world. Seriously. Everyone is unique, everyone is special, everyone is different. Everyone is their own pretty singular snowflake. All the more reason to mock them. Again, you have to realize that in making fun of everyone, you must mock yourself as well. Otherwise you're being a misanthropic pretentious ***********. Going back to the topic at hand: if you want to get your rage at the world out, play Diablo II. If you want to play a roleplaying game, that's why D&D is here. Evil is an alignment reserved for NPCs and douches. Neither of those terms are mutually exclusive. NPCs can be just as douchey as evil PCs can. -TRRW
Sunrider 04-08-04, 07:05 PM	Evil characters are great fun to play - particularly if there's another good-aligned player-controlled party out there to get you. Your mission - take over the world. Their mission - stop you. Let's see who wins...
green_yawgmoth 04-08-04, 08:10 PM	I frequently enjoy playing LE, NE, and CE characters, and I'd like to think I rp them all well. Especially NE, since that's what I am. :cool: But you're right; a lot of newbies like CE because they think they can do whatever they want and not have to worry. This of course makes it hard on the rest of the evil community, because DMs hear horror stories, build up a stereotype in their heads, and *poof*, no evil in their game. I played in a game (it lasted all of 4 sessions :rolleyes: ) with 6 players: 4 CE newbs, 1 NE who was about as good of a RPer as a brick, and me. It was.... unpleasant. Just imagine getting sneak attacked, then fireballed just because you were in the area. Even though there's 4 gargoyles and a mind flayer that you're supposed to kill. Yeah. -_-;
green_yawgmoth 04-08-04, 08:14 PM	Originally posted by Sunrider Evil characters are great fun to play - particularly if there's another good-aligned player-controlled party out there to get you. Your mission - take over the world. Their mission - stop you. Let's see who wins... Or another evil party trying to do the same. Who will win that battle; evil, or evil? ;)
Sunrider 04-08-04, 08:23 PM	I'm usually the DM - controlling the world's politics, events and random factors is even more fun (and more difficult to balance) when there's more than one party out there. Although I generally design the world without regard for the party (i.e. the world runs on its own and isn't centred around them) I have to take the parties into account when the evil party controls a vast empire (including one of them being the Emperor). and the two good parties are major figures in separate rebel groups...
Thorak 04-08-04, 08:25 PM	Originally posted by PhaedrusXY And I disagree about Sesame Street being to blame for the world's current social pains. :D It's precisely when I start thinking I am just another insignifigant cog in a big, useless machine that I think "Why not go buy some C4? What do I have to lose, anyway?" This is my point. If you didn't have a false sense that you're 'special', you'd feel pride at being a useful cog in the machine of society. Maybe you'd want to be a more important cog, a 'special' cog, and you'd strive for that. And earn it. It's the false belief that you're 'special' automatically that disillusions yourself with your non-special treatment, giving you the urge to go buy that C4. And no, I'm not a communist. I don't think everyone should be forced to be an identical cog. My only point is that, from birth, you are a typical, standard cog. If you want to be noticed as a special, worthy-of-notice cog, you have to earn that right somehow. This is true of our society as it stands now; you get nowhere without trying. The problem is that if you think you're 'special', you expect that you should get somewhere without trying; you're special after all. But you're right. It's not just Sesame Street. There's whole hosts of other children's programming that's just as bad. But Sesame Street got the ball rolling, and it's the most common.
Surgo 04-08-04, 08:55 PM	Going back to the topic at hand: if you want to get your rage at the world out, play Diablo II. If you want to play a roleplaying game, that's why D&D is here. Evil is an alignment reserved for NPCs and douches. Neither of those terms are mutually exclusive. NPCs can be just as douchey as evil PCs can. I had fun roleplaying a general in an army composed of many undead attacking an elven city. I can't really think of any nice way to say this, but you being run over by a car a couple of times might help you and the rest of us out. [[ NOTE: Trolling/baiting, even if couched in dry humor, is a violation of the Code of Conduct (http://www.wizards.com/coc), so please refrain from doing so in your posts. -- WizO the Hutt ]]
keith187 04-08-04, 10:17 PM	I am the cog comander! All other cogs are nothing compaired to me! BOW BEFORE MY COG GREATNESS OR SUFFER!!! Evil in games can be fun but only in small doses. If you only play evil games you'll get tired of it and then you'll want to switch to good games. What is needed is a balance between the two play a mix of good and evil games.
Vaalingrade Ashland 04-08-04, 10:28 PM	I play non-good because Good seems fake to me. Flat, affectless, souless.
TheRedRobedWizard 04-08-04, 10:37 PM	I had fun roleplaying a general in an army composed of many undead attacking an elven city. I can't really think of any nice way to say this, but you being run over by a car a couple of times might help you and the rest of us out. Everything I wrote was from personal experience. Every evil character I've ever seen played, in any game, in any edition of any game, ever, has been an irredeemable douche. No matter how well versed the player was in roleplaying, acting, or stand up comedy, the result was the same. Thus, my logical conclusion: Evil = Douchery. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be evil characters, I'm just saying that people who play evil should realize that MOST other people in the world will see them as a douche at best, and a target for justice at worst. There are "acceptable levels" of evil. Using evil methods to achieve good ends, for example. Evil is a tool. Some people use that tool to hurt everyone, others use it for the greater good of everyone else. It's similar to how ninja are portrayed in Legend of the Five Rings. They sacrifice their honor for the good of their Lord, Clan, and Empire. They use forbidden, dishonorable methods to achieve results that benefit their Clan, and the Empire as a whole. That kind of evil isn't the kind I'm refering to when I talk of "evil = douchery". What I am refering to is the "durrr I wanna raise a lot of undead and kill people because I'm EEEEEEEEEEEVIL" kind of evil. That's just idiocy. Also included in this is the "I'm angsty and angry at everyone, so I'm going to be a douche and ruin the game for all the other players by being evil, stealing their stuff, and being a general ***********" type of evil, as well as the "blood! blood everywhere! I will bathe in the blood of the slaughter of the innocents" kind of evil. Both serve no purpose other than to further the douchery of evil. And as to your ascertation that I should be killed or maimed, that's just not very nice. You're entitled to your opinion though, just as I'm entitled to mine. So we'll leave it at that. -TRRW
ORC_Tuhteth 04-08-04, 10:43 PM	Hey guys, make sure you stay away from real-world topics, especially when discussing morality, evil, etc. That's the kind of thing that can go really bad, really fast. So keep your discussions and references restricted to D&D, please. :)
Sereno 04-09-04, 09:42 AM	Originally posted by PhaedrusXY You know, not that I'm a Christian, but I think I remember a quote from a famous carpenter who said something very similiar to this. ("Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.") Now I don't know if you're a Christian, Buddist, Muslim, or Hindu, and this isn't necessarily directed at you, but it's amazing how much hypocrisy I see from the "moral majority", and how most of them don't even recognize when they're being hypocritical. Actually, I am Catholic ... nearly everyone focuses only on the phrase you mention ... but not the rest of it. To the adulteress, He tells her to "now go and sin no more." JC *did* judge her, but felt that she did not deserve to die for her sins. He didn't say, "Go ahead and do whatever you want now that I've spared your life." I agree that hypocrisy is a common problem, but this isn't an example of it.
Sereno 04-09-04, 09:52 AM	Originally posted by Henchcritter Nope, orcs are usually evil, which means 50% are. The generalization proves my point. Labeling a whole race as evil and cannon fodder is a really bad outlet. Normal people are born with tendencies to enjoy violence and evil stuff, even the bible agrees with that. So why act paranoid about it. The truth is society puts you up with rules and people you can't stand. Sometimes you are fed up and feel an urge to do something nasty against which bothers you. Nothing weird again, as long as you don't act on it, it's perfectly normal. D&D can be an outlet for that. I'm not talking about the monster races in total ... I specifically mean the ones I set to be the antagonists in my adventures. Yes, I know there are good orcs, goblins, etc. However, there comes a point where the bad guys *ARE* the bad guys, and they only serve the purpose of being the bad guys. Personally, I prefer my enemies to be non-human or at least suitably horrible (like Nazis or other "really evil" people. Personally, I don't even like XBox games that require the killing of people. I don't mind killing the Covenant or the Flood in Halo, but I didn't like killing of people in Timesplitters, even though it was a beautifully executed game. I absolutely hate the idea of GTA-style games. I understand that all humans have a dark side, but (again My Opinion) I don't think it's a good idea to indulge it on a regular basis.
Sunrider 04-09-04, 03:26 PM	Why do so many people on both sides of this debate take 'evil' to mean crazy or psychopathic? You don't need to engage in a bloodbath to be evil - all that does is expose you, weaken your position, and strengthen support for your opponents. In fact an effective evil character doesn't *ever* have to personally kill anyone - keep your hands clean, use minions to do the dirty work, bribe officials to look the other way, etc. are usually far more effective than slicing up everyone who gets in your way. Evil people have friends and allies just like everyone else, as well as minions and underlings. Otherwise they would never be able to assert control over their domains.
Vaalingrade Ashland 04-09-04, 03:36 PM	Orcs are closer to huimans than they are Flood. Just a tiny bit more bestial. Not much difference between them and my neighbor's uncles. Does that mean I get to kill him because he's funny lookin'?
PhaedrusXY 04-09-04, 05:22 PM	Originally posted by Sereno Actually, I am Catholic ... nearly everyone focuses only on the phrase you mention ... but not the rest of it. To the adulteress, He tells her to "now go and sin no more." JC *did* judge her, but felt that she did not deserve to die for her sins. He didn't say, "Go ahead and do whatever you want now that I've spared your life." I agree that hypocrisy is a common problem, but this isn't an example of it. Right, Jesus judged her. But he was the "Son of God" and was without sin, so he could "cast the first stone" with impunity. What he told all the mortals present was basically "Don't judge others. You're not qualified." Jesus is also supposed to be the judge of everyone's sins at the end, right? So what I gather from that little section is that he's qualified to judge the "sins" of mortals, but other mortals aren't and should mind their own business.
Koga:The ninja trick 04-10-04, 01:20 AM	The Koga likes to play evil characters too, but not chaotic evil manslaughter evil, that's not evil, that's stupidity. Evil makes you think. It makes you come to terms what defines a human being, and how the mind can penetrate the fabric of an otherwise good person. We all inheritly want happyness and to help others, but our illussions and "evils" cloud our perception and warp us into "evil" people. (I ussally play lawful evil to signify this warped sense of heroics.) My evil characters are not about raping, murdering, or even looting. Infact if it were feesible, my characters are so lawful they could take the exhaulted feats and still remain evil in the long run. They're evil in the sense that they question themselves, they're scared inside, angry at what they did not accomplish, and destroy themselves with hate. A true villain is the biggest villain to himself. Infact if one of my evil characters were to meet your players he'd probably say something along the lines of "Little boys go to hell" and unleash the bad magics on them. :P
Thorak 04-11-04, 09:15 PM	Every evil character, NPC or PC, should be about manipulating people into doing what the CHARACTER wants, not what they would normally want. That's what evil essentially is; the desire to better one's self at any cost, especially that of others. Whether this manipluation is the sly, hidden, and diabolical machinations of an evil genius, or Gorrgg the CE half-orc barbarian saying "Give Gorrgg sword. Or Gorrgg KILL." is immaterial; in either case, they're using their strengths to convince/force others to bend to their desires. This doesn't forbid friends and allies, however. An evil mage can easily see that smiling and being friendly with the fighters and healers in the group keeps the evil mage alive. The fighters, of course, respect the sheer kaboom power of the mage, and his ability to turn the tide of combat if they keep him protected. And the healer, well, he's now got minions he can manipulate with his healing to do his and his God's dirty work. Sure, they're all manipulating each other, but they can easily work together with no little to no conflict, no more than a regular Good party. Because there's strength in numbers, and if they can get 5 times the loot by doubling their party size, there's more loot for each person than there would be keeping it smaller, even with the new guys added to the equation. More loot = more strength = better self-improvement. And more people who hopefully like you enough to help protect you. The "I'm evil, therefore I'm going to go kill stray dogs for fun" characters aren't evil; they're psychotic. Mental illness is not the same as evil. Sure, said psycho is probably evil too, but it stems from the mental illness rather than a deeper moral setting. Which is limited imagination, IMHO. Evil can be hideously fun. Especially in a mixed-alignment group. But only if the evil character's not psychotic; if he is, the group will put him down. If he can recognize that he himself is stronger with the group of allies than without, he's got good reason to keep them around, entirely for his own selfish, immoral reasons.
Gyrofthewastes 04-11-04, 09:37 PM	And then there are those of us who consider that the basic, average individual in modern society is in fact utterly self-interested and apathetic about the pain, hardship, destitution, or lack thereof that most others experience; that the most vocally self-righteous today are generally the most uncaring. To some of us, playing an evil PC who wantonly kills monsters and steals their wealth is more honest.
Rogue 04-11-04, 10:44 PM	I must agree with Thorak. You must achieve that higher status 'cog' position. It isn't a birth-right, unless you are a prince or something, but even then they should strive to be the best prince there was. There are two catagories of people, and this is the cold hard truth: Those who strive to do their best, to the best of their abilities, or at least strive, are achievers. If I went into what a non-achiever was, I would be nailed for 'trolling' again, and that would be two different WizO's too. *cough* Cronic *cough* wel *cough* fare *cough* 'Scuse me. Anyways, I think that Seseme Street just makes sure kids know that they are different. I can see were they might get the idea they are better and deserve better treatment, but I never did. Must have rolled high on my will saves against self-centerness:D. Just my 2 cp.
Thorak 04-11-04, 11:44 PM	To be fair, I only use Sesame Street as a symbol for my argument. I think the problem is real, that kids today are being given a false sense of entitledness, but it's got bigger cultural causes than just one long-running TV show. Overall, there's a greater and greater trend towards what people 'should' get without significant effort. Raises just for showing up to work for a certain number of years, rather than for doing exceptionally well. In Canada at least, increasing social services (and rising taxes to pay for it). More and more lotteries are springing up, making for more and more 'quick riches'. More get-rich-quick scams being perpetrated, and also fallen for, like the infamous Nigerian scam. More and more credit cards, lines of credit, re-financing homes, etc. I could go on, but I think the trend is clear; people want things now, they don't want to earn them in any real way, and they're willing to use any possible avenue they can to get there, however much they know the odds are against it. To me, this is an expanding culture of greed, and one that is pretty thoroughly 'evil' at heart. But I'm defending an off-topic point here. Back to the point at hand!
Rogue 04-12-04, 12:02 AM	This goes for off-topic and on-topic: "There's a sucker born every minitue, we are gonna milk them for all they're worth!" Thats what credic companies and hack-and-slash evil characters think. Lol, its true, and thats the sad thing.
Xandar Dae'Ithil 04-12-04, 01:25 AM	Originally posted by Henchcritter I, as an old geezer just love to play LE characters. To the original poster: ask yourself. In a world filled with cityguards, paladin orders and clerics dedicated to good gods, what happens if evil PC leave a trail of bodies to follow. Sure in D&D you don't have fingerprints, but you have divination magic so dead men do tell tales. Under a good GM, playing an evil PC is harder then a good one. A good PC is only at risk when adventuring, an evil one is always at risk. Any goof up you make will give the GM more rope to tie up your PC. And he has every right to, you agreed to that when you wrote the E on your sheet. I agree 100%... For those who think people shouldn't be allowed to play evil characters, or that only "douches" play evil characters...did you all have bad experiences with playing evil characters or something? Now, I myself have always played a good character...until now. I will be co-DMing a campaign where everyone will be playing evil characters (well, I'll be chaotic neutral, but that's besides the point), and I'm not doing it because I'm a douche, or I want bloodbaths, or anything else. Hell, it would be cool to play an evil character. I'm almost tired of playing good guys all the time. That doesn't mean I want to run into a town and murder everyone in sight...if someone pisses me off, I may kill them later when no one's watching and dump the body somewhere else, and being an assassin, I'd be killing others as well. But it'd be neat to be always on the run, never being able to truly trust anyone (course, you could do that with good characters too). Point being, there's just as much roleplaying in evil characters as good, but..if you have a bad roleplayer, of course you're going to get the hack and slash crap. And hell, even having your character rape someone else is okay. They're evil. Of course, not all evil people rape someone...but hell, it's roleplaying. But like someone said...if you have the person vividly describing the rape, you have a problem, and maybe you should have an intervention or something o_o
Kyuketsukiouji 04-16-04, 11:59 AM	Generalities like "All evil characters are bad" are always fallacies. I will admit, however, that the evil alignments (and Chaotic Neutral), are often the refuge of players who tend to take their roleplaying on the lighter, or more frivolous, side, which can be frustrating for a serious DM. This doesn't mean there's a problem with Evil characters, it means there's a problem with some players. I've played with people who did not have any more devotion to roleplaying that they would to a game of Diablo (and I mean the original one, since it requires even less thought than Diablo 2). For such people, slaughtering entire villages for no reason, backstabing their fellow players in the middle of an adventure, commiting random atrocities and eating the freshly-slain corpses of their enemies is "fun". I don't consider most of that to make for even remotely interesting roleplaying, so when I DM and I encounter a player like that, they are politely but firmly redirected towards somewhere they can enjoy their style of gaming, without ruining mine. Does this mean I think Evil characters are bad? Most certainly not, since I play Evil characters too. I think juvenile (in mind, not age) players are boring, but I also think a well-played evil character is just as interesting as any other alignment character. Take a look at Raistlin in the original Dragonlance books. He slowly sinks away from neutrality into evil, attracted by the lure of power, but he's not a boring, kill-everything-in-sight-for-fun character at all. It's mostly a question of style. I've played the noblest of paladins, who could, and often did, lay down their lives for other, and I've played evil characters who caused untold death and suffering in their mad quests for power. Both have their places, and both can be quite fun, as long as the players understand what they're doing and show some respect for the other people they play with.
Quenditar 04-16-04, 02:20 PM	Originally posted by Rogue This goes for off-topic and on-topic: "There's a sucker born every minitue, we are gonna milk them for all they're worth!" Thats what credic companies and hack-and-slash evil characters think. Lol, its true, and thats the sad thing. You can play an intelligent evil guy that way too. I had an evil enchanter who only lasted two sessions, but would have lasted longer except that the party druid wanted to kill the wizard (the druid's order wants to eradicate powerful, unstable, destructive wizards) and I agreed to help out. For a payment of 4000 gp, of course. The plan went okay - the druid "tried out" contagion and gave the wizard laryngitis, then we trapped her in a room and managed to hit her with dominate person and baleful polymorph. The resulting rat, however, became property of the party bard - until the wizard's brother paid me 80,000 gp to solve the problem (after the druid had left). This is a 12th-level party. I don't think he's ever welcome in that party again, but he certainly made out well! But without the wizard-offing plan, he could have stayed with the party for a while. He wants to support himself and continue his research; the party is a means to both, and he can make himself useful enough to keep around. It would be interesting if they met him again - after a few evil plans have been put into effect, of course. :smirk: