Good player, evil PC...mixed alignment party [Archive] - Wizards Community

Good player, evil PC...mixed alignment party [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Adrian_Crane
12-07-07, 12:56 PM I'm playing with a group in a FR setting. The character mix is rather odd:

Me: NE - Drow (custom surfacer variant with no SR/SLA) Fighter 1/Wizard 2 -- I was originally a Gnome Artificer of Gond, who is now an NPC wandering the dungeon pulling random levers and turning knobs. :D
N - Aasimar Cleric of Oghma 3
CG - Air Genasi Ranger 3
NE - Drow (full) Rogue 1 / Fighter 1 -- originally CE Tiefling Rogue, and soon to be Half Elf Lycanthrope Barbarian of Malar, probably CE. The player goes through characters like a can of Pringles, seldom bothering to record much aside from the bare essentials (he usually doesn't even track his hitpoints).

Now, we awoke in a dungeon (except for the recent switches), but the bottom line is that the group is working well fighting together, since we've realized we have to rely on each other to get out of this place. It seems like we were "collected" for some form of planar and/or portal experimentation.

The thing is, when it comes to loot, we're all very much out for ourselves. Everyone tries to search the room faster than the other guy, leading to opposed checks in large rooms and a certain amount of subterfuge. It's great fun!

The one downside is that it can be hard for me to work as a team player in some cases, due to my character. Therefor my question is: how far would a Neutral Evil (mostly selfish) character push the "I need them to survive" justification in aiding the other adventurers? So far none of them know that I can cast spells, since my character doesn't want to reveal that capability yet. I'm also wearing what boils down to a Ring of Disguise, so I look like a Wood Elf and nobody is the wiser (yet).

As an example of a common dilemma, yesterday we could have gotten through a fight with Mephits far sooner if I'd just used Color Spray. Given we weren't in dire straits, I withheld on that.

A more direct problem came when the Cleric, while searching a library, was grappled by a Mimic in bookshelf form. He was at 3 HP when the Ranger and I, hearing him yell, ran to see what happened (the Drow Rogue didn't bother). At that point, I had Benign Transposition prepped and COULD have cast it to switch places with him, getting him out of the grapple and leaving the Mimic wrapped around an Armor-Spiked, higher-STR character with more hitpoints remaining.

It was too much of a stretch, so I didn't do it. In fact, the Ranger went first and successfully intimidated the Mimic with a firebomb, getting it to drop the Cleric--that saved me from my debate (which was being discussed out loud between me, the DM, and the other players). Still, how far could a selfish, Neutral Evil character be expected to go when he knows he has no allies? Other Drow are hunting him (he's keeping an eye on the Rogue and may kill him next session since the player wants to re-roll anyhow), and surfacers hate him almost as much.

Thoughts?
toucanbuzz
12-07-07, 03:07 PM NE is pure selfishness. However, IF someone is of use to you, you might put yourself in harm's way to pull their bacon from the fire. But you'll have to ask, were they in that situation because they were weak? How much do you really need them? How many of your limited resources are you going to risk saving this person? Too many and it's not worth it.

With NE, the bottom line is your own well-being. NE is generally not a team player and only works with others long enough to accomplish a goal, which is generally personal power over others.

I can't see you revealing you can cast spells to the others. Why waste it unless your life is at risk, and why give up your edge to those who are disposable and certainly have no reason to know your powers? :schemes:

2nd Edition Player's Handbook had a great scenario about all the different alignments working on a quest "together" and facing a dark priest and gorgon. As I recall, the NE got petrified trying to sneak around and steal gems while the priest and gorgon focused on the other idiots.

Moral? There is no loyalty. The NE ditched the others when he saw a chance to expose them to all the risk and snatch up the treasure himself. Hopefully they would soften up the competition before the NE had to do anything.
JimProfit
12-07-07, 04:21 PM lol, i've had to deal with too many neutral evils, i'd waste them. Cowards have no buisness being adventurers, they should be reserved for npcs.

It's okay every once in awhile, but after a while you have to ask yourself why you putup with one another? Cause you're good?

If you can slaughter a bunchof goblins, I don't see what's stopping you from chopping the head off that prick who left you to die brutaly by the hands of the Gorgon Priest.

I've been called neutral evil a few times. I'm not a coward or pure selfish, I just don't give a crap. No respect, no inhibitions. I'm in it for the womenz. No women, eh, I might help you, if I feel like it, when i'm bored or annoyed screw you. If you keep pushing it, I may just conspire against you.

But am I the type to just leave a comrade behind? No.. not unless I don't like them I suppose. It's probably not a good idea to leave them behind anyway. Unless that guy has completely useless gear, if you run away, the badguy can take his stuff, and noone wants that.
Adrian_Crane
12-08-07, 01:28 AM Hm...the character is progressing gradually towards Neutral, but he does have to live long enough to get there, which is why if I'm an ass to the party I at least want to be useful enough that they don't kill me off. And again, my biggest justification if I HAD acted would have been that we need a healer or we're all screwed. It still smacked too much of Paladin-ish sacrifice though (ick).
kelvinaw273
12-08-07, 08:52 AM Well alignment need not be applied to every single person you meet. Self-preservation (the number one in most evil characters) has required you to consider the needs of others to get them to consider your needs, because you need to keep each other alive. This is not acting out of alignment, it's plain common sense.

You need to keep the cleric alive so that he can heal the rest of you, so transpositioning in that case would have been acceptable - you weren't putting yourself in that much danger and you were keeping alive the person you needed. After the fight, you might be hurt but the party healer would owe you a big one. That's an investment in the future, as long as you all pay your debts.

You can use this to justify the distribution of loot too:
"Look, I know we all want to walk out of here richer, but that comes second to walking out of here alive. We need each other to do that. I don't like any of you, but I'm neither too proud nor to stupid to admit that I need you if I'm going to live. So I'm going to share what I find with anyone who agrees to do likewise, so that the best use can be made of this stuff in the interests of getting me out alive. Likewise, I'm not going to double cross anyone here, period. But if ANY of you look like you're going to double cross ME, or if any of you hold back on something that can help all of us, I'm not going to argue, I'm going to kill you. Period. I have no room for dead-weight, especially treacherous, willing dead-weight trying to use me."

Neutral evil is nasty, selfish and manipulative yes - but that does not mean you cannot form bonds of friendship. It means that you treat your friends better than you treat everyone else. Those who are not your friends are still idiots and scum to be used and abused at your whim, but your friends have proved useful to you, so you will assist them in return. This isn't being nicey-nicey, it's survival and common sense.

In effect the difference between an evil person and a good one could be defined as where they draw the line on friendship: an evil person is hard to befriend and hard to impress, his 'line' is close to him; a good person is easy to befriend, and his 'line' extends to almost everyone.
Sunic_Flames
12-08-07, 05:25 PM Well alignment need not be applied to every single person you meet. Self-preservation (the number one in most evil characters) has required you to consider the needs of others to get them to consider your needs, because you need to keep each other alive. This is not acting out of alignment, it's plain common sense.

*snip*

In effect the difference between an evil person and a good one could be defined as where they draw the line on friendship: an evil person is hard to befriend and hard to impress, his 'line' is close to him; a good person is easy to befriend, and his 'line' extends to almost everyone.

Quoted for truth. :cookie:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Adrian_Crane 12-07-07, 12:56 PM	I'm playing with a group in a FR setting. The character mix is rather odd: Me: NE - Drow (custom surfacer variant with no SR/SLA) Fighter 1/Wizard 2 -- I was originally a Gnome Artificer of Gond, who is now an NPC wandering the dungeon pulling random levers and turning knobs. :D N - Aasimar Cleric of Oghma 3 CG - Air Genasi Ranger 3 NE - Drow (full) Rogue 1 / Fighter 1 -- originally CE Tiefling Rogue, and soon to be Half Elf Lycanthrope Barbarian of Malar, probably CE. The player goes through characters like a can of Pringles, seldom bothering to record much aside from the bare essentials (he usually doesn't even track his hitpoints). Now, we awoke in a dungeon (except for the recent switches), but the bottom line is that the group is working well fighting together, since we've realized we have to rely on each other to get out of this place. It seems like we were "collected" for some form of planar and/or portal experimentation. The thing is, when it comes to loot, we're all very much out for ourselves. Everyone tries to search the room faster than the other guy, leading to opposed checks in large rooms and a certain amount of subterfuge. It's great fun! The one downside is that it can be hard for me to work as a team player in some cases, due to my character. Therefor my question is: how far would a Neutral Evil (mostly selfish) character push the "I need them to survive" justification in aiding the other adventurers? So far none of them know that I can cast spells, since my character doesn't want to reveal that capability yet. I'm also wearing what boils down to a Ring of Disguise, so I look like a Wood Elf and nobody is the wiser (yet). As an example of a common dilemma, yesterday we could have gotten through a fight with Mephits far sooner if I'd just used Color Spray. Given we weren't in dire straits, I withheld on that. A more direct problem came when the Cleric, while searching a library, was grappled by a Mimic in bookshelf form. He was at 3 HP when the Ranger and I, hearing him yell, ran to see what happened (the Drow Rogue didn't bother). At that point, I had Benign Transposition prepped and COULD have cast it to switch places with him, getting him out of the grapple and leaving the Mimic wrapped around an Armor-Spiked, higher-STR character with more hitpoints remaining. It was too much of a stretch, so I didn't do it. In fact, the Ranger went first and successfully intimidated the Mimic with a firebomb, getting it to drop the Cleric--that saved me from my debate (which was being discussed out loud between me, the DM, and the other players). Still, how far could a selfish, Neutral Evil character be expected to go when he knows he has no allies? Other Drow are hunting him (he's keeping an eye on the Rogue and may kill him next session since the player wants to re-roll anyhow), and surfacers hate him almost as much. Thoughts?
toucanbuzz 12-07-07, 03:07 PM	NE is pure selfishness. However, IF someone is of use to you, you might put yourself in harm's way to pull their bacon from the fire. But you'll have to ask, were they in that situation because they were weak? How much do you really need them? How many of your limited resources are you going to risk saving this person? Too many and it's not worth it. With NE, the bottom line is your own well-being. NE is generally not a team player and only works with others long enough to accomplish a goal, which is generally personal power over others. I can't see you revealing you can cast spells to the others. Why waste it unless your life is at risk, and why give up your edge to those who are disposable and certainly have no reason to know your powers? :schemes: 2nd Edition Player's Handbook had a great scenario about all the different alignments working on a quest "together" and facing a dark priest and gorgon. As I recall, the NE got petrified trying to sneak around and steal gems while the priest and gorgon focused on the other idiots. Moral? There is no loyalty. The NE ditched the others when he saw a chance to expose them to all the risk and snatch up the treasure himself. Hopefully they would soften up the competition before the NE had to do anything.
JimProfit 12-07-07, 04:21 PM	lol, i've had to deal with too many neutral evils, i'd waste them. Cowards have no buisness being adventurers, they should be reserved for npcs. It's okay every once in awhile, but after a while you have to ask yourself why you putup with one another? Cause you're good? If you can slaughter a bunchof goblins, I don't see what's stopping you from chopping the head off that prick who left you to die brutaly by the hands of the Gorgon Priest. I've been called neutral evil a few times. I'm not a coward or pure selfish, I just don't give a crap. No respect, no inhibitions. I'm in it for the womenz. No women, eh, I might help you, if I feel like it, when i'm bored or annoyed screw you. If you keep pushing it, I may just conspire against you. But am I the type to just leave a comrade behind? No.. not unless I don't like them I suppose. It's probably not a good idea to leave them behind anyway. Unless that guy has completely useless gear, if you run away, the badguy can take his stuff, and noone wants that.
Adrian_Crane 12-08-07, 01:28 AM	Hm...the character is progressing gradually towards Neutral, but he does have to live long enough to get there, which is why if I'm an ass to the party I at least want to be useful enough that they don't kill me off. And again, my biggest justification if I HAD acted would have been that we need a healer or we're all screwed. It still smacked too much of Paladin-ish sacrifice though (ick).
kelvinaw273 12-08-07, 08:52 AM	Well alignment need not be applied to every single person you meet. Self-preservation (the number one in most evil characters) has required you to consider the needs of others to get them to consider your needs, because you need to keep each other alive. This is not acting out of alignment, it's plain common sense. You need to keep the cleric alive so that he can heal the rest of you, so transpositioning in that case would have been acceptable - you weren't putting yourself in that much danger and you were keeping alive the person you needed. After the fight, you might be hurt but the party healer would owe you a big one. That's an investment in the future, as long as you all pay your debts. You can use this to justify the distribution of loot too: "Look, I know we all want to walk out of here richer, but that comes second to walking out of here alive. We need each other to do that. I don't like any of you, but I'm neither too proud nor to stupid to admit that I need you if I'm going to live. So I'm going to share what I find with anyone who agrees to do likewise, so that the best use can be made of this stuff in the interests of getting me out alive. Likewise, I'm not going to double cross anyone here, period. But if ANY of you look like you're going to double cross ME, or if any of you hold back on something that can help all of us, I'm not going to argue, I'm going to kill you. Period. I have no room for dead-weight, especially treacherous, willing dead-weight trying to use me." Neutral evil is nasty, selfish and manipulative yes - but that does not mean you cannot form bonds of friendship. It means that you treat your friends better than you treat everyone else. Those who are not your friends are still idiots and scum to be used and abused at your whim, but your friends have proved useful to you, so you will assist them in return. This isn't being nicey-nicey, it's survival and common sense. In effect the difference between an evil person and a good one could be defined as where they draw the line on friendship: an evil person is hard to befriend and hard to impress, his 'line' is close to him; a good person is easy to befriend, and his 'line' extends to almost everyone.
Sunic_Flames 12-08-07, 05:25 PM	Well alignment need not be applied to every single person you meet. Self-preservation (the number one in most evil characters) has required you to consider the needs of others to get them to consider your needs, because you need to keep each other alive. This is not acting out of alignment, it's plain common sense. snip In effect the difference between an evil person and a good one could be defined as where they draw the line on friendship: an evil person is hard to befriend and hard to impress, his 'line' is close to him; a good person is easy to befriend, and his 'line' extends to almost everyone. Quoted for truth. :cookie: