I do not advocate seeing anything tasteless or blatantly offensive pawned off as "evil" in print. (And I would strongly agree with the Paizo staff for filtering such material out.) However, an evil party-based story could be as complex and motivating as the best "good" adventure.
For those gaming groups that would like to avoid an evil adventure, the choice is easy. Simply exercise your free will and choose not to use the material. Many Dungeon magazine aficionados need to "pass" on an adventure for one reason or another, many times because simply playing through three adventures a month is not realistic. (As a DM of a group that meets once-a-week, I know there is no way that we could play through 3 adventures a month.)
Finally, if Paizo Publishing supports D&D as a product line (...and they do a good job at that...), then would it not be reasonable to think that supporting such products like the Book of Vile Darkness and the new, Champions of Ruin would also be appropriate? Perhaps, Paizo could limit "evil" adventures to 1 or 2 a year, but I think gamers wouldn't mind taking a walk on the "evil" side once and a while.
I would like to hear from the Paizo staff as well as my fellow gamers to see how they feel about this topic. Be well, and happy gaming!
Personally, I think that if Paizo and Wizards embraced Evil campaign material as much as Good aligned material, they would see their sales spike...but they would also start seeing the eventual stream of "Christians", crybabies, right-wing nutjobs and spineless parents who are too lazy to police their children who would begin the letter-writing, "official protesting" and Congressman-writing until someone with serious political power waves an issue in front of the TV cameras...
I sympathize for Paizo for having to keep such sensibilities in mind when providing material to the players and DMs who crave it, but such is the state of society today.
I've run Evil campaigns for well over 20 years - read all about it *here…* and *here…* and *here…*; I'd stand my three kids up against any other Republican's kids any day of the week to compare their manners and character...AND their common sense.
(/rant)
(A sane Republican),
M
|
Dungeon already prints adventures that are morally ambiguous. What then, is the difference between a good adventure, and an evil adventure?
Simply put, an evil adventure requires an evil act to be drawn to a successful conclusion.
For example, to seal the portal to the netherworld (or open it), requires the sacrifice of 12 virgins from the local town. A good aligned party would not want to sacrifice anybody, nor would they want the gate opened. This would qualify as an evil adventure.
Such adventures are unnecessary in Dungeon. Evil parties can participate in any adventure as published with no modification (their actions might be somewhat different, but they still kill people and take their stuff).
Adventures that require PCs to perform evil acts to succeed are unnecessary.
And I have yet to see an argument to the contrary. An adventure that doesn't require an evil act to succeed can be published in Dungeon, even if much of the activities are morally ambiguous.
Personally, I think that if Paizo and Wizards embraced Evil campaign material as much as Good aligned material, they would see their sales spike...but they would also start seeing the eventual stream of "Christians", crybabies, right-wing nutjobs and spineless parents who are too lazy to police their children who would begin the letter-writing, "official protesting" and Congressman-writing until someone with serious political power waves an issue in front of the TV cameras..."
I agreed with everything you said Marc until you mentioned "CHRISTIANS" in a deragatory manner. I have enjoied reading your posting and but I happen to be a Christian and a D&D player/DM for almost 20 years; and I too have played and DM'ed both good and evil parties. But when you make blanket statements grouping Christians along with crybabies, and right-wing nut jobs, that is just the type of attitude that perpetuates the ignorance over the game (D&D)Im sure we both thouroughly enjoy. Im sure that we would both would like nothing more than to see the game grow and do well, but making deragatory statements to groups that you do not necessarily agree with or understand is being a bit hypocritical ...don't you think? Just my two cents.
Christian Warrior
Personally, I think that if Paizo and Wizards embraced Evil campaign material as much as Good aligned material, they would see their sales spike...but they would also start seeing the eventual stream of "Christians", crybabies, right-wing nutjobs and spineless parents who are too lazy to police their children who would begin the letter-writing, "official protesting" and Congressman-writing until someone with serious political power waves an issue in front of the TV cameras..."
I agreed with everything you said Marc until you mentioned "CHRISTIANS" in a deragatory manner. I have enjoied reading your posting and but I happen to be a Christian and a D&D player/DM for almost 20 years; and I too have played and DM'ed both good and evil parties. But when you make blanket statements grouping Christians along with crybabies, and right-wing nut jobs, that is just the type of attitude that perpetuates the ignorance over the game (D&D)Im sure we both thouroughly enjoy. Im sure that we would both would like nothing more than to see the game grow and do well, but making deragatory statements to groups that you do not necessarily agree with or understand is being a bit hypocritical ...don't you think? Just my two cents.
Christian Warrior
I'm sorry that you misunderstood my categorization of "Christians" without putting the due sarcasm into the " __ "'s...
Being baptized Episcopal, raised Baptist and married to a Catholic has allowed me to consider myself 'Generic Christian'; my categorization of "Christians" was meant to include anyone (of any religion, truth be told...) who would presume themselves righteous enough to declare what is moral and responsible for everyone else...typically, the radical right of all sects usually covers this demographic.
I CAN make an argument that simply going around and killing stuff does not a proper Evil campaign make - but I think that would take up an entire thread in itself. I'm sure that there are enough DMs out there who've run them and created the material for it...the point is, it would be nice if we could FIND some of the same material published for convenience sake without the threat of censorship or harassment by some party who unilaterally deems us and Paizo morally irresponsible or dangerous to "Mainstream" society.
No broad offense intended, Bandit.
M
Personally, I think that if Paizo and Wizards embraced Evil campaign material as much as Good aligned material, they would see their sales spike...but they would also start seeing the eventual stream of "Christians", crybabies, right-wing nutjobs and spineless parents who are too lazy to police their children who would begin the letter-writing, "official protesting" and Congressman-writing until someone with serious political power waves an issue in front of the TV cameras...
Speaking as a right-wing (back in the early 90's - Now I would be branded with the L-word by the Gestapo and flown away to an inernment camp somewhere to not be allowed a trial) Christian, who is so lazy I don't even have kids, I'm upset!
Just thought I go for the whole shabang and be a crybaby too.
But perhaps we could just call the sort of people I think you are refering to as fundamentalist Christians (or perhaps: "Branch Robertson" - it worked for that guy in Waco). You know the sort of people who are trying to run our government according to their version of Catholicism creating a fundamentalist theocratic state rather than the plutocracy we had been enjoying up to that point.
Hey I've just come up with an idea for an evil campaign!
Vote Evil in '08
GGG
PS So Marc, the "sane Republican" title does that make you a Democrat now? 'Cause you know if you ain't with the President you're probably about to be outed by Karl Rove, the voice of treason. Careful how you reply they might be watching ;)
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own." - Number 6
Dang it Marc, you're too fast for me. ;)
GGG
Careful how you reply they might be watching ;)
LOL. . . I doubt it. :)
Then again. . . if it's "for our protection," or "for our own good," maybe they ARE watching. . .
Such adventures are unnecessary in Dungeon. Evil parties can participate in any adventure as published with no modification (their actions might be somewhat different, but they still kill people and take their stuff).
Absolutely. I think any adventure published in Dungeon is a potential evil adventure. Marc's Shackled City campagin is living proof of that (even though the PC are all dead now).
However, what might be interesting is an article (perhaps in Dragon) that specificlly deals with adventure conversions/issues with evil parties. I think Marc should propose it to Jason Buhlman. . . considering the messageboard interest, it may be very sucessful.
Why do we need two topics for this? And why am I replying to both? Either way, I agree with MarcChin.. a sealed module where the characters need to do something evil in order to succeed, and where their opponents are good dragons, paladins and celestials is something I would love to see. If they think it is too sensible to print, publish it as a payable pdf. If someone wants to whine for that (I'm not mentioning any religion here now..) let the hypocrits do so.
Why do we need two topics for this? And why am I replying to both? Either way, I agree with MarcChin.. a sealed module where the characters need to do something evil in order to succeed, and where their opponents are good dragons, paladins and celestials is something I would love to see. If they think it is too sensible to print, publish it as a payable pdf. If someone wants to whine for that (I'm not mentioning any religion here now..) let the hypocrits do so.
- Heh;
I thought that this WAS the other thread, and that my original post got whacked by the Admin...
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/dungeon/generalDiscussion/evilAdventur esSupportForBoVDAndChampionsOfRuin
Read the other thread for my idea - we all seem to be on the same page!
M
PS So Marc, the "sane Republican" title does that make you a Democrat now? 'Cause you know if you ain't with the President you're probably about to be outed by Karl Rove, the voice of treason. Careful how you reply they might be watching ;)
Yeah, I been all over the field on that, so I have a good perspective, I think.
Raised in a conservative Asian home by card-carrying NRA and Republican Party parents, pulled to the left by College and then elastically drawn back to center by being all grown up with kids myself now...
My philosophy: (which was what I minored in at FSU, so I'm no slouch)
- Moderation is a natural state; radicalism in anything, left or right (or any issue, for that matter) implies that the believer is willfully denying open debate of the issue and a logical reasoning process...
...simply put, radicals (left, right, or otherwise) are ignorant.
Time to get back on thread,
M
|
One problem with that idea is that what is 'moderate' is defined by local sociopolitical trends, as well as media portrayal of norms: what's 'radical' in one place is 'moderate' in another and vice versa.
Yep. Moral relativism is fun, but however much moral relativists and moral absolutists beat each other up we have to remember that the majority of the popular media & general public in "our" (Western/liberal/capitalist/democratic) culture in general (and en masse) have a position along the lines of:
i) all value systems are equal and are culturaly specific, the value systems of one culture cannot be evaluated in the context of another
ii) except moral relativism which is universally true & the only value system that really recognises the equality of all other value systems, and is therefore superior to the others
iii) and those systems which deny the equality of all other value systems (eg facism) and are therefore inferior
:) cynicism is fun
Speaking of philosophy and the thread, one of the core ideas in D&D (the game, specifically the rules) is that there is no moral ambiguity. The heroes are heroes. Orcs are bad. Player character races are good except for morally deviant NPCs who consort with evil creatures in the Monster Manual and who any paladin worth his salt can detect as such. The game still, after thirty-plus years, makes these distinctions. The rules actually hamper an evil game.
You can run one just as you could a sanity wrenching cosmic horror game or a bigger than life superhero game, but some of the rules (or as I like to think of them: tools) are going to be burdensome. Sort of like using a wrench as a hammer. You can do it. It's just more work (and a bit deconstructionist). If I want horror I'll play Call of Cthulhu. Super hero? DC Heroes. And when I want a morally corrupt game I play Vampire (original World of Darkness). There are rules systems that support subtle and not so subtle evil. D&D isn't one of them. You can do practically anything you want to any of the above mentioned systems (they are all just tools after all). I have run or played in horror games and adventure games and heavy science games and philisophical games in very one of those systems and probably a dozen more and as one-offs they're great they break the trend and give you something novel, like those "very special episodes" on sitcom TV, but maintaining it can be tough and many props to Marc doing so. Book of Vile Darkness is kind of the bone tossed out to appease the "radical" evil crowd* and does contain tidbits for adapting the 3 core books into a darker campaign just like Frostburn has rules for a colder one.
I don't think the D&D rules can really get too much more specific on the subject. Adventures? I give you adventures are a different story. We do have cold adventures after all, but still it probably takes a good GM less ten minutes to adapt an adventure's outline to nearly any genra or clime. I mean you have to see how your PCs are going to fit in anyway regardless of alignment.
*Disclaimer: I do not mean to be judgememntal/insult/hurt the feelings of/or in anyway besmirch people of evil character or persuasion - even though being evil and all you probably deserve it. Thank you.
Where are my virgin sacrifices?
GGG
Yep. Moral relativism is fun, but however much moral relativists and moral absolutists beat each other up we have to remember that the majority of the popular media & general public in "our" (Western/liberal/capitalist/democratic) culture in general (and en masse) have a position along the lines of:i) all value systems are equal and are culturaly specific, the value systems of one culture cannot be evaluated in the context of another
ii) except moral relativism which is universally true & the only value system that really recognises the equality of all other value systems, and is therefore superior to the others
iii) and those systems which deny the equality of all other value systems (eg facism) and are therefore inferior:) cynicism is fun
Yeah, fascist all suck! Let's round them all up and imprison them!
:)
GGG
I think it's a matter of creative plot re-construction. I'm starting up a evil Pc campaign set in waterdeep. the newest issue of dungeon "Blood of malar" is perfect for a group of dubious characters. evil pc's opperating in the city would have just as much reason to get involved as good ones would. they just need a little more motivation, as opposed to just doin a good deed. in my parties case lord Orlpar will be replaced by Laird the scissor, the PC's patron working secretly for a small sect of mask worshippers looking to pull off some evil aims, the leaders of this sect will have ties to the baron of blood and the church of lovitar. by the time they get to run "blood of malar" they'll be quite dedicated to laird as a very well paying patron, so securing his life should be a no brainer, I'm even writing in Dhusarra and her allies to oppose the group before hand so that when the time comes they be sure to stand against her.
My group has decided that they would like this "evil" campaign to last longer than one session of killing everything just cause. so they know that for the game to work they need to not kill everything and eachother, though they may dislike eachothers company they still depend on the others abilities to ensure thier own success
But i also agree that it is not in the best interest of the magazine to publish evil adventures as they really do need to appeal to the broadest audience.
just my thoughts