Lords of Chaos: Or, shouldn't Chaotic Evil be fun at least sometimes?

[Douglas Muir 406]

Just finished Lords of Chaos, Volume 2 of Paizo's Book of Darkness. It's a very well made product -- good production values, lovely art, good writing (noticeably better than the over-the-top prose in the previous volume), a reasonable amount of crunch. But it's very... narrow. The demon lords are mechanically pretty similar -- each has a disgusting Obedience ritual and three boons, neatly arranged by power. I guess I can live with that, though it seems kinda... nonchaotic. My bigger issue is they're all loathsome, to the point where you'd have to be more or less insane to worship them. (This is in sharp comparison to the previous volume... while Hell is presented as horrible, you can totally see the intriguing aspects of worshipping Asmodeus. Some Lawful types on the Paizo editorial staff, one suspects.)

Here's the thing: I think every alignment should have its attractive aspects. I don't want PCs to be Chaotic Evil -- been there, done that, nothing but trouble -- but I do want them to sometimes look at a Chaotic Evil NPC and say, wow, that guy is cool. Lords of Chaos doesn't help with that, because its default assumption is that CE is just vile.

The Joker. Belkar Bitterleaf. Iago. Tyler Durden. Max from Sam and Max. Loki. Chucky. Count Olaf. Everyone on "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia". Alex from "A Clockwork Orange". Kevin Eleven (as a kid). Princess Azula. Caligula. The Talented Mr. Ripley. Sideshow Bob. (1)

Chaotic evil can be a guy who's just enjoying himself hugely. And it should be -- in a game -- fun, at least sometimes. Lawful evil is all chains and shiny leather jackboots. Neutral evil is Dr. Lecter asking Clarisse if she can still hear the lambs. But chaotic evil? Belkar Bitterleaf, sexy barefoot god of war, skipping along a castle wall after setting a paladin on fire. There should be room in the game for that.

Doug M.

(1) Lists like this always produce at least one person who needs to say that Princess Azula is really Neutral Evil. It's an illustrative list, okay? Also, I just want mention the line in Ben Ten: Ultimate Aliens where they time-travel to meet Ben's younger self, and he recognizes older Kevin, and he yells "You're Kevin Eleven! You're evil!" and the mostly reformed Kevin replies "I'm not evil. I'm... nuanced." Because that's just a great line.

[Mikaze]

Douglas Muir 406 wrote:

(1) Lists like this always produce at least one person who needs to say that Princess Azula is really Neutral Evil.

Heh.

Spoiler:

That certainly isn't where she landed alignment-wise in the end! ;0

[Hama]

I presume that is because the paizo staff wants to discourage us from trying to play CE alignments. Because it is evil i guess...never got that we should only play a good party thing. Half of the games i played, some or all of the PC's were evil, and we had awesome fun doing it. I mean, my favorite campaign ever had me playing a drow fighter, in company of a evil human cleric, evil rogue and evil sorcerer. And we were trying to ascend an evil god to greater power. It was awesome.

[Gorbacz]

The demons of D&D lore are sadistic, evil, cruel and not "fun". Gygax didn't write the demon lords as appealing pranksters, he wrote them as full-on ultimate evil. Traditionally, the demons are the Chimera to oppose the Belleforont PCs. And Golarion is a very traditional world.

[Shadow_of_death]

Quote:

Belkar Bitterleaf, sexy barefoot god of war, skipping along a castle wall after setting a paladin on fire

I'd like to point out that this only works in fiction because rules and consequences only exist when it is convenient for them to. In a game of Dnd the DM rarely stops to allow the comical side of CE (cause you can get away with to much that way) and we are left with the sadistic side

Although considering we are talking about demons, yeah I kind of expect embodiments of pure evil to be completely unlikeable. I mean when it is considered a good act for a paladin to torture something then that thing must be 100 different kinds of twisted. They are worshiped for there power, not there ideals.

[Old Nekron]

Gorbacz wrote:

The demons of D&D lore are sadistic, evil, cruel and not "fun". Gygax didn't write the demon lords as appealing pranksters, he wrote them as full-on ultimate evil. Traditionally, the demons are the Chimera to oppose the Belleforont PCs. And Golarion is a very traditional world.

Grazz't anyone? A Gygax favorite........

[Douglas Muir 406]

Gorbacz wrote:

Gygax didn't write the demon lords as appealing pranksters, he wrote them as full-on ultimate evil.

Gary said it, I believe it, and it's good enough for me?

I got no problem with full-on ultimate evil. I'm just saying, open it up a little. Currently, the lords of chaotic evil are actually more consistent and predictable than their devilish rivals. That just doesn't seem right.

Doug M.

[Douglas Muir 406]

Hama wrote:

I presume that is because the paizo staff wants to discourage us from trying to play CE alignments.

Dunno. Personally, I don't much like having evil PCs -- IME and IMCs it has tended to end badly. But YMMV! If it worked for your group, great. Point is, if I want to build cool CE NPCs, this book doesn't help much.

-- I should add here that while I'm a bit critical of Lords of Chaos, there were definitely things I liked about it. One is that it managed to avoid most of the mistakes that the Book of Vile Darkness made. Nipple Clamps of Exquisite Pain... The Lichloved feat... okay, let's move on.

Doug M.

[Deadmanwalking]

I don't know if I agree with this thread's premise. Angazhan, Haagenti, Jezelda, Mestama, Nurgal, Socothbenoth, Zura, and particularly Nocticula all sound like a lot of fun to worship if you're not troubled by those pesky morals.

A lot of their Devotions just involve orgies, getting high, or similar amusing activities with occasional blasphemies or sacrifices thrown in for good measure. So they seem like fun folks. Evil, sure, but a hell of a good time, at least potentially.
.
.
.
Additionally, you need to be not just CE to follow a Demon Lord, but philosophically devoted to CE (or really ambitious), and that requires being more of a bastard than your standard CE guy. I mean, would Belkar (or Alex, or Loki, or Chucky) go out of their way to hunt up a demon lord to serve? Which isn't easy, what with their cults being secret and hunted.

That's some serious effort (and a Feat), and your average fun-loving CE guy just doesn't tend to have the time or inclination. And that leaves aside guys like Tyler Durden who'd probably be against the very idea of serving anybody (which is in no way uncommon among CE).

[Boxhead]

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Additionally, you need to be not just CE to follow a Demon Lord, but philosophically devoted to CE (or really ambitious), and that requires being more of a bastard than your standard CE guy. I mean, would Belkar (or Alex, or Loki, or Chucky) go out of their way to hunt up a demon lord to serve? Which isn't easy, what with their cults being secret and hunted.

That's some serious effort (and a Feat), and your average fun-loving CE guy just doesn't tend to have the time or inclination. And that leaves aside guys like Tyler Durden who'd probably be against the very idea of serving anybody (which is in no way uncommon among CE).

This. Just as not every LG character has the high ideals of a Paladin, not every CE character worships a Demon Lord.

This book is about showcasing the Demon Lords of the Abyss, who are the epitome of all that is Chaotic and Evil. The mechanics are just a little added touch, in my eyes. I would have been perfectly happy if this book was crunch-free.

[James Jacobs]

Actually... I think some of the demon lords MIGHT be a little "fun," but still dangerous overall. That said...

The focus of this book wasn't to provide a book that talks about Chaotic Evil. It wasn't even intended to be a book about the Abyss. It's a book that focuses SPECIFICALLY on the demon lords and to a lesser extent demons that work for them. It's actually a pretty narrow slice of what chaotic evil encompasses. You certainly don't have to associate with demons if you're chaotic evil, so there's PLENTY of room in the game for characters like those listed in the OP's first post.

As for being "non chaotic," I disagree. Demon lords are QUITE chaotic, ranging from the type of shapes they represent (from humanoid to completely non humanoid, from small to enormous, from beautiful to hideous), and on top of that their whole goal is to destroy mortals and their works and all that.

But that said... they're not PURE chaos. Demon lords are, essentially, a form of organized chaos; they're organized by evil. If you're looking for pure, raw chaos, you'll need to wait for us to do more with the Maelstrom. And honestly, several of the characters the OP lists might better be modeled as chaotic neutral than chaotic evil...

[GeraintElberion]

Gorbacz wrote:

The demons of D&D lore are sadistic, evil, cruel and not "fun". Gygax didn't write the demon lords as appealing pranksters, he wrote them as full-on ultimate evil. Traditionally, the demons are the Chimera to oppose the Belleforont PCs. And Golarion is a very traditional world.

Belleforont?

I don't get the reference?

[Gorbacz]

GeraintElberion wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

The demons of D&D lore are sadistic, evil, cruel and not "fun". Gygax didn't write the demon lords as appealing pranksters, he wrote them as full-on ultimate evil. Traditionally, the demons are the Chimera to oppose the Belleforont PCs. And Golarion is a very traditional world.

Belleforont?

I don't get the reference?

Bah, typo. It's Bellerophon in English. The hero who slew Chimera, his story is often referenced as the archetype of "every hero must have his villain" (and vice versa).