PDA

View Full Version : [Any] Evil Characters Do Not Need Evil Powers



Aron Times
2009-08-07, 03:04 PM
I am writing this post mainly with 4E in mind, but this topic applies to just about any RPG that allows evil characters (which is virtually all of them).

One of my pet peeves regarding roleplaying evil characters is the notion that they need evil powers to be evil. For example, one common complaint against 4E is that it doesn't offer any options for evil characters, particularly evil divine characters.

I guess it's because they're used to the 3.5 evil cleric's ability to channel negative energy. Good clerics do good things to people, and thus channel healing positive energy. Evil clerics do evil things to people, and thus channel harmful negative energy.

All 4E clerics, regardless of religion or deity, have Healing Word. Yes, even clerics of evil deities have Healing Word. At first glance, Healing Word seems to be a "good" power since it heals people, which is usually thought of as a good thing.

However, it can also be used to heal people against their will. A particularly sadistic cleric can use Healing Word to prolong a prisoner's agony. He can go to town with whatever torture he can think of since he can just use Healing Word to bring the prisoner back from the brink of death. There is virtually no chance of accidentally killing the prisoner when you have such powerful healing magic available.

For a less sadistic but just as evil use of Healing Word, imagine an evil church (let's say, Bane's) that hoards its healing magic from the people it rules over. By eliminating all external sources of healing in the realm, the Church of Bane gains a monopoly on magical healthcare, rationing out healing to their most loyal followers. This keeps people from rebelling, as the alternative is often much worse.

I find it amusing that people readily accept good characters using "evil" powers to do good, but not evil characters using "good" powers to do evil.

Well, that's all for now. What do you think?

Gorgondantess
2009-08-07, 03:07 PM
Well... those are kind of esoteric. The most reasonable evil use of healing power is healing someone who is evil, so they can go on to do more raping and killing and all that.
But, yeah, if I were an evil cleric and all I got were blesses and healing magics, I'd get pissed. Why, pray tell, can I not curse someone? Or make their skin rot off the bone?

Morty
2009-08-07, 03:12 PM
That's all very cool, but what you're doing is essentially making up things to cover up WoTC's intentional omission.
Yes, evil characters can work without powers specifically geared towards them. However, if Good clerics get good powers, why shouldn't the same work for Evil characters? And how do you explain no Channel Divinity feats for evil deities?


I find it amusing that people readily accept good characters using "evil" powers to do good, but not evil characters using "good" powers to do evil.

What "evil" powers? There are no evil divine powers in 4ed at all - though there are many that can go either way - so I don't see how anyone can use them to do good. Since, you know, they aren' there.

Finally, your statment that this thread isn't specifically about 4th edition is quite amusing. It doesn't really concern any other system because 3rd edition provides evil clerics with evil powers and no other RPG system except for D&D determines a character's powers by his/her alignment or its equivalent.
4th edition D&D assumes that the PCs will be good or unaligned, including clerics. Clerical powers are designed accordingly. Most people are fine with that, but predending that it's not the case is futile.

AstralFire
2009-08-07, 03:13 PM
Healing is really far more useful than necessarily good.

I actually have a god in my Tareea setting with the following things:

Colors: Violet and Green.
Names: The Heartbreaker, The Shadow, The Nemesis.
Portfolio: Evil, Death, Healing, War, Domination.
Weapon: Katana

Precisely because he uses torture and brainwashing extensively.

Blue Ghost
2009-08-07, 03:14 PM
An evil cleric that uses healing for evil purposes is indeed an interesting and perfectly viable idea, but the problem, as I see it, is that they are forced to do that. It's kind of odd for all evil clerics to use healing instead of the traditional curses and necromancy and whatnot.

AstralFire
2009-08-07, 03:16 PM
An evil cleric that uses healing for evil purposes is indeed an interesting and perfectly viable idea, but the problem, as I see it, is that they are forced to do that. It's kind of odd for all evil clerics to use healing instead of the traditional curses and necromancy and whatnot.

For directly evil purposes, perhaps.

Simply being able to heal and aid allies who are doing evil in Her Dark Name is sufficient.

Must a sword be forged from the iron in the blood of a million innocents for it to be a murderous tool?

ZeroNumerous
2009-08-07, 03:18 PM
Must a sword be forged from the iron in the blood of a million innocents for it to be a murderous tool?

No, but it should be put into the bodies of the living for it to be a murderous tool. Otherwise it's just a large carving knife.

To be an evil cleric in 4e, you have to beat your plow into a sword.

AstralFire
2009-08-07, 03:20 PM
No, but it should be put into the bodies of the living for it to be a murderous tool. Otherwise it's just a large carving knife.

To be an evil cleric in 4e, you have to beat your plow into a sword.

Doctors IRL who voluntarily proffer their services to tyrannical warlords and mob bosses could easily be argued to be evil, and all they have to do is stitch someone up. I'd always want someone capable of healing on my side, it is a very powerful tool. Finding ways to directly make healing into an evil act is difficult and doesn't fit in every circumstance, I agree; when I made Elester and much of Tareea, I was specifically seeking to find ways to turn paradigms on their head.

But it is a powerful tool for aiding and abetting anything, regardless of the moral 'rightness'.

Aron Times
2009-08-07, 03:28 PM
You guys seem to be forgetting all the damage-dealing cleric powers in the PHB. All 4E clerics, regardless of alignment, can use their divine magic to heal or harm their enemies. It all really depends on how the cleric uses his god-given powers.

A cleric casting Astral Storm (the 4E version of Storm of Vengeance) on a horde of marauding demons burning, raping, and pillaging their way through town is doing a good act. The same cleric casting it on the Temple of Ilmater, with lots of sick people inside, is doing an evil act. A cleric using Healing Word to run a free clinic is doing good, while a cleric using Healing Word to prolong torture is doing evil.

BRC
2009-08-07, 03:28 PM
I don't mind evil clerics having traditionally "Good" powers, because really, it's all about how you use them. A Fighter's sword can be used for good or evil. A Wizard's fireball dosn't care who it's burning.

Really, the idea of Evil clerics being unable to heal or buff only works for the "BWAHAHA, ALL I CARE ABOUT IS SPREADING PAIN AND SUFFERING" type evil character. Every other type of evil character, the greedy schemer, the well-intentioned extremist, the amoral mercenary, ect ect, would all want accsess to the traditionally "Good" powers.

At the same time, only the "I LOVE EVERYTHING, LET'S ALL BE FRIENDS" good character wouldn't mind being limited to healing and buffing.

kamikasei
2009-08-07, 03:29 PM
I think what it comes down to is that "evil cleric" is a different niche to "cleric who is evil" much more so than "evil fighter" or "evil rogue" or any of those things.

An evil any-other-class is just someone who uses that class' powers to do evil. But an evil cleric is a vessel of an evil god and doesn't necessarily want to fulfill the same party role of helping and healing his allies while smiting his enemies, only doing so while being evil to boot.

I think it simply requires a conceptual shift where what in earlier editions was an "evil cleric" is in 4e an "evil divine servant" realized as a warlock, or avenger, or something along those lines.

Morty
2009-08-07, 03:31 PM
You guys seem to be forgetting all the damage-dealing cleric powers in the PHB. All 4E clerics, regardless of alignment, can use their divine magic to heal or harm their enemies. It all really depends on how the cleric uses his god-given powers.

A cleric casting Astral Storm (the 4E version of Storm of Vengeance) on a horde of marauding demons burning, raping, and pillaging their way through town is doing a good act. The same cleric casting it on the Temple of Ilmater, with lots of sick people inside, is doing an evil act. A cleric using Healing Word to run a free clinic is doing good, while a cleric using Healing Word to prolong torture is doing evil.

*sigh*
Right. So there's a whole bunch of "neutral" powers for clerics in the PHB. There are some who are mostly good, especially in their description. But there are no powers, none at all, that are unquestionably evil.
But it all doesn't matter in the slightest. Because the designers of the game said, quite explictly and in several places, that evil clerics as PCs aren't supported and that the clerical powers are supposed to be "holy" in nature. So this is a design feature one might or might not like and support. But what you're doing here is denying the designers' claims from the rulebooks.

AstralFire
2009-08-07, 03:41 PM
I think there's a difference between saying that evil PCs are unsupported by the intent of the designer and saying that evil PCs are not able to be made in a way that supports them well mechanically. 4E's 'lack of support' to evil characters runs along the line of 'lack of support' for Sorcerers in 3E who don't use bloodlines. An assumption in the system (and in the latter's case, one that really drove me up the wall), but one you could get around with a minimum of mechanical effort - most of the work is in the flavor. (Which can be a lot of work, depending on the mindset of the people you play with!)

I also believe kami's point about this requiring a paradigm shift is a good one.

Morty
2009-08-07, 03:45 PM
I think there's a difference between saying that evil PCs are unsupported by the intent of the designer and saying that evil PCs are not able to be made in a way that supports them well mechanically. 4E's 'lack of support' to evil characters runs along the line of 'lack of support' for Sorcerers in 3E who don't use bloodlines. An assumption in the system (and in the latter's case, one that really drove me up the wall), but one you could get around with a minimum of mechanical effort - most of the work is in the flavor. (Which can be a lot of work, depending on the mindset of the people you play with!)

I also believe kami's point about this requiring a paradigm shift is a good one.

This is all true. But OP's point seems to be that you can play an evil cleric in 4ed just as easily as you can play a good one, which is, well, not true. It's not hard to make your cleric evil of course, but it'll require some refluffing and probably coming up with a Channel Divinity power for your evil deity - because the system doesn't support that option.
Also, I wouldn't compare it to a sorcerer in 3ed who's not a dragon or demon wannabe; lack of any sort of class features for sorcerer in 3ed made it difficult for his fluff to have an impact on crunch in core, and bloodline feats were out of core.

AstralFire
2009-08-07, 03:47 PM
This is all true. But OP's point seems to be that you can play an evil cleric in 4ed just as easily as you can play a good one, which is, well, not true. It's not hard to make your cleric evil of course, but it'll require some refluffing and probably coming up with a Channel Divinity power for your evil deity - because the system doesn't support that option.
Also, I wouldn't compare it to a sorcerer in 3ed who's not a dragon or demon wannabe; lack of any sort of class features for sorcerer in 3ed made it difficult for his fluff to have an impact on crunch in core, and bloodline feats were out of core.

It was just the first thing that came to mind; it's not a perfect analogy. :smallsmile:

Morty
2009-08-07, 03:49 PM
It was just the first thing that came to mind; it's not a perfect analogy. :smallsmile:

Yeah, that was some nitpicking on my part. My point stands - it's possible to make a 4ed evil cleric, but the system won't support you in this as it supports you when making a good or unaligned cleric.

jmbrown
2009-08-07, 03:50 PM
But there are no powers, none at all, that are unquestionably evil.

Because there's no point in having "unquestionably evil" powers. That's a black and white descriptor that only furthers the generic cliches that riddle the fantasy genre.

Good and evil are descriptors added to how people use their powers, not the specific effects of the powers. One of the cleric's powers involves you beating the pulp out of someone has divine energy radiates from your righteous beating and scares the crap out of your enemies. This could be a righteous smiting to your demonic enemies or a vicious public display of fear-through-violence. One is used in a good manner while the other is "unquestionably evil."

4E removed this crap because it was redundant and only furthered the "clerics and wizards can do everything other classes can do but more efficiently and cooler." The powers are "generic" because it's up to the DM and players to explain how they use them. A good cleric uses discern lies to find out where the kidnapper hid the hostages; an evil cleric uses it forcefully on a prisoner to learn where the magic foo is before he cuts the prisoner's throat.

edit: divine power also gives you evil domains but again, the powers themselves are generic because unaligned characters can worship evil gods. In 4E, your actions speak your alignment thus a cleric who worships an evil deity is slightly cruel and callous while a truly evil character is tyrannical and destructive.

AstralFire
2009-08-07, 03:52 PM
Yeah, that was some nitpicking on my part. My point stands - it's possible to make a 4ed evil cleric, but the system won't support you in this as it supports you when making a good or unaligned cleric.

I cannot speak for the OP, but I wouldn't argue with this at all - it is easier to make an exalted-type character than anyone leaning towards vile, is one way that I think you could put it. However, it is sometimes presented as an insurmountable or excessively tiresome challenge, which is something I do not understand due to earlier points made about healing.

Zeful
2009-08-07, 03:54 PM
I don't really understand the odd complaints that people have towards evil.

On the Wizard's Boards for 4e you have people constantly asking for Necrotic powers for evil deities, almost completely forgetting that Radiant energy is the power source of all gods. Period. An Evil god will give his clerics Radiant abilities because that's where his power comes from.

I agree that there should be some things like Channel Divinity for evil gods, and some Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies. But beyond that, meh.

Morty
2009-08-07, 03:58 PM
I cannot speak for the OP, but I wouldn't argue with this at all - it is easier to make an exalted-type character than anyone leaning towards vile, is one way that I think you could put it. However, it is sometimes presented as an insurmountable or excessively tiresome challenge, which is something I do not understand due to earlier points made about healing.

*shrug*
I can't speak for those who present it as "insurmountable challenge". If the OP clarifies it that he meant those who treat making an evil cleric in 4ed impossible, then I'll agree with him.

Indon
2009-08-07, 04:15 PM
If a Paladin and Cleric have supernaturally good powers, why not supernaturally evil powers to complement them?

Luckily, powers are simple enough that you can just swap the Radiant and Necrotic keywords, reflavor the abilities, and you're generally good to go. My Warder I'm playing is, flavor-wise, a demon, and his Warder powers have just been renamed. They don't even do a different damage type.

My DM for that campaign reworked anti-undead abilities to instead affect Good-aligned clergy.


I don't really understand the odd complaints that people have towards evil.

On the Wizard's Boards for 4e you have people constantly asking for Necrotic powers for evil deities, almost completely forgetting that Radiant energy is the power source of all gods. Period.
Wait, seriously? They actually wrote that into the game?

That seems an obvious target for houseruling for a game with an evil party.

Zeful
2009-08-07, 04:28 PM
Wait, seriously? They actually wrote that into the game?

That seems an obvious target for houseruling for a game with an evil party.

Why? Necrotic and Radiant Energy aren't aligned at all (neither was Positive, negative, but we saw how that worked out), they are simply the energy of (un)Death and Life, respectively. Only gods like Orcus (undeath) and the Raven Queen (death) have any reason to give necrotic energy.

jmbrown
2009-08-07, 04:31 PM
Besides, radiant by definition is any emanating or reflecting beams. It eventually took on a positive meaning as in shining light or love, but the traditional definition of radiant is completely neutral. Anything that generates visible power is radiant.

Keld Denar
2009-08-07, 04:40 PM
The real question you have to ask yourself is...

Why would evil NOT want to play with all the cool toys?

Fiendish_Dire_Moose
2009-08-07, 04:45 PM
Thank you. People at my local gaming store have been giving me guff for who knows how long about that, and I've been telling them the same thing for as long as I can remember.

tbarrie
2009-08-07, 04:56 PM
Why? Necrotic and Radiant Energy aren't aligned at all (neither was Positive, negative, but we saw how that worked out), they are simply the energy of (un)Death and Life, respectively.

I haven't seen anything suggesting a connection between radiant and the energy of life. As far as I can tell, radiant attacks are pretty much what the name implies: supernatural light. If radiant meant life energy, why would Colour Spray or all of those Star Pact Warlock attacks be radiant?

Indon
2009-08-07, 04:58 PM
Why? Necrotic and Radiant Energy aren't aligned at all (neither was Positive, negative, but we saw how that worked out), they are simply the energy of (un)Death and Life, respectively. Only gods like Orcus (undeath) and the Raven Queen (death) have any reason to give necrotic energy.

Evil is not generally associated with illumination*, even after you step outside of D&D and everything it's influenced.



*-Exception: The Banefire.

ZeroNumerous
2009-08-07, 05:01 PM
(neither was Positive, negative, but we saw how that worked out)

They were in 3.5.

EDIT:


Evil is not generally associated with illumination*, even after you step outside of D&D and everything it's influenced.

Wait, "glowing with an evil light" isn't acceptable anymore?

Indon
2009-08-07, 05:07 PM
Morgoth does not hate the sun because it emits good-aligned light.

Keld Denar
2009-08-07, 05:24 PM
Light is evil though. Pelor is the god of the sun. The sun produces light. Pelor is evil (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=846926). THEREFORE, light is evil.

No more arguements allowed.

chiasaur11
2009-08-07, 05:30 PM
{Scrubbed}

AstralFire
2009-08-07, 05:32 PM
All very good points, gentlemen.

And now, Exhibit G:
http://yourfaceisanadvert.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/navi.jpg
Hey! Look! Listen!

She glows with a vile light.

JaxGaret
2009-08-07, 05:45 PM
4e Clerics are party healers, period. That's one of their primary roles - being a leader - whether Good or Evil. If someone wants to play an evil character with a connection to the divine who doesn't have a primary class feature tied to healing, they can choose the Paladin, Invoker, Avenger, etc.

Starsinger
2009-08-07, 05:49 PM
Why? Necrotic and Radiant Energy aren't aligned at all (neither was Positive, negative, but we saw how that worked out), they are simply the energy of (un)Death and Life, respectively. Only gods like Orcus (undeath) and the Raven Queen (death) have any reason to give necrotic energy.

I actually find that Radiant Energy makes a lot more sense for The Raven Queen than Necrotic. Since yes, The Raven Queen is a goddess of death. But she's also very anti-undead. Afterall, Undead are a mockery of her Death aspect. Living creatures will eventually die without intervention, but radiant gives a nice boost to the undead slaying.

Edit: Oh yeah, in answer to the OP's question.. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BadPowersBadPeople

Haven
2009-08-07, 06:06 PM
For what it's worth, in the DMG section on evil gods, it actually does suggest replacing radiant with necrotic damage.

Moofin Bard
2009-08-07, 06:11 PM
I haven't read any of this except the first post. Brutal honesty there.

Anyway this reminds me, my friend had started an evil campaign, and my other friend, whom I love dearly but probably needs some help, decided to make an evil fighter. Boring, right? No because 'Maverick' killed people then used their bodily fluids to draw upon them. And in the campaign he killed a baby and stuck it on his spiky chest plate.

Jothki
2009-08-07, 06:13 PM
As far as replacing healing with curses and such, isn't that just saying that Evil Clerics should be Strikers/Controllers instead of Leaders? Wouldn't it be easier to just have Evil religous casters be more likely to be one of the more offensively oriented Divine classes?

Devils_Advocate
2009-08-07, 06:15 PM
A character doesn't need Dark powers to be evil nor Light powers to be good. Nor does a character necessarily need to be evil to use Dark powers nor good to use Light powers. This is because Light Is Not Good (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LightIsNotGood) and Dark Is Not Evil (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DarkIsNotEvil).

In 3rd Edition, Good Clerics got Light powers and Evil clerics got Dark powers (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ColourCodedForYourConvenience). But it made no particular sense for moral alignments to have affinities for amoral forces like that, which is probably why they decided to get rid of that for 4th Edition and give gods the same powers regardless of alignment. Some people don't like how they made this different from how it was before. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheyChangedItNowItSucks)

Light and Dark make way more sense as Lawful and Chaotic, anyhow. Use socially-approved glowing holy smititude from the heavens to blast either horrible demonic invaders or the unfortunate natives that your glorious hegemonic empire wants to conquer. Use the icky, smelly power of necromancy to either enslave someone as your undead minion for all time or to free willing people from hunger, thirst, tiredness, and aging. Whatever. They're means that can be put to various ends, and the main difference is in how people feel about them.

AstralFire
2009-08-07, 06:28 PM
I haven't read any of this except the first post. Brutal honesty there.

Anyway this reminds me, my friend had started an evil campaign, and my other friend, whom I love dearly but probably needs some help, decided to make an evil fighter. Boring, right? No because 'Maverick' killed people then used their bodily fluids to draw upon them. And in the campaign he killed a baby and stuck it on his spiky chest plate.

...Keep Maverick away from me.

PLUN
2009-08-07, 06:34 PM
I don't know man, if you have your Dark Heresy players fighting the Ruinous Powers, they'll eventually want to see some, well, Ruinous Powers. It's what the bouys and gulls came to see, see.

I do like 4th ed ditching the positive/negative thing. Made clerics seem less like alignments or faiths and more like batteries. Plus, the idea of an evil party with no logistical or medical support because 'it's not evil' always got under my craw.

ashmanonar
2009-08-07, 06:56 PM
Light is evil though. Pelor is the god of the sun. The sun produces light. Pelor is evil (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=846926). THEREFORE, light is evil.

No more arguements allowed.

Oh, yes. My players will be encountering the Burning Hate more than once in their travels.

Pelor? God of the sun!

Desert-dwellers? Fear and hate the sun!

AstralFire
2009-08-07, 06:57 PM
Desert-dwellers fear and respect the sun. Its absence at night is just as deadly for them.

Jalor
2009-08-07, 07:29 PM
Why don't we take a look at the flavor text of some Cleric and Paladin powers? I'm sure you'll find some evulz in there somewhere.

Paladin:
Bolstering Strike
You attack your foe without mercy or reprieve, and your accuracy is rewarded with a divine gift of vigor.
Without mercy. Sounds pretty evil.
Enfeebling Strike
Your brutal weapon attack leaves your foe weakened.
Brutal. Leaves your foe weakened. Again, plenty of evil.
Fearsome Smite
When you strike a foe with your weapon, the force of the blow causes him to shudder and second-guess his tactics.
It's called "Fearsome". This is no hippie Vow Of Peace paladin, this guy is a hardass. Maybe he follows Bane or Asmodeus.
On Pain of Death
You invoke a prayer that wracks your foe with terrible pain, and causes further pain whenever he makes an attack.
You know who else uses spells with pain? Xykon.
---
These are at-wills, a first-level encounter, and a first-level daily. PHB1 was the only book I checked; this guy can be played right out of the box. All the powers use Charisma, so this Evil Paladin of Asmodeus or whatever is actually playable.Cleric:
Sacred Flame
Sacred light shines from above, searing a single enemy with its radiance while at the same time aiding an ally.
Anyone who doubts the evil quotient of "sacred light" has never stood in the deserts of Nevada while wearing a black shirt.
Lance of Faith
A brilliant ray of light sears your foe with golden radiance. Sparks of light linger around the target, guiding your ally's attack.
See above. Note how The Bad Guys have finally figured out that working together is more effective than backstabbing one another.
Cause Fear
Your holy symbol ignites with the fury of your god. Uncontrollable terror grips your enemy, causing him to instantly recoil.
Uncontrollable terror sounds pretty evil. More so than simply hitting the enemy with a mace, which Clerics can also still do.
Cascade of Light
A burst of divine radiance sears your foe.
Again, light does not mean good. Light can be painful. Excruciatingly so.
---
These powers are all PHB1 and all key off of Wisdom. That's another class with a convincing first-level divine villain. Maybe a Cleric of Bane? He seems the type to use oppressive, painful light.

Domigorgon
2009-08-07, 09:01 PM
Or, to Abyss with 4E and simply play 3.5! Hooray!

AstralFire
2009-08-07, 09:54 PM
Or, to Abyss with 4E and simply play 3.5! Hooray!

... :smallsigh::smallsigh:

Jallorn
2009-08-07, 10:16 PM
I have only one thing to say:

It is not the sword, but the wielder that does evil.

mikeejimbo
2009-08-07, 10:46 PM
You guys seem to be forgetting all the damage-dealing cleric powers in the PHB. All 4E clerics, regardless of alignment, can use their divine magic to heal or harm their enemies. It all really depends on how the cleric uses his god-given powers.

Yeah, but most of those deal radiant damage. It just seems hard for me to imagine an evil cleric hitting people with radiant damage, anyway, and my DM won't change it to necrotic for evil clerics.

Also:


You know who else uses spells with pain? Xykon. Hitler

AstralFire
2009-08-07, 11:04 PM
Maybe it's just because I've been exposed to too many JRPGs and anime where Luminous God imagery is subverted 24/7 into Evil God to the point where I expect it, but radiant evil things make sense to me.

Lamech
2009-08-07, 11:35 PM
Wait, you guys think radiant damage, A.K.A. radiation is good?!? Okay what are the worst weapons in the modern world:
1) Nukes
2) Dirty bombs
Nukes are basically a gigantic flash of light. Dirty bombs use radiation to kill people. Your telling me that light is what good people use now? I think that only evil vile clerics would use a weapon that can endanger all who get too close. Hey, Ms. Cat-girl you okay?

Knaight
2009-08-07, 11:35 PM
One of the few things I like about 4e is that they didn't put in large amounts of "evil" powers. Bad people still have allies, so healing is useful, it makes more sense for something to kill you than its absence, which makes the whole evil darkness thing absurd, and for the vast majority of the time the same spells are useful for everyone. A few more evil rituals would have been fine, as curses and what not, although even those have a certain grey area.

Yora
2009-08-08, 02:46 AM
Desert-dwellers fear and respect the sun. Its absence at night is just as deadly for them.
Sea-dwellers fear and respect the ocean. It's the source of their food and central to their way of life. But it can destroy ships and whole cities within a few hours, without warning and any chance to prevent it.
Water is destruction. :smallyuk:

AKA_Bait
2009-08-08, 07:06 AM
Also, frankly, things can just be reflavored without a problem. If you want a shadowy evil guy just have the in game effects of a radiant power radiate darkness instead of light. I'll grab the cleric powers mentioned above as examples.

Sacred Flame
Old: Sacred light shines from above, searing a single enemy with its radiance while at the same time aiding an ally.
New: Black darkness bubbles up from the ground and lashes in a searing stroke against a single enemy while at the same time aiding an ally.

Lance of Faith
Old: A brilliant ray of light sears your foe with golden radiance. Sparks of light linger around the target, guiding your ally's attack
New: A ebony ray of darkness sears your foe with its black radiance. Swirling specks of night linger around the target, guiding your ally's attack.


Cause Fear
Old: Your holy symbol ignites with the fury of your god. Uncontrollable terror grips your enemy, causing him to instantly recoil.
New: Your holy symbol darkens to pitch black with the fury of your god. Uncontrollable terror grips your enemy, causing him to instantly recoil.

Cascade of Light
Old: A burst of divine radiance sears your foe.
New: A burst of unholy darkness sears your foe.

There, that wasn't so hard was it? Nothing mechanical needed to be changed.

Myrmex
2009-08-08, 07:39 AM
Also, frankly, things can just be reflavored without a problem. If you want a shadowy evil guy just have the in game effects of a radiant power radiate darkness instead of light. I'll grab the cleric powers mentioned above as examples.

Sacred Flame
Old: Sacred light shines from above, searing a single enemy with its radiance while at the same time aiding an ally.
New: Black darkness bubbles up from the ground and lashes in a searing stroke against a single enemy while at the same time aiding an ally.

Lance of Faith
Old: A brilliant ray of light sears your foe with golden radiance. Sparks of light linger around the target, guiding your ally's attack
New: A ebony ray of darkness sears your foe with its black radiance. Swirling specks of night linger around the target, guiding your ally's attack.


Cause Fear
Old: Your holy symbol ignites with the fury of your god. Uncontrollable terror grips your enemy, causing him to instantly recoil.
New: Your holy symbol darkens to pitch black with the fury of your god. Uncontrollable terror grips your enemy, causing him to instantly recoil.

Cascade of Light
Old: A burst of divine radiance sears your foe.
New: A burst of unholy darkness sears your foe.

There, that wasn't so hard was it? Nothing mechanical needed to be changed.

But what if I'm too much of a jerk to be aiding my ally? What if I just want channel the deity to punch someone in the face really hard? Play a paladin?

Morty
2009-08-08, 07:41 AM
Why don't we take a look at the flavor text of some Cleric and Paladin powers? I'm sure you'll find some evulz in there somewhere.

Paladin:
Bolstering Strike
You attack your foe without mercy or reprieve, and your accuracy is rewarded with a divine gift of vigor.
Without mercy. Sounds pretty evil.
Enfeebling Strike
Your brutal weapon attack leaves your foe weakened.
Brutal. Leaves your foe weakened. Again, plenty of evil.
Fearsome Smite
When you strike a foe with your weapon, the force of the blow causes him to shudder and second-guess his tactics.
It's called "Fearsome". This is no hippie Vow Of Peace paladin, this guy is a hardass. Maybe he follows Bane or Asmodeus.
On Pain of Death
You invoke a prayer that wracks your foe with terrible pain, and causes further pain whenever he makes an attack.
You know who else uses spells with pain? Xykon.
---
These are at-wills, a first-level encounter, and a first-level daily. PHB1 was the only book I checked; this guy can be played right out of the box. All the powers use Charisma, so this Evil Paladin of Asmodeus or whatever is actually playable.Cleric:
Sacred Flame
Sacred light shines from above, searing a single enemy with its radiance while at the same time aiding an ally.
Anyone who doubts the evil quotient of "sacred light" has never stood in the deserts of Nevada while wearing a black shirt.
Lance of Faith
A brilliant ray of light sears your foe with golden radiance. Sparks of light linger around the target, guiding your ally's attack.
See above. Note how The Bad Guys have finally figured out that working together is more effective than backstabbing one another.
Cause Fear
Your holy symbol ignites with the fury of your god. Uncontrollable terror grips your enemy, causing him to instantly recoil.
Uncontrollable terror sounds pretty evil. More so than simply hitting the enemy with a mace, which Clerics can also still do.
Cascade of Light
A burst of divine radiance sears your foe.
Again, light does not mean good. Light can be painful. Excruciatingly so.
---
These powers are all PHB1 and all key off of Wisdom. That's another class with a convincing first-level divine villain. Maybe a Cleric of Bane? He seems the type to use oppressive, painful light.

That's really just good, old, warped D&D moralty that transcends editions.

Myrmex
2009-08-08, 07:46 AM
That's really just good, old, warped D&D moralty that transcends editions.

No, that's how fighting for your life while murdering someone for their stuff is. Brutal and merciless.

...oh wait.

AKA_Bait
2009-08-08, 07:50 AM
But what if I'm too much of a jerk to be aiding my ally? What if I just want channel the deity to punch someone in the face really hard? Play a paladin?

Well, yeah. Play a non-leader role if you don't want to help your allies. If you just want to hit things in the face with evil power a Warlock with the Infernal pact seems to have you covered. Just flavor the abilities to match your deity and call yourself a priest in game.


No, that's how fighting for your life while murdering someone for their stuff is. Brutal and merciless.

...oh wait.

Oh come on! They were totally provoking us with their staying home in their lairs and having valuable stuff.

Fiendish_Dire_Moose
2009-08-08, 07:58 AM
{Scrubbed}

Knaight
2009-08-08, 08:28 AM
Lets not go there. The discussion won't end well.

Fiendish_Dire_Moose
2009-08-08, 09:03 AM
{Scrubbed}

AstralFire
2009-08-08, 09:11 AM
{Scrubbed}

Fiendish_Dire_Moose
2009-08-08, 09:30 AM
{Scrubbed}

Proof that light does not equal good: Witchblade.

Starsinger
2009-08-08, 10:17 AM
But what if I'm too much of a jerk to be aiding my ally? What if I just want channel the deity to punch someone in the face really hard? Play a paladin?
That's what Invokers, Avengers, and some Paladins are for. You're falling into the strange trap of thinking that your Class equals your "Job".


{Scrubbed}


Said conversation is also forbidden.

ashmanonar
2009-08-08, 10:21 AM
Desert-dwellers fear and respect the sun. Its absence at night is just as deadly for them.

Quiet you.

*shushes*

mikeejimbo
2009-08-08, 11:12 AM
But when I think of radiant, I don't just think of light, I think of a brilliant, holy light that you cannot even look upon because you're not worthy.

Jalor
2009-08-08, 11:18 AM
But when I think of radiant, I don't just think of light, I think of a brilliant, holy light that you cannot even look upon because you're not worthy.

"Feeble mortal! You are unworthy of the attention of Bane! Now die!"

JaxGaret
2009-08-08, 11:19 AM
But when I think of radiant, I don't just think of light, I think of a brilliant, holy light that you cannot even look upon because you're not worthy.

Ahem... exhibit A for why this is nonsense: the Starlock.

Preconceived notions for how one assumes things are (even though there is little to zero reason for thinking so) are a big stumbling block for a lot of people when it comes to situations like this.

Xuincherguixe
2009-08-08, 07:01 PM
Echoing what previous posters have said.

So you're an evil overlord. You're going off to start conquering things. You start appointing some commanders into your army... and then it hits you that none of them can actually heal.

Any sensible evil overlord gives up right then. They would have given up before they even started raising an army.

Evil needs, healers. Otherwise they're not going to be very effective. Destruction powers? There's a lot of classes with that already. That healer roll is a pretty big gap. One not made up for with "doing damage".

I will admit, that a paragon of all things wretched is not terribly likely to be a healer (then again, I watch a lot of Anime too. I can think of a few evil healers.) It's more likely that you'll get clerics that are in it for their own selfish desires. Sure they pay lip service for Asmodeus. But they're doing all this for wealth, power, and sex. Asmodeus is just a means to an end. Much like how they are just a means to an end for him. If that cleric gets out ahead for doing what he's told? Well that's just fine. In fact, encourages more people to convert! And all the while the world gets more wicked all the time...

You can melt peoples faces off, but there's always going to be some people with the guts to risk face melting. But if you make peoples lives easier? Going to be awfully tempting. Healing naturally makes peoples lives easier.

All that being said? I imagine an evil cleric as a mercenary. They'll channel the powers of their terrible gods to give you back that arm of yours.

For gold.

Sure, good people lose limbs too. Maybe he'll grow them back for them too. But only if they give them money. And they'll give back hands to people who had them cut off for stealing. Payed for by the money they got from stealing. Who knows? He might be a risk taker. In return for future gold, he'll give you that hand right now. If you don't get it there fast enough he can always take it back...



Now, I would say there is a place for the raving mad lunatics who want to rip apart everything. They probably need healing too of course, but general destructive powers suit them a bit better. Even though some of them might be "priests", other classes might suit them better. They might be best served to get contractors to do their healing.

Cthulhu can be worshiped by Warlocks (... maybe wizards), Asmodeus by Clerics. All is good bad in the world. You've got your sociopaths and psychopaths!

Indon
2009-08-08, 07:11 PM
Wait, you guys think radiant damage, A.K.A. radiation is good?!? Okay what are the worst weapons in the modern world:

My next 4E character will now be a cleric named Cherenkov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation).

Also, evil does not need healing. Evil does not roll with healing. Evil rolls with overwhelming power and unfair odds.

...coincidentally, this makes for an awesome justification as to why the PC's tend to handily slaughter them all in 4th edition.

HamHam
2009-08-08, 07:12 PM
Evil Clerics can heal you know. They just can't do it spontaniously and have to prepare their Cure Blank Wounds just like Good Clerics have to prepare their Inflict Blank Wounds.

Though really they should just get some wands of CLW, because that's better.

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-08-08, 07:18 PM
I am writing this post mainly with 4E in mind, but this topic applies to just about any RPG that allows evil characters (which is virtually all of them).
A game, like D&D, may want to tie a descriptor like evil or good or sanity to certain mechanics. Whether it is necessary is a misleading question since it is a question of designer/player choice, that is of the feel the designers/players want for the game.

jmbrown
2009-08-08, 07:47 PM
A game, like D&D, may want to tie a descriptor like evil or good or sanity to certain mechanics. Whether it is necessary is a misleading question since it is a question of designer/player choice, that is of the feel the designers/players want for the game.

The descriptor should be up to the player, not the mechanic. When you attach descriptors, you remove player choice and make things black or white, yes or no. It's why the assassin has to be evil. Even if you flavored your character as a political assassin who removes dictators and monster warlords, he can't be good but the rules restrict him to evil.

Don the Bastard
2009-08-08, 08:27 PM
My evil 4th ed campaign will be a good testing ground.

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-08-08, 08:59 PM
The descriptor should be up to the player, not the mechanic. When you attach descriptors, you remove player choice and make things black or white, yes or no. It's why the assassin has to be evil. Even if you flavored your character as a political assassin who removes dictators and monster warlords, he can't be good but the rules restrict him to evil.

My comment was more generic than D&D though it included D&D.

Perhap the clearest example of a mechanized descriptor in a game is sanity in the call of cthulluh. Going insane is waht you want to avoid. To not make the game a comnplete storytelling exercise sanity has to mechanized into the game.

Now you can very easily drop the evil descriptor from D&D. So that is a game where an evil mechanic might be considered "optional" in that it can be easily dropped. However, it was written in by the designers at the start, all those years ago, to give the game a specific "feel".

You on the other hand are talking about the evil descriptor is used within certain version of D&D and with regards to a specific class.

In reponse to that, I can tell first, alignment in D&D should not be used as a straightjacket. If it is, then you and your fellow gamers would be better served if you understood alignment in a more expansive way.

As for the assassin class, I can tell you that I have allowed good assassin types in my games since the class was first published oh so many years ago.

HamHam
2009-08-08, 09:25 PM
The descriptor should be up to the player, not the mechanic. When you attach descriptors, you remove player choice and make things black or white, yes or no. It's why the assassin has to be evil. Even if you flavored your character as a political assassin who removes dictators and monster warlords, he can't be good but the rules restrict him to evil.

You can totally have a non-evil assassin. He just won't have levels in the class called Assassin, but rather other classes that do basically the same thing but are not evil.

Members of the class "Assassin" are Evil because the methods they use are evil. Their techniques are the magical equivalent of strapping bombs to toddlers and throwing them at people.

jmbrown
2009-08-08, 09:36 PM
In reponse to that, I can tell first, alignment in D&D should not be used as a straightjacket. If it is, then you and your fellow gamers would be better served if you understood alignment in a more expansive way.

Alignment is a straight jacket in D&D terms. Powers are affected by alignment, magic works differently for alignment, and in some classes faltering from your alignment boots you out permanently.

D&D has always been designed as an "epic hero" game. Odysseus, Beowulf, King Arthur, the Monkey King, Miyamoto Mushashi; you're a hero who's fighting for a generally good cause against unquestionably evil foes.

Recent works stray away by making things more gray (see Eberron) but the roots of D&D have always been in heroic tales. The descriptors are there to remind players that you're the heroes and the villains are big bad and evil and need to be killed. You don't necessarily have to be good as epic heroes have their failings, but in the D&D spirit you're not supposed to be evil or resort to evil methods to accomplish your goals.


You can totally have a non-evil assassin. He just won't have levels in the class called Assassin, but rather other classes that do basically the same thing but are not evil.

AFAIK there's no official WotC written class with death attack which is the basis of the assassin.

Assassin's are evil not because of flavor reasons but because traditional D&D assassins were members of an evil guild and nobody bothered flavoring it otherwise in subsequent editions. There's nothing inherently evil about death attack or using poison.

JaxGaret
2009-08-08, 09:42 PM
AFAIK there's no official WotC written [non-Evil] class with death attack which is the basis of the assassin.

Au contraire (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/prc/20070401a).

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-08-08, 09:43 PM
You can totally have a non-evil assassin. He just won't have levels in the class called Assassin, but rather other classes that do basically the same thing but are not evil.

Members of the class "Assassin" are Evil because the methods they use are evil. Their techniques are the magical equivalent of strapping bombs to toddlers and throwing them at people.

The assassin's class not so unique methods are a relatively weak death attack and poison use. The class is not much more sneaky than many other classes, nor more deadlyan etc. It has the descriptor evil because the class, in general, will be used for a character that is an...assassin, a hired killer. And in general, in the generic dndverse, a bad thing. But you can have character concepts and world settings where that is not such a bad thing. In fact, I think the specifix question, "Can I make a good aligned assassin?" has been asked in these forums before. In a campaign I ran a long, long time ago with a feudal Japanese theme, one of the players was a good assassin, working for his lord like the other characters, except using the techniques of The Ninja.

HamHam
2009-08-08, 09:53 PM
Assassin's are evil not because of flavor reasons but because traditional D&D assassins were members of an evil guild and nobody bothered flavoring it otherwise in subsequent editions. There's nothing inherently evil about death attack or using poison.

BoED classifies poison use as inherently evil. Now, this may or may not make sense but the fact is that BoED is RAW.

Also you need to perform an evil act to qualify for it.


The assassin's class not so unique methods are a relatively weak death attack and poison use.

And Assassin only spells.

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-08-08, 10:04 PM
Echoing what previous posters have said.

So you're an evil overlord. You're going off to start conquering things. You start appointing some commanders into your army... and then it hits you that none of them can actually heal.

Any sensible evil overlord gives up right then. They would have given up before they even started raising an army.

Evil needs, healers. Otherwise they're not going to be very effective. Destruction powers? There's a lot of classes with that already. That healer roll is a pretty big gap. One not made up for with "doing damage".

I will admit, that a paragon of all things wretched is not terribly likely to be a healer (then again, I watch a lot of Anime too. I can think of a few evil healers.) It's more likely that you'll get clerics that are in it for their own selfish desires. Sure they pay lip service for Asmodeus. But they're doing all this for wealth, power, and sex. Asmodeus is just a means to an end. Much like how they are just a means to an end for him. If that cleric gets out ahead for doing what he's told? Well that's just fine. In fact, encourages more people to convert! And all the while the world gets more wicked all the time...

You can melt peoples faces off, but there's always going to be some people with the guts to risk face melting. But if you make peoples lives easier? Going to be awfully tempting. Healing naturally makes peoples lives easier.

All that being said? I imagine an evil cleric as a mercenary. They'll channel the powers of their terrible gods to give you back that arm of yours.

For gold.

Sure, good people lose limbs too. Maybe he'll grow them back for them too. But only if they give them money. And they'll give back hands to people who had them cut off for stealing. Payed for by the money they got from stealing. Who knows? He might be a risk taker. In return for future gold, he'll give you that hand right now. If you don't get it there fast enough he can always take it back...



Now, I would say there is a place for the raving mad lunatics who want to rip apart everything. They probably need healing too of course, but general destructive powers suit them a bit better. Even though some of them might be "priests", other classes might suit them better. They might be best served to get contractors to do their healing.

Cthulhu can be worshiped by Warlocks (... maybe wizards), Asmodeus by Clerics. All is good bad in the world. You've got your sociopaths and psychopaths!

Yes, I didn't snip. I'm sure there are many that need to read this more than once. Powers are just weapons. Like weapons, it is not the objects themselves that are evil, but how they may be applied. Hell, fluff is meaningless! Take what's already in play and give it new fluff.

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-08-08, 10:11 PM
BoED classifies poison use as inherently evil. Now, this may or may not make sense but the fact is that BoED is RAW.

Also you need to perform an evil act to qualify for it.
Except, yoi know, when it's not evil to use poison...



And Assassin only spells.
Exactly, cause hiding one's alignment is something a good character would never do...

Altima
2009-08-08, 10:23 PM
I thought that it was a given and well and truly understood that D&D (and WotC) blatantly favors good over evil to varying degrees?

The move of healing spells from Necromancy. Healing spontaneous casting being incredibly more useful than spontaneous wound spells. The Paladin only allowed to be a lawful good warrior of a lawful or good deity.

Healing is important, however. While not as important in 4e is in earlier editions, the cleric is still a vital part of the party in preventing a gruesome death. I prefer the way they took it in 4e, as there is no mechanical handicap in the Leader role for going evil.

Honestly, if you want to be a greedy SoB when it comes to healing, neither you nor your party will last long. People who are ****s to everyone in a world where you're quite literally getting attacked every other day generally don't last long, anyway.

The lack of channel divinity support does kinda blow, though.