|
I've been told by many people that sometimes a lawful evil character can fit into parties better than chaotic neutral characters, but am unsure how it would work, roleplay-wise. My Lawful Evil wizard is focused on achieving ultimate magical power, by any means, and will lie, steal, and kill for it. I'm sure the paladin would love me doing that. Thoughts, or maybe stories of your L.E. characters in situations like these?
Any character of any alignment can be a successful member of an adventuring party, as long as the character is above all, a team player. On the flip side, characters of any alignment are going to have problems if they have diametrically opposed beliefs; a NG druid who believes nature should remain unspoiled is unlikely to get along well with a LG cleric of Abadar who believes that civilization and cities provide safety to the weak and vulnerable.
Paladins simply highlight this to an extreme, and often a single paladin being present is assumed to flag everyone to be "paladin friendly", would a paladin sit idly by while you ate a baby for ultimate arcane power? Well, no. But would a paladin journey with you into a forgotten crypt to find a shady magical cult? Probably.
Most problems in parties come from players being disruptive, not from the letters E or G being written in an alignment box.
ps. feel free to search the 10, 000 other alignment threads that pop up every second day.
First, don't set yourself up to fail.
LE in a party with a paladin = fail
LE without a plan/good reason to work with the party = fail
LE 'by any means' without self imposed limits = fail
LE likely has a code of conduct that they abide by.
LE can work well with others and will not necessarily sacrifice them lightly - retraining minions is so time consuming.
LE is not CE. you have structure, you have solid reasons for doing what you do, and rarely act on a whim. You almost certainly have a respect for the need for social structures and regulations (you might not believe all of them apply to you).
LE may well adhere to the absolute letter of any rules, but will seek to gain every edge within those rules (imagine you are an RPG optimiser ;) /jk)
LE wants to be top of the pile, but probably won't tear down the pile to get there.
Unfortunately most of my actual experiences with LE characters were from when I was a kid and I made a lot of mistakes and witnessed those made by others. It has made me very cautious about who I would allow to play a LE character and wouldn't really help.
|
Playing LE "by any means", is a strict contradiction. Your own lawful alignment would suggest you limit yourself to a code or stricture. Obeying the letter of the law while abusing the spirit of the law, a common trope of LE, is not a by any means trait. Frankly, the phrase "...focused on achieving ultimate magical power, by any means,..." does not sound like you intend to be lawful at all, and therefore are unlikely to be Lawful Evil.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of it depends on how the individual players are running that particular alignment. After all, alignment is a very broad brush that can contain all kinds of different personalities and motivations.
I've partied with Lawful Evil characters who were quite easy to get along with, because they were played as utterly ruthless but also completely loyal to the group. Once someone was part of the Lawful Evil guy's group, he would murder an entire civilization down to the last infant to help them.
By comparison, I've also played with chaotic neutral characters who just do random disruptive things for no discernible reason other than to be disruptive.
You can guess which one I'd rather have at the table.
|
|
More specific to your situation, it depends on how your DM and player view the Law vs good of the paladin nature. FOr many paladins if you do not violate their code, and dont outright go about flaunting your selfish, self abosrbed nature, a Paladin can be used to legitimize many things you do. On the other hand, for a paladin who places good over law, a lawful evil player is just as bad if not worse than a chaotic neutral. it depends a lot on the party. i honestly feel neither of those alignments are likely to work well with a palidan in the party, and thats because hes a paladin. Group dynamics change with a paladin.
|
|
You know the person you sometimes see at the table who demands there be an ordered chain of command in the party, even though everyone else is doing fine without it, and who berates anyone who doesn't go along with it? You know the person who thinks there's one predetermined right way to do everything, and attacks any idea involving creative experimentation?
THAT is your LE character in a non-Evil party. This idea floating around that LE is preferable to CN is just stupid.
|
|
Playing LE "by any means", is a strict contradiction. Your own lawful alignment would suggest you limit yourself to a code or stricture. Obeying the letter of the law while abusing the spirit of the law, a common trope of LE, is not a by any means trait. Frankly, the phrase "...focused on achieving ultimate magical power, by any means,..." does not sound like you intend to be lawful at all, and therefore are unlikely to be Lawful Evil.
I suppose I didn't really explain too much about him, or much of anything in the post, rather. I wanted this to be more of a discussion on how a lawful evil character would act, not how the alignment itself works. My wizard is going to use this magic for tyranny, either by becoming a god later on or just bending the world to his whim. He has a code, such as senseless killings and killings of animals, but he occasionally breaks the former in fits of emotional rage, which he also seeks to remove. He also has a code that he feels above, and that the weak are only weak because they fail to act.
I was more wondering what your experiences with Lawful Evil characters were in parties that weren't completely evil. For example, my wizard would not be loyal to the group, but they are a means to a very desirable end, and keeping them alive and not against him is a very important step to greatness. He feels above torture and senseless murder, and leaves that to any underlings he has at the moment. He isn't chaotic, and doesn't seek global chaos, for chaos cannot be ruled. There's more, but again, I'd prefer the discussion be about different opinions on lawful evil in groups, and stories about the topic, rather than the alignment at its core. Thanks for all the replies so far!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fictionally, Gentleman Johnny Marcone from the Dresden files books is a good example of how it can work, though he is more of an occasional ally than a party member in most of the books.
I haven't played any evil characters myself though I made a few characters who walked a very fine line between Lawful Neutral and Lawful Evil. My take is that, in order to work in an otherwise good (or neutral) party, you need to play a particular type of Lawful Evil. Lawful Evil "because I want ultimate power and will stop at nothing to get it" is probably not going to work out well long term. Lawful Evil because, "I am unswervingly loyal to Lord Jaarmath and will do anything necessary to preserve the peace of the Elsir Vale" is more likely to work. The key difference between the two characters is that the goal of the first Lawful Evil character is probably going to place him at odds with the party in a way that cannot be resolved without giving up his goal. The goal of the second lawful evil character is probably shared by the party (as long as you're playing in the Red Hand of Doom adventure at least). The disagreements between him and the good/neutral aligned party will be about the means they use to pursue their goals, not about the goals.
While the lawful evil character might be less squeamish about the methods he uses to preserve the Elsir Vale than the cleric of Pelor would like, he is willing to stay close enough to the neutral part of the line that he is able to preserve a working relationship with the good party members which is the best way for him to accomplish their shared goal. He views them as allies whose tender consciences need to be carefully managed in order to accomplish their shared goals. They view him as a monster, but he's their monster and as long as they keep an eye on him, he probably won't step too far out of line.
It does demand a certain type of good/neutral character too in order to work. In the books, Harry Dresden is probably too much of a jerk to be a long term party member with Johnny Marcone. Dresden seems to think that Johnny being evil gives him a license let his inner a-hole run rampant whenever Marcone is around. But pragmatic or diplomatic good/neutral characters could potentially work with the evil character (Dresden works with Mab in the later books and mostly manages to be civil). The paladin code even offers enough flexibility to allow it in a party with a paladin under certain circumstances.
"While she may adventure with good or neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally
with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good."
There's no requirement for LE characters to 'act evil'. Look at the Hellknights, for example. The Order of the Nail features characters all along the Lawful spectrum, working together. I imagine that, when mixed groups patrol together, the evil ones will roll their eyes and let an offender go with a warning, muttering about the one LG character's soft heart. When he's not there to constrain them, they may let loose.
Or, not to be inflammatory, but look at American politics. Without pointing fingers, I'm sure we can all agree that members of Congress tend towards Lawful, while running the spectrum between Good and Evil. They work together, sometimes smoother than others.
|
Lying, cheating, and stealing are fine as long as they are not the first and foremost methods of obtaining goals. I think such a character would understand that those means are a good way to attract unwanted attention and therefore best to avoid if possible. Thats where the other PCs come in. They can help you reach your goals and keep you out of trouble.
Problem is eventually they will catch on or gain enough power to be rivals. At that point there will be intra-party fallout. If y'all are cool with that then by all means it should be a real fun journey. If y'all are not cool with that, then you will need another approach.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You know the person you sometimes see at the table who demands there be an ordered chain of command in the party, even though everyone else is doing fine without it, and who berates anyone who doesn't go along with it? You know the person who thinks there's one predetermined right way to do everything, and attacks any idea involving creative experimentation?
THAT is your LE character in a non-Evil party. This idea floating around that LE is preferable to CN is just stupid.
That's a LE player, not character. Whole different problem.
I was more wondering what your experiences with Lawful Evil characters were in parties that weren't completely evil. For example, my wizard would not be loyal to the group, but they are a means to a very desirable end, and keeping them alive and not against him is a very important step to greatness. He feels above torture and senseless murder, and leaves that to any underlings he has at the moment. He isn't chaotic, and doesn't seek global chaos, for chaos cannot be ruled. There's more, but again, I'd prefer the discussion be about different opinions on lawful evil in groups, and stories about the topic, rather than the alignment at its core. Thanks for all the replies so far!
Keep in mind that if he's not loyal to his party, make sure that the friends you are playing with are happy that they could be thrown the wolves if a better offer comes along. Evil characters, at least evil PC's, can have friends, they can have relationships; the recent story arc in the Order of the Stick with Tarquin does an interesting job of portraying LE characters who can function with others.
What you want to discuss to me doesn't really seem like a direct consequence of LE, it seems more like a consequence of a character who is a loner; if this is the case I'd be talking to my friends who I will be playing with and my DM.
|
|
IN a more general sense then, A lawful evil character derives power from the law (and/or its abuse), and finds the law to be useful and generally necessary to achieve his ends. He can be bed friends with just about any paladin early on in his career, and likely gets along halfway decently, because a Lawful Evil character is unlikely to overtly lie, cheat or steal on a regular basis and often put you on the wrong side of the law.
Once you get strong enough, Evil Auras become a problem. In a party with a paladin, it depends on the paladin but in general there will be party conflict if not PVP. Because of this, making an evil character in a party with a paladin or similarly righteous characters is a problem, but that problem also crops its head with CN or CG characters. Paladin's change party dynamics and the whole party needs to be ready to play with one.
But if you dont have a Paladin or similar in your party, And are careful about your overt power grabs, a Lawful Evil character can certainly adventure with other characters. At any costs Power hungry? NOt going to likely play well with others. A character using the party's power and growing influence to promote his own power development and deflect rumors that his off hours activities might be less then savory? He can be a great companion for years without the party realizing he doesn't actually care for them.
The real problem with CN is the people who use it as a stand-in for evil. CN believes in Freedom of choice above all else. But a lot of players use that as an excuse to promote self interest above all else, an Evil trait. Its a hard line to walk, and a lot of people fail.
Lawful evil is a lot less of a balancing act in some respects, but getting an evil character to appear to be a team player can be an even bigger one. Its all down to the player honestly, but I'd prefer the player who is honest about their out of game intentions for his character more than the one who is not. That honesty might mean a level of maturity that would allow it to work. Then again, maybe not.
This is why I hate Paladins... if someone insists on a paladin, suddenly everyone needs to.change/be wary of him. Not even evil... CN and CG have issues with Pallies as well...
This is why I hate Jerks... if someone insists on a paladin, suddenly everyone needs to.change/be wary of him. Not even evil... CN and CG have issues with Jerks as well...FTFY
Paadins don't have to be douchebags, problems with Paladins come from the same source as problems with Evil Characters. From the player.
Except Paladins can be problems all their own.
Lets say some one wants to make a Robin Hood type ranger (not an uncommon idea among people). If there is a Paladin in the party though he will have a hard time trying to do that because the Pally has the straight jacket of a code.
The Paladin warps everything about him through his very existance.
Conflict is the spark that drives good drama. A well-played Paladin will make it work. A Jerk will work against it.
A good Paladin maybe,but you dont even need to be a jerk. An average person would have difficulty resolving inter party problems caused by an ability that can potentially make them lose ALL OF THEIR POWEERS.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lawful Evil characters in a good party need to have three things:
1.) LIMITS. First and foremost a Lawful Evil character is defined by what he WON'T do, not what he WILL do. For example, my LE Monk is ruthless, and largely concerned with his own self-perfection above all else, and expects his companions to strive for the same excellence in their areas of expertise. Anyone who gets in his way is considered an enemy, and pretty much fair game for whatever needs to be done to them. He'll torture for information, and "remove" troublesome roadblocks to the party. However, non-combatants (especially children) are off-limits. Not having a focus on combat or adventuring is nothing shameful, though he does think that no matter what you do you should attempt to be the best at it. People who get in the way by circumstance or accident will be dealt with non-lethally where possible, though he won't shed any tears if they die.
2.) A common goal with the party. This one should be self-explanatory. If you don't share the same goal, why in the nine hells are you even traveling with them? Honestly, this should be a criteria for any party member.
3.) Discretion. Ain't nobody need to see all the gory details, especially if your party disapproves of your methods.
My personal take on Lawful Evil in the adventuring party would probably be something like Renegade Shepard from Mass Effect. Still trying to save the world, but perfectly willing to murder, torture, and whatever else it takes to get the job done.
Wow Rynjin, your LE guy is more noble than some of my TN characters have been.
Noble is the name of the game with LE IMO. The whole idea is combining evil acts with an honorable nature.
Plus part of the point of that character was a semi-redemption arc and moving to LN over time, and shedding his alcoholism (and the Drunken Master archetype that went with it) after a while.
The same website would define him as a "Type 2" Lawful Evil character.
Type 2 is a baddie with a code of honor (personal order) that prevents them from doing truly heinous things, or at least keeps them focused and disciplined, and if nothing else, you can count on them to always keep their promises. Often a Pragmatic Villain. This code of honor sometimes leads to the Type 2 conflicting with Type 1's when their values and codes conflict with those of main-stream society. This does not make them Chaotic. Types 2's do have a sense of order, just not the one that society at large possesses. If this is the case, expect the Type 2 to be a Byronic Hero or Übermensch. They typically value loyalty in their minions and possess Evil Virtues, and tend to be reliable allies in an Enemy Mine situation where alignments would fizzle out. The second type tends to either perform a Heel-Face Turn or suffer death by redemption. The alternative is that they ultimately choose evil over this and cross the Moral Event Horizon. Note that these two types are not mutually exclusive.
|
|
My personal take on Lawful Evil in the adventuring party would probably be something like Renegade Shepard from Mass Effect. Still trying to save the world, but perfectly willing to murder, torture, and whatever else it takes to get the job done.
Trying to save the world =/= lawful. Renegade Shepard is clearly Chaotic, and quite possibly evil. Their all consuming drive just happens to save the universe, and she cares about saving the universe, but she threw off the shakles of good and law long ago to get it done.
|
I played a LE Gentleman Lizadfolk in a Skull and Shackles game. Pretty much everyone else was N/CN.
Well, and one LG "Tortle" Monk.
Up until that point, most of the party was happy silly pirating, with my PC handling business, and making sure no one violated the "Pirate's Code".
Then, we had a new player. He decided to play a Vow of Poverty "Tortle"(some turtle race) Monk, with a distaste for theft, violence, and material possessions.
In the end, my PC murdered this PC, whilst he slept, and everyone was fine with it afterwards. Even the player of the murdered PC.
>Lawful Good Pirate
>Wut
>Lawful Good Pirate
>Wut
Just like Robin Hood is a Lawful Good Bandit.
You can make it work so long as you don't portray your pirate or their men very...piratey.
IIRC that tortle was problematic for a different reason entirely. I imagine BBT could give you a link to a detailed explanation as to why.
I'm personally not a huge fan of evil characters in my party, but I feel that LE can work with a mostly good group much better than any other evil alignment, or even better than chaotic neutral for that matter.
For the most part I would say how well the LE character fits in is dependent on the player, and the rest of the players that make up the group. Although, if there's a paladin in the group, all bets are off. The key is to have a strong motivation for working with the rest of the party members and trusting them, and making sure they can trust you too. Concentrating on the "lawful" more than the "evil" helps as well.
I've been told by many people that sometimes a lawful evil character can fit into parties better than chaotic neutral characters, but am unsure how it would work, roleplay-wise. My Lawful Evil wizard is focused on achieving ultimate magical power, by any means, and will lie, steal, and kill for it. I'm sure the paladin would love me doing that. Thoughts, or maybe stories of your L.E. characters in situations like these?
When I was thinking of examples in fiction of LE characters the first guy I thought of was The Operative from the movie Serenity. In the spoiler there's a direct quote from the film that backs me up I think.
Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: I don't murder children.
The Operative: I do. If I have to.
Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: Why? Do you even know why they sent you?
The Operative: It's not my place to ask. I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin.
Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: So me and mine gotta lay down and die... so you can live in your better world?
The Operative: I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... any more than there is for you. Malcolm... I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done.
.
Also, pretty much any villain played by Robert Carlye in a movie or TV series is played as LE.
I've been told by many people that sometimes a lawful evil character can fit into parties better than chaotic neutral characters, but am unsure how it would work, roleplay-wise. My Lawful Evil wizard is focused on achieving ultimate magical power, by any means, and will lie, steal, and kill for it. I'm sure the paladin would love me doing that. Thoughts, or maybe stories of your L.E. characters in situations like these?
in one of the APs (council of thieves) Paizo teamed the LEM (CG) , Seelah (LG Pally) and Seltyeil (LE magus) in the same group.
The paladin may not LIKE what you do...but you may also not make in obvious what you do.
Dr. doom has worked WITH the fantastic four before, and they KNOW hes a bad guy....
Its like being at work, or on a team... do you LIKE all these people you have to work with? Would you hang out with them all?
Usually no.... you tolerate each other for a greater goal....just yours and paladins are...different goals.
Paladin is alway trying to redeem you. you are always trying to make the paladin "see the light" and smarten up.
Does mean you have to mud wrestle for bikini tops every time you dont see eye to eye.
There's no requirement for LE characters to 'act evil'. Look at the Hellknights, for example. The Order of the Nail features characters all along the Lawful spectrum, working together. I imagine that, when mixed groups patrol together, the evil ones will roll their eyes and let an offender go with a warning, muttering about the one LG character's soft heart. When he's not there to constrain them, they may let loose.
Or, not to be inflammatory, but look at American politics. Without pointing fingers, I'm sure we can all agree that members of Congress tend towards Lawful, while running the spectrum between Good and Evil. They work together, sometimes smoother than others.
^ this...
its kind of like game of thrones , nights watch.
not everyone defending the castle is the same alignment.
some of the men defending the wall against "wildlings" are the same alignment AS those wildlings.
Example. Mance Rayder is more of a chaotic good/neutral type guy.... several of the rangers in the night watch would have the same alignment as that (quoran half hand comes to mind) BUT they would rather choose their lawful evil "brother" in the watch over any wilding....alignment be damned.
This is why I hate Paladins... if someone insists on a paladin, suddenly everyone needs to.change/be wary of him. Not even evil... CN and CG have issues with Pallies as well...
eh.... you would like my paladins.... Im more of a Obi wan kenobi, than an ONWARD TO JUSTICE!!!! type pally player.
I once got to 5th level before anyone int he party figured out I WAS a paladin... they thought I was a ranger.
Lawful Evil characters in a good party need to have three things:
1.) LIMITS. First and foremost a Lawful Evil character is defined by what he WON'T do, not what he WILL do. For example, my LE Monk is ruthless, and largely concerned with his own self-perfection above all else, and expects his companions to strive for the same excellence in their areas of expertise. Anyone who gets in his way is considered an enemy, and pretty much fair game for whatever needs to be done to them. He'll torture for information, and "remove" troublesome roadblocks to the party. However, non-combatants (especially children) are off-limits. Not having a focus on combat or adventuring is nothing shameful, though he does think that no matter what you do you should attempt to be the best at it. People who get in the way by circumstance or accident will be dealt with non-lethally where possible, though he won't shed any tears if they die.
2.) A common goal with the party. This one should be self-explanatory. If you don't share the same goal, why in the nine hells are you even traveling with them? Honestly, this should be a criteria for any party member.
3.) Discretion. Ain't nobody need to see all the gory details, especially if your party disapproves of your methods.
A GOOD LE character is a tyrant.... not a cut throat.
LE characters USE PEOPLE.... he NEEDS the party, thats why hes with them.... if they further his goals great.Take out all the bad guys? Get their treasure? Yes please...Less competition for me!
Good PCs are not "world domination " types, so they are never a threat to his "ultimate plans"
Except... those plans are "when I become president" and right now...everyone are interns.
The whole thing of end game would be in the distant future, not a period of time that actually gets covered by the campaign at hand...
>Lawful Good Pirate
>Wut
well....what if you are a pirate on the waters of a drow controlled domain?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Adventuring groups are a group of freelancers that need to cooperate. It's like a band, there are a lot of things that could happen to make certain people not fit.
Alignment can be an issue, yet its the overall personality that is key. To take an example, Magneto and Professor X can either be best friends and allies or bitter enemies. It all depends on the situation (and the writer).
A good aligned group can accept a LE PC in the fold if the LE PC is a team player that actually cares about the group. If the LE PC cares, that individual might actually use that "by any means" attitude to protect people that are dear to the LE individual.
Of course, there's a lot of ways anyone can become a square peg trying to fit in a round hole. Being a jerk is the big one. It doesn't matter if you are too strict paladin person, the CN crazy person, the LE tyrant, or any other mix of alignment. A jerk is a jerk and doesn't fit with a group.
Some PCs might be cool, yet if a band has four bass guitar players and no other instruments, it might not go many places. So everyone either needs a mix of roles, or everyone plays a class that can fit many roles - each player taking a slightly different specialty. (All monk or all cleric parties seem to work well).
The main point is that if someone isn't a jerk and cares about their group, they go farther than those that just disrupt the fun of others.
>Lawful Good Pirate
>Wut
Actually, a highly customized campaign, that sort took a little flavor of Skull and Shackles. Sort of.
How has that player gone since then, by the way?
This is why I hate Jerks... if someone insists on a paladin, suddenly everyone needs to.change/be wary of him. Not even evil... CN and CG have issues with Jerks as well...FTFY
Paadins don't have to be douchebags, problems with Paladins come from the same source as problems with Evil Characters. From the player.
True, nobody has a problem with the paladin in our group. Personally, if I were playing a pally, I'd play him with a philosophy of "set a good example and others will follow", rather than playing him as a bored medieval cop dishing out ass kickings to anyone who breaks even the slightest rule, which is how alot of the problem players play Paladins.
Of course, all these issues with paladins are really issues with the players themselves. I'm of the opinion that these same players would cause problems no matter what class they were playing.
|
|
OP's character doesn't sound like LE, but rather NE - "I'm going to get what I want by any means possible".
LE can work VERY well in a party. You just have to be aware that the PC in question is going to demand that everybody play by the same rules, but try to twist those rules to their own advantage where they can. They CAN be counted on to keep their bargains and make good on promises - just expect those promises and bargains to be as self-serving as possible.
Also: paladins can detect evil, but remember that not every evil character has to have an evil aura! A good DM and Player can make the whole thing work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The real problem with doing that kind of paladin right is it requires TWO people not to be douchebags... the player and the GM, because by RAW often if you ignore the LE too often the GM can make you fall, which then leads the player to play it as lawful stupid to avoid that.This is why I hate Jerks... if someone insists on a paladin, suddenly everyone needs to.change/be wary of him. Not even evil... CN and CG have issues with Jerks as well...FTFY
Paadins don't have to be douchebags, problems with Paladins come from the same source as problems with Evil Characters. From the player.
True, nobody has a problem with the paladin in our group. Personally, if I were playing a pally, I'd play him with a philosophy of "set a good example and others will follow", rather than playing him as a bored medieval cop dishing out ass kickings to anyone who breaks even the slightest rule, which is how alot of the problem players play Paladins.
Of course, all these issues with paladins are really issues with the players themselves. I'm of the opinion that these same players would cause problems no matter what class they were playing.
"While she may adventure with good or neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good."
One day, people will fully realize that the associates clause actually doesn't make you fall. Until then, I will continue to try to remind them that anyone who does make you fall because of this hasn't actually read the rules correctly.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Prof X/Magneto is a really good example.
Magneto has ALWAYS been evil. maybe he wasnt as a child, but he was as adult.
Magnetos hunt for nazis, although justified to a point, was still carried out as an evil character would do it.
Prof X, arguably NG, had the power to feel magnetos pain and anguish (the source of his evil motives) and want to help him (ie change his alignment)
X and mags worked together because they had a common goal... (training and mentoring mutants) but for different reasons/end goals (because they had different alignments.
Hunting and punishing nazis doesnt make you good.
LE demon hunters are still evil, even tho demons are evil themselves.
another GOOD example of this is Obi-wan/Vader.
Obi wan was always LG, even though his mentor Qui-gon was arguably CG or possibly Neutral.
When he begins mentoring Anakin he views skywalkers ways as something similar to Qui-gons alignment.
He mis judges his later anger and hate as "youthful exbueration" failing to recgonize the growing evil due to his closeness to anakin and the fact that they had saved each others lives on multiple occasions.
Anakin has always been chaotic, something Obi thought he could teach out of him.
He shifted from CN to CE from manipulations from palpatine over the course of the 2nd and 3rd movie.
The real problem with doing that kind of paladin right is it requires TWO people not to be douchebags... the player and the GM, because by RAW often if you ignore the LE too often the GM can make you fall, which then leads the player to play it as lawful stupid to avoid that.This is why I hate Jerks... if someone insists on a paladin, suddenly everyone needs to.change/be wary of him. Not even evil... CN and CG have issues with Jerks as well...FTFY
Paadins don't have to be douchebags, problems with Paladins come from the same source as problems with Evil Characters. From the player.
True, nobody has a problem with the paladin in our group. Personally, if I were playing a pally, I'd play him with a philosophy of "set a good example and others will follow", rather than playing him as a bored medieval cop dishing out ass kickings to anyone who breaks even the slightest rule, which is how alot of the problem players play Paladins.
Of course, all these issues with paladins are really issues with the players themselves. I'm of the opinion that these same players would cause problems no matter what class they were playing.
"While she may adventure with good or neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good."
One day, people will fully realize that the associates clause actually doesn't make you fall. Until then, I will continue to try to remind them that anyone who does make you fall because of this hasn't...
I agree.... I think lots of people would like my paladins.
you get all the bennies of having a paladin and non of the pala-bull....
although im more likely to play a holy guide/temple champion than your typical white knight.
Lawful Evil characters in a good party need to have three things:
1.) LIMITS. First and foremost a Lawful Evil character is defined by what he WON'T do, not what he WILL do. For example, my LE Monk is ruthless, and largely concerned with his own self-perfection above all else, and expects his companions to strive for the same excellence in their areas of expertise. Anyone who gets in his way is considered an enemy, and pretty much fair game for whatever needs to be done to them. He'll torture for information, and "remove" troublesome roadblocks to the party. However, non-combatants (especially children) are off-limits. Not having a focus on combat or adventuring is nothing shameful, though he does think that no matter what you do you should attempt to be the best at it. People who get in the way by circumstance or accident will be dealt with non-lethally where possible, though he won't shed any tears if they die.
2.) A common goal with the party. This one should be self-explanatory. If you don't share the same goal, why in the nine hells are you even traveling with them? Honestly, this should be a criteria for any party member.
3.) Discretion. Ain't nobody need to see all the gory details, especially if your party disapproves of your methods.
This is pretty much how I play all my LE characters in a group, either a good or evil party. Great summation of how to do it the right way.
|
|
How has that player gone since then, by the way?>Lawful Good Pirate
>Wut
Actually, a highly customized campaign, that sort took a little flavor of Skull and Shackles. Sort of.
He got married. He plays as a guest PC once in a blue moon. Much more mellowed out.
By the way, that Kingmaker game that got sort of mentioned in there, is still going. We just recently took a break for some Star Wars Saga, but it has not ended.