With a group consisting of a Chaotic Evil, Neutral Evil and Lawful Evil character...I'm wondering how it's suppose to work out when it comes to conflicting view points. The Chaotic Evil character is a loose cannon ala serial killer. If that character were to commit a murder/crime without reason, what would be the typical reactions of the other two characters?
I'm trying to find two things, one views point where they can all continue to exist together and another where they can realistically be outraged at each other. Perhaps determining a middle ground and a way that they would police each other.
As a GM, I'm tired to hearing players go "Oh, well my character is evil and would look the other way" without taking Neutral and Lawful alignments into consideration.
Thank you in advance!
I think that the NE character wouldn't care about the murders so long as the repercussions did not hinder or inconvenience the NE character.
As for LE character, it might depend on the reason the murder happened, and where the murder took place. I know you said CE did the murder "for no reason," but there is always a reason for such action. Even if the reason is "His shirt is ugly". Otherwise I think LE might feel similarly to NE as mentioned above. However, if such things occur too frequently LE might want to distance himself from CE because he deems CE too erratic to trust as an ally for long-term goals.
2 cp
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a CE guy kills someone for no apparent reason, neither of the other characters would be happy because it does nothing to help them.
NE: Wouldn't like that it could get them caught or that it draws attention to them. He's like a regular criminal, he does crime for easy money and he doesn't mind hurting someone to gain something for himself. But he's NOT going to do bad stuff when there is no purpose to it, just cause he'd punch a guy in the face to take his wallet doesn't mean he'd just punch a guy in the face. He sees his own actions as somewhat justified, he has to get by, but he may be just as upset as anyone else that sees a random beating/murder in the street. He might not say anything the first time, out of fear for his own well being, but he wouldn't put up with a crazy guy's s~$+ forever.
But a NE character could also be a survival of the fittest type, if the guy couldnt defend himself against the CE, then oh well. he's just worreid about making sure he could defend himself if he needs to.
LE: Would be pissed because that's not how you do things. He's like a mobster, he follows the old ways. You don't sell hard drugs to kids and you don't kill for no reason. If a LE character kills someone, it was to assert authority or make a point, he'd NEVER kill randomly. He'd be just as disgusted by the CE guy as a LN or even LG character. In this party the LE guy is likely to be the leader, and if the CE person killed without his say so and for no reason, he may feel the need to punish the CE character himself.
If good is selflessness and saving people, then evil is selfishness, not killing. And I'd say most serial killers are too meticulous to be CE, but you cant really say they ALL are or aren't.
In reaction to a murder for no reason (ala "I felt like killing something") it depends on the thoughts/feelings of the specific individuals who are privy to the event. There are way too many differences between individuals to just categorize a simple blanket reaction. Two characters of the same alignment can still have very different reactions to the world. Similar alignments don't even necessarily equate to similar worldviews in anything but the broadest of comparisons.
For neutral evil, are they of the "evil for the sake of evil" viewpoint, or just selfish to the point of malice, or something else entirely? Someone of the first philosophy might be appreciative of a random act of evil, supporting the habit. But what if the act jeopardizes their much grander evil schemes? What if the victim was also evil? The "selfish" person would probably worry about how the murder affects them directly - were there witnesses? Was there any monetary gain to be shared? Can the act be used as leverage against the perpetrator in the future?
For lawful evil, what sort of laws/code does the character follow? Do they see evil as a moral choice, or is their evil the result of a vicious amorality? Do they believe murder to be wrong, and if so, under what circumstances? Do they care about local ordinances, or only about their own personal code? By doing so has the murderer broken any oaths/promises that either of them have made?
Certainly having a party member come up and say "Hey - I just murdered a lone vagrant in a deserted alley for kicks!" will probably elicit a different response than "Hey - I just murdered the mayor's daughter in a crowded bar for kicks!" Even if another character might otherwise be indifferent or appreciative of a party member's act, most of the time someone else's actions landing you in trouble does not go over very well.
The particulars of the victim are important too. Someone who might otherwise be indifferent might become annoyed or angry if the deceased was a beautiful woman, handsome man, child, member of a specific profession, member of a specific nationality, etc. "Evil" does not equate to "looking the other way"; just because someone's evil doesn't mean they don't care for or have an affinity for anyone else. Perhaps the LE character's beloved mother was a prostitute, or the NE character is a staunch patriot of their native land of Generica - if the victim was a Generican harlot sparks would fly.
As far as policing each other, this is tough to generalize as well. Maybe the NE character is overbearing or a natural leader, whereas the LE character is timid or cowardly, resulting in whatever pleases the NE character being "acceptable" and whatever ticks him off becoming not so. Reverse these traits and you have a very different scenario.
|
Some people play CE as a license to be psycho-killers with the long-term survival instincts of a mayfly. (Particularly annoying in Vampire games, where one is playing a character that could, in theory, have existed for *centuries* before the player opened his mouth and got him ganked off 14 minutes into play.)
NE is *purely* selfish. The stone cold *second* a CE character's murder-palooza causes trouble for the NE character, his first instinct will be to cut him loose, either by walking away and letting him burn in whatever fire he's just set, or by handing him off to the angry authorities or outraged relatives of his latest victims, or slitting his throat in the night and claiming the reward money from those same grieving relatives / angry authorities.
A LE person who has made some sort of personal oath or promise or commitment to the CE person might find it more difficult to throw him to the wolves in this manner, but also be more willing to use 'tough love' to 'correct' problem behavior. (With the LE equivalent of 'tough love' being anything from using magic to modify his behavior, such as custom bestow curses that cause him to feel the pain of any injury he causes to another or something, to just torturing him until he is willing to play nice.) A LE person is also more likely to involve authorities, if necessary, and if the LE person *has not* made any sort of promise or oath or alliance with the CE person, then the kid gloves are off.
A notable difference between evil and good characters is the amount of crap they will put up with from their travelling companions. A disruptive character may find himself looking up from a lower plane of existence, wondering where it all went wrong.
Meta reasons (friends not wanting to gank their friend's character because he's playing him like a dick) might lead to a bit of restraint, but that only encourages the dickish behavior to continue, and results in the game being no fun for everyone else. Ultimately, PVP is never a great idea for people who intend to game with each other again and remain friends, and the use of mind-affecting spells (or bestow curse behavior modification) is equally disruptive to real-world player dynamics, so, in the end, the best solution is out of game. If one player's character is acting like a dick, the best solution is for it to be handled by the setting itself, and not by other PCs.
If CE dude does a bunch of crazy crap, CE dude goes down in a blaze of glory as the town guard gank his psycho-killer butt. NE and LE character narrowly escape, leaving CE dude to lie in the bed he made. Player of CE dude might be annoyed that they didn't stay and die with him, but *they* weren't the ones the guards were after, now were they?
Ideally, player of CE dude makes his next CE character with a tiny little hint of survival instinct.
Thank you for the input everyone! Meta reasons is unfortunately something that happens in RPG, even if the character was say, the destroyer of your homeland. The best solution is to be handled with the setting itself.
The debates over how to interpret alignment will endure well beyond the current versions of RP games.
In a nutshell no alignment should be played as "[blank]-stupid." Chaotic evil does not equal serial killer. Lawful good does not equal Dudley Doright. There is not much that annoys me as much in game play as a player who says "I HAVE to do that because of my alignment!"
If a group of players have been adventuring together then in the vast majority of cases they would have developed some sense of loyalty towards each other.
If the CE character is being played as a serial killer, then he is a threat to the lives and livelihoods of his party members unless they too are serial killers or at least are supportive of the CE's hobby and are willing to accept the risk it brings to them. However, since they are also evil, they are more likely than a good character to be more than a little selfish, so the chances are good that they would dislike having their lives and livelihood threatened by their serial killer "friend."
But at most that means they would likely simply part ways with the serial killer. The lawful evil character MIGHT have enough investment in the law to even turn the CE character in, but that's an individual player decision about how to play their characters.
There is no "right" answer to how a LE or NE (or even CG, LG or NG character) would react to the situation. Alignment is not a straightjacket, it is a guide.
My CE guy acts like a good guy, cause he is chaotic!
He would save the orphans from the burning orphanage for no real reason other than hoping their continued existence will continue to blite the world.
There is a very big difference between evil and stupid.
You might be very evil and want to screw up everyone around you. But the WAY you do it is the point.
I have played a campaign from lvl 1 to 14 in a drow Society. Everyone. And I mean - EVERYONE.. Is evil..
But there is punishment for getting caught.. And that is the point between evil and stupid.. The fewest just grab their sword and decapitate everyone around you.
The chaotic evil might challenge for a duel..
The neutral evil might hire an assasin
And the lawful evil screws them up through the law and in a few weeks their enemey makes it the gallows or mines as a slave..
Also, I have played a campaign from lvl 1 to 13 in Cheliax society with all players LE.. We did many many many evil things.. But nothing illegal and "f%!#ed up"