How do you play an evil character? As a DM how is an evil character accepted? Does an evil character realize that they are evil? Do other PC's realize that the evil character in their party is evil? These are all questions that I think can be explored among others when playing, or considering playing an evil character. If you're a DM who is set against having an evil PC in your party, the question is why? Is it because players of evil PC's often seem to make in apparent that their character is evil in plain view of the rest of the PC's?
I am hoping to present this as an opportunity to workshop a workable presentation of Evil PC's, and an all Evil party. The 4e setting which is implied is Points of Light, this doesn't mean that all these points of light will produce fully good characters.
I will give you an example: Jason wants to play an Evil PC, he sets his goals for the PC as normal, perhaps the evil PC just wants money, giving into greed and temptation to get it. He joins an adventuring company, will he outright say to the rest of the players that his character is evil? No, nor should he, this PC party suits his PC's goals quite nicely without making it known that his PC's intentions are more sinister. He decides that his PC will have a few quirks, like always scratching at his shoulder when he's lying about something. Something that the PC's wont pick up on right away. One of the skills he chooses for his PC is Bluff(We'll say his PC is a rogue for this example). He will definitely use underhanded tactics to better his enemies, and be able to talk his way out of unpleasant situations should he need to do so. So far it looks like he's unaligned. What's he got in his backstory? Murderer, Thief, philanderer, hmm, what else would a character who is more evil inclined have done?
This is an example of character creation that would allow the player to play an evil character without being a detriment to his party. While the player's have downtime between the adventuring the rogue could be giving some kind of lie to his party about having to see someone or to retrieve some moneys owed by a friend or two in this city. This is where Roleplay comes into making a character evil.
Maybe the character has good intentions, but has a habit of doing something that others would see as dastardly, evil, or even distasteful. Remember not every player is going to want a fully good PC, and not every player will want to play a fully evil character.
Its kind of daunting isn't it? But also, looks like it will be a lot of fun.
I told the wood-be evil player to come up with more than just "I'm adventuring for money". Otherwise, his ties to the party could, and probably would, lead to him trying to take advantage of them. But I think that's a pretty reasonable thing to ask of any player, "Why aren't you a merchant then?" Not sure what else to say. And, I think you're right that with out further background he should just play unaligned.
We ended up deciding on a template for them all to work together, at the suggestion of the players too. They are going to be the international branch of a nation's policing body, specifically Imaskar. It seems to work because they will probably have to do things that are pretty foul, but at the same time will be upholding law and justice. Although, its totally mirky, hardboiled morality.
The only thing I'd suggest is an Anthony Hopkins quote from an interview where he was asked how he plays evil so well, "My characters like themselves."
Playing a villian can be fun especially when rest of the party is good, even in 4e i have never told my players that they couldn't be evil, in fact one of my players he and i reflavored the paladin into a blackgaurd. Wasn't to hard to do and its set up some very interesting situations for lots of fun rp. It can however cause alot of issues and i think putting an evil character into a group of good guys is gonna spell disaster at some point so as a DM need to explain to the players, that if want to play a villian need to consider where it will lead, will the campaign change them? one of my players is an evil wizard who hides his intentions but has stated he intends to have him slowly change his way of thinking.
A great example of how bringing an evil character into a campaign can ruin it was in my own experience. I was playing a very rightous and good divine character, who had even attained the living saint template. When a new player decided to come into the campaign, he chose to be an undead(was a race in 3.5 i forget what its called but had undead traits) necromancer, now this totally conflicted with my character. I continually warned him and the group that bringing an necro into the group would not work rp wise, and after much arguments he went and played the character anyway. being one of those people keeps to the character no matter what, i had no choice to be have my character make party choose, new guy or the me, and since they refused to make a choice he left the group.
I tell this story because it needs to be known that introducing an evil character into a group, can be fun but it can also be disastrous. My basic point is if your going to allow evil characters its your duty as the DM to carefully monitor and manipulate how there being used and played and make sure its 100% ok with the whole group, or don't allow it because it can really upset things.
How i RP evil!
Never been asked this but i've been told i do rp evil characters exceptionally well. Is probably because almost all of my characters don't tend to think of themselves as good or evil, in fact if you really think about it good and evil are just words and is how i see it for my characters. Who is to say what is good and what is evil? whats good to you or evil to you may not be to me and its same in real cultures. Society dictates what is good and evil right and wrong. To most people eating the dead would be considered evil, by most but in some cultures that was considered honoring the dead. Of course are some actions are universally evil such as murder, and theft(though kender would argue this one!).
My point is when you go to play an evil character i think its generally a good idea to never use good or evil in playing them. Reason is that, it can sort of skew way you think of your character. A cleric of Bane is probably going to tell you that, law and order and subjugation is only true means to peace HE feels his way is the right way and will argue it or beat you in the face till you agree! Truth is no great villian ever saw themselves as the bad guy, just doing what they do because its who they are!
A great way to portray this is something like this. A young wizard falls in love with a princess and loves her very much. He is always at her side and believes in truth and justice and has a heart of gold. But the opposing king sends and assassin to kill the princess and wizard was not there. The wizard in such grief made a classic choice and sells his soul and becomes a Lich! he uses his new found power to raise countless undead, and kills murders, and destroys anything in his path to finding the assassin. Once he finds the assassin he kills him only to find the tyrant of enemy kingdom was real culprit! he turns his sight on the enemy kingdom and uses his power to fight for justice! in the lich's mind he is fighting for justice, though he does so in an evil way is he good? is he evil? who will players side with? choices like these blur line between what is good and evil and are always things to consider.
That being said are your characters are pretty blatantly vile and evil. A fighter who kills for pure joy of killing, or a wizard who uses human test subjects in his magical experiments are pretty clear cut and also viable choices but in my own opinion don't offer the intrigue and fun of that evil that blurs the line between what is right and wrong.
Just a few thoughts i had on it, and things i always consider when doing an evil character.
I know that there will always be dissension with certain thoughts on the matter, which I welcome, disagreement and agreement can lead to great things.
There are quite a few quotes I can possibly use with this idea/concept, so I don't know which to really choose.
Mostly I believe DM's in general(there are those who don't fall into this statement, so I don't mean any disrespect with it) are afraid of allowing Evil PC's. Many DM's fear adding an element of conflict within their adventuring parties with the addition of evil PC's, unless it suits their story in some way. This usually comes in the form of an NPC rather than a PC.
What Types of chapters would you consider a book like this to have? The Basics, Playing/DMing evil, Simple choices and Complex Choices, Background Help, what else?
Many DM's fear adding an element of conflict within their adventuring parties with the addition of evil PC's, unless it suits their story in some way.
I have never understood this notion that every party with even a single Evil character must have some conflict within them. If these people are adventuring together, I assume it is because they like each other, and want to protect each other. If they didn't, they wouldn't be with each other.
"Evil" does not mean "stab murder burn kill everyone including your friends!"
I have never understood this notion that every party with even a single Evil character must have some conflict within them. If these people are adventuring together, I assume it is because they like each other, and want to protect each other. If they didn't, they wouldn't be with each other.
"Evil" does not mean "stab murder burn kill everyone including your friends!"
Conflict doesn't necessarily mean bad conflict. When I say conflict I mean tension, just couldn't think of the right word at the time.
Conflict doesn't necessarily mean bad conflict. When I say conflict I mean tension, just couldn't think of the right word at the time.
No. You used the proper literary term. Conflict means any sort of tension, or struggle in which there are two opposite forces with mutually exclusive goals.
Conflict doesn't necessarily mean bad conflict. When I say conflict I mean tension, just couldn't think of the right word at the time.
I still don't understand how there would be more tension in an Evil group than in a non-Evil group. While Evil is usually shown as being stupidly paranoid of everything and backstabbing friends at every turn*, Unaligned and Good characters can still have ideological troubles with each other. In the same way, Evil characters cna be like-minded and work well together.
Really, I don't feel that any special rules or consesions need to be made to play Evil characters. All that changes is your "side".
*I've always found this to be a little too much of "Cartoony" Evil. You know, the kind with guys twirling their mustaches. That's just not how normal people act to their friends. I know some people do, but being Evil does not require this.
I have never understood this notion that every party with even a single Evil character must have some conflict within them. If these people are adventuring together, I assume it is because they like each other, and want to protect each other. If they didn't, they wouldn't be with each other.
"Evil" does not mean "stab murder burn kill everyone including your friends!"
*Nods* Yeah, it is a odd thing for me to understand as well. I have had worse luck with LG Paladins killing the party then evil characters.
Our Do's:
- Keep everyone on the same page. If your playing cartoony evil, everyone is on that page. If your playing a more subtle, complicated evil, everyone is on that page. This helps reduce the chance of players going off into areas that are distasteful, harmful to the campaign, etc.
- Don't view evil campaigns as different method wise. There is still a story, sandbox, or whatever method you employ. The events that take place are simply different.
- Flesh out the characters. I think this is the best way to avoid any harm, is to make them actual fleshed out characters, the harm comes in when people just do one-dimensional evil characters.
- Related to above. Not everything need be evil all the time. Just like how good PCs may perform unsavoury tasks at times, evil may not always perform evil tasks or intend to cause as much harm or mayhem as possible.
- For the DM, build a cast of NPCs that relate to the PCs. This can be a way to monitor ones level of "evilness" and keep the PCs tied to what is happening. You may have a character that is neutral and above your PCs or someone despicable and below the level your PCs would go.
I think in general there really isn't that much difference between a good campaign and a evil one.
Yeah, totally agree its important to outline why the party is together. It's just more important to outline it in detail if you have an evil member in an otherwise good party.
Flesh it out is the best advice for any game, imo.
"Keep everyone on the same page. If your playing cartoony evil, everyone is on that page. If your playing a more subtle, complicated evil, everyone is on that page. This helps reduce the chance of players going off into areas that are distasteful, harmful to the campaign, etc."
That's a great point.
I find it really useful to consider alignment on the spectrum of self-serving to serving others. Rather than who does what. Or this is good and that is evil. It makes a party of adventures more viable imo. Hannibal Lecture is a really good example of that sort of murkiness, sure he kills people solely for self preservation but sometimes he also kills people because he considers them an affront to society. Not every evil character should be Hannibal Lecture, but he's a lot more interesting than say "I'm in it for money". And, also, more likely to work with good aligned characters in the long run, even if there's conflict.
I still don't understand how there would be more tension in an Evil group than in a non-Evil group. While Evil is usually shown as being stupidly paranoid of everything and backstabbing friends at every turn*, Unaligned and Good characters can still have ideological troubles with each other. In the same way, Evil characters cna be like-minded and work well together.
Really, I don't feel that any special rules or consesions need to be made to play Evil characters. All that changes is your "side".
*I've always found this to be a little too much of "Cartoony" Evil. You know, the kind with guys twirling their mustaches. That's just not how normal people act to their friends. I know some people do, but being Evil does not require this.
Ok, while I agree with part of this statement, I think I need to clarify something, I'm not looking into a "How to play a Cartoony Evil guy." Cartoony evil is fun sometimes, however, if that's the only evil character you allow into your party there will probably be more issues than necessary.
I also don't mean the type of evil character who is over-paranoid about being stabbed in the back while he slept. Though it is one option that I will not rule out if the players want to play a completely evil party.
When I played under a DM as an Evil PC(this was in 3.x) My character got attacked, all because the Paladin had an issue with the alignment(Y'know that Detect evil garbage that 3.x paladins had) of my character. I advised the paladin and the player of the paladin, as well as everyone at the table, that while my character did have an alignment of evil this shouldn't mean that he should be killed on that. The paladin(and player of said character) justified this attack by stating "Oh he hasn't done anything, but that doesn't mean he won't do something, I'm just acting first." As though the detect evil ability gave him all the justification he needed.
This is something I want to help future players and DM's avoid entirely when playing/having evil aligned characters in the party. With 4e this is actually made a little bit easier than with previous editions. What I intnd to do with this guidebook is to show that evil doesn't necessarily mean murderer toying with the party intending to betray and slay them(that's for an Evil DMPC/NPC to do anyway). An evil PC may have the intention to betray the party once his goals are achieved - Until that point the Evil PC will keep the party around, watching for the opportunity to either slip away at night, or openly explain his reasons for being with the party.
If you have ever read the Mystra series where Midnight(Took me a little while to remember her name) becomes the New Mystra, Kelemvore becomes a god of the dead, and Cyric becomes the new evil god that replaces Bane you may understand what I am trying to display here. Just because a character is evil, and likely will betray the party in some way, doesn't mean he wont need the party to help him achieve his goal moments before the betrayal. Sometimes the Evil character doesn't know the entirety of his/her own goals, and will need the party longer than he/she originally thinks necessary. Most often the Evil PC is there because his goals follow the same lines as the other PC's goals.(Yes I seem to have repeated myself here, maybe)
Kalnaur is probably referring to something like This as an example... at least one of the characters is obvious about his moral stance.
Kalnaur is probably referring to something like This as an example... at least one of the characters is obvious about his moral stance.
Yeah, that's about what I'm thinking. That and Black Mage from 8-bit theatre. And that halfling rogue twit from Order of the Stick. Though these guys all have their more 'cartoony' moments, they are also all rather absolute about their choice to be evil. They really feel pretty much no remorse for most of their actions, and yet their "good" party fellows tolerate them because, well, sometimes you need evil to fight evil.
If the party knows that the one member is evil, they will need just as much reason to use him and not betray him when the time comes, no?
That sounds like awesome fun. That's total prisoner's dilemma.
Your Paladin friend is a dolt. Proactive strikes have a real history of being considered acceptable.
If the party knows that the one member is evil, they will need just as much reason to use him and not betray him when the time comes, no?
That sounds like awesome fun. That's total prisoner's dilemma.
I got over it when another party member basically knocked the Paladin out cold.
Which is good, as my next up character for if my current one dies is an evil wizard, and I'd really rather not have the paladin start trying to disembowel him in his sleep when he joins the group.
Evil can be fun- even the subtle evil. My designs might be 'evil' on a grander scale, but that doesn't necessarily mean I can't work with the party, or will even act evil all the time in their presence.
Just because I choose to dispell enemy mages, buff some party members, and advocate capturing the enemy leader alive doesn't mean I'm a stalwart champion of good. It just means that my plans haven't come to fruition yet. :p
I do however play in an all evil campaign, and have to admit I'm enjoying it.
Personally I think that having experience in roleplaying games is important when dealing with evil. Both as player and DM.
And, as some have mentioned, is beeing on the same page, and somehow find a way of having your characters getting along.
I actually think that one of the most important things that we did was sit down and talk, the DM and the players. When you play evil, terrible things can happen, either by the characters hands or by others. We sat down, and talked about what things we wanted to have in the campaign. And we also talked about things that we absolutely didn't want in the campaign.
This meant that we all knew what we were getting into.
I play a character that doesn't see herself as evil, but dedicated to a person and a cause. I usually have my character use the best of her knowledge to solve any problems, and sometimes this includes commiting quite terrible acts. I don't play the killer, the dark mysterious one or the seducting femme fatale for that matter. Just someone that does what they believe is right, and hoping to get a lot of goodies in return in the long run.
The current one I'm building wants to become a god- he knows it can be done, and he's decided that the best way to do that is to join a group of adventurers. He doesn't care about their scruples or principles- but that doesn't mean he won't help them if he decides it suits him.
Really, in the tradition of subtly evil characters, it still takes work to get them to work and not just be 'neutral'. And when your DM is convinced that evil characters must regularly be evil, and tends to alter character's alignments because he feels they're not portraying their stereotype right, well... I've got my work cut out for me.
The biggest thing I can do, I think, would be to play him as a bit arrogant- I can do that well, and it serves to highlight his flaws while not necessarily giving his alignment away to the party.
Other then that, it's just a matter of perhaps expressing interest in the most direct solution to any problem initially, then waving it off when the good characters call him on it. "oh no, I was kidding. Of course I don't want to boil the mayor in acid."
Anyway, Havoc is a drow rogue who likes to play mind games and manipulate people to do things they ordinarily wouldn't do. He's a cynic, which isn't necessarily evil, but it puts him at odds with the LGs of the group. He knows he needs this group to survive, and the RPing is bringing him more to consider the group as a kind of family that he actually gives a damn about, but his nature is most often expressed with his treatment of captured enemies "Screw it! I say we whack 'em now!" and his trying to get away with little things, like palming things out of treasure chests before the rest of the party can see what's inside. He's still Evil, and the party sometimes has to threaten his well-being to keep him in line, but he's in no way detrimental to the party as a whole.
-DON'T BE EVIL-STUPID: Evil should have an agenda that will be profitable and advance him, not one that is pointless, idiotic and stupid. An excuse to murder your group and random people is a Deranged Lunitic that should be institutionalized, and not an Evil Villain.
-DON'T KILL YOUR PARTY MEMBERS: This is Evil-Stupid, it's being a jerk OOC since you are meta-gaming your PC to ruin the game for the other players, and it is also short sighted as it motivates others to kill you right back.
-GOOD PEOPLE ARE THE BEST PARTY MEMBERS: They are generally more gulible and trusting, they don't stab you in the back or slit your throat while you are sleeping, so you can trust them, they will defend your life, and most importantly, when they figure out your evil plot they will actually confront you with it before taking action which gives you plenty of warning (rather then secretly ploting behind your back)
-ALWAYS KILL OTHER EVIL PCS IN YOUR GROUP: It wins points with the good PCs, plus they can't be trusted, they WILL slit your throaght in your sleep. Always off the competition.
Some rules I use myself for playing an Evil PC, especially in a mixed group:
-DON'T BE EVIL-STUPID: Evil should have an agenda that will be profitable and advance him, not one that is pointless, idiotic and stupid. An excuse to murder your group and random people is a Deranged Lunitic that should be institutionalized, and not an Evil Villain.
-DON'T KILL YOUR PARTY MEMBERS: This is Evil-Stupid, it's being a jerk OOC since you are meta-gaming your PC to ruin the game for the other players, and it is also short sighted as it motivates others to kill you right back.
-GOOD PEOPLE ARE THE BEST PARTY MEMBERS: They are generally more gulible and trusting, they don't stab you in the back or slit your throat while you are sleeping, so you can trust them, they will defend your life, and most importantly, when they figure out your evil plot they will actually confront you with it before taking action which gives you plenty of warning (rather then secretly ploting behind your back)
-ALWAYS KILL OTHER EVIL PCS IN YOUR GROUP: It wins points with the good PCs, plus they can't be trusted, they WILL slit your throaght in your sleep. Always off the competition.
Some Do's and Don't's that make a lot of sense. Never liked seeing other players go evil-stupid to the point I or another party member had to kill their character.
The last one is a little iffy, since multiple evil characters may have the same or similar goals to the rest of the party. If they are actively competing with your character, then yes, your character may need to take care of the nefarious and dastardly villain. "He was going to betray you, I saw it in his eyes." and "He told me that the only way I would stop him was to kill him." are the best excuses if it comes to that. - Of course you should have a prior agreement with the other player in the case that this does happen, so that no one has hard feelings in the end. I know how some people can get very attached to their characters.
Eventually they caught up to us in a village while we were in a tavern. The vigilante paladin demanded that the party gave me up for custody. The party's halfling paladin was almost ready to give me up and when it came to blows he even tried to knock me unconscious (he thought that if i were his prisoner the vigilantes would let him hand me over to the authorities instead of them thus ensuring a more favorable treatment; yeah it really stupid but he thought it could happen, don't ask). He then settled for not attacking me or the dwarf who decided to side with me. Unfortunately for him I am going to incriminate him for a robbery and murder we had committed way before he became a paladin; and the vigilantes know it happened because it was in their home town, they just don't know who did it.
So this is something that has the potential to really destroy our party (I haven't decided yet if I am going to kill him for trying to attack me, the more pressing problem at the moment is to stay alive) and it wasn't even something that happened in a session. The DM just decided to send after me some LG vigilante guys lead by a LG paladin. Damn, being evil is tough.
Metagamers ruin games.
Just so DM's know, just because your player has it in his backstory, doesn't mean you have to make large deals about it. Perhaps the Evil PC has a valid reason for that past action that he is aware may or may not come back to haunt him.... This is where DM's and players should do more discussion on backstory and consequences of past(backstory) and present(in game) actions.
Evil_Warlock Have you been useful to your party? If yes, then it really shouldn't matter whether or not your group is being confronted by vigilante's... One thing I dislike about LG is that many players tend toward the "I'll believe anything that someone else says, because I'm following the law and it is my duty" type of LG rather than the "I'll consider your words, as the laws of where we are don't cover these accusations" type. It's very much like Evil characters, there's Lawful-smart and Lawful-stupid. But that's a bit off topic.
From my experience DMing, evil parties will almost constantly come to blows over minor things, but in general the Evil PCs recognize that, well, most of the time people like them cannot work in cohesive peer-oriented groups, and so they do not want to lose the massive benefits of that. So, while my players will very readily place their pieces on the table and roll initiative against each other or do stupid pranks on each other, it never goes beyond beating someone up.
Although, all my evil games have exclusively had gangsters of some sort as the PCs. I've never run or been in a game where the PCs play outright villains. I'm not sure exactly how that would go, since one of my players doesn't like it very much.
Some good advice so far, lets keep the advice going. I also want to expand this to Evil PC concepts(the Anti-hero is among this breed IMO), Background help, and even playing the characters choices.
1.) ---NEVER--- play stupidly. "I walk up to him, and kill him." is not justified by your alignment, neither does "Chaotic" mean "I do what the **** I want, when I want."
2.) On that note, if you play Chaotic Evil, discern the difference between something that is anti-law, and something that is in itself just quirky and strange in nature. One is closer to the truth of the alignment, the other is a personality addition.
3.) On that note, invest in a personality quirk that completes his alignment. No one is innately evil, something about them -makes- them evil. Maybe they're greedy, and that overpowers their common/sense of right and wrong, maybe they're just bloodthirsty. But, something is in them that makes them choose the choices they do.
4.) Invest in the leadership feat, or a familiar, or animal companion, and give them a quirk to go with your characters. Sometimes, it's just fun to portray a character who is possessed of companions or lackeys whom they can share moments with. After all, bad guys need love, affection, and a laugh or two, too.
JLaurHughes
Evil_Warlock Have you been useful to your party? If yes, then it really shouldn't matter whether or not your group is being confronted by vigilante's... One thing I dislike about LG is that many players tend toward the "I'll believe anything that someone else says, because I'm following the law and it is my duty" type of LG rather than the "I'll consider your words, as the laws of where we are don't cover these accusations" type. It's very much like Evil characters, there's Lawful-smart and Lawful-stupid. But that's a bit off topic.
Of course I have been useful, I rarely if ever do something that is disruptive for the party. Not only because I don't want to play like that, but because of story elements too (I have had some dreams that relate my ultimate goals with the other two members of the party, so it is in my best interest to further the cause of the party). It's the fact that the rogue/paladin thinks that because another paladin asked him to side against me he has to agree with him. Let's face it, what I did happened in the underdark a lot of years ago. It is a dangerous place where you know what you risk for doing business there. My point is that he shouldn't have interfered because these guys are not even legal representatives of justice, they have been paid to find my character and throw him in jail if not kill him outright. However you are right we should not derail the topic.
Also regarding the character concepts that you mentioned, I think the most viable of them is the antihero which is also the basis of my character. Most of the other concepts would be too aggressive to be tolerated for a long time. The antihero would be willing to work with a group to further his own goals but the methods he would employ would not be bound by a strict moral code. Of course this does not mean that the antihero is always going to use the evil way. I think the concept brings a relatively safe level of tension into the party, just enough to keep things interesting. Anything more aggressive than that and you have to ensure that there are no LG characters in the party and that the party is always in outside pressure that prevents them from infighting.
As for tips
1: play it smart and try to utilize story elements to your advantage, no one is going to tolerate stupid evil
2: you have to realize that you are here to further your own cause and not to accomplish some obscure evil agenda; you are an evil character not the evil high priest of an evil cult (unless of course you are the evil high priest of an evil cult)
Here is how it was setup:
My character grew up with the other characters until he was about 8. His immediate family was killed at this time and he was sent to his uncle on the outskirts of the area. Those that did it got away with it on a legal technicality.
He lived a secluded life. His uncle was morally loose and didn't have any issues with using force and guile to get things done. Long story less long, he got training from his uncle and his friends that were of 'questionable' alignment.
After his training was complete and he turned 18, he left for the city to start his adventures. Some of his childhood friends had the same idea and they had a friendly reunion and formed a party.
My character was VERY protective of his family and friends (party falls into this category). He despised sexual assault and demanded retribution for any wrong doings. If he found out that a friend was harmed, he would track down who did it, kidnap them, torture them with in equivalent manner for an extended period, then either kill them or ruin the rest of their lives.
If a merchant ripped off the party, he would return later and steal what he believed he was owed, plus a little more for the trouble.
The basic idea is that the evil character was extremely loyal to the rest of the party, but how he dealt with people that wronged him was evil. He wanted to adventure to track down and kill those that killed his family. His other motivation was that the current ruling class and laws were flawed. He wanted the power to force them to make changes for the better. He saw himself as doing good for the community, but had no qualms about how he achieved it.
So if you get your evil guy/gal to have a reason to not betray the party, there should only be moral conflicts which can be handled with role play.
I'm playing in a vampire and werewolf game at the moment that's loosely based on White Wolf games but I believe advice from playing an evil vampiress can apply to Dungeons and Dragons here.
I play a female vampire who plays the whole seductive thing to a T. She doesn't act the tramp but she's a tease aka flirty looks, clothing that's revealing but not so much that it gives everything away, a bit of hand holding. Then, when she finally gets the "lucky guy" alone, she has her fun with them before ripping their throats out.
The one other female in the group hates her guts. :D
So she is evil. But she is far from stupid. She keeps a knife on her to slash the throats of victims to obliterate the marks that come from a vampire feeding along with stealing all valuables and throw off the trail of suspicious vampire hunters. She also leaves enough blood in the victim to make a mess of things so the crime actually looks natural. But, other then not getting caught, she has no greater agenda than her own pleasure.
Recently she became a paid informant for a pair of vampire hunters from the Vatican though. She feels no loyalty to her fellow creatures of the night and enjoys the nice protection and dividends that come from being on the pay roll of the Vatican. The only problem now is being a lot sneakier when it comes to her playing her hunting games.
So I think playing an evil party member requires a few things:
1) Being smart about it. You actually want to live long enough to enjoy the fruits of your heinous acts.
2) Discretion when it comes to evil-doing.
3) Making sure your evil overlord wannabe does have some reason to be traveling with the party in question.
4) Being prepared to accept consequences may come from your actions (AKA arrest warrents, bounties on your head, angry party members who discover your attempted villainy, and the occasional lynch mob).
5) Just because you are evil and the rest of the party isn't doesn't mean you can't develop some affection for them even if they are interfering pests upon occasion. Think of them as your puppy who widdles on an important project before it's completed but is just so damn cute in its stupidity that you can't really get angry at it.
Hope this advice helps!
One nice thing about this is that it gives the party a common bond, and an extant quest, and a pretty good reason not to betray each other, even if different paths to darkness might put them at odds or cross-purposes with each other all the same. It also gives a good backdrop for the characters to consider why their character is turning evil- is it something forced on them or that they were trapped into? Is it a willing sacrifice they made for the "greater good"? Is it simply a symptom of a much more general descent into madness?
Honestly, the last time I played a campaign like this, the party came to represent nothing so much as the ensemble from Watchmen, which we all took to indicate that it was a rousing success of a story.
So... um...
There are two kinds of evil PCs: Brutal Evil and Mastermind Evil.
Brutal Evil
This type of player is interested in playing an evil PC to escape the constraints of a morally bound character. They want to sneak into a family's window at night and slit all of their throats and steal their hierlooms, they don't want to have to talk to the king, they want to kidnap and pummel their advisors to get the answers they need, they want freedom!
Brute evil characters have trouble figuring their place in a party of non-evil PCs, everyone is a target and they potentially stand to gain from killing the other players in the game. Brutal evil PCs are destructive and can seriously hamper the enjoyment of other players, it requires a good player to handle a character like this without derailing or destroying a game.
Some tips for playing a brutally evil character:
1. You are with these people (the other PCs) for a reason, define that reason clearly in your background so you know exactly why you do not want to kill them. If your character currently plans to kill them, let the DM know so he can try and work a reason not to into the early plot.
2. Be ready to be corralled on occasion by the DM or the PCs, you may be reveling in your new-found bloodthirst but if you're bloodthirst-ing all over important story PCs expect the entire town guard, a powerful wizard or the geas of a good god to be in your future. Don't take this as your character being destroyed as a concept, work it out with the DM and figure out an in-character way to tone down your murderism (for a bit).
3. Take a breather once in a while for the other player's sake! Remember what it was like playing a good character? Having to take time to think about moral quandaries or decide the best way to do something without killing everyone in the town? The good PCs you are traveling with are still dealing with those conundrums and you need to be prepared to wait a minute while they think over their options. Sure, you are always capable of the most direct (read: bloodiest!) route but they may not be willing or able to follow you. You may be an amoral deathmachine, but you're part of the team too (for some reason?)
4. Many players do not play evil characters because the things they do are HORRIBLE to them. Describing that you garrote wire an innocent man and take his purse so you can buy some new daggers is bad, but when you start getting into the R-rated offenses (I shouldn't need to mention the variety) you may begin to cause some serious discomfort in those of lighter constitution. Try to keep a good gauge of the other players, after a particularly horrific atrocity, check with them (or the one who has turned green) and make sure they're still willing to play if you keep on like this. People are emotional, evil is unpleasant! 1+1 DOES equal 2!
Evil Mastermind
This type of player is exploring evil for a higher-functioning reason, whether as an interesting roleplaying experiment or to test out some evil-only game options, he is not so interested in getting his fists wet as he is in breaking out all of the powers you've never seen before and getting the PCs at each other's throats. His evil choice is more social or intellectual as opposed to visceral.
Masterminds have no trouble fitting in to a group... until things start going missing or important NPCs start winding up dead... or the game slows down when he has to constantly whisper or pass messages to the DM... when "okay, we all go to sleep" turns into a 15 minute private session for the mastermind. The problem with the mastermind is he is already a good player who is exploiting his amorality to play the game the way he wants to.
Tips for playing the wolf among sheep:
1. You need to read all of the tips for the Brutal Evil character and try to follow them as well!
2. On top of that, try to leave the interrelations of the PCs alone. Good PCs are usually notoriously gullible and trusting, as the intelligent villain you know that and can exploit it... but don't! D&D is a game of teamwork, sure you may occasionally need to stick a dagger in someone's back to get a good foothold to climb a wall... but turn around and offer your hand afterward otherwise these good guys are going to wonder why they keep you around at all.
3. Recognize that as much as you are calculating them, they are calculating you too. Be aware of the value that a character with limited inhibitions brings a group trying to overcome in-game challenges, if you can see them struggling with something don't hold back just because it would put your character in some unnecessary risk. Don't forget the teamwork just because you're playing chess with your allies!
4. Just don't be a jerk.
Opinions: I have many.
Though I have never played a villain in a game of D&D, I have extensive experience playing villains in other mediums, I just have the personality that can be expressed through an evil character in a way that dissolves group cohesion, causes massive paranoia and develops bitter enmity with every encounter. I stick to playing NPCs pretty much as a rule.
Hell, you can evil do reluctant evil, with races or people that are trying to be good, but keep failing hilariously, and eventually decide that since they're so bad at being good, they might as well be good at being bad.
Evil doesn't have to be cruel, for example. Word Fwuffy won Fwuffy, dark wabbit of wile weachery, for instance could be quite the nicest bunny you've every run into. He could frolic with the children and be neat and tidy, and all the while be plotting your eventual doom.
No, the evil I have always preferred playing is the "I'm evil because I was forced to be" evil, the "I generally try to do good things, but I'll use extreme methods to accomplish them" evil... Otherwise known as "The Anti-Hero"
My own personal experience, as both a GM and a player, is that The Anti-Hero is usually the easiest to integrate into a group of predominantly good PCs. More often than not, the Anti-Hero's goals are in harmony with the Good aligned PC's: removing the local goblin tribe that's been harassing the village, overthrowing the despotic duke who rules with an iron fist over the city, or any other plot you could think of...
What's different is the means by which the Anti-Hero will use to accomplish theses goals...
Nasidious Tyrantfiend (human Hexblade)... one of my oldest and favorite characters. Old Nas was the child of Nerull worshippers, and was indoctrinated as a child into some really foul stuff, which I won't go into too much detail over. Needless to say, while still very young, his parents met a violent end at the hands of an adventuring group, in the process, saving poor old Nas and placing him in an orphanage. Already a rather maladjusted kid, being in an orphanage hurt Nas more than it helped him, as he was a frequent target of bullies and such. Being a problem child, Nas was cast out of the orphanage at age 13, alone and without a copper to his name. Fortunately, fate finally smiled upon him, and he was taken in by an elderly half-orc, whom happened to be a retired adventurer. The half-orc, Karn Red-Tusk, taught Nas the basics of swordplay, and more importantly, showed the kid a bit of much needed compassion and understanding, becoming the closest thing to a father the Nasidious had ever known. Unfortunately, around age 16, odd occurence began happening around Nas, and in a minor argument one evening, Nas became enraged and instinctually lashed out at Karn with wild arcane power, accidentally killing him. Upon coming to his sences, Nas was horrifed by his actions and fled, eventually meeting up with the PC group.
Now, here, we have this guy who's been beaten and battered all his life, but has experienced at least some sense of belonging and genuine friendship. He genuinely wants to do good, and very much wishes to atone for his actions, but he has a vicious streak 3 miles wide...
Nas wouldn't go out of his way to hurt people. He didn't want power, or bloodshed, or anything like that. All he wanted was to try and fix things in the world he knew was wrong. He couldn't stand bullies, and hated anyone who would harm someone for personal gain. Problem was, he dealt with these problems in extreme, often times utterly horrifying matters....
Nas catches a street urchin picking his pockets? Good PC's would probably give the kid a stern reprimand, turning over to authorities at worst. Nas? He'c cut the urchin's hands off. Local tribe of goblins harassing the towns folk? Nas goes in and kills them all, men, women, and children alike.
The classic example of Nas was a high ranking noble in a large city was committing some rather nefarious deeds (the least of which were over-taxing the lower class and generally being abusive to anyone whom was below his station). This noble was also believed to be guilty of consorting with a the criminal element in the city, and was the cause of a lot of problems going on within it's walls. However, said noble was pretty well protected by his status, and was all to willing to hide behind the law.
How did Nas take care of the problem?
He snuck into the noble's house one night, killed half his family, and framed it on the noble.
Anyway... I've ranted enough here.
Think of the party as a useful resource to be utilized. Would you ever throw your money away without any thought? Why would you do something like that for your valuable party members? With the proper application of RP skills they can help you in a lot of ways. Not to mention the high combat value of getting between you and your enemies. Of course you have to somehow contribute to the overall effort to be able to claim their help (unless you are that good at convincing them to work for you that you don't have to lift a finger, in which case tell us what is your secret).
You hit the nail on the head for my current evil character in a mostly good campaign. Evil in no way has to be detrimental to anything, and "I'm gold hungry" isn't the only flavor of greed for evil. Knowledge, power, contacts, secrets, the list goes on. When you are only evil in your own mind, no one can ever pin it on you!
Said evil character I play is a Tiefling Bard/Wizard who secretly reveres Vecna. Bastard child all his life, moved between unwanted caretakers, payed or pitying mentors, Ancev turned to old man undead himself for the value of secrets and knowledge. With no one to ever check his morality, he's gone the way of "Everyone must do it, we just hear about those that get caught". Long story short, he hooked up with an adventuring group just for the experience and knowledge of it while trying to weasel out tips, tricks and secrets from his fellow party members.
Will he betray the party? No*. But he sure doesn't have a problem telling a lie to the rogue to make him think he worships the Raven Queen just to hear his entire character history! (*Betrayal is in the eye of the beholder, what they won't know won't hurt em... right?)
Does he love killing? Nope. But cutting a throat (for a purpose) to make sure no one finds out he's been stealing information on how Eladrin use Longswords for implements sure as hell won't make him hesitate.
Will he unveil some grand plan to usher in the age of undead in the name of the might Vecna?! Hell no. Evil is fundamentally all about you. Ancev could care less about undead, to him its just the core of an apple. Part of the apple, but who the hell wants to eat it? Worship is just another knowledge, he takes what he wants and ditches the rest. This is where evil boils down to which direction you are looking, in his view no way in hell is he evil. He gets what he wants, tries not to hurt anyone and moves on. From the cleric of Pelor's point of view Ancev has been untruthful, a thief, murderer, sacrilegious (pretending faith of others) and the list goes on. But he never looked the right direction.
In conclusion, even though I'm having an absolute blast with the character I can't wait for his end. Words will never be able to describe the pure joy I will experience when I tell the party about Ancev after he's gone. The realizations, connections, deceits, cover ups, manipulations, and reactions to it all will be priceless. That, and when they find my paraphernalia bag full of a dozen Holy Symbols of various faiths, stolen eladrin secrets, and proof of murders it will be like finding out your baby sitter is wanted for strangling children. THAT my friends, is evil... when they don't know it till its too late. :evillaugh
If this thread has touched anyone in a special way, I would highly recommend The Black Company by Glen Cook. An amazing work of fiction that is true inspiration for the whole concept of "What/who is evil"
I'm surprised they haven't figured out his name yet. I mean, seriously. Dood.
Hilarious isn't it? The big thing here though is that on the forums its being read and Vecna is mentioned in the same post. If no one has mentioned Vecna to you in weeks and you are just hearing the name Ancev out loud... its pretty easy to miss. My DM didn't even catch on right away until I gave him the written version of the history that I had already told him verbally.
Of course, to be fair, my mind tried to pronounce it ahnkev, not ansev.
For the record, this character never made any secret of the fact that he was self-serving, arrogant, manipulative, and hedonistic. He was a mercenary, plain and simple - allied with the rest of the group only because they happened to share a common goal. Of course, when he finally discovered that there was more profit to be found in working for the bad guys, he turned on the party (becoming the BBEG of the campaign, in fact). None of them should've been surprised, but somehow they never saw it coming.
How did he get away with it? By being likable.
This character honestly believed that his gift for Sorcery made him superior to all other forms of Mortal life. However, that belief manifested itself as bravado - a kind of a fearless, "can-do" attitude. That attitude was infectious, and before long he was everyone's favorite party member. They all knew that he was too infatuated with himself to care sincerely about any of them, but that somehow became a part of his charm - just one of the quirks that made him an entertaining character.
So... here's my advice on sneaking an Evil character into a Good party: if you're entertaining enough, the other players will look the other way. As long as you can keep them laughing, most players are willing to let a few character defects slide.
This thread is really inspired by another in the Future Releases forum here.The 4e setting which is implied is Points of Light, this doesn't mean that all these points of light will produce fully good characters.
For starters - you need to re-read Rich Baker's 'Points of Light' memo. It does not equate points of darkness as a haven of evil. 'Points of Light' are active centres of civilization. If they go Dark, they are simply dormant or ruined. It is the failure of the network interconnection that results in the isolation and failure of a Point of Light. The Village is isolated from other communities and it falls the next time goblins march through.
Points of Light are havens of Civilization (both good and evil).
What I do is establish the following:
Leadership Alignment:
Population Dispersal
50% Alignment:
25% Alignment:
12.5% Alignment:
6.25% Alignment:
3.125% Alignment:
3.125% Other Alignments:
So if I roll for these things I might get Leader(LN), 50% (NG), 25% (LN), 12.5% (LE), 6.25% (NE), 3.125% (CE), 3.125% (Other). This describes a community that is majority Good (>50%) tending Neutral (81.75%). Significantly Evil is represented by just over 20% of the population and Law is a Minority point of view.
If you want an Evil character in this community who isnt a murder suspect (CE), you are looking at the LE vocal minority who are disgusted as to the leniency of the Headsman's Axe and the complacency of the Populace with regard to rules. Surak the Butcher probably doubles as the Baron's Headsman just so he can feel that He is dishing out the Law to criminals who violate the Law.
I have never understood this notion that every party with even a single Evil character must have some conflict within them. If these people are adventuring together, I assume it is because they like each other, and want to protect each other. If they didn't, they wouldn't be with each other.
"Evil" does not mean "stab murder burn kill everyone including your friends!"
Exactly. Evil people can like, or even love people and have friends who they are loyal to.
I had an evil wizard in 3.5 who was traveling with a good group. They saw him as a bit selfish and somewhat arrogant, but he helped out, never tried to steal from them or do anything other than what a good companion should.
Two members of the party killed off an NPC that the party saw betray a dwarven stronghold to the orcs. The barbarian we killed was a member of a tribe that wanted revenge, and the second NPC present got away to report what had happened.
While we were traveling through the woods, we were ambushed by a bunch of the tribe members. After a long, hard fight, everyone was unconcious or possibly dead, except for me. I was flying in the air and had expended all of my magic except for my wand of magic missles. There were only 2-3 barbarians left, but they had ranged weapons and it was very iffy on whether or not I could survive against them, let alone win.
I tried to bluff them into letting us go, or face the rest of my mighty magic. I had killed many of them, so it was a possibility. They didn't fall for it completely, but they did agree to let me have everyone but the two who killed the tribe member. If I let them have those two to kill, the rest could go free.
Being evil, even though they were "friends", I wasn't about to risk probable death to save them, especially when I had secured the safety of most of the group. There were 7 players, so I saved myself and 4 others by agree to let them kill the two they were after.
If had been playing a "good" character, I'd have tried to kill them. An evil character can and will have an impact on the game, but it doesn't have to be him vs. the group. That's just disruptive.
For starters - you need to re-read Rich Baker's 'Points of Light' memo. It does not equate points of darkness as a haven of evil. 'Points of Light' are active centres of civilization. If they go Dark, they are simply dormant or ruined. It is the failure of the network interconnection that results in the isolation and failure of a Point of Light. The Village is isolated from other communities and it falls the next time goblins march through.
I don't see how this is relevant, we're not discussing the setting itself. We're discussing playing Evil PC's here.
Points of Light are havens of Civilization (both good and evil).
I agree, this is why We're discussing the inclusion of an Evil PC into a party, or playing a group of Evil PC's.
What I do is establish the following:
Leadership Alignment:
Population Dispersal
50% Alignment:
25% Alignment:
12.5% Alignment:
6.25% Alignment:
3.125% Alignment:
3.125% Other Alignments:
So if I roll for these things I might get Leader(LN), 50% (NG), 25% (LN), 12.5% (LE), 6.25% (NE), 3.125% (CE), 3.125% (Other). This describes a community that is majority Good (>50%) tending Neutral (81.75%). Significantly Evil is represented by just over 20% of the population and Law is a Minority point of view.
If you want an Evil character in this community who isnt a murder suspect (CE), you are looking at the LE vocal minority who are disgusted as to the leniency of the Headsman's Axe and the complacency of the Populace with regard to rules. Surak the Butcher probably doubles as the Baron's Headsman just so he can feel that He is dishing out the Law to criminals who violate the Law.
Again, I don't really see how this is in any way relevant. We're not discussing societies or evil NPC's within the setting, we're discussing Evil PC's within the Game, ones not controlled by the DM.