I have a certain number of players who have been asking for me to run an evil campaign, but I haven't found a set of adventures that I thought would work well with a group of evil PCs. (I don't want to do a lot of modification, as I have limited time.)
I noticed one of the pregenerated PCs for Second Darkness is LE and another CN making me think that Second Darkness shouldn't be too difficult to adapt to some of my more "free spirited" characters. Meaning those who constantly want to kill anyone who annoys them including patrons, shopkeepers, town guards and little children.
Most of these players were in an Age of Worms campaign and they derailed the campaign by burning down Balabar's house, picking fights and running away from the half-orc then insulting the guards who came to help. Rise of the Runelords and Cauldron seem to need fairly "good" characters without a lot of modification or large amounts of restraint on the PCs part. Savage Tide seems like it could work, but some of my players itching to be evil are running through it now.
If anyone has any suggestions for adventures that would be easily adapted for an evil group, please let me know. Thanks.
Creative Director
|
Second Darkness does indeed work RELATIVELY well with evil PCs, but not with drow PCs. The primary requirement first of all is, as always, that evil characters need to work well with the other PCs, and they need to work well within the BASIC plot of the adventure. Once you get characters who are mostly interested in doing their best to destroy the plot of the adventure, or acting in such a way that they simply cannot interact with the non-enemy NPCs, though, you have a problem.
I imagine, in any event, that our iconic LE and CN characters are not good friends, but that they're friends of each OTHER'S friends, and out of respect for their mutual allies they do their best to work together. Probably not well, but at the same point neither are any of them trying to burn down houses or murder town guards.
Basically... your players need to WANT to go on the adventure. If they simply want to run amok, you can use the adventures as sourcebooks and stat-block banks to use against them, but the very nature of that kind of free-form chaos is pretty much the exact opposite of what a pre-published adventure is trying to do.
Thanks for the quick response James!
I think having it work relatively well is the best I can hope for. I just want to avoid adventures where the party is doing things out of the goodness of their hearts or because it's the "right" thing to do.
The first adventure seemed well suited for the group as it has groups too powerful to kill right away, offers money and allows for the killing off of said powerful group later on. Also going into a drow city where their evil acts will not seem that out of place should be perfect.
Their interactions with non-enemy NPCs depends on if they think they can take said NPC or if there is more gain in leaving them alive. So that can be a problem, but the Adventure Paths often provide enough material that other NPCs can provide information and motivation if need be. Also having a thread to pull the PCs along is very helpful whereas linking random adventures runs into the "what's my motivation" problem. I also find more hack and slash adventures to be a little boring to run.
Anyway, it seems that Second Darkness will continue to be a good adventure for non-good PCs. If anyone else is planning on running this with an evil group, I'd be interested in knowing what changes they made and any problems they face.
Rise of the Runelords and Cauldron seem to need fairly "good" characters without a lot of modification or large amounts of restraint on the PCs part. Savage Tide seems like it could work, but some of my players itching to be evil are running through it now.
If anyone has any suggestions for adventures that would be easily adapted for an evil group, please let me know. Thanks.
I'm running RotRL for a group of CN giantkin goblins, and many of them are closer to evil than to good. The trick there is that most of the enemies of the presumed good guys end up being enemies of my PCs too, so they're forced to do most of the adventure path. They're just doing it without all of the support built into the campaign.
Considering that in fact none of the iconics have a Good alignment, that Riddleport is a hive of scum and villainy to rival Mos Eisley, and that the drow's plot threatens the whole world, giving even the most unpleasant PC a motivation to fight the Big Bads, it seems to me that this AP is designed with morally grey to black PCs in mind.
I don't think evil is a problem as long as it isn't coupled with stupid. A key PC in our AoW was evil through and through--she was aiming, from very early on, to follow in Vecna's footsteps--but smart, manipulative, and careful. She did finally get in trouble with the most hardass good PC, but not for about 4/5 of the campaign. (When godhood came in sight, the temptation was a bit too much for her: she made friends with Ma'kar, which the other PC just could not stomach.)
In my hands, playable evil characters need solid long-term goals that will restrain their short-term indulgences. And those goals should involve the other PCs as much as possible, so that the temptation to go it alone is suppressed.
Mary
|
Honestly, the problem I'm having is whether good PCs - specifically, paladins - will be viable in Second Darkness. Given that at one point the PCs will be assumed to be working for a drow noble house, I'm having trouble seeing how that won't automatically violate the paladin code and either signficantly derail the adventure or cause the paladin to Fall.
Honestly, the problem I'm having is whether good PCs - specifically, paladins - will be viable in Second Darkness. Given that at one point the PCs will be assumed to be working for a drow noble house, I'm having trouble seeing how that won't automatically violate the paladin code and either signficantly derail the adventure or cause the paladin to Fall.
I'd think paladins would be problematic from square one, and I'd be inclined either not to allow them, or to move significantly away from the usual interpretation of paladinhood.
A lot of the paladin PCs I've known would have such a strong visceral reaction to the soul-selling theme in the very first scene that it would likely derail the rest of the module. I mean, this guy is exploiting one of the gameworld's greatest evils as a form of casual entertainment: and we're supposed to accept a job from him?
Mary
I'd think paladins would be problematic from square one, and I'd be inclined either not to allow them, or to move significantly away from the usual interpretation of paladinhood.
A lot of the paladin PCs I've known would have such a strong visceral reaction to the soul-selling theme in the very first scene that it would likely derail the rest of the module. I mean, this guy is exploiting one of the gameworld's greatest evils as a form of casual entertainment: and we're supposed to accept a job from him?
Mary
I thought a paladin would be an interesting choice to play in this campaign. I could envision a paladin with the "Scouting for Fiends" trait. He would have to be cognizant that he is working/investigating to bring down a greater evil, and making a list of people/things to bring to justice as soon as the time is right. He doesn't want to strike to soon or the main source may get away. To add to this character's survivability, I would add an NPC agent who initially feeds him information and guidance. (Offering advice such as "yes, Saul is evil, but there is something else. Wait and watch. The true villain will reveal itself."