|
Splintering off from the evil campaign discussions in the general forums I'm wondering what elements would make for a working "Evil" campaign? What type of stories do you think should be presented? What elements do you think should be included to help keep an campaign on track? Should vices be included as elements to portray reality or should they be just window dressing that aren't really addressed (such as drug use)? Anything else that might be added to an evil campaign?
I think it's key to define what kind of evil campaign you are after, as there are so many different kinds of evil and different motivations.
You could have the party be a coherent group of blackguards, evil clerics and assassins and the like all working toward furthering their dark overlord's plan to become a god or take over the world. A reverse standard campaign, if you will.
I find that muddled evil groups tend to end up fighting each other more than playing out the adventure. Without something to keep them cohesive, poorly thought out evil tends to get backstabby.
|
Having options that provide different ways to keep the group cohesive for a long period of time is an absolute must.
Also:
Moral ambiguity and gray areas - Not just for heroes anymore!
It's highly dependent on the characters and players, a lot of Evil PCs will fall into the category of "Even Evil Has Standards". After finding out what's important to the PCs, throw some hard moral dillemas at them as see how they approach things differently(or similar) to what you'd expect from standard good or neutral PCs. How far are they willing to go for what is important to them, or for each other?
Having options that provide different ways to keep the group cohesive for a long period of time is an absolute must.
Also:
Moral ambiguity and gray areas - Not just for heroes anymore!
It's highly dependent on the characters and players, a lot of Evil PCs will fall into the category of "Even Evil Has Standards". After finding out what's important to the PCs, throw some hard moral dillemas at them as see how they approach things differently(or similar) to what you'd expect from standard good or neutral PCs. How far are they willing to go for what is important to them, or for each other?
well I actually joined an evil game right here on the Boards, Linky
Check it out maybe it will give you ideas, he he.
Oh! Another important thing is to work out why they are evil. What motivates them outside of the main plot? Wealth? Power? Bloodlust?
If you know that, you can tie that into the campaign such that completing the campaign is a better way of fulfilling their evil than killing other members of the party.
Evil for evil's sake doesn't last.
|
|
Oh! Another important thing is to work out why they are evil. What motivates them outside of the main plot? Wealth? Power? Bloodlust?
This is an absolute must.
The one time I played an evil character, his primary motivations in the beginning were fear and love of his family. It really helped me flesh him out.
Mainly, you want to make sure the game doesn't devolve into rape/murder for fun. Just make sure your players know that you can be evil without raping dead babies and they will be punched if they try, and things should go somewhat smoothly.
On a related note, make sure they know they can be evil without backstabbing the other players constantly.
Oh! Another important thing is to work out why they are evil. What motivates them outside of the main plot? Wealth? Power? Bloodlust?
If you know that, you can tie that into the campaign such that completing the campaign is a better way of fulfilling their evil than killing other members of the party.
Evil for evil's sake doesn't last.
Very true, plus a leader type is important to keep the players from killing each other.
|
|
Moral ambiguity and gray areas - Not just for heroes anymore!
Definitely think the moral ambiguity/gray areas are important. I once played a drow priestess, who recently abandoned drow society for the surface, who performed a mercy killing on an NPC which led to the group discussion of whether or not it had been an evil act. From the view point of the character the person was beyond recovering with magic, which because of social morals that weren't completely abandoned was also deemed week so performing the mercy killing was seen as a blessing.
|
|
Good points so far, but what kind of story elements would you include, i.e. missions or quests?
Oh right, sorry.
Depending on the faiths among the PCs, establishing a cult or temple could be a challenge, especially if their faith's standing in society requires them to do it in secrecy. Undermining and marring the reputation of rival faiths could play into that as well. Manufacturing disasters, plagues, famines that rival faiths can't help the populace with quite as effectively as the PC's can, for example.
Races against rival adventurers and good NPCs to recover a powerful artifact in some dungeon.
Defiling a heavily guarded tomb or morgue in order to ensure enemies of the PCs stay dead.
A widely-spanning quest to track down just the right candidates to sacrifice for some profane ritual, willing or unwilling.
Infiltrating and sabotaging the ranks of anti-slaving forces, such as the Grey Fleet of Andoran.
PRISON BREAKS!
Grudges borne by your ancestors against the people currently running things. Maybe the PCs' forebears were genuinely wronged by the group currently in power whereever the game is set? Maybe they were mercs who were dumped or wrongly(?) accused of warcrimes after having been pivotal in saving the kingdom, or such.
|
|
Splintering off from the evil campaign discussions in the general forums I'm wondering what elements would make for a working "Evil" campaign? What type of stories do you think should be presented? What elements do you think should be included to help keep an campaign on track? Should vices be included as elements to portray reality or should they be just window dressing that aren't really addressed (such as drug use)? Anything else that might be added to an evil campaign?
This is one of those things I'd be curious to see if it could work beyond just an amusing one-shot. I have some memories of what were pretty silly 'evil parties' from when I first started gaming and yeah it was mostly over the top and devolved into un-fun backstabbing.
But how could it work? The one thought I have right now would be something akin to the Godfather, so more in the LE, NE territory than CE. A party working together to hold up their faction in some underworld conflict, maybe ultimately taking over the family business? The family would be almost certainly involved in some perfidious schemes ranging from fairly tame things such as blackmail, extortion to of course murder, slave trade, political corruption etc. In this setup the party would while certainly be 'bad guys' could still draw the line at some things (kind of like Corleone not willing to get in on the drug racket). I could see that working with the right group and there's lots of film, literature to serve as a template.
...But how could it work? The one thought I have right now would be something akin to the Godfather, so more in the LE, NE territory than CE...
Chaotic Evil Campaigns never work. CE is simply destruction and slaughter for it's own sake - which *may* be fun for a one shot, but really gets old fast (not to say it plays havoc with the headcount).
Neutral Evil campaigns are difficult as well because NE is the ultimate selfish "I don't care if any of you life or die" alignment with no holds barred. Sooner rather than later you will have backstabbing UNLESS you prevent that by implementing a strong "we" concept (f.i. by putting a curse on the PCs that when one dies and still is dead a day later, the others die as well). Which only serves to simulate a Lawful Evil environment.
The leaves Lawful Evil, the only real evil campaign alignment. In it everything you need for an evil campaign is already there:
- a "code fo honor" that everyone must adhere to (or be painfully punished)
- a background for some authority that watches over the PCs behavior
- a starting point for a campaign
- a strong source of motivation to go on adventures
So make it clear to the players that it's Lawful Evil or nothing - you may even go one step further and let the PC's play Tieflings or even Devils (why settle for the lesser evil at all?).
As for adventures: everything works that usually works - just give it an evil spin. That may be a bit lame, but certainly works. Some specific ideas are:
- become the tyrant of a village/city block/barony/kingdom and satisfy your overlord with taxes and slaves
- become the nemesis of a certain person or organisation
- work towards the creation of a gateway to hell
- get to the top of whatever evil epmire your living in
- be zealots of an evil church
One last advice: let the Players start at 5th Level or even higher. The low levels in evil societies ar characterized by bullying and weeding out the weak - not really fun. You should assume the PCs have already risen above the faceless abused masses somewhat.
To me, the law-chaos axis provides infinitely more party conflict than the good-evil one in games. The trick to an evil campaign IMO is to make the players need eachother. Evil does not mean you will backstab your friends, not even CE. Sure, you may have a party kill or two, but I've personally seen more good characters party kill than evil ones.
CE: Barbarian tribalism. A campaign of the Germanic Hordes rampaging into Rome to sack the city and gain the spoils. Just because they are CE does not mean they can't have a strong sense of brotherhood among themselves, so long as they don't show weakness. Therefore, their tribe cannot show weakness, else the others will destroy them.
NE: Playing multiple sides against the other. I saw someone post a campaign summary somewhere of a game where they took a job from the regent, and manufactured a war for him. The regent went to make a political coupe, and they betrayed him and exhonorated themselves. They then slowly wormed away at the underlying power behind the throne until they controlled the government, and since they were the ones who manufactured the war, they were able to make peace. Its a perfect example of a NE campaign.
LE: Building a structure the people welcome with open arms that will completely oppress them. This campaign is about convincing people that you are acting in their best interest by solving problems you create for them. Slowly, they give you power over them, until you are the pigs in Animal Farm.
This might not be exactly on topic here, but I requested that my players make evil characters for when I start running Council of Thieves in about a month.
The players were all happy to do so except one, who mentioned that he was planning to play a paladin. I don't personally have an issue with that, although I don't think Chelliax is going to be very hospitable to a paladin. I'm going to think of him as the control group.
Interesting note: I've seen many, many games with a good party and one evil character who either hides it or doesn't make much of an issue of it, a la Belkar. If the reverse isn't true and a good character can't manage to get by in an evil party without causing trouble, I'm going to find it very satisfying in light of the arguments against evil as "disruptive".
EDIT
Oh, and I might keep a running report on the game somewhere on the forums.
|
|
Interesting note: I've seen many, many games with a good party and one evil character who either hides it or doesn't make much of an issue of it, a la Belkar. If the reverse isn't true and a good character can't manage to get by in an evil party without causing trouble, I'm going to find it very satisfying in light of the arguments against evil as "disruptive".
I actually played the only evil character in a group of good characters in the past and it worked out well because of my backstory. In my character history, I was a good person until until there was a mishap in a tavern (a case of mistaken identity) and mercenaries began hunting me. After managing to kill enough of them, I gained evil alignment due to addiction to the rush of murder and the anxiety involved. Eventually, I just took the name of the person I was mistaken for as a trophy of sorts, found a local group of adventurers, and joined up, pledging only to kill the people that endangered them. Thus, everybody in the party enjoyed my protection and I got my fix on a regular basis... I made sure not to mention that if trapped in a room with them for long enough, I might be killing them just for a rush... and we all lived happily ever after. =)
So, story told, I think that a combination of certain past events (detailed character histories) and comparable agendas (typically mutual protection, glory, rewards, etc.) can be the glue that holds parties together. In my experience, it just needs to be a tight, symbiotic relationship.
|
There is a really good book that could give you ideas for an "evil" campaign. It is titled Villains by Necessity, it is written by the author Eve Forward. It is about a group of villains attempting to save the world by restoring evil to it after it has been overcome by the forces of good. It is a really good book (although rare to find) and I recommend it to anyone who like fantasy books.
There is a really good book that could give you ideas for an "evil" campaign. It is titled Villains by Necessity, it is written by the author Eve Forward. It is about a group of villains attempting to save the world by restoring evil to it after it has been overcome by the forces of good. It is a really good book (although rare to find) and I recommend it to anyone who like fantasy books.
I played in a 1 shot with that premise. It had something to do with quantiy of good in universe = good/evil. If there was no good, its ok, the formula just goes to 0. If there was no evil though, you got a divide by 0 error in the universe... It was a highly special game where we played the worst villians ever, but we were the last so we were important.
It used a homebrew system where the only stats were rape, pilliage, and burn.
The greatest evil that which thinks it is doing good.
These people don't wake up each morning and say "Yet again another beautiful morning for evil".
These people believe in there hearts of hearts what there doing is good.
Thats how you make a evil campaign interesting.
These people accept slavery, infact indorse it, why?
Aternatively there other ways to go about it.
Perhaps the misunderstood villian idea, they want to make a coucil to rule over 'this land' why? because they will be better than anyone else who is currently ruling it.
There super geniuses why wouldn't they be better?
I know Godwin's going to come like a lightning bolt from the heavens and kick me in balls for this but, the reason Hitler is really scary is because it didn't take that much.
He was a failed painter and he was living in this place where everything is turning to shiite so he's going to do something about it and at the start people were like YEAH HITLER!
But the most important thing to know about evil campaign is it all about one thing.
Power.
Acquiring and hording it.
More than anyone man should have.
|
|
Aspis Consortium adventures, where the "heroes" are under orders by a powerful merchant guild to retrieve artifacts in a rather dubious way i.e. kill and steal the item from the Pathfinders, or retrieving dubious item the normal way aka adventuring like any normal party. The PCs could eventually become the most powerful, influential people in the world with the help of the Consortium.
|
|
I ran an evil campaign once. Everyone in the party was part of the same family. They were all part of a LE family of aristocrats. I ran it like a mafia family. The party began at first level as the “foot sholdiers” they were all cousins. An uncle was their minder.
As they gained in levels, they got more important missions.
Splintering off from the evil campaign discussions in the general forums I'm wondering what elements would make for a working "Evil" campaign? What type of stories do you think should be presented? What elements do you think should be included to help keep an campaign on track? Should vices be included as elements to portray reality or should they be just window dressing that aren't really addressed (such as drug use)? Anything else that might be added to an evil campaign?This is one of those things I'd be curious to see if it could work beyond just an amusing one-shot. I have some memories of what were pretty silly 'evil parties' from when I first started gaming and yeah it was mostly over the top and devolved into un-fun backstabbing.
But how could it work? The one thought I have right now would be something akin to the Godfather, so more in the LE, NE territory than CE. A party working together to hold up their faction in some underworld conflict, maybe ultimately taking over the family business? The family would be almost certainly involved in some perfidious schemes ranging from fairly tame things such as blackmail, extortion to of course murder, slave trade, political corruption etc. In this setup the party would while certainly be 'bad guys' could still draw the line at some things (kind of like Corleone not willing to get in on the drug racket). I could see that working with the right group and there's lots of film, literature to serve as a template.
Actually one of the longest campaigns I've ever run followed an evil party. In fact, the group worked better as a team than the good characters in the previous 3 campaigns with the same players.
i feel the easiest way to make an evil party work well is for the evil characters to be attempting to stop a world ending evil, you cant rule the world if some one ends it.
|
|
Aspis Consortium adventures, where the "heroes" are under orders by a powerful merchant guild to retrieve artifacts in a rather dubious way i.e. kill and steal the item from the Pathfinders, or retrieving dubious item the normal way aka adventuring like any normal party. The PCs could eventually become the most powerful, influential people in the world with the help of the Consortium.
Actually a good organization to work with would be Razmiran cultists, given their background revealed in the current module run (Living Mask).
Aspis Consortium from what I've read just seems more CN or even true nuetral given their pention for strictly profit at any cost. Though I could see them as sort of a Ferengi type evil in regards to the aspects surrounding their write up. "I would never sell my mother! <looks around cautiously> Exactly how much are we talking if I were to take your offer."
I don't really get why so many people read CE as being 'only' lunatics and rapists. Sure, the alignment may fit on those kinds of characters, but I protest the idea that every single CE character is gorked in the head. I feel it's the equivalent of the Paladin stigma, hence Chaotic Stupid.
Just because you're chaotic evil doesn't mean you're going around killing people all the time The characters might be CE but they still have some common sense (well... maybe not if their int is like, 5...). Being CE means that the character doesn't have a problem killing, and doesn't agree with the laws in the world (and maybe work to see the laws crumble under their own weight). Sure, the rulebook says destruction for destruction sake and more haphazard planning, but nowhere does it say that characters have to be stupid.
Anyway, to make an evil party work, have them be a longtime group rather than a haphazard one just formed. That way they can be friends and evil at the same time. Or you could force them into a situation where it's not desirable to kill the other characters. For example: necklaces that can't be discarded and if you kill someone that also has a necklace, you die too. But the players will probably start to figure out ways to remove the necklaces, but maybe that is where the characters bond and start trusting each other.
As for campaigns, there's a lot you can do. The first one that comes to mind is a heist. Sure, one heist couldn't hold up a campaign, but if they had to make several heists (for whatever reason) and something else starts spinning in the background, things could get interesting.
They could be revolutionaries, doing what they need to make the world change. Would be regarded by everyone else but themselves as Evil.
They could be smugglers, smuggling various stuff for people.
Chaotic Evil Campaigns never work. CE is simply destruction and slaughter for it's own sake - which *may* be fun for a one shot, but really gets old fast (not to say it plays havoc with the headcount).Neutral Evil campaigns are difficult as well because NE is the ultimate selfish "I don't care if any of you life or die" alignment with no holds barred. Sooner rather than later you will have backstabbing UNLESS you prevent that by implementing a strong "we" concept (f.i. by putting a curse on the PCs that when one dies and still is dead a day later, the others die as well). Which only serves to simulate a Lawful Evil environment.
The leaves Lawful Evil, the only real evil campaign alignment.
I disagree. Just because someone is CE, it does not mean they are completely insane. Expect them to lie cheat and steal, but if they rely on the help of the rest of the party it would be a foolish move to betray them without gain. In addition if there fellow party members are very important to them, (yes, CE people do have things they care about) they could be even more zealous in protecting them than a pally.
Coolest idea for an evil campaign in 3.5 that I ever heard was the following:
All of the characters must have as a goal (if not necessarily their only goal) becoming immortal of one form or another (becoming undead, becoming a demigod, or otherwise escaping the 'maximum age' clause while generally protecting themselves from other threats. They were to do this 'by the book' if possible, so that there were mechanical reasons for their immortality. All the characters must also be seeking to help their allies achieve immortality as well. It was up to the players to provide much of the motivation for this, but since they were building characters that had 'helping their allies' as part of the concept from the get go, backstabbing was largely avoided.
The campaign ran all the way up to epic or near epic levels, culminating with all of the characters having achieved their goal.
After the end of that campaign a good campaign was started with new characters, taking place several hundred years later in a world now ruled by the characters from the first game, with the goal of eventually overthrowing the characters from their previous game.
|
Having run a very successful CotCT game, and just recently finished playing in a SD game, both with evil parties, these are the things I found to be helpful:
1: Evil parties want to be paid. More so than good parties, you can motivate low-to-mid level Evil groups with nothing more than cash. It made the starting point of negotiation with various NPC's much more easy to access.
2: Expect jerk NPC's to really drive them. In SD, there are a BUNCH of jerky NPC's (mostly Elves of some kind...go fig!) who treat you like crap, expect you to kowtow, bow and scrape, and who double cross you at every opportunity. These NPC's will be a motivating force against themselves, the groups they represent, and possibly their entire race. In SD, we quite frequently had to stop and ask "Why are we saving these people anyways?"
3: Get the group together, and allow the inter-party bonds to be made organically. Again, with CotCT, the opening adventure is written with just that in mind...the party gets together, they have a clear and organized goal, and as soon as that happens, all hell breaks loose. During the resulting chaos, it's a little hectic to try to sort out feelings/plots/etc....you roll with it (as a character) and soon will have "remember when?" stories to swap in game.
4: Be flexible with the encounters. Sure, monster XYZ is supposed to show up in room 1, but the party circumvented that entire place. Re-dress the scenario, use the same map, same monster, et al, just place it in the area the PC's DID go. No reason to tell them there was another option at that point, they got to go where they wanted, and you got to use the monster and room as written.
5: Play hardball. The only DM choice I disagreed with in our SD game was when our barbarian, Loex, had been captured and thrown in drow prison. IMO, he should have gone down swinging in that melee he caused, and we would have had to find another PC. Instead, he was captured, imprisoned, and tortured for a month or so before we could spring him. That's not something you can ignore, and it colored his character's actions for the remainder of the AP. Not saying it was WRONG, per se, but not a choice I would have made were I dm'ing.
-t
The trick to an evil campaign IMO is to make the players need eachother. Evil does not mean you will backstab your friends, not even CE.
I totally agree with this. I played a LE fighter in a campaign a number of years ago. It was me, a CE elf cleric/wizard/dread necromancer, and a NE drow ninja. We joined forces to steal jewels from a high ranking noble, and ended up killing him in the process. We were branded "The King killers" and an entire nation hunt was on.
Over the course of the campaign, we hid, dodged the law, joined an evil syndicate, were betrayed by the syndiate, got our revenge on the syndicate, and in the end became infamous villains who had no regard for the nations law, even killed a number of their powerful NPC heroes who came to get us.
During the course of the campaign, we were always on guard, knowing we had to stick together or we'd be caught and killed. Alot of it was encounters of us (evil) vs. good, but also alot of evil vs. evil.
It was awesome. We were always on the run, looking for a safe haven, and trying to gain power to protect ourselves, and defeat our enemies. At the end, when we finally found a safe haven and had reached about 15th-16th level, we retired our characters and developed an epilogue storyline for them, even role played separate parts with our DM.
My fighter ended up taking a storm giant's castle we had taken during the campaign, and hired a bunch of hirelings who became my Brigade. We would take our brigands for money, but also cause trouble from behind the scenes. Eventually, my guy infiltrated the country's government, obtaining a barony, then dukedom, and finally, instigated a coup and became the ruler of the whole nation.
The neormaner organized a neromany shool, raised a HUGE undead army, and reeked havoc across the land.
The drow ninja created her own guild, and became my personal assassin.
One of the best campaigns ever, and I tend to prefer a NG alignment for most characters, and my favorite class is paladin. You run it like a normal campign, with the same intrigue and elements as a "good campaign" but tweek it to evil. Always remember, there is always NPCs more powerful than your PCs, and they do have the little used option in games of retreating to fight another day. We had to do that a few times, or swallow our pride just to survive. However, in the end, we were able to get our revenge.
Lastly, ditto to what Psionichamster said above.
Remember to have fun, let them expect to have set back, win, and lose, even lose items, etc. Just let things take it's course and allow the characters to help move the campaign along.
|
|
The trick to an evil campaign IMO is to make the players need eachother. Evil does not mean you will backstab your friends, not even CE.
I'll agree with you also. One only needs to look at comic books to see plenty of examples of evil characters who for one reason or another uphold their friendship or past friendships, preventing them from doing evil toward a given person. In our genre the best example is Rastlin and his brother Caromen, as well as the rest of the companions, in how he didn't take evil actions toward them and at one point even saved them when he could have let them die.
Life debt could also be another reason they wouldn't don't harm each other. Oaths of fealty made in the past due to some previous connection would prevail for most of the evil alignments while serving as the last thin thread the CE maintains toward their final spiral into oblivion.
Anyone use Book of Vile Darkness? I own it, but never got around to actually putting it into play.
I've played in one evil game, and it was my second-favorite game of all time and resulted in my favorite character of all time. And I play almost exclusively good characters, so that was a considerable surprise. There were three major things that contributed to the amazing success of that game.
1 - The GM and all players were experienced and were all good role-players.
2 - We were all close friends out of game who spent a lot of time together, and when we talked about the game we knew we could trust each other not to metagame.
3 - All our characters had compatible goals. Note that I didn't say we had the same goals - all but one character (who was the bodyguard of another PC) had distinct goals that were occasionally in conflict. But our goals always related to each other closely enough that we all were going to the same places together.
We were in a homebrew setting (hey, the wiki for it still exists) and the basic premise of the game is that an evil elven noble had tasked us with retaking an elven city that had been taken over by barbarians, retaining control over that city, and then using it to march on an upstart Lawful Good nation to the north. As the game progressed we realized that the purpose behind all of this was that the Lawful Good nation was guarding a relic that could theoretically be used to attain demi-godhood. The elven noble was a master manipulator, and was responsible for putting everyone together through a delicate mix of blackmail and bribery. The party was:
1-An Elven Warlock necromancer who eventually became a lich. He was the son of elven noble who was bossing us around, and every bit the master manipulator that his father was.
2-A half-evil-fey sorcerer who was either PC #1's mother or sister, I don't think we ever found out for sure. Partially succubus-themed, but with a much heavier emphasis on nightmare things.
3-An Elven Swordsage who had a series of incredibly bad experiences with human bigotry. He was the personal bodyguard of PC #1.
4-A partially deranged cleric of the spider-themed god of order and construction. He was constantly hear the chittering of his god urging him to do things.
5-A human Truespeaker who had fled the barbarous human nations for elven civilization (he actually had levels in Elf Paragon to reflect his obsession with elven society)
6-Me. I started as a half-ogre ranger driven by revenge, but about four sessions in we finished taking over the first city and I didn't really have much of a purpose left. So I switched to a goblin cleric of the sun-god of tyranny (in this setting the goblins had a massive desert empire).
In the first stage of the game we were entirely under the control of the Elven Noble. We marched to out first city, freed it from human occupation, and set ourselves up as rulers.
In the second stage, we spent a bunch of time investigating various things going on in the city and dealing with diplomatic troubles. PC #1 secured the loyalty of everyone else and began to sever ties with his father in subtle but polite ways.
By the third stage, even though they acted all polite and friendly in public and were still theoretically allied, PC #1 and his father were now in open competition. We assembled out army and marched on the Lawful Good kingdom.
The fourth stage consisted of the final two sessions, and it was when everything broke apart and the party began openly competing with each other. It culminated in a cross-planar game of cat-and-mouse as three characters fought over the artifact (two in an attempt to become demi-gods, myself in an attempt to turn it over to my god) PC #3 defended PC #1, and PC #2 revealed that she was an emissary of the nightmare god and tried to destroy the world. All over a backdrop of two divine armies fighting each other (my sun god vs. the moon-god of death). The Truespeaker departed before the last session, having attained immortality by his own means and wanting to avoid the fighting.
In the end, PC #1 became a demi-god of necromancy and resurrected PC #3 to be his chief minion, PC #2 had died, PC #4 had also died but had managed to keep the world from being destroyed, PC #5 was some kind of Truespeech-powered paper lich, and I was promoted to chief Pit Fiend in charge of reform after pointing out all of the many ways my god and his armies had messed up (not out loud, of course, I had more sense than that, but gods can read minds).
All 3 of Far_wanderer's comments are needed to make it work also. That's how mine was too.
Actually one of the longest campaigns I've ever run followed an evil party. In fact, the group worked better as a team than the good characters in the previous 3 campaigns with the same players.Splintering off from the evil campaign discussions in the general forums I'm wondering what elements would make for a working "Evil" campaign? What type of stories do you think should be presented? What elements do you think should be included to help keep an campaign on track? Should vices be included as elements to portray reality or should they be just window dressing that aren't really addressed (such as drug use)? Anything else that might be added to an evil campaign?This is one of those things I'd be curious to see if it could work beyond just an amusing one-shot. I have some memories of what were pretty silly 'evil parties' from when I first started gaming and yeah it was mostly over the top and devolved into un-fun backstabbing.
But how could it work? The one thought I have right now would be something akin to the Godfather, so more in the LE, NE territory than CE. A party working together to hold up their faction in some underworld conflict, maybe ultimately taking over the family business? The family would be almost certainly involved in some perfidious schemes ranging from fairly tame things such as blackmail, extortion to of course murder, slave trade, political corruption etc. In this setup the party would while certainly be 'bad guys' could still draw the line at some things (kind of like Corleone not willing to get in on the drug racket). I could see that working with the right group and there's lots of film, literature to serve as a template.
I was JUST about to text you about this thread.
I was a player in this game, and I have to tell you- playing evil really forced us to bring our A game to the table, DM included. After the first party died(as usual, everyone except the bard) due to a bad case of the stupids, we were forced to make new characters and SERIOUSLY think about them and why they were evil. I made an evil paladin(HAIL ASMODEUS! HAIL CHELIAX! FOR HOUSE CHARGATHNON!) who was about 13 or 14 years old(rolled poorly on some stats and had to come up with a reason why they were so low) who had a Knight protecting him(one of the other PCs). It was some of the most fun we ever had at the table. We knew people would be prejudiced against us because of our alignment, and we encountered it on occasion, so we had to actually push the Lawful side of our alignment, even as we subtly corrupted a few NPCs. We usually did this by offering them revenge on someone who had hurt them, or showing how Asmodeus was truly a misunderstood deity who, although he was harsh with those that failed him, would reward those who took the time to pull themselves up out of the muck and mire in his name(read: social darwinism). We also did stereotypical D&D/Pathfinder heroics, slaughtering goblins and other monsters that threatened the countryside(annexing their land, possessions and slaves in the name of holy Asmodeus, of course). In short, we got more adventuring done in a few sessions than we almost ever did as good characters(although the game before that where we had to fight that losing battle at the temple was AMAZING- and once again, only the bard survived to tell the tale).
Evil games and evil PCs are very much misunderstood. With a patient and skilled DM that can reign in the PCs excesses, it can be a truly rewarding experience.
{EDIT} I'm also running a Girls Only Darklight Sisterhood game where the vast majority of the PCs are quite evil. So far, it's been a blast!
Chaotic is defined as "doing your own thing", "not likely to work together with others for long", "not adhering to rules".
This alone is hard enough for a party. If temepered with Good, all is well, because the Good will hold the "chaotic" in check most of the time.
With Chaotic Neutral this is harder, but can also be tolerated because the CN PC can always be "well meaning" but be unreliant (a Rogue who should deliver a message but instead, on a whim, starts pick pocketing people and gets himselve jailed endangering his group mates this way is a typical example).
Chatic Evil finally is "not accepting the rules unless they please me und not reluctant to do all kinds of things to get my own way if I can help it". CE societies in this way are impossible - a constantly scheming churning mass of killing, just like demons are.
The "babarians" sacking Rome are a very bad example because these were babarians only in the eyes of the Romans but in reality were much more organized and adhering to a rigid clan structure than the romans themselves during this time. All of them were from ex-roman-occupied countries and used romes military principles and structures to a much greater effect than rome itself during its decline.
In fact each and every "babarian" horde we were told about in history classes was actually Lawful as hell. Be it Vandals (who are also a good example of how bad propaganda can ruin the view of the later generations), Tartars, Goths and whatnot.
That is because the truly chaotic never get far, never get accomplished enough as a group in order to get remebered.
Chaotic is defined as "doing your own thing", "not likely to work together with others for long", "not adhering to rules".
This alone is hard enough for a party. If temepered with Good, all is well, because the Good will hold the "chaotic" in check most of the time.
With Chaotic Neutral this is harder, but can also be tolerated because the CN PC can always be "well meaning" but be unreliant (a Rogue who should deliver a message but instead, on a whim, starts pick pocketing people and gets himselve jailed endangering his group mates this way is a typical example).
Chatic Evil finally is "not accepting the rules unless they please me und not reluctant to do all kinds of things to get my own way if I can help it". CE societies in this way are impossible - a constantly scheming churning mass of killing, just like demons are.
The "babarians" sacking Rome are a very bad example because these were babarians only in the eyes of the Romans but in reality were much more organized and adhering to a rigid clan structure than the romans themselves during this time. All of them were from ex-roman-occupied countries and used romes military principles and structures to a much greater effect than rome itself during its decline.
In fact each and every "babarian" horde we were told about in history classes was actually Lawful as hell. Be it Vandals (who are also a good example of how bad propaganda can ruin the view of the later generations), Tartars, Goths and whatnot.
That is because the truly chaotic never get far, never get accomplished enough as a group in order to get remebered.
The idea that chaotic characters are unreliable is dumb. For the Rogue example you use, it is not that he is unreliable becaus he is chaotic. He is unreliable because he is an idiot. Just like Paladins don't have to be stupid because they are lawful, other characters don't have to be because they are chaotic.
I find it interesting that by your definition of Chaotic, Sherloch Homes fits in perfectly. And yet he is one of the best examples I can think of for Lawful. He works poorly with others, blatantly disregards laws, rules, and social norms, and is constantly running off to investigate on his own - your definition of Chaotic.
That being said, he is completely logical (to his veiw of logic) in all his thoughs and actions. He orders everything he encounters into his veiw of the world, and puts it in its place. His veiw of the world is extremely structured, and when he encounters something that does not fit, he works to make it fit rather than adapting his world view. This is the defining part of his character, so he is lawful.
The barbarian Hordes that sacked Rome, I agree, were lawful. The barbarian hordes that people think of when they think of sacking Rome, were not. In a fantasy game, its not hard to have chaotic societies. They are the ones that have loose rules and informal structures. They don't have rigid class systems. I would classify many tribal societies as chaotic.
One example for Chaotic Evil, your looking at lots of corruption and bribery in daily life. People think the governement is powerless and ineffectual, but in reality thats only partially true. Its goal just isn't the well being of the general populous, but the promotion of a lawless class above the general populous. If something doesn't involve the empowered class, they don't really care (or wonder why they don't get a cut), unless it threatens them in some way.
Annother example is a society ruled by strength. The strongest among them leads, and does what he wants. This works for smaller, tribalistic societies. There is an alpha, with a variable heirachy below him. He can be unseated be someone else who has the strength and support.
|
|
An interesting thought that just crossed my mind is having the players belong to an order of Sin Eater like cabalists. Basically they are evil by choice or sacrifice who, for good or ill, purge others of evil so that those individuals might go on to a better afterlife than what they are destined for. Some work for money and others work for the thrill of it, but they all follow a code to some extent. They could even be structured kind of like the Blue Star Adepts in Thieves' World. Who swear oathes to fight for law at the final battle in return for magical power, but until then can do whatever they please for the most part.
Just had a thought for an evil campaign... "Government Sponsored Evil".
For anyone who has seen the series "Firefly" and the movie "Serenity" you'll have ample examples of the LE alignment in the agents. Especially the Agent from the movie Serenity. Another good example would be the movie Swordfish.
Have the group be one of many groups that are government sponsored. (This is not to say that all such people are evil. It just gives us a good structure to control the evil ones.) They can be Assassins/Spies, Black-ops, etc. They are the people the government calls on to do the dirty work. You have a controlling factor in that as agents of the government in question the group knows that if they screw up they will be blacklisted/cut-free or even worse disposed of.
Missions could be the retrieval of documents, assassination of key individuals, kidnapping of rival factions family members, etc...
Things that are "morally" in the grey or black area on either the Law or Evil axis of the alignment scale.
|
|
I like that. You could even go a step further and they were raised in the program like "Hitman" or "Soldier", perhaps even have a spell on them that serves as a kill switch. They know it's there but it takes a certain way of dispelling that they have to discover to get free. Players could even play it "Femme Nikita" style where they want redemption, but the program keeps pulling them back in, making them do things they don't want too, i.e. assinations, and such. And some, like the Agent in Serenity, even believe in the "cause" they are fighting for. Definitely has possibilites if not in a regular fantasy setting then maybe in a modern fantasy setting.
There is a really good book that could give you ideas for an "evil" campaign. It is titled Villains by Necessity, it is written by the author Eve Forward.
It's really an amazingly good book.
There's another, called Grunts, which is told from the perspective of an orcish general working for the BBEG as the final battle approaches. It's got some of the most evil halflings I've ever seen in a book. Don't remember the author though.
I find it interesting that by your definition of Chaotic, Sherloch Homes fits in perfectly....
No, he doesn't. You can always say what he will do and how he will approach a certain problem - that is extremely lawful - he isn't unreliable in the slightest. That he puts his own law above the law of the land isn't chaotic as well and he works well with at least one other person - so much that they are really undividable.
The Rogue in my example isn't stupid, he is simply not predictable. An opportunity presented itself and she, because of being chatoic, grabbed it when others expected her to do something different. Out of my example you can't really decide wether the action was really stupid because this information is missing (was the victim looking extremely capable and guarded or clueless and rich, an easy picking with only minimal risk and delay?).
Also it has been said that "not even CE people backstab their groupmates all the time" - which is of course right, the gist is that you can't really say WHEN they will do it, only that it is completely possible for them at any time. A Chaotic Character is driven by urges as much as by calculation, intelligence or stupidity is not a big factor in this, as chaotic characters may be overcome by these urges even if it's bad for them in the (more or less) long run. This is even true for a CG char - it's just being Good he will probably kill nobody because of it.
So CE is really your potential homicidal maniac - just because he isn't on spree every time of the day doesn't mean that will be so nice 5 minutes from now. Hard to imagine such a character taking part in a months spanning campaign where the players rely on each other except with extreme railroading (exploding necklace anyone?).
|
|
Also it has been said that "not even CE people backstab their groupmates all the time" - which is of course right, the gist is that you can't really say WHEN they will do it, only that it is completely possible for them at any time. A Chaotic Character is driven by urges as much as by calculation, intelligence or stupidity is not a big factor in this, as chaotic characters may be overcome by these urges even if it's bad for them in the (more or less) long run. This is even true for a CG char - it's just being Good he will probably kill nobody because of it.So CE is really your potential homicidal maniac - just because he isn't on spree every time of the day doesn't mean that will be so nice 5 minutes from now. Hard to imagine such a character taking part in a months spanning campaign where the players rely on each other except with extreme railroading (exploding necklace anyone?).
Every character in a D&D game is a potential homicidal maniac. The point of the game system is to find monsters, kill them, and take their things.
Ascribing modern earth morality to such a world is designed to fail.
-t
I find it interesting that by your definition of Chaotic, Sherloch Homes fits in perfectly....No, he doesn't. You can always say what he will do and how he will approach a certain problem - that is extremely lawful - he isn't unreliable in the slightest. That he puts his own law above the law of the land isn't chaotic as well and he works well with at least one other person - so much that they are really undividable.
Sorry, but I have to disagree with you for many of the reasons you mentioned here. Just because someone is Chaotic doesn't mean they can't have friends, work with other people at all or even follow a line of reasoning to its perfectly logical conclusion- just that they will go about it in a way that more Lawful-minded folks wouldn't recognize. I'd even venture that they are so unpredictable that they become woefully predictable once you get to know them.
|
...But how could it work? The one thought I have right now would be something akin to the Godfather, so more in the LE, NE territory than CE...Chaotic Evil Campaigns never work. CE is simply destruction and slaughter for it's own sake - which *may* be fun for a one shot, but really gets old fast (not to say it plays havoc with the headcount).
Neutral Evil campaigns are difficult as well because NE is the ultimate selfish "I don't care if any of you life or die" alignment with no holds barred. Sooner rather than later you will have backstabbing UNLESS you prevent that by implementing a strong "we" concept (f.i. by putting a curse on the PCs that when one dies and still is dead a day later, the others die as well). Which only serves to simulate a Lawful Evil environment.
While your characterizations of NE and CE are partially correct, but only represent one possible implementation of those alignments. Unfortunately, many people fall into this "alignment trap" and make all sort of restrictions on behavior that do not need to exist.
Here are some tips to make CE and NE characters work better (CN might as well go in as well).
CN - live free or die many oldtimers argue that CN means you are completely unpredictable, random, and basically insane. That is silly. You are unconcerned with good or evil, and have no preference about orderly living or following personal whims. You essentially live in the moment and do whatever seems 'best' or most interesting. Very playable alignment if approached correctly.
NE - The (EVIL) ends justify the means this one is also easy to play. Your pc is unconcerned with orderly living or personal freedom. Your only focus is to increase suffering and evil in the world. That can be accomplished by doing fell deeds, or by gaining personal power to enable greater deeds to be done down the road. Cooperation with allies is fine, as long as the end result is more evil in the world. Betraying your party members is just dumb, as it lowers your overall chance of survival, and thus impacts your ability to do evil.
CE - Do as you will. your will is law Possibly the hardest alignment to play, not because of actual philosophy but because of DM prejudice. IF CE characters really were homicidal maniacs, how do Drow cities survive? How do evil churches hold together? Obviously, they do. And don't even try the argument that 'not everyone in that organization is CE'. Of course they aren't. But the majority ARE and society still functions.
No, to play a CE character, your focus is simply following your own desires regardless of social propriety or laws. Have the hots for your sister? No prob. Want the shiny necklace? take it. Annoyed by the brat whining to much? Give him an accident. BUT, this doesn't make you stupid. CE characters may plan the untimely demise of a party mate, but will often be smart enough to realize they need them or the rest of the party alive, so will bide their time. This is the mechanic that allows Drow noble houses to function, and will work for adventurers as well. Remember, a whim defered is not a whim ignored. Anticipation can often be as enjoyable as action for a CE character.
CE and NE are very playable alignments. Heck, in one of my older campaigns I player a NE Necromancer/priest who horrified his LE party members. The fighter often told me that I had to die before I could become a Lich. My character would find these warnings amusing and simply respond "not today my friend. But your impertinence will earn you my 'special attention' when you are finally foolish enough to make the attempt. Today, you still need me." This basis was perfectly acceptable to maintain party cohesion. We both were planning to murder each other - but not today.
...
NE - The (EVIL) ends justify the means this one is also easy to play. Your pc is unconcerned with orderly living or personal freedom. Your only focus is to increase suffering and evil in the world. That can be accomplished by doing fell deeds, or by gaining personal power to enable greater deeds to be done down the road. Cooperation with allies is fine, as long as the end result is more evil in the world. Betraying your party members is just dumb, as it lowers your overall chance of survival, and thus impacts your ability to do evil.
CE - Do as you will. your will is law Possibly the hardest alignment to play, not because of actual philosophy but because of DM prejudice. IF CE characters really were homicidal maniacs, how do Drow cities survive? How do evil churches hold together? Obviously, they do. And don't even try the argument that 'not everyone in that organization is CE'. Of course they aren't. But the majority ARE and society still functions.
No, to play a CE character, your focus is simply following your own desires regardless of social propriety or laws. Have the hots for your sister? No prob. Want the shiny necklace? take it. Annoyed by the brat whining to much? Give him an accident. BUT, this doesn't make you stupid. CE characters may plan the untimely demise of a party mate, but will often be smart enough to realize they need them or the rest of the party alive, so will bide their time. This is the mechanic that allows Drow noble houses to function, and will work for adventurers as well. Remember, a whim defered is not a whim ignored. Anticipation can often be as enjoyable as action for a CE character.
...
I disagree that NE characters have to promote evil, but more or less agree with this. Evil characters do not have to go out of their way to create evil. They just have to be self serving and put themselves and their goals over others. In this way, most merchants are evil in my campaigns, at least all those in it for the profit.
Yeah, NE is just selfish in my view. Unconcerned with anything but what you want and willing to do whatever (in or out of the law) to get it.
|
|
I harken back to Dragonlance story lines: first, the world exists with a balance between good and evil. Swing too far in one direction (generally by evil), and good will eventually restore the balance. However, it's not impossible (and has happened in that setting) that good swings the balance too far (eradicating ogres, vices, etc.)
Also, in one story line, the forces of evil (Lawful Evil) actually conquer the world to prepare against an invasion of chaos, which good was completely unprepared (and unwilling in some ways) to handle. Certain dark actions would have to be taken, but good, neutral, or evil, no one wants to see their world obliterated.
Yeah, NE is just selfish in my view. Unconcerned with anything but what you want and willing to do whatever (in or out of the law) to get it.Unless a person or group of people (family, friends, community) is what they want. In which case, woe to the person who tries to destroy them.
All bets are off when family is involved. :)