PDA

View Full Version : Evil PCs Campaign



Feldarove
2011-04-07, 02:25 PM
My dnd group seems to have an underlining desire to play evil characters, but whoever DMs always seems to not allow it. So, I have decided to create a campaign where the players’ would create evil characters. I understand the difficulty involved, especially in keeping the players from murdering each other, but I really look forward to creating something.

However, as soon as I started brainstorming I had a problem. Our group switches regularly between 3.5 and 4th edition and I am wondering:

Which edition of dungeons and dragons, 3.5 or 4e, would make for a more compelling "Evil Campaign"?

Feel free to answering my question or to add any thoughts/insight into dm-ing and creating an evil campaign.

Velaryon
2011-04-07, 02:41 PM
You should be able to use either one, I would think. To be perfectly honest, I haven't messed with 4th edition because I saw no need for it. So instead of just saying 3.5 because that's the one that I know, I will turn the question around on you.

If your group plays both, what do you like about each edition? That might lead to your answer as to which would be a better fit for this campaign. Is the great flexibility of 3.5 or the... whatever 4th edition offers, more useful and important for the campaign that you want to run?

ScionoftheVoid
2011-04-07, 02:46 PM
Whilst I don't know anything much about 4th edition, I will say that there are a wealth of options for Evil characters in 3.5, allowing Evil of all stripes to be well mechanically represented. Additionally it has many very effective low-level spells which halt opponents non-lethally, so as long as at least one character is both a spellcaster and smart enough to realise that killing one another is counterproductive, PvP should not be a game-ending problem (though since Evil characters are in the vast majority willing to be lethal it might help if this character is on the very edge of neutral). And then there are classic Evil archetypes much more easily represented in 3.5 (as far as I am aware): summoners of demons and devils, mad scientists and artificers using and becoming abberations and golems, necromancers leading undead hordes, warriors and mages who are themselves undead and mind-controlling enchanters with thralls of all kinds.

TheCountAlucard
2011-04-07, 02:49 PM
So, I have decided to create a campaign where the players’ would create evil characters. I understand the difficulty involved, especially in keeping the players from murdering each other, but I really look forward to creating something.It helps if the players craft motivations for their characters. :smallsmile:

Evil characters, to work well, need to be proactive, often far more so than good characters. Evil adventurers in particular should have ambitions and large-scale goals, even the chaotic evil ones (they'll just be less specific on the particulars).

For one thing, it goes a long way toward knowing what to be prepared for. It also gives you a slightly-smaller workload, since forcing the story along will be less necessary. Another benefit is that their drives will likely tone down the likelihood of pointless acts of random violence (or is that random acts of pointless violence :smallconfused: ), as such debauchery probably doesn't do anything toward advancing their goals.

As for what edition you should use, I honestly can't say one way or the other. There are plenty of gaming systems that should work just fine with evil PCs, though.

Ravens_cry
2011-04-07, 02:51 PM
Probably 3.5. Fourth edition is much more focused then 3.5, Evil stuff is mostly regulated to DM tools rather then character options in my limited experience, I only own the PHB.

Doug Lampert
2011-04-07, 02:53 PM
My dnd group seems to have an underlining desire to play evil characters, but whoever DMs always seems to not allow it. So, I have decided to create a campaign where the players’ would create evil characters. I understand the difficulty involved, especially in keeping the players from murdering each other, but I really look forward to creating something.

Killing other PCs is most often an extreme case of STUPID EVIL.

Far stupider than any Lawful stupid paladin. The paladin at least has the excuse that he thinks he's doing something for a higher cause.

The "Evil" PC is screwing HIMSELF for no reason at all, evil characters NEED some allies at least as badly as good characters and have a MUCH MUCH harder time recruiting appropriate allies. Killing your dupes minions allies, yeah, that's the word I was looking for, allies, when they are still potentially of use is simply insane.

If they kill each other without good in character reason beyond "I'm EVIL" then let the player of the dead guy run some of the monsters as you CONTINUE to through encounters appropriate for the full party at them (plus an extra monster for the player to run), plus you have no one trust them in town so they can't sell any of their loot for reasonable prices.


However, as soon as I started brainstorming I had a problem. Our group switches regularly between 3.5 and 4th edition and I am wondering:

Which edition of dungeons and dragons, 3.5 or 4e, would make for a more compelling "Evil Campaign"?

Feel free to answering my question or to add any thoughts/insight into dm-ing and creating an evil campaign.

3.x has more support for evil PCs. 4th doesn't even give you evil cleric powers for worshipers of evil gods.

4th is a lot easier to run, and vastly better ballanced.

Pick what you want from the game and pick a system.

In my experience a setting often suggests a rules set. Do you have a setting in mind beyond "evil PCs". That's really no more a campaign driver than "good PCs" is.

Feldarove
2011-04-07, 03:12 PM
In my experience a setting often suggests a rules set. Do you have a setting in mind beyond "evil PCs". That's really no more a campaign driver than "good PCs" is.

Like I said, I hadn't really gotten too far into the planning.

Some things that I have thrown around so far:

The players will not start at 1st level. They will start somewhere at "mid" level.

They will be imprisoned for thier evil deeds.

A "good" NPC will offer them conditional release. He needs thier "skills" to accomplish a task.

The setting will be 2 heavily war torn nations, one "good" one "evil".

Each nation views itself as "good".

The players will, for a time being, unwittingly be assisting one nation in a major power swing.

Dragons will most likely be heavily involved.

Fhaolan
2011-04-07, 03:29 PM
Yeah, the system itself doesn't matter as much when it comes to alignment-based games. You need to get to a different level of detail before the system comes into play.

First, due to cultural conditioning Evil games usually have a lot of baggage brought along that can damage or hamper your enjoyment of the game. To combat this, you need to be very clear on what makes this an Evil campaign. Simply having all the characters be 'Evil' isn't enough. How are they Evil? How Evil? Is this randomly killing kittens for the lulz, or mad schemers for world domination? If you don't go in with a clear idea of what kind of game the group wants to play, you'll end up with a lot of random stupid evil. Or perhaps even worse, a normal party that is just token 'Evil' in the same way that many D&D games are just token 'Good'. A bunch of violent hoboes wandering through the world causing havoc. Could be good, could be evil, only labels can tell. :smallsmile:

Doug Lampert
2011-04-07, 03:34 PM
Like I said, I hadn't really gotten too far into the planning.

Some things that I have thrown around so far:

The players will not start at 1st level. They will start somewhere at "mid" level.

They will be imprisoned for thier evil deeds.

A "good" NPC will offer them conditional release. He needs thier "skills" to accomplish a task.

The setting will be 2 heavily war torn nations, one "good" one "evil".

Each nation views itself as "good".

The players will, for a time being, unwittingly be assisting one nation in a major power swing.

Dragons will most likely be heavily involved.

It's probably a lot easier to arrange for a major power swing as a direct result of PC actions in 3rd edition. 4th doesn't have as steep a power curve. OTOH level 11-15 PCs in a world where most soldiers are something like level 4 minions will still be able to make a difference, so either COULD work.

So that's more or less a wash, with maybe a minor edge to 3.5.

4th edition dragons typically strike me as less interesting as evil mastermind style oponents than in 3rd edition (no spellcasting for example). 4th dragons are still fairly nasty, they're just not as good as masterminds. OTOH 4th edition metallics are typically unaligned (and nothing is tagged "always" for alignment), which works a LOT better if you want morally ambigous situations.

So again that's more or less a wash, with maybe a minor edge to 3.5.

And of course 3.5 has better support for evil PCs, all in all I'd probably go 3.5 if I were running this and hadn't pretty well sworn off 3.x as far more work than it's worth.

Starting mid-level you need some backstory for most or all of the characters, this works a LOT better if they have a previous history of cooperation. There's no reason they should trust each other otherwise, and since someone is bound to think "why not betray the sucker who let us loose?" so there's likely to be at least some built in party tension anyway.

I'd create an NPC antagonist who's the one who "betrayed" them and got them jailed. Probably someone sneaky and good at hiding. The "good" NPC can offer to give them a lead on this antagonist as well as their freedom and a payment if they fulfil their mission. It gives them a common initial point.

Since they're getting out of prison start them gear starved until they fulfil their initial mission. The guy freeing them shouldn't be stupid enough to let them go, give them lots of valueable stuff, and then expect them to do what he says to.

Also, make it clear to them, killing your fellow PCs does NOT result in getting a free replacement with full gear. Replacement PCs show up with negligable gear at best (or with the value of gear given to their heirs). A weaker party will NOT result in easier adventures. And anyone new will NOT be expected to be particularly cooperative toward the rest of the party.

At START you can't have an assassin secretly hired to betray and kill the party, who'd go to the trouble of infiltrating a bunch of guys in prison, the initial betrayor is out there hiding somewhere. But replacement characters.... Well, you are likely to be annoying the rich and powerful...

DougL

Feldarove
2011-04-07, 04:30 PM
At first I had thought of having some magical Mark or Seal placed on the characters that might force some sort of cooperation, but Doug L's idea of having someone put them there and the pcs knowing each other before hand has me thinking in a different direction.

Which also answers questions like "how evil?" and "what kind of evil"?

I believe that the overall idea would be a group of individuals who get the job done regardless of casualities or cost. Granted they don't want to get caught or wind up dead themselves, but they certainly aren't good guys.

With what Doug L said, I would imagine that I would create a ocean's 12 (13) like scenario, except the PCs are a bit more evil.

They dont have to be ugly, mean, crazy mother f***ers.

They might be charming and sly, and possible have a loose cannon in the group (aka Chaotic Stupid Half-Orc Barbarian).

Obviously what the player's create is up to them, but I would at least inform them that this won't be a horror movie game where they play the role of the psycho-killers on the loose.

Feldarove
2011-04-07, 04:34 PM
I suppose a better way to phrase my "which edition" question is...

It seems that 3.5 is built to allow for Evil PC's more than 4th edition, but is there something in 4th edition that might make for an interesting evil pc campaign?

Our group likes the sword and sorcery aspect of 3.5 and likes the video game aspect of 4th edition.

Doug Lampert
2011-04-07, 04:57 PM
I suppose a better way to phrase my "which edition" question is...

It seems that 3.5 is built to allow for Evil PC's more than 4th edition, but is there something in 4th edition that might make for an interesting evil pc campaign?

Our group likes the sword and sorcery aspect of 3.5 and likes the video game aspect of 4th edition.

4th ed doesn't have anything that screams "Evil campaign hook" to me. Maybe Heroes of Shadow (due out 19 April) will help, but to me the advantage to 4th is that it's a much simpler system to run, and to tweek, and to make a large and well detailed sandbox in. (I have literally hundreds of NPCs with full combat write-ups and some roleplaying notes in my campaign notes for my current 4th edition game.)

But if I were you I'd seriously consider the Darksun style inherent bonuses. Reducing gear dependence is a good thing if running Evil characters, since it reduces the incentive to backstab and to randomly rob bystanders and shop-keepers.

DougL

druid91
2011-04-07, 08:05 PM
At first I had thought of having some magical Mark or Seal placed on the characters that might force some sort of cooperation, but Doug L's idea of having someone put them there and the pcs knowing each other before hand has me thinking in a different direction.

Which also answers questions like "how evil?" and "what kind of evil"?

I believe that the overall idea would be a group of individuals who get the job done regardless of casualities or cost. Granted they don't want to get caught or wind up dead themselves, but they certainly aren't good guys.

With what Doug L said, I would imagine that I would create a ocean's 12 (13) like scenario, except the PCs are a bit more evil.

They dont have to be ugly, mean, crazy mother f***ers.

They might be charming and sly, and possible have a loose cannon in the group (aka Chaotic Stupid Half-Orc Barbarian).

Obviously what the player's create is up to them, but I would at least inform them that this won't be a horror movie game where they play the role of the psycho-killers on the loose.

If you do get a CE lunatic, Teach them the Isaac school of mass murder. Everyone but your teammates and employers is a toy, you play with toys until they break. The rest? They are the other kids, you can be mean but you don't break other kids.:smallbiggrin:

TheThan
2011-04-07, 10:20 PM
it always seems like the biggest problem with evil campaigns is intra party fighting. Backstabing and murder.

That defeats the purpose of the campaign. What is needed is a deterrent, a sufficient enough reason, or goal that killing each other will become a very bad idea.

DaragosKitsune
2011-04-08, 12:33 AM
As mentioned prior, you need to make sure every party member has some large scale, long term goal. That could be anything from ascension to godhood, to lichdom, to running a criminal organization, etc. Basically, think of any of the BBEG's you've run in the past. An Evil campaign is ideally made up of a bunch of fledgling BBEG's with a modicum of trust between them. You're going for an old-fashioned, comic book style super villain team-up.

Thunder Hammer
2011-04-08, 01:56 AM
I'm no expert in this, but I refer you to...

http://www.rpg.net/columns/list-column.phtml?colname=badworsevile

In particular:

http://www.rpg.net/columns/badworsevile/badworsevile10.phtml

which is #10 and onwards.

This is a whole rpg column dedicated to building evil villians and running evil games. Highly recommend it.

BooNL
2011-04-08, 02:43 AM
The easiest way to make sure your pcs don't start stabbing each other in the back is to make sure each has something in common.

They could all be cultists worshipping the same demon, or they're all trying to break the same wizard's geas.
Anything, just make sure they have a history together and a reason to stick with each other. "Imprisoned and forced to work for the good guys" isn't that much of a motivator for them. Let the group decide how they met up and why they became locked up in the first place. If they were (for example) planning a heist, it could be cool for them to try and finish what they started under the radar of the good guys.

Yora
2011-04-08, 02:58 AM
I'd advice talking to the players beforhand how they want to make their characters evil. If they want to backstab each other all the time, and everyone knows it in advance. Sure, why not. Sounds like it could be fun. But the important thing is that everyone knows it will be that kind of campaign.
If they decide they want to be ruthless characters that work well together, the players should respekt that and keep conflict within the party to situation where it matters and don't steal from each other and shove other characters down the stairs just for the evulz.

Pentachoron
2011-04-08, 02:59 AM
The only times I've had this be successful were ones where first I determined why they wanted to do an evil campaign. If it was something other than "so we won't need an excuse to wantonly slaughter" I'd proceed, otherwise I'd probably step away from it if I were you, those things tend to be very little fun for the DM, and whatever players get turned on first, I find.

I also typically make the party exist as friends beforehand to avoid in party fighting.

Feldarove
2011-04-08, 11:15 AM
Thanks for all the help so far. Definitely some solid advice and ideas.

Tiki Snakes
2011-04-08, 11:30 AM
3.5 definately has more material that is explicitely for Evil PC's, that's a fact. However, I don't think that really matters, as 3.5 has more alignment specific content all round, where 4th doesn't stress about it so much.

So there's more specific content in 3.5, but less restricted content in 4. It evens out, to my mind, and boils down to you running whichever you feel more comfortable with.

Especially with an 'Evil' campaign (which could go wildly off the rails at any moment), it's best to be comfortable enough to wing it when needed.

If you settle of 4th edition, there's one thing to consider; There aren't really going to be a vast wealth of explicitely 'Good' npc's and creatures in the monster manuals sitting waiting for you. So if by 'Evil Campaign' they mean moustache twirling panto villains vs the shiny fluffy saints, then you'll have to tweak and homebrew a lot of the things they'll be dealing with. On the flipside, this is very easy to do, but it depends if you are comfortable with having to do so.

If however, your evil campaign is going to be less...reflective than that, and they are as likely to face other self interested factions and complete monsters as themselves, then you won't really have a problem.

MrRigger
2011-04-08, 11:35 AM
Yeah, an overarching goal or reason for the party to work together is a good idea. Though having them be cultists of the same evil god may not be the greatest idea. Lots of backstabbing that goes on in the cult hierarchy.

For instance I have a LE Dread Necromancer right now that, as an endgame goal, wants to establish an Undead City, basically so he has a place where he can study without fear of being turned or destroyed by good clerics. Let's face it, a remote cave in the desert is one of the least secure places to hide out from a questing party out to destroy undead. A city is safe compared to that.

However, he needs funds and allies to get the materials and trade to build his city. So the campaign is him establishing his name, gathering treasure, gaining allies, sabotaging enemies, and building his undead army. On the surface, very much the same as a Good campaign, the difference is the substance and goals.

MrRigger

Feldarove
2011-04-08, 11:56 AM
Let's face it, a remote cave in the desert is one of the least secure places to hide out from a questing party out to destroy undead.
MrRigger

That cave seems to be working out pretty well for Osama Bin Laden

:smallsmile:

Morghen
2011-04-08, 12:47 PM
Make sure your players don't want to just have a campaign where they can murder each other. If they want that and you give them "backstory and plot" campaign, dissatisfaction may result.

The joy of murdering a fellow PC in a repercussion-from-the-other-PCs-free-environment can be exhilarating.

FuryOfMetal
2011-04-09, 01:51 PM
Evil PC's don't always have to be fighting the "good guys" or trying to overthrow celestia. They can just as easily fight other groups and organizations with evil goals and tendencies. They might disagree on matters of evil that are just as important to uphold as a Good campaign that fights the "Bad Guys". Maybe the other groups evil plans are in the way of whatever evil plan your group is trying to accomplish. Evil is less likely to be on the side of other Evil types compared to Good's chances of alliance with other Good types.

I hope that made sense.

Talakeal
2011-04-09, 01:59 PM
Another important factor to an evil campaign is setting boundaries which everyone at the table is comfortable with. Will you allow rape, torture, harming children, and other subjects which aren't normally discussed in polite society? How graphic will you let players be with their descriptions of depravity? If you aren't up front about this it can really harm the game.
I remember one time when I had an evil character who was keeping a sentient creature with a valuable hide and regeneration alive in my dungeon so that I could skin him repeatedly and sell the hide. My GM promptly quit the campaign.

Talakeal
2011-04-09, 02:00 PM
Sorry, server error caused a double post.

MarkusWolfe
2011-04-09, 03:03 PM
That cave seems to be working out pretty well for Osama Bin Laden

:smallsmile:

He said a questing party, not army officials.

Feldarove
2011-04-09, 03:25 PM
I would say that anything goes in this campaign.

I'm ok with make-believe!

In one of the campaigns with a fellow player I played a catfolk ranger (demon hunter).

I was tricked by a succubus and got it pregnant. I then hunted her down, killed her, and ripped out the catfolk/succubuss demon spawn fetus and ate it (keeping a piece of the fetus as a trinket...you know for catfolk roleplay).

And I'm fairly confident one of my player's is a closet pedophile...so it could get interesting

mint
2011-04-10, 06:51 PM
I started running a game where all the PCs had a component of Evil in their alignment. It was inspired by something I read in the thread 1001 bad plot hooks (contains a surprising amount of good plot hooks).
The party is personal staff to an Evil Wizard. Wizard does stupid crap and the PCs need to deal with it. Its been five sessions now and though the PCs do a lot of morally ambiguous stuff -and also bad stuff- The main appeal seems to be that you can solve problems by being jerks and not thinking so much about your alignment or the fall-out. Nobody needs to be the straight-man, which is a huge relief.
They solve problems in terrible ways, like...

See a kid being bullied? Teach him how to make a mace with a sock and half a brick. Next time he'll be prepared!

Scary Vampire Lady threatening to out you as a female wizard (girls can't do magic silly!) to your employer? Roofie her drink and bring her to a frat party. At a seminar.


My group has... coarse humour at best. Comfortable with one another, not so many boundaries. Two of the guys are dating. The first is playing an orphaned Warblade who s constantly angry and yells at people all the time, the second is playing a gestalted Knight/Paladin of Tyranny who's life goal is to insult all of creation. He has yet to meet a person he can not get to. The first char is in love with the second. We've made some jokes in incredibly poor taste about the first violating the second, as that is simply where you go in your head when you see them play.
But frankly, that is the closest we've gotten to PvP.
I think maybe the PvP think is easier to do if the dynamic between the PCs is tense and volatile.

They do mean spiteful stuff but they don't do stuff that is truly psychotic.
And I think that is why it works. Though you could argue that it isn't really an Evil game, rather a game about PCs who happen to not be Good.
I think the key to any game I've run that worked out well in the end has been a strong, fun foundation in the form of a solid group dynamic.
The players are proper friends or family, have real, if silly, jobs and places in their community.
Ultimately I have very little control of that though. I can just encourage it.
Starting the game where the characters have just been brought together is a big issue... maybe.

Mutazoia
2011-04-11, 12:53 AM
Well most of my last groups campaigns all had us basically evil. It was just the way we played. We took and sold slaves, burned villages that we didn't like for one reason or another.... hell we played the Imperial march every time we entered a city. But the DM handled it pretty easily...we were fighting some one more evil than us...basically we were the lesser of two evils.

The last campaign started with us being captured by an BBEG who was taking people, branding them, putting them through some ritual and turning them into a devoted puppet army. We escaped and had to hunt down the BBEG before he found us and made us slaves. We weren't nice about it. We raped, pillaged, and plundered our way across the land. But we had the whole, give us what we want now and we'll go away, or don't give us what we want and be enslaved later, thing going for us.