|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would go further, and say that most stories you hear about 'the disruptive paladin' actually belong in this thread.
Yeah, but I'm trying to be diplomatic here. ;)
'Diplomatic' means using Smite, to finish them quicker, and reduce the pain of their eradication.
Unlike our world, where it can be argued that good and evil are abstract concepts, and that it is debatable whether it is worth denying one's selfish desires on the gamble of post-mortem salvation, the inhabitants of any world based on the cosmology found in the core D&D game operate with the full knowledge of the consequences.
Devils exist.
Demons exist.
Daemons exist.
Demodands exist.
Qlippoths exist.
The gods of evil exist.
When a person harbors evil in his heart, he effectively stands up and shouts "I want to be like them!".
Every time he takes an evil action, he does become more like them.
And upon death, he does actually become one of them.
It is the duty of every good creature to oppose such people with every fibre of their being, mental and physical, so their actions come to naught, so they see the error of their ways, and turn from that path.
And when that has been tried, and the evil one remains fully aware of their evil, but revels in it, then it is the duty of the good to put an end to that life, as early as possible.
While ending the life of an evil mortal does unfortunately increase the multitudes of Lower Planes, better it be done while the evil one is still young and inexperienced.
What matter that there be one more larva to be traded between hags?
Better that, than the evil one be cosseted, appeased, ignored, have excuses made for them, and rise after death as a dretch, a quasit, an imp.
Let the descendants of those who would do evil, with the aim of winning the favour of some dark lord, attempt to converse with their sire in the afterlife. Let them see the pitiful station they inhabit, as a wriggling limbless abomination, forever eaten, excreted and reformed, by those they planned to rule! Let the sons and daughters of evildoers see the folly of their forefathers! Let them see the rewards of hubris!
Let them reflect on the fact that even the most modest, most humble, most lowly of the servants of Good are reborn to glory, as beings of light, throwing off the aches and sorrows of fragile flesh, while the founder of their line, the one they thought would bring them power and riches, shrieks in endless terror in filth of their own making!
Let all shout out the rewards of the afterlife, so that all may make an informed choice! Let those who would recoil at the horrors of the pit seek to avoid such a fate, and in doing so, experience the truth, that doing good is a self-replicating upward spiral, that they follow for its own sake, rather than fear of the alternative.
Let those who would cry out against the tortures of the Pit, who would blame the servants of Good for its existence, rather than the dregs who inhabit it, who create the prison from their own psyche, let those who seek twisted 'revenge' on the innocent, for their ancestors' own failure, let them be under no illusions, that their choice is their own, willingly made, in full receipt of the facts, and that when they are cut down, to face the same eternal suffering, they have no grounds for complaint, no cause for appeal, and NO EXCUSE.
Let all refuse to accept some vague reward henceforth (in the afterlife) and instead gather what powers they may in life.
Srsly.
|
@Beckett: I have one player that always play Neutral Selfish characters, but he plays them quite intelligently, trying to avoid warning others of his misdeeds and usually knows how to cooperate with others for greater personal good.
I was actually going for a play off of words for Lawful Stupid. The mentality I mean has Neutral Selfish and playing intelligently as mutually exclusive, as it is the player that is selfish, refussing to let the other players, particularly the paladin/cleric/monk/moral obligation character actually play their class. I'm not saying that all Neutral characters are this way, but rather it is a very specific, (and sadly not uncommon) style. The kind that ignor the first and the real most important rule in RPGs. Don't be a douche!
I looked at him and said, with glee, 'Detect Good, M-F!'
Thank you for that. That made my night.
Devils exist.
Demons exist.
Daemons exist.
Demodands exist.
Qlippoths exist.
The gods of evil exist.When a person harbors evil in his heart, he effectively stands up and shouts "I want to be like them!".
Every time he takes an evil action, he does become more like them.
And upon death, he does actually become one of them.
Etc, ect, blah, blah, blah.
Obviously this is exaggerating the point, but even in a world where demons and devils exist, it's no easier to tell what falls under good and evil. Evil outsiders existing does not demonstrate much.
Doing an action that a evil outsider might do does not mean someone wants to be like an evil outsider.
Doing an action that is considered evil doesn't mean you want to be like an evil outsider, or even necessarily evil depending on the conditions.
Finally, even in Golarion, where all this evil exists, people with evil hearts do not just become evil outsiders when they die.
Let all refuse to accept some vague reward henceforth (in the afterlife) and instead gather what powers they may in life.
Srsly.
Well, that's my stance in real life.
But people who live in a world where the Outer Planes are a known quantity?
Why on earth would I want to go to an Outer Plane and deal with a brand-new hierarchy where I start at or near the bottom?
No, thank you. I'll take a hefty helping of the 'Shade' template (Forgotten Realms) and just live forever on the Prime Material, accumulating power enough to rival those silly outsiders (banishing them as needs be when they poke their noses into MY prime material).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly never really understood evil campaigns even from a gm perspective. Most novels or tales or stories, even ancient myths. A heroe is someone who does something beyond the normal and others look up to him/her in deeds.
Is not the object of the game to tell a good tale and everyone enjoy it for the entertaining value.
Those arguing about paladibns or good characters should ask themselves how many movies books or games would they read, play or enjoy if the bad guy destroyed everyone ebnd of story. To me it makes a shallow story and plotline. Evil characters kill, maim and ransack town roll credits...what is the point..or in the end as the credits are rolling they fight over loot and start killing each other. Personally if i read a tale about that or watched a movie like that i would walk out with disgust.
Even tales of Illiad, Icelandic Sagas, and various mythic tales had heroes and sure they had faults most of them but thier was some redeeming quality in them.
I thought the object of the game was to kill things cause they were green and take their stuff... :P
I have only ever had a good experience playing a paladin so I cant add to much to this thread. I've enjoyed reading it though.
I played in an evil campaign once... Once, I didn't enjoy it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest, I've had much more fun playing the evil guy in an heroic campaign than I have in evil campaigns generally.
But I never turn down an invite (from groups I like) to join an evil campaign.
Mind you, there's more than 'kill, maim, ransack town' involved in a decent evil campaign. Think big: ransack a country or a continent. Meet, and defeat, the joint armies of three kingdoms, united to try stamping out your towering villainy. Infiltrate and subvert... the possibilities are endless. Usually, we're the elite force of an evil king, or priest of an evil god, working to eliminate threats sourced out of good nations/temples/etc. Pretty much like heroes, but working for the bad guys.
I had played a Paladin once; I was given hell, not by the GM, but by another player. I decided to make an intelligent Paladin. I got criticized for sneaking along with the rest of the party, for using sleep on enemies (I was multiclassed with sorcerer), for tripping an enemy, and for using obscuring mist to allow hostages to escape. I don't really understand what part of a Paladin's code says you have to start an unnecessary ruckus or put yourself and the people around you in the middle of danger.
Alitan..now you are one of the few intelligent players that play your alignment with some substance and flair i must add. Like you did in the keep you hid and did subversion tactics and still were able to work within the confines of the group. Most players i have gmed for or played with seem to not understand group dynamics..nor how to work to acheive goals.The see the Gm and players as adversaries or enemies to be defeated.
In my opinion, this was not what storytelling or running a game is about, it is about a good tale that everyone walks away with something good out the session.
Mind you, sometimes heroes die or a paladin may sacrifice himself for the good of the group or a belief but it should not be lessened and should add to the story. the players should all be happy the way things worked out in the end and be adult enough to deal with it if they made mistakes.
After all this is for the purpose of entertainment.
Thank you; I love a compliment, Obsidaeus!
It's worth noting that even on the occasion when I play a Neutral/Evil character, any nitpicky GM would have me shifted to Lawful/Evil after about four levels of play...
There's an unfortunate confluence in gamers at large between 'evil' and 'chaotic.' Which we all know isn't really the case ('we' being the thoughtful folks on this thread).
My (admittedly brilliant, lol) play of an evil-but-cooperative character fits in with the actual purpose of this thread, though; the GM and players of any group have to be committed to working together. When they aren't, you get horror stories about paladins getting screwed over by their fellow-adventurers, or worse, the GM.
I've been (judging by posts across various threads) exceptionally lucky with my gaming groups over the years. We have OFTEN had character-vs.-character conflicts, but almost never player-vs.-player ones. And our character conflicts have usually been tongue-in-cheek for-effect things, in which all the players involved were still working together for that seemingly-elusive quality: fun.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have played a few "evil" characters, though haven't really played in an "evil" campaign (nor would I want to). I usually play good characters, I have played a few neutral ones; the evil characters have been a very small minority out of the many characters I have played over the years.
However, in every case that I can remember-- these characters have been 'evil' (in D&D alignment terms), because they were the sort of dedicated, perhaps a little fanatical/fundamentalist, types who were utterly f***ing ruthless and genuinely believed that the "ends justify the means" (without reservation on what 'means' they would consider using). Yeah, they might have been a little bit selfish and had a desire to improve their own standing and power-- but all of them were willing to cooperate with the group, generally worked towards "good ends" and for the benefit of society (my neutral characters have been the more mercenary "I expect to be well-paid" types, not the evil ones), and were not d**ks to their friends. Some of them have also been rather bloodthirsty and way too disrespectful regarding the basic value of sentient life.
They just take their methods, means, and what they're willing to do to get there (including stabbing backs, deceit, lying and cheating-- but only where "necessary") way too far and regularly 'cross the moral event horizon'. These characters have been smart enough (and played with sufficient intent to not disrupt the game) to keep their more ruthless, underhanded, vicious and/or dirty methods concealed from their nicer companions. It ain't rocket science to play a character like this and still contribute, rather than take away from, the overall game for everyone at the table...
Those who have seen me post on certain other threads will know that personally I have pretty strong ideas about good and evil, right and wrong-- my few characters generally violate a lot of those lines. I don't think I've ever been breaking my standards in gaming though, because the point is (as a player)-- these characters often "justify" their methods as right and acceptable to themselves and try to explain them that way in game, but I (the player) do not excuse their actions as morally acceptable or their reasons as anything other than the rationalized excuses they are.
I woud say the main horror story with the paladin is that that they suck against anything non-evil. Even against evil opponents, they have only so many smites per day. You can beef it through feats but they aren't great overall. You only end up spending feats trying to make your character in the most mediocre class created, minorly mediocre.
In my experience, Paladins are not the issue at all. It all comes down to Rogue, both the class and the players. It's easy to blame it all on th paladin, but all the stuff about Lawful Stupid is the exact same for Rogues. Rogues are just Nuetral stupid, or Chaotic Stupider. This is really an issue with playstyle, and it is equal portions other players and the DM.
The Rogue, (and sometimes other classes, rarely) seem to see the inclusion of a paladin or sometimes even a cleric or monk, anyone with a code or built in morality restriction, as an excusse to play the most imature, unrealistic "I want to be evil and do whatever I feel like and call it shades of grey", and my personal <anti>code of behavior (see above) should rule everyone else's playstyle. Not only am I going to be so over the top and childish, and set the bar for shades of grey, I'm going to go out of my way to instigate and ruin the other player's fun just so I can feel special and be what a Rogue should be. But, everyone else should just accept that.
Which I never understood. I've played two Paladins, both of which had extremely close Rogue companions. One they were best friends, practically like sisters, and the other they actually were clanmates (Illumians, so actual biological connection could have been as close as brother and sister or as far as distant cousins). The first was CN (having recently converted out of CE after meeting my Paladin) and the other was CG. There were a lot of episodes in both cases of sighing and "this is a better way to do this" from both sides, but never this whole conflict thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I woud say the main horror story with the paladin is that that they suck against anything non-evil. Even against evil opponents, they have only so many smites per day. You can beef it through feats but they aren't great overall. You only end up spending feats trying to make your character in the most mediocre class created, minorly mediocre.
It looks like this is a point you're eager to discuss, but you might want to just keep it to a thread actually dedicated to arguing over the merits and failures of the class.
Ah yes. Good point. Sorry I digressed. Sort of furious at myself while making the posts.
The only unfortunate part about it was that I never got to use the "I'm just playing my character" card. The rogue's player never protested. He accepted the situation with a grim smile, and created a neutral good character so that he could continue the campaign.
See, I can handle this. Respect it, even. You both played, push came to shove, and he accepted the consequences of getting caught.
"Idealism is for kids! Cynicism is for mature adults who know who the real world actually works! What do you mean it's evil to wipe out the entire race?! The book says they're evil! It's a game!"
Sadly I've run into that guy. Even more sadly, he wasn't twelve years old at the time.
Mikaze, "that guy" is like 50% of the people who read these message boards. lol.
Their opinion is that killing goblins and kolbolds is fine, in even the most cruel and sadistic ways, even when the creatures themselves are neutral, because they ARE goblins and kolbolds and are meant to be killed. And yeah, they call their PCs "good" too. /sigh