evil or out of character?

[evilgijoe]

in the Campaign i have a NE assimar rogue who is party face man/con artist.
he heals the fighters(which makes sense to me since out of 5 encounters Ive had no enemies even approach me, basically they get hit so i don't)
I've prevented the tiefling fighter from mugging people, since that would draw attention,and commoners don't carry much money(risk/reward aspect)
The reasoning seems perfectly logical to me, but dm is unsure if im evil as align, so cant i be selfish and self interested ect. or do i need to go stab happy on the next random villager?

[Chester]

in the Campaign i have a NE assimar rogue who is party face man/con artist.
he heals the fighters(which makes sense to me since out of 5 encounters Ive had no enemies even approach me, basically they get hit so i don't)
I've prevented the tiefling fighter from mugging people, since that would draw attention,and commoners don't carry much money(risk/reward aspect)
The reasoning seems perfectly logical to me, but dm is unsure if im evil as align, so cant i be selfish and self interested ect. or do i need to go stab happy on the next random villager?

How does your group / DM define "evil"?

Personally, I look at evil as self-serving, manipulative, and opportunistic. You need not go "stab happy" in the next village, but you might kill in cold blood if you thought you could get away with it.

[Grayson01]

No I think you are doing just fine. This to me feels like it's falling into the same Lawful Stuiped or Stuiped Good that some (most) Paladins fall into. Your motivations are really what's more impoartant then the actions. You are healing the Meat Sheild so he can still be a Meat shield and it makes him more loyal to you so he will keep throwing himself in front of Swords for you, not because you care about his/her well being. Not allowing teh Muggings is to prevent the attention that would hinder and prove problomatic to your evil deeds I.E. your Cons and such. You don't have to be a blood thirsy stab happy nut case to be evil. Lex Luther (Depending on which adaptaion) (traditonally LE) is a good example he donates tons of money to good causes, founds Police events and dose lots of real good always to promote some evil plot or promote a reputation that pulls the negative eyes off him, you know so he can become the President of the USA.

[ArcturusV]

Well, you're Neutral Evil. I wouldn't say anything would necessarily be out of character for it.

Take Gobbos for example. In Faerun at least I think Goblins are defined as basically being the purest mortal form of Neutral Evil, or something like that.

Do Goblins mug everyone they see with a twitch reflex? Do they leave their wounded to die? Nah. They'll patch up wounded warriors (Hey, they're Veterans, core to the military elite now!). They'll bypass someone if there's something better or a reason not to lash out.

The only worry I'd have from your blurb isn't necessarily Evil or not... well... depends on how you defined it at the time. If your Evil character said "Pssh, don't mug that commoner. Disposing of bodies is a pain in the ass. Bribing guards is annoying... and what are going to get from it? 2 cp?" is one thing. If you framed it as just saying "No, that's a bad idea" I might think more Neutral aligned.

... anyway... I'm more looking at if your character is Neutral Evil, or Lawful Evil. That's the line to watch out for. Caring about the rules of society, paying your debts, etc. That's Lawful sort of behaviors. You could, following your examples and depending on the whims of the plot, drift towards Lawful Evil. Which probably doesn't matter too much unless you're a Cleric of Demon Lord or something.

[evilgijoe]

the only laws he will follow is if he is payed to do something he does it, bad for business to betray clients. but it wont stop him from stealing back an item he was paid to get them at a later time. as for other times he follows laws when convenient and there are witnesses/enforcers. like if a guard is being"unreasonable" best revenge is sleight of hand a stolen item onto guard and report he was taking bribes to his superior.

[ArcturusV]

Well remember that "Lawful" does not mean "Obeys all the edicts passed down by a guy in a bejeweled coronet in a pile of rocks".

Lawful means a certain amount of code, professionalism, honor, a belief in an orderly society, etc. A druid who never follows some law passed by the local King, can still be very Lawful by merely respect the "Laws of nature" and the order of the natural world. Believing most of reality to be a complex machine like state where every plant, animal, mineral, and man is a small sprocket or cog turning in perfect order.

... but will still ignore things like when the Town Guards say something like "Oi, pay your Gate Fee to enter the city", and decide to just flip them off, turn into a bird, and fly over the wall and into the city instead. He's still very Lawful, even as he flaunts the law.

[Prime32]

Evil is about acting in self-interest even if it harms others, while Good is about acting in the interest of others even if it harms yourself. Committing crimes that will surely be connected back to you isn't in your self-interest - if a Good character and an Evil one both have a chance to attack a dangerous villain in broad daylight, the Good character is more likely to do it.

[evilgijoe]

Ty Arcturus,I had not considered the lawful part since i thought it needed more rules than I have on him.
As for his best interest, definitely. My concept for him is he had a what do i gain/what do i loose column running in his head for every action he takes. sort of like a mental ledger.I would have went just TN, but he wouldn't be bothered if innocents are hurt that he doesn't know.ie,if there is a bandit attack on a caravan and the caravan has the upper hand and they seem loaded he would possibly help.otherwise he would wait to see if the bandits are wounded enough to take everything.

[KillianHawkeye]

Mere selfishness is not Evil. Everybody is selfish to one degree or another. It's human nature.

For more info, see the quote in my sig.

[Grayson01]

KillianHawkeye I don't think your quote is quite accurate, I think Evil is Look out for number one even at Great Great cost of number 2, 3, 4...

[ArcturusV]

Generally. Good people can be selfish. Neutrals can be selfish. But evil is the one that is willing to go the extra mile to be selfish. Claiming the last slice of pizza? Not evil. Stabbing someone in the hand, pinning it to the table, when they reach for the last piece of pizza before you get it? Evil.

[Grayson01]

CE but yeah that is a very good point, kinda like Deadpool Stabbing Jack Hammer Over eating the last Cheese Puff, even though they were Jack Hammer's Cheese Puffs....


Generally. Good people can be selfish. Neutrals can be selfish. But evil is the one that is willing to go the extra mile to be selfish. Claiming the last slice of pizza? Not evil. Stabbing someone in the hand, pinning it to the table, when they reach for the last piece of pizza before you get it? Evil.

[jaydubs]

Good - I greatly value the welfare of other people. A good person might run into a burning building to save someone else.

Neutral - I value my own welfare over the welfare of others. But, I do not completely ignore the welfare of others. A neutral person might call 911 if they see a building on fire, and a neutral person would require significant motivation to harm other people. A "him or me" situation, after being offered a very large sum of money, for revenge, etc.

Evil - I value my own welfare to the exclusion of the welfare of others. Or I actively enjoy hurting others even when it gives me little to no advantage. An evil person will commit crimes to avoid minor inconveniences, or may simply enjoy hurting others.

A simple test to see if your character is evil or simply neutral. He encounters a child who is obviously impoverished. After begging for days, the child has finally scrounged up enough gold to buy medicine for his sick mother. The amount of gold is inconsequential to you. For example, you have 1,000 gold, and the child only has 2 gold. Given an opportunity to take the gold without any chance of being caught for it, do you take it?

Edit: This example obviously excludes the "totally insane" version of chaotic neutral. That branch might well kill the child, sell his organs, and then use the proceeds to cure the mother. Also, lawful evils might be against stealing.

[tomandtish]

in the Campaign i have a NE assimar rogue who is party face man/con artist.
he heals the fighters(which makes sense to me since out of 5 encounters Ive had no enemies even approach me, basically they get hit so i don't)
I've prevented the tiefling fighter from mugging people, since that would draw attention,and commoners don't carry much money(risk/reward aspect)
The reasoning seems perfectly logical to me, but dm is unsure if im evil as align, so cant i be selfish and self interested ect. or do i need to go stab happy on the next random villager?

It's always important to make sure you and the DM are on the same page when it comes to alignment. Too many problems occur because you and they have differing expecations of what good and evil alignments are from the beginning.

But there's nothing wrong with being evil but nice. Holland Manners from Angel, Bester from B5, Cancer Man from X-Files. None of them are walking around slaughtering people at random, and actually seem quite nice to others.


Generally. Good people can be selfish. Neutrals can be selfish. But evil is the one that is willing to go the extra mile to be selfish. Claiming the last slice of pizza? Not evil. Stabbing someone in the hand, pinning it to the table, when they reach for the last piece of pizza before you get it? Evil.

But... but ... it was really GOOD pizza..... :smallwink:

[Flickerdart]

in the Campaign i have a NE assimar rogue who is party face man/con artist.
he heals the fighters(which makes sense to me since out of 5 encounters Ive had no enemies even approach me, basically they get hit so i don't)
I've prevented the tiefling fighter from mugging people, since that would draw attention,and commoners don't carry much money(risk/reward aspect)
The reasoning seems perfectly logical to me, but dm is unsure if im evil as align, so cant i be selfish and self interested ect. or do i need to go stab happy on the next random villager?
Imagine a really horrible person. Let's say, someone who kidnaps orphans and sacrifices them to an Elder Evil for longevity on every full moon. And yet, he must feed and clothe himself, so he holds down a job, let's say at a lumber mill. He goes to the market and buys vegetables. He pays his taxes and goes to the pub with his friends on Friday evenings. The activities of his everyday life are just regular Neutral things. They do not, however, make him any less of a horrible and twisted capital-E Evil person.

Alignments aren't about frequency, they're about magnitude and intent. Your character is loyal to his allies, and reluctant to commit crimes that don't benefit him much, but those are Lawful traits and have no effect on the Good-Evil axis.

Having said that, merely being self-interested doesn't make you evil. A Chaotic Neutral character might steal from the poor, and generally earn a living through illegal activities. An Evil character would twist the knife - break what he cannot steal, destroy a worthless but sentimental object to watch the victim cringe, threaten someone's loved ones to get to them. In the same way that Good characters sometimes perform kind deeds when it's inconvenient, a thoroughly Evil person might go the extra distance even when impractical. Being pragmatic is Neutral, and doing Neutral things doesn't redeem an Evil character.

[TrollCapAmerica]

If evil characters went around stabbing everyone in town for fun or robbing begger children of medicine for the lulz they wold never get by in any civilization.The absolute worst least realistic evil character is the one that has no rational behind what they do

Evil can come in alot of forms.Sure you could have the kind of petty evil doing all those things I mentioned but even they would need some rational behind such actions and would only do something like that if absolutely positive they both gain a benefit and can get away with it

I think the best way to play the evil character is to define what exactly is it that makes them evil.Lemme throw some examples down

It could be a level of selfishness that goes the extra mile beyond a Neutral version.Where the character doesnt just put themselves first but sees everything as something that serves him.If a situation isnt to his benefit in some way he wont care about it in any way.He might save a princess [expecting a big reward] then sell her out to slavers when he finds the reward is inadequate but he isnt going to stab the princess because she was rude while being rescued [might rough ehr up a bit but who cares right?]

It could be overwhelming pride.This could range from a character that thinks so highly of themselves that they believe they are above all the rules/morality of everyone else or that "deserve" something [Status power McGuffin etc] so much more than anyone else that they are willing to do anything to obtain it.This is your Dr.Doom kind of evil

They could also be something as simple as overly cynical.They could believe that everyone is willing to backstab them at a moments notice and the only way to survive is to be the baddest meanest SOB imaginable.Nobody can hurt you if they are too scared to act or too stabbed,This kind of felller probably doesnt believe hes evil hes just "realistic" and smarter than everyone else

[Thrudd]

I see evil as not only selfish, but actively seeking to hurt others in some way whenever possible. Your power and comfort means less if someone else is just as comfortable or powerful as you. If someone else has something you want, you aim to take it. When given the opportunity to harm someone else without harm to yourself, you take it (not necessarily/always physical harm, but also materially or mentally/emotionally). An evil person has some form of sociopathic/psychopathic behavior. Will you heal somebody who is helping you? sure. You will also let them die the second they are of no use to you. Will you refrain from stealing if there is a good chance of being caught? If you are smart. As soon as there is less threat of being caught? You steal to your heart's content. You are essentially without a conscience.
Lawful evil may have a sense of ethics or loyalty which makes it seem slightly less evil, like not directly harming children or only harming people not of your own group. But outside the confines of their rules, they will do anything, and will find loopholes in those rules if they deem it necessary or convenient.

Neutral means not being motivated by compassion and care for others, but also not being subject to sociopathic/psychopathic tendencies. It is essentially the normal self-interested selfishness/survival instinct that all beings exhibit by default. You will not go out of your way to hurt people, you'll even help others if it isn't any bother, but you won't risk yourself or your possessions to help someone in trouble. You don't want to hurt people unless there is a good reason to, you aren't without a conscience, you have the capactity to care for others. Your capacity for caring does not generally extend beyond those with whom you have personal relationships. You will do what you need to do in order to survive.

Good means having compassion for the suffering of others, and being motivated to act altruistically regardless of personal relationship. You will help others whenever you can, even if it is risky, and try to do what is "right" even if it is hard.