| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not always, but playing an evil PC can be more of a want to feel "badass" than actually being "evil."
Sadly, this is true all to often.
Being badass has nothing to do with alignment.
I've only played in a few games where an evil character was a problem, but in those cases the problem was the player, not his character. Obviously if one of the players is a LG paladin in an otherwise mixed alignment group the situation is problematic at best.
Those situations aside, think of it like the real world. People you meet do not have some alignment label attached to them. Many 'evil' people keep their evil tendencies secret. You can potentially befriend someone, only to later discover that some aspect of their nature is evil. Even if that aspect eventually breaks the relationship, you could go years before discovering such a problem exists.
I enjoy playing LE characters, because I like to follow secret agendas, and I like characters that are flawed. I never play peaceniks, like what seems to be the OP's preference and know almost nobody who does.
I say play what you want, and let the party politics build themselves - mixed parties of alignments is far more realistic. Even in stories of bands of heroes, there is often somebody with some dark history and perhaps weaknesses that get the party in trouble. This makes the game interesting. Really groups of complete do-gooders tend to be boring and party dynamics bland (not always, but complex party dynamics tend to be far more interesting and mixed alignements is a great way of achieving that).
GM has promised a leash policy on him as well, so I think I'm good.
|
I've only played in a few games where an evil character was a problem, but in those cases the problem was the player, not his character
This. 100%. No matter what alignment you play, above-the-table you're all there to play the game together and have fun. Attempting to screw the party over is not fun. My wife and I have a saying for such people: "You role playing an ass isn't role playing. It's just you being an ass." Usually followed shortly by "Gtfo my house".
I can't get away from the fact that the group her character is in somehow managed to survive having a Chaotic Evil Orc in it...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's easy to forget that evil doesn't necessarily mean that he can't be a team player. As a lawful character he's probably more likely to see the benefits of a group dynamic and to value the rest of the party, even if it's just for the skills that they possess instead of the bonds you've created as companions.
That said it's still really important that you communicate with your GM and they other players involved. Evil characters are kind of like the S&M factor that way: you've got to be comfortable and trust the people you're playing with for it to be any fun at all. Good luck and I hope your game goes well!
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
GM has promised a leash policy on him as well, so I think I'm good.
No, you went too far. You got offended by a few letters on a sheet that weren't like everyone else, and now a character is leashed. Huge over-reaction. You could be spoiling another person's game, because I've seen the complain to the dm lead to this leashing before. Tsk tsk tsk.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, you went too far. You got offended by a few letters on a sheet that weren't like everyone else, and now a character is leashed. Huge over-reaction. You could be spoiling another person's game, because I've seen the complain to the dm lead to this leashing before. Tsk tsk tsk.
That is irrelevant. If any offender dares to go against my will in the slightest way, tight control must be placed on them until they behave in exactly the manner I desire. Only when all are like me can the greater good be achieved. No more will I merely sit back and watch while other people do the things they want; allowing them to play their own characters freely is too large a concession.
The wonderful irony is that the OP's reaction to the Lawful Evil character is far more Lawful Evil than anything the Lawful Evil character has done.
No, you went too far. You got offended by a few letters on a sheet that weren't like everyone else, and now a character is leashed. Huge over-reaction. You could be spoiling another person's game, because I've seen the complain to the dm lead to this leashing before. Tsk tsk tsk.That is irrelevant. If any offender dares to go against my will in the slightest way, tight control must be placed on them until they behave in exactly the manner I desire. Only when all are like me can the greater good be achieved. No more will I merely sit back and watch while other people do the things they want; allowing them to play their own characters freely is too large a concession.
The wonderful irony is that the OP's reaction to the Lawful Evil character is far more Lawful Evil than anything the Lawful Evil character has done.
Uh what? I didn't realize you were in the role playing group, how is the DM? What's there quest like?
GM has promised a leash policy on him as well, so I think I'm good.No, you went too far. You got offended by a few letters on a sheet that weren't like everyone else, and now a character is leashed. Huge over-reaction. You could be spoiling another person's game, because I've seen the complain to the dm lead to this leashing before. Tsk tsk tsk.
I disagree. She spoke to the DM, and the Dm agreed. Now if she make the DM agree with threats or something, then that woudl be another story.
The issue here is that the other player refuses to play anything other than a Evil PC- in any game.
The issue here is that the other player refuses to play anything other than a Evil PC- in any game.
Except if you read the OP you'll see that that's not true at all. Out of the three characters the player in question made before the current one, only one was evil.
One was a Paladin FFS, this "always plays evil characters" business is clearly nonsense.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
All I can say is I would run away from this group if I was any of the other players. Having one person complain and try to control anothers gameplay basically before it has even started is a little on the zealous side.
Seems like poor coping and or roleplay skills to me if letting a OOC comment or reading of someones character sheet can cause so much discontent on a persons part.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really recommend playing an evil character once in a while. I am a very peaceful person and always try to look for the reasons behind other peoples "wrongdoings" and try to understand them. Since most people tend not to actively try to do bad things, I'm neraly never mad at anybody.
But no matter how peaceful and nice a peryon is, there is an evil part in everybody. Most people don't let it out in everyday life, since they don't want to cause any harm, but it is ALWAYS there. In my opinion there is no such thing as a completely good or bad person. Once you accept that and accept the fact that you, too have a little shard of darknes inside you, take that shard, look at it from all sides, accept it as a part of yourself and THEN make it an RPG character. I get to play my inner a/%%hole in a regular game of Black Crusade (Warhammer 40k, you play as the "bad guys" by default)and I can tell you guys, it's liberating. All the evil things that little voice in the back of your head wants you to do to that guy that nearly runs you over with his car at the end of a godawful day and then starts to swear at you, even if it was his fault? Let them out. Lay waste to towns, raze kingdoms to the ground and strike fear in the hearts of the weak. It's an RPG, no one gets hurt and you get all that darknes out of your stomach without hurting anyone.
On second thought, I should probaly go to bed. I seem to have a tendency to become a little dramatic at 6 in the morning...
Edit: The time does seem to also have a negative impact on my spelling...
A person who choses to be a douche choses to be a douche, doesn't matter what alignment they write on the sheet, its how they play the game.
The issue here is that the other player refuses to play anything other than a Evil PC- in any game.Except if you read the OP you'll see that that's not true at all. Out of the three characters the player in question made before the current one, only one was evil.
One was a Paladin FFS, this "always plays evil characters" business is clearly nonsense.
Some posters make a point of never letting a few inconvenient facts get in the way of the rush to judge and condemn.
On topic, I'll chime in with everyone else who's said that alignment is far less important than party cohesion. An evil character who works along with the party is far less trouble than a good one that's constantly disruptive.
|
|
I just want a "good guys" game.
well, he doesn't. As you don't own the game, I suggest you deal with it...You simply have no say over his playing style - UNLESS he's disruptive, but that would go for any player regardless of alignment.
I've played an assassin with a LG paladin and LG cleric in the group for years. We had loads of fun in character: I let him try to convert me during travel, I let them talk their way out of things, but if their conversation didn't convince the NPC's to stand aside, I simply cut down who needed cutting, as it was the logical thing to do.
We made it as a group to level 13 until a beautiful TPK happened.
I think it boils down to giving eachother room to play the thing you want to play. That goes both ways though.
I'm just sick of always being the one who has to suck it up and give in as a player. I'm a bit of a hippie at heart, always playing the peaceful character
I have reasons to want to acquire his services. I am a vanara alchemist. He's a sorcerer with a magic shop and a soft spot for interesting items. The procuring business, its called.
There is your problem :-)
A lawyer is lawful evil.
An adventurer is a mass murderer. You are playing a game which revolves around finding sentient creatures that does bad according to your views, and kill them without a trial. A lawful good character doing this is real scary, because she is following her own rules to justify mass murder. A paladin does this with a religious motive. Follow my drift?
Alignment is a game statistics, it is not a moral imperative. You are in a game with your geeky friends, playing imaginary massmurdering elves that are reeeealy powerful. Their alignment gives them access to certain spells, prestige classes, summonings, familiars, etc etc.
And you are worrying too much. ;-).
Better a LE sorcerer who lets you be you than a LG paladin who tries to enforce his alignment on everyone in the party.
So you met someone who doesn't know how to play a Paladin?
From what I read in the actual Core Rulebook, LE people can be very discriminating as well.
So you met someone who doesn't know how to play a Paladin?
From what I read in the actual Core Rulebook, LE people can be very discriminating as well.
Yep. I agree completely.
This whole thing is very silly and plenty of other people have already made very strong arguments for why a LE can be a fine addition to a group of adventurers. I'll just say that the OP seems like a very controlling person who gets easily flustered when she doesn't get her way, and I feel bad for her boyfriend. That is all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, the LE guy is probably the least offensive (or potentially). By their nature, the NE guy is a selfish "beat your mother to death for 10 dollars" kinda evil. The CE guy? Gleefully destructive evil.
The LE guy generally has a purpose, and doesn't mind getting his hands dirty. He'll have a code of ethics, even if twisted.
Yknow, once upon a time I believed Dr. Doom was the template/example for LE. But over time, I'm thinking he's more NE and pretends to be more principled than he is. He is a selfish putz that will sacrifice anyone and anything to get his way, he's like...an evil tantrumming child.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Like blackbloodtroll has already told you guys, and I have already stated. I had an overreaction. I have cooled down. I am fine now. The gm agreed with my concern. maybe some of the things I said contradicted each other, but I was mad and I apologize. It can happen. I started this thread because I was upset about something I knew was no big deal, something any of the great gamers of paizoland could be totally fine with. But I wasn't, and I knew I was in the wrong, and I needed advice on how to stop this horrible anti-evil problem I have.
To the 95% of responders who helped me get over it, thank you.
edit: realized first sentence didn't fit with theme of post.
I don't see having an opinion as a problem.
There are actual problems that some players and DMs need to get rid of, but those are tales for another thread.
I can't get away from the fact that the group her character is in somehow managed to survive having a Chaotic Evil Orc in it...
He was the last of his religion. His god told him "work with these people to save the faith.". He realized once that plot arc was over so was the character.
Well, the LE guy is probably the least offensive (or potentially). By their nature, the NE guy is a selfish "beat your mother to death for 10 dollars" kinda evil. The CE guy? Gleefully destructive evil.
Heck, even NE can make a good team player (as long as he deems playing with the team more rewarding / convenient / whatever, at least)...
.From experience, the alignments I have seen used, or abused, for destructive play, hiding behind "hey, I'm just playing my character" were:
- CE (psychopathic behavior ahoy!)
- CN (I do what I f#?ing want, capiche?)
- LG (condescending holier than thou types)
- LN (The Law is the Law, whatever it says, whoever made it)
- NN (Seems the (good) party won this time, let's do some evil to balance things)
I am pretty sure you can use pretty much any other alignment to justify destructive, anti-party behavior as well (okay; NG might be tad less easy).
The way you describe CN sounds pretty CE as well.
And yeah, people keep forgetting time and again that alignments are a guideline, not a straitjacket.
They're also not meant to be interpreted in such idiotic ways, either. The absurdity of it all is amazing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another thing, by the way - consider using a formally evil party member to create contrast situations where your own goodness becomes clearer for it, without breaking party cohesion. That is, you can have heated discussions on whether to help poor debtors, villagers etc., you can bear some of the costs yourself because your evil teammate doesn't want to, and get more of the feeling of being an actual hero than you would have if there hadn't been a selfish jerk around to provide that contrast. The same, of course, goes in the other direction - you can act out being surprised, ashamed on his behalf, or angry - within civility's bounds - and that will give the other player additional black-hat moments just as it gives you white-hat moments. The Order of the Stick is full of this kind of thing, but it can work out in regular play as well.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The way you describe CN sounds pretty CE as well.
There's a reason Chaotic Neutral has a reputation for being the alignment people pick when they want to play evil, but evil PCs aren't allowed.
The way you describe CN sounds pretty CE as well.There's a reason Chaotic Neutral has a reputation for being the alignment people pick when they want to play evil, but evil PCs aren't allowed.
If I were a DM in PFS (likely to never happen), I'd probably get a reputation for "ruining the fun" of the morons who try to get away with such behaviour.
|
Yknow, once upon a time I believed Dr. Doom was the template/example for LE. But over time, I'm thinking he's more NE and pretends to be more principled than he is. He is a selfish putz that will sacrifice anyone and anything to get his way, he's like...an evil tantrumming child.
Like most fictional characters not explicitly written to be a paragon of one of D&D's nine alignments, trying to shoehorn Doom into one of the alignments results in a poor fit.
The issue here is that the other player refuses to play anything other than a Evil PC- in any game.Except if you read the OP you'll see that that's not true at all. Out of the three characters the player in question made before the current one, only one was evil.
One was a Paladin FFS, this "always plays evil characters" business is clearly nonsense.
Some posters make a point of never letting a few inconvenient facts get in the way of the rush to judge and condemn.
On topic, I'll chime in with everyone else who's said that alignment is far less important than party cohesion. An evil character who works along with the party is far less trouble than a good one that's constantly disruptive.
Yesterday I attended a lecture on politeness and insults in Japan. Made me want to play a character that was so respectful, utterly polite but at his core, wantonly evil--not to the party of course, they are inside the clan and there is proper decorum to uphold.
I've played evil chars, chaotics, offensive mavericks (this caused the most problem with other players), but not polite lawful evil yet.
Another thing, by the way - consider using a formally evil party member to create contrast situations where your own goodness becomes clearer for it, without breaking party cohesion. That is, you can have heated discussions on whether to help poor debtors, villagers etc., you can bear some of the costs yourself because your evil teammate doesn't want to, and get more of the feeling of being an actual hero than you would have if there hadn't been a selfish jerk around to provide that contrast. The same, of course, goes in the other direction - you can act out being surprised, ashamed on his behalf, or angry - within civility's bounds - and that will give the other player additional black-hat moments just as it gives you white-hat moments. The Order of the Stick is full of this kind of thing, but it can work out in regular play as well.
Yeah! For sure. I have the players tooling around with a war criminal fighter, now the party is good and are sort of redeeming/re-directing him to more nobler pursuits (they are not just mass murdering thieves). If they stray, if they entertain evil options, it gets him talking about the good old days. Then they know they should stop, because the crimes of this guy were major.
Dm is not at all using it as a controlling tool, but this evil npc's backstory is a good marker of what evil actually is and how the players could go that way by just a few choices. A bit like old Korgan of BG2 getting all teary at party evil.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like blackbloodtroll has already told you guys, and I have already stated. I had an overreaction. I have cooled down. I am fine now. The gm agreed with my concern. maybe some of the things I said contradicted each other, but I was mad and I apologize. It can happen. I started this thread because I was upset about something I knew was no big deal, something any of the great gamers of paizoland could be totally fine with. But I wasn't, and I knew I was in the wrong, and I needed advice on how to stop this horrible anti-evil problem I have.
To the 95% of responders who helped me get over it, thank you.
edit: realized first sentence didn't fit with theme of post.
It's good to hear you got it worked out. Sadly, some posters in this forum can't let things go, and many more just don't read past the first page, or even the first paragraph, some don't even read past the title. The best thing to do in the case of this thread is to just forget and use the hide button.