PDA

View Full Version : Roleplaying evil characters: your preferences



Grim Portent
2013-11-04, 08:49 AM
As a mostly evil roleplayer I find myself wondering how other people like to play the darker side of morality. So please, share examples and preferences of how you play evil, be it the cuthroat pirate, the dark wizard or the evil overlord.

I personally tend towards scheming intrigue based evil. A gradual and obscure path to power which should go unnoticed until the last possible moment, though I have had fun playing more brutish and forthright PCs, savage warrior types can be remarkably relaxing to play whether you're splitting skulls in a skirmish or knocking people through windows in a tavern brawl.

To my mind my best evil PC is one I'm still playing. Iago the Warpsmith, a heretek in a Black Crusade game. Utterly sociopathic, no empathy or concern for other creatures, all he is interested in is the acquisition of knowledge and control. Dedicated to forbidden science and rituals he wants to combine the technology of aliens, the eternal powers of daemons and the strength of mankinds space marines into unstoppable abominations of war and domination.

The Dark Fiddler
2013-11-04, 09:01 AM
I prefer otherwise good or neutral characters with loose morals. Mercenaries who are more than willing to kill somebody unrelated to their job, a swordsman who doesn't mind torturing for information, stuff like that.

Dwy
2013-11-04, 09:03 AM
I prefer to keep it simple, playing characters that are a little too selfish and greedy, characters who will go too far, killing already defeated enemies etc. Characters who won't take major risks without personal gain or strong motivation (hatred, lust, being forced to etc). These characters can co-exist in parties with good guys, or at least neutral guys, unless they lose it, at the same time, these characters will most often not be irredeemably evil. Having your evil-doer go soft (not Good with a capital G, but better) can be a lot of fun.

valadil
2013-11-04, 09:22 AM
I'm with Dwy. I don't want to play a monster, but a person. To me it's much more interesting to play someone who thinks he's good and either screws up or takes a few steps too far than to play someone who was irredeemable right from the start.

hamishspence
2013-11-04, 09:28 AM
Yup- it's the difference between playing Vader and playing Palpatine.

Grim Portent
2013-11-04, 09:35 AM
I find redeemable evil only works in some settings, in Black Crusade it's basically impossible due to the way morality is considered in the setting (Black vs Black) whereas in most settings of D&D for example evil is something few would actively choose.

Acatalepsy
2013-11-04, 09:45 AM
If you're going Evil, go all in. While there's something for "I'm pragmatic and selfish" or "I'm doing what has to be done", cheerful arrogant psychopathy is where the real fun is.

TheCountAlucard
2013-11-04, 10:14 AM
As I'm more frequently a DM/GM/ST/Friend Computer than a player, I rarely have the opportunity for "evil" PCs, but those times when I do, I try and paint them with more than just black; my priority is to make them believable people first. For that matter, if it's intended to be anything more than a cardboard cutout NPC, I do this when GMing as well.

If I'm playing an evil PC (or one who I intend to fall to villainy), I clear it with my GM, and the other players as well. Not just that he's evil, but how and why as well. This goes double in an evil campaign.

Example: One of my STs announced his intent to run an Abyssal game. I explained my concept, a Hundred Kingdoms warrior-poet who was dragged in chains to be executed, but received a reprieve by means of Abyssal Exaltation as the headman's axe fell; he hated the Mask of Winters for what he did to Thorns, but was ultimately grateful for his gift of "life," and so served him loyally. While I did intend to have him turn against the Deathlord, it was going to be a gradual thing, and would only start once he relayed his "debt."

Another Example:The time I got to play Vampire: the Masquerade, I set out to play a devious, manipulative Lunatic. His mental issue was, essentially, inadverdently using his powers. With most of his disciplines being mental in nature (telepathy, aura reading, domination, emotional manipulation, "stealth"), he probably would have made himself a lot of enemies, fast, if he didn't play himself off as two different kinds of more "harmless" varieties of crazy.

Frozen_Feet
2013-11-04, 10:19 AM
I've played a variety of evil characters and it's hard to say which kind I like most, but one sticks out most:

I like for my evil characters to have a point. Some tiny piece of ground where they are actually right, or necessary. Something to say or do that can't be ignored or downplayed just because the character is a lying sonuvabitch.

I also like for my evil character to serve as meaningful moral challenges or mirrors. This is related to the above. I like for other players to seriously consider the question "are we actually being any better than this guy?" I consider it a personal failure when they don't.

Incidentally, this leads to me playing relatively low-key villains, who are decent people or at least have some admirable qualities, if not for fits of pettiness, cruelty or other immoral behaviour. The song "Osapäivänatsi" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8yc81whbd0) ("Part-time Nazi") by Juice Leskinen captures this perfectly. :smallbiggrin:

The Oni
2013-11-04, 10:35 AM
Arrogant psychopaths only account for a small percentage of evil people. It's pretty hard for a person to conceive of him/herself as evil - and typically, the ones who acknowledge their own evil aren't the ones you have to watch out for.

AgentofHellfire
2013-11-04, 10:57 AM
In general, when I play evil my characters tend to have certain things in common:

--They're direct, rather than subtle. since generally some part of their motivation relates to a desire to feed their egos.

--They're generally either moral nihilists or hypocrites that believe they or their race deserves more than others or other races.

The Oni
2013-11-04, 11:02 AM
Genuine evil is good. It's nice to have a villain that's hatable. The caveat is that the evil needs to be believable. Card-carrying, puppy-kicking evil is usually not believable if your character is human in any way.

I like to play sociopathic villains who kill not for malice but because the target was between points A and B. I like to play awful hypocrites who are the best example of the villains they claim to be fighting. But mostly, I like to play the villain who's so crafty, so eloquent and so devoted to his plan, he almost looks like a hero.

AgentofHellfire
2013-11-04, 11:10 AM
Genuine evil is good. It's nice to have a villain that's hatable. The caveat is that the evil needs to be believable. Card-carrying, puppy-kicking evil is usually not believable if your character is human in any way.

...I really want to segue into my card-carrying, puppy-kicking villain now, that I really liked and thought had a pretty believable reason to be that way...

She was basically a vampire, and during her human life she was kicked around through foster homes and treated like she was crazy for holding as true the ideas her birth father kind of planted in her head (which included a belief in and obsession with a lot of the darker occult stuff), she actually kind of wanted there to be vampires, for a long time, so becoming one felt like validation and ascendance at the same time.

So now, she likes showing off that she's a superior creature, and that includes by bullying the lesser beings by doing things like killing their families. It's not just pointless puppy-kicking, in other words, but a power complex.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

So basically, puppy-kicking villains are totally possible in real life. :smallsmile:

Brookshw
2013-11-04, 11:23 AM
I'd prefer it played intelligently by my players. When its random slaughter for evil lulz by characters with no goals it feels pointless to run a game.

Joe the Rat
2013-11-04, 12:09 PM
"random slaughter for lulz" - that's like part of the Adventurer's Credo:

"Random Slaughter for Laughs and Loot
Just make sure they're Evil and everything's Good."

Morithias
2013-11-04, 12:13 PM
Brutally pragmatic and wise.

My villains realize that the best way to beat the good guys, is to never have to face them.

They play the legit game, they play subtly, and they rarely let their greed get the best of them.

They desire money, power, etc, but they never go over that edge that would result in that hero bashing their head in.

As Alexis Stratos, my iconic character from my skype group puts it.

"Diplomacy and Respect are more powerful than fear and intimidation, and peace of mind is more valuable than any gold."

Lorsa
2013-11-04, 12:55 PM
I suppose my most enjoyable evil characters (when I am the player) are those that simply favour reason over emotion to such an extent that things like compassion are meaningless. They value their goals and very little else.

This may be because that's the kind of evil that I feel exist inside me, that if my believes in the good of humanity and intrinsic value of human life was eradicated that's what I'd become.

The Fury
2013-11-04, 12:59 PM
I've mentioned my evil PC preferences on another thread, so I'll just post the short version here.

On some perverse level I sort of want to see my evil PCs stopped. Maybe it's because the story doesn't feel finished until they are. That's provided that they become a legitimate threat first. Other than that I've played the morally complex bad guys with standards and outright monsters-- both are fun in their own way.

The Oni
2013-11-04, 01:02 PM
So basically, puppy-kicking villains are totally possible in real life. :smallsmile:

That does sound like a believable villain - but, on the other hand, your villain isn't human, now is she? Take all that repressed bitterness and anger and vampirize it, and it makes perfect sense. The vampiric urges encourage the whole "Apex Predator" thought process, while the power complex is justified through her vampirism. Quite good.

Bulhakov
2013-11-04, 02:33 PM
I generally play good characters. On the few occasions I played evil characters, they were, as Morithias put it, "brutally pragmatic". They had their own goals/agendas (sometimes even good agendas), and showed little to none empathy while reaching them.

QuintonBeck
2013-11-04, 04:55 PM
I've only played one evil character, he didn't start that way though, he fell.
A devout LN cleric he was the guiding force and leader of the party, then the big reveal of the campaign was the pantheon of gods were actually just kinda Wizard of Ozing their whole divinity thing so, with his entire ethos and set of laws that he normally turned to shattered by the fact that they weren't given by divine beings he went a little crazy, "Screw the rules, they're all just a made up pack of lies anyway" and got killed by his the rest of the party (though it took them about half a session to finally stand up and say they weren't going to follow him down the rabbit hole since he had led them for so long)
So I suppose I'm not too good at playing evil characters, at least not when I haven't been playing them the whole time. I've yet to give it another chance though I hope to play a LE character in one of my next games.

CarpeGuitarrem
2013-11-04, 05:00 PM
One of my favorite authors, John C. Wright, says something to the effect of, "Every villain should have a speech where they explain to the heroes why they are undoubtedly in the right."

I rather like that approach. (Mind you, I also like more muddled cases like characters who aren't sure of their morals--but then again, I guess they don't really count as villains.)

Ravens_cry
2013-11-04, 05:26 PM
I like the defector from decadence type. While still evil, they are appealed by the excesses of their parent culture, and the sheer inefficiency of its senseless violence. They are amoral and willing to do much to attain their goals, but inefficient? Never!
Why do evil when good gets you want just as fast? It's when it doesn't one must turn to evil.

TheThan
2013-11-04, 06:01 PM
If you're going Evil, go all in. While there's something for "I'm pragmatic and selfish" or "I'm doing what has to be done", cheerful arrogant psychopathy is where the real fun is.

oh I agree, give me a top hat, opera coat and a Moustache to twirl any day of the week. If you going evil, go all in.

*strolls off, practicing evil laugh*
buahahahahahah!

Acatalepsy
2013-11-04, 06:57 PM
oh I agree, give me a top hat, opera coat and a Moustache to twirl any day of the week. If you going evil, go all in.

*strolls off, practicing evil laugh*
buahahahahahah!

And it's so easy when you're evil.... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxJrjV4PNXA)

Kane0
2013-11-04, 07:53 PM
I prefer a combination of jaded and ruthless, with either scheming or brutal themes. Occasionally I try pure selfishness or utter hatred but I don't really do those as well.

Bosaxon
2013-11-04, 07:54 PM
Only rules are the party is off limits for kills and adhere to the general squeamish factor tolerated by other players. You can still administer corporal punishment to fellow pcs around from time to time if you take damage as a result of their actions, inaction, or poor rolls, but otherwise, you have higher priority targets or lower priority that can be a lot more fun.

This is the evil I rarely play. Everything else I can make arguments for being somewhere in neutral.

Mekboy
2013-11-04, 09:15 PM
With my evil, I tend towards the 'evil with a moral code' (not specifically lawful, just following their own brand of logic). Examples include the mystic theurge necromancer who quite happily used evil magical artefacts, raised her fallen enemies and generally was happy to use any kind of evil magic to her own ends - most of which were trying to rid the world of evil races. And there's the Khornate duellist I've played in a few Black Crusade games, who's basically just looking for a challenge to make herself stronger. Consorting with demons, giving offerings to the Blood God and receiving his blessings in return, but generally refused to kill anyone who surrenders (they got turned into slaves instead, weaklings that they were) and following a general code of honour, refusing to drink, take drugs, use witchcraft et.c

devinebovine
2013-11-04, 10:09 PM
I played in an "evil" campaign run with friends. We all started with pretty basic archetypes: I was insane violence for violence's sake, there was a reserved but scheming leader, and a rogue who didn't really care about anything but killing and stealing for profit.

However as the game progressed and we began fleshing out our characters, we began to plumb the morality within evil. Foremost in my mind was the fact that we were living in an "evil" (defined by D&D) society, and yet somehow a functioning society lived and thrived. Just as one can argue about different ways to be good (consider the real moral philosophies which can differ greatly), we began to formulate and define the different ways to be evil.

Eventually my character, who was a cleric, wrote a treatise. In it he made the claim that pure evil stems from a perfect sense of love. But whereas good tends to direct that love outwards, evil is about loving oneself above all other things. "Weak" traits, like helping others out of compassion/duty, seeking compromise, being generous, stem from the failure to completely love oneself. Thus, the only way for an action to be judged truly evil, it must be done for no other purpose than to better oneself. Not killing someone can be worse than killing them, when their continued existence would cause greater harm to them and benefit to you. In the end, when everyone cares ultimately only about themselves, a perfect society is created where people view others as a means to an end. The more people you try to use, the greater your ends can be. It is therefore perfectly within keeping of villainy to build a society and work together (with the caveat that it's not really working "together", since all others should be viewed as tools).

Another character built up a cult around hatred and refuted my character's leanings. True evil, he said, comes from understanding that the self is weak, prone to failure, and ultimately doomed by the forces of the world arrayed against it. The only proper response to this is hatred and aggression, both against oneself and the world at large. The world and everything in it must die, since it clearly seeks our own destruction.

And then there were those who played characters that stayed out of this and were just simply cruel because it was titillating. We even had a vampire who, although perfectly fine with draining the life from innocents and using babies as bargaining chips (and then literally throwing those chips away when no longer needed), went to immense lengths to protect her helpless progeny, and was really a loving mother.

Overall it felt as though we had a pretty good spread of justification for villainy, and since we weren't all on the same page there was occasional tension and party disagreement over the "correct" incorrect way to act. Great fun was had by all.

Raimun
2013-11-04, 11:17 PM
I prefer to play heroic characters, either Good or Neutral. There's nothing like making the world a better place by judicious application of violence.

Still, I have to say I kind of liked playing a scheming and civilized Lawful Evil-type. Especially since I had actual political power and could plan mysterious attacks on the unsuspecting countryside.

"Go forth my minions!" :smallcool:

I don't think I would want to play a Chaotic Evil character who takes all of the candies from all the babies and flips the finger for every and all puppies.
One, I have no desire to do that sort of thing.
Two, that would be like be playing an NPC-mook.
And three, that's not very effective villainy. :smalltongue:

Remmirath
2013-11-04, 11:21 PM
I like playing all sorts of different characters, and that sometimes ends up including evil ones. I'd say that neutral characters are probably the majority of what I play, with somewhat more that are good than evil -- but alignment is usually something I only add onto the sheet once I have everything else about the character done. I mostly use it to sum up the moral outlook of the character rather than using it as a base for their outlook.

Misguided evil characters, those who are evil from excess greed or ambition with too little care for the rights of others, and power-hungry tyrants tend to be the more common types I play, both for evil PCs and for villains. Evil because of revenge taken too far is another one, or out of fear of becoming weak, or out of pragmatism taken to its extremes. Really, the only type that I don't often play is the evil-for-evil's-sake type, because I find it more difficult to wrap my head around. I have played some anti-paladins like that, however.

I suppose what I enjoy the most is the evil characters who are redeemed, or the formerly good characters who fall to evil. I tend to find alignment shifts interesting.

TheDarkSaint
2013-11-05, 02:32 PM
My evil PC's usually get taken away :(

The last one I had was a smooth talking sorcerer who, through judicious use of charm person and suggestion, married a local spinster who was rich and then began winning over the population of the town to become elected as mayor.

In the mean time, he was sacrificing townsfolk to Bane in secret and setting up a cult. My DM told me I could do whatever and then seemed shocked when I started taking over stuff and setting up members of the party and local paladins to take the fall for the murders. He took the character away and made him an NPC villain. Oh well.

Later, we did discover his identity and were about to go after him, but died in a TPK with some effreet. I was kind of happy he was never caught.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-11-05, 03:22 PM
I've got a soft spot for jaded, ruthless, "I'm only doing what has to be done"-type villains, especially (ex)-paladins. But what I really love is the fall. It's no fun playing a baby-killing, commoner-slaughtering psychopath. For me, the real fun is in the expressions on my party members' faces when they realize the Lawful Good party leader they've all been following has, before their eyes, turned into a soulless monster of a man, and they didn't even notice.

The Fury
2013-11-05, 03:47 PM
I've got a soft spot for jaded, ruthless, "I'm only doing what has to be done"-type villains, especially (ex)-paladins. But what I really love is the fall. It's no fun playing a baby-killing, commoner-slaughtering psychopath. For me, the real fun is in the expressions on my party members' faces when they realize the Lawful Good party leader they've all been following has, before their eyes, turned into a soulless monster of a man, and they didn't even notice.

A sort of inversion of this can be cool too-- the party suddenly noticing that the jaded, ruthless "token evil team mate" is actually a lot more noble than everyone thought. Though it's usually more confusion than shock.

VariSami
2013-11-05, 04:31 PM
Warped.

Really, it surprises me how easily such characters can be integrated with into a neutral party. They are rarely notably greedy or treacherous or otherwise dangerous to party integrity. It is just that their ideals are less than desirable for most, and they might be willing to demonstrate the perks they are missing even to unwilling targets. But preferably when their responsibility is merely indirect, and willing targets are always preferred.

For example, a LE (dread) necromancer who found true beauty only in death and considered himself both an artist who helped people by sculpting their bodies to perfection by animating them. But would he kill innocents to gain bodies? Oh, no, they would not understand the honor and benefits of the undeath state. However, a famine is killing them? The character will not provide them with food but rather, lectures on the lack of metabolism in the undead. He would then suggest that they testament the rights to their bodies to him in order to begin their new lives as higher beings - mindless undead.

The Oni
2013-11-06, 12:38 AM
For example, a LE (dread) necromancer who found true beauty only in death and considered himself both an artist who helped people by sculpting their bodies to perfection by animating them. But would he kill innocents to gain bodies? Oh, no, they would not understand the honor and benefits of the undeath state. However, a famine is killing them? The character will not provide them with food but rather, lectures on the lack of metabolism in the undead. He would then suggest that they testament the rights to their bodies to him in order to begin their new lives as higher beings - mindless undead.

So like Tsukiko, only slightly less creepy.

Trickquestion
2013-11-06, 02:24 AM
One of my favorite characters was actually evil. I had decided to craft a character that was "High Functioning Chaotic Evil." The character that came about was a Hybrid Bard/Sorcerer with jacked up Charisma, pretty high intelligence, and low wisdom. The concept of the character is that he wants to live the good life: Fine wine, crowds of attractive groupies, and piles of cash. How does one gain those things in this bleak fantasy environment? Why, you adventure for them of course! So his bit was that he was a great team player, who never double crossed the party, and was working with Good aligned characters to accomplish the quests. What made him evil (and frequently hilarious) was his utterly flippant disregard for humanoid life. He would frequently bluff his way past guards and the like with outrageous lies and ridiculous disguises, thanks to his through the roof charisma, stole everything that wasn't nailed down, knifed a few civilians behind the party's back for pocket change, once convinced a band of pirates to storm a town as a distraction, and seduced more then a few maidens for completely selfish reasons.

What kept him working with the party however, was how funny he was, essentially. His dialogue with the rest of the party was non-stop goofy ham, and because of that, they never really took him seriously enough to consider him an actual villain.

ShadowFireLance
2013-11-06, 02:37 AM
And it's so easy when you're evil.... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxJrjV4PNXA)

Hell. Yeah. :smallcool:

I think I will return to my favorite character of all time.
His name was Andregyrtudarrhathatarmornoskualin, he, was a Godwyrm. Or at least believed himself to be one, and made everyone believe it.
He did whatever the hell he wanted, because he had the power to back it up, but he also had specific goals in mind. Those being total enslavement of the Deities, and utter annihilation of every Paladin.

He ended up getting killed by an overdeity, because he broke the necks of Demogorgon, and ripped the spine out of Death, and disemboweled the Archangel.

It was a type of evil I refer to as Simply 'Evil' on the alignment sheet.
He saved a child from drowning, only to have her watch as he destroyed the city and ate everyone that she knew.
And forced her to eat her brother's brains.
And slowly turned her into his heir.



Good times.

(If anyone wants the full story, I should type it out. I think I might if someone wants it.)

The Oni
2013-11-07, 02:42 AM
Hell. Yeah. :smallcool:

I think I will return to my favorite character of all time.
His name was Andregyrtudarrhathatarmornoskualin, he, was a Godwyrm. Or at least believed himself to be one, and made everyone believe it.
He did whatever the hell he wanted, because he had the power to back it up, but he also had specific goals in mind. Those being total enslavement of the Deities, and utter annihilation of every Paladin.

He ended up getting killed by an overdeity, because he broke the necks of Demogorgon, and ripped the spine out of Death, and disemboweled the Archangel.

It was a type of evil I refer to as Simply 'Evil' on the alignment sheet.
He saved a child from drowning, only to have her watch as he destroyed the city and ate everyone that she knew.
And forced her to eat her brother's brains.
And slowly turned her into his heir.



Good times.

(If anyone wants the full story, I should type it out. I think I might if someone wants it.)

I'd like to hear it. I'm guessing he looked something like your current avatar?

Jay R
2013-11-07, 08:56 AM
I've never chosen to play an evil character.

But in my first real game, back in 1975, playing a Paladin, our party was down to 1, 2 or 3 hit points each. My Paladin picked up a magic sword, and the DM handed me a note. "This Flaming Sword has just turned you Chaotic" (which meant "evil" back then).

I told the party that it was a Holy Sword with a quest that I had to take on alone. I told them that they had to leave the way they cam, single file, and never turn back, no matter what they heard. Then I followed and killed them one by one.

So, no evil characters, but my paladin murdered the entire Lawful (Good) party.

Frenth Alunril
2013-11-07, 10:35 AM
My evil PC's usually get taken away :(

The last one I had was a smooth talking sorcerer who, through judicious use of charm person and suggestion, married a local spinster who was rich and then began winning over the population of the town to become elected as mayor.

In the mean time, he was sacrificing townsfolk to Bane in secret and setting up a cult. My DM told me I could do whatever and then seemed shocked when I started taking over stuff and setting up members of the party and local paladins to take the fall for the murders. He took the character away and made him an NPC villain. Oh well.

Later, we did discover his identity and were about to go after him, but died in a TPK with some effreet. I was kind of happy he was never caught.

I don't think surprise is the right word, delighted, perhaps.

He he he. Just you wait, sir, just you wait :)

People are already looking to return to the rock.


That being said, I like my evil to be many different sorts. CE, NE, LE are all good and fun, but a tyrannical LG can be a blast. In fact, part of the power grab TheDarkSaint mentions involved an inquisition, which is always perpetrated in the name of good, but his PC manipulated things, allowing for him to interrupt the inquisition, doing evil for good results with evil results that were viewed as good by society.

That, that is evil.

ShadowFireLance
2013-11-07, 05:17 PM
I'd like to hear it. I'm guessing he looked something like your current avatar?

The actual picture I have of him is this;
http://artfiles.alphacoders.com/436/43617.png

I'm working on typing his full story out for my sig, so I'll PM you when I finish.

LadyLexi
2013-11-07, 06:05 PM
When I play as an evil character, I play evil as a horrible monster. I have slaves, I have farmers killed for not bowing before me. I force my minions to go kill gold dragons so that I can have a new dress. I am a full on Cruella Deville.

I like to play collectors, good or evil. As evil, I collect signs of power. I don't care about the magical goodies of destruction, I want things that signal my superiority over other, pathetic creatures. Dresses and jewelry, a luxury tent made of unicorn hides, a decanter made from solidified sorrow.

In games like World of Darkness, I tend to play evil as manipulative and impractical. I will allow a associate of the group to die out of petty jealousy or greed, even if in the long run they would have been of greater use to the group alive.

The line for me is ruining the game for the other players and I try not to cross it when I can avoid it.

The Oni
2013-11-07, 06:07 PM
The actual picture I have of him is this;
http://artfiles.alphacoders.com/436/43617.png

I'm working on typing his full story out for my sig, so I'll PM you when I finish.

...Dear gods, what level were you playing to? Or did you just stop rolling once your characters could eat suns?

kyoryu
2013-11-07, 06:57 PM
I generally play evil characters as sociopaths. Completely lacking in any kind of empathy.

Not necessarily stupid. Not moustache-twirling caricatures. Not sadists. Just lacking in empathy. The only question they would ask is "how does this impact me?" The smart ones are smart enough to look forward to the *consequences* of their actions, while the dumber ones might not be.

ShadowFireLance
2013-11-07, 11:06 PM
...Dear gods, what level were you playing to? Or did you just stop rolling once your characters could eat suns?

We started at level 30. Gestalt. :smallbiggrin:
I ended at some level.

The Oni
2013-11-07, 11:56 PM
We started at level 30. Gestalt. :smallbiggrin:
I ended at some level.

Really when your starting point is roughly ECL 45, how do you find anything big enough to gain XP?

ShadowFireLance
2013-11-07, 11:59 PM
Really when your starting point is roughly ECL 45, how do you find anything big enough to gain XP?

By;
1: Dm being a much better Optimizer.
2: Dm planning for this.
3: Dm building NPC's for this.
4: Having Other players in a PvP environment.

The Oni
2013-11-08, 12:18 AM
...The sensible roleplayer in me says this is far too large a scale for any meaningful drama but the powergamer in me says ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWAH.

ShadowFireLance
2013-11-08, 12:20 AM
...The sensible roleplayer in me says this is far too large a scale for any meaningful drama but the powergamer in me says ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWAH.

You have no idea.
See, when you get in that area, you start dealing with deity level powers, and then suddenly realize that you can't destroy everything without your enemies attacking you when you're weakened.

Pokonic
2013-11-08, 12:26 AM
It depends on the type of evil one's dealing with.

I don't like playing one-dimensional characters. If your in thrall to the Nine Hells and wear black armor forged with the scales of a silver dragon and cooled with the blood of orphans, you should probably have a decent reason for being so.

Ghost Nappa
2013-11-08, 03:50 PM
The Machiavellian Puppetmaster.

Why do things when you make people do things for you, think it was their own choice, take the fall for their mistake, and then give you what you want anyway?

TandemChelipeds
2013-11-08, 05:28 PM
I like my evil characters to be utterly, unflinchingly, happily Evil, and proud of it- But with ethics, and even a personal morality that doesn't make them any less evil. A recurring character concept of mine is a Lawful Evil mercenary cleric who lives according to the notion that if you're good at something, you should never do it for free. Of course, he happens to be good at killing. What this means is that he'll do things like defend dirt-poor peasants from monsters, only to use it as leverage to extort them out of money they can't afford- But he also won't kill anyone, as much as he'd like to, if there isn't any money in it. And he enjoys his murder quite a bit. This leads to a twisted kind of personal morality- Because he believes that it is the correct order of things that people should always receive payment for their services, he will always oppose slavery, and he will always take personal offense at the refusal of a gift. In an odd way, his is an evil that is often beneficial, even if he himself is a terrible human being.

Daimbert
2013-11-08, 05:34 PM
I haven't played evil much, but for evil I prefer cold, calculating, emotionless. A character that has a specific goal, and is willing to do anything to achieve it. If that means torturing or killing people, that's fine. If it means working with good characters, that's fine, too. I also prefer them to be Lawful, so they will keep deals that they make ... but will follow it to the letter, meaning that if it benefits them to interpret something literally to screw over the people they're dealing with, they'll do it. If not, they won't.

So, I guess, kinda like Tarquin but less nuts.

TandemChelipeds
2013-11-08, 05:41 PM
I haven't played evil much, but for evil I prefer cold, calculating, emotionless. A character that has a specific goal, and is willing to do anything to achieve it. If that means torturing or killing people, that's fine. If it means working with good characters, that's fine, too. I also prefer them to be Lawful, so they will keep deals that they make ... but will follow it to the letter, meaning that if it benefits them to interpret something literally to screw over the people they're dealing with, they'll do it. If not, they won't.

So, I guess, kinda like Tarquin but less nuts.

That sounds more neutral than evil, though. By those standards, Tyler Durden's evil. Colonel Kurtz is evil. Hell, Abraham Lincoln's evil by those standards. Unless you're talking about a strictly self-interested goal, of course. An unfettered philosophy alone isn't enough to qualify a character for evil status, I think. That's more chaotic than anything else.

Daimbert
2013-11-08, 05:47 PM
That sounds more neutral than evil, though. By those standards, Tyler Durden's evil. Colonel Kurtz is evil. Hell, Abraham Lincoln's evil by those standards. Unless you're talking about a strictly self-interested goal, of course. An unfettered philosophy alone isn't enough to qualify a character for evil status, I think. That's more chaotic than anything else.

I meant to say that it was indeed only a self-interested goal; they want something because THEY want it, and will do anything to get it, regardless of what others want. And they are never noble goals; they are well aware that their goals aren't good.

Again, think Tarquin, but less nuts.

TandemChelipeds
2013-11-08, 05:51 PM
I meant to say that it was indeed only a self-interested goal; they want something because THEY want it, and will do anything to get it, regardless of what others want. And they are never noble goals; they are well aware that their goals aren't good.

Again, think Tarquin, but less nuts.

Ah. Oh, yeah, then. Definitely evil. Though I could see it getting interesting if the self-interested goal is one that is normally held in high esteem. Like a Lawful Evil monk who commits horrible atrocities to better understand his or her own nature, for the sake of enlightenment.

Winter_Wolf
2013-11-08, 08:32 PM
I like to play intelligent-evil characters. A sociopath, if you will. "In it to win it; if I gotta kill a few hundred people to do it, I'm okay with that" kind of guys (or gals). Has zero empathy or sympathy, but able to fake it towards a larger goal. Would rather use opposition as unwitting or at least unwilling but still coercible resources than just waste 'em, but some people would rather just die/let others die than do something against their idealistic views. Arguable the latter are the more intelligent, considering that this particular type of villain is going to kill anyone the minute they stop being useful. And the occasional "make an example" killing as needed.

Flat out "kill 'em all; don't bother to sort 'em out" is also fun once in a while, but I prefer the malicious user over the violent murderer. Because seriously, most D&D games I've played in or even heard of cast the PCs are violent murderers regardless of their stated alignment.

TheCountAlucard
2013-11-08, 09:14 PM
The Machiavellian Puppetmaster.

Why do things when you make people do things for you, think it was their own choice, take the fall for their mistake, and then give you what you want anyway?Humorously enough, that's how three different Kindred responded to my Malkavian's "prank." :smallamused:

Daimbert
2013-11-09, 04:54 AM
Ah. Oh, yeah, then. Definitely evil. Though I could see it getting interesting if the self-interested goal is one that is normally held in high esteem. Like a Lawful Evil monk who commits horrible atrocities to better understand his or her own nature, for the sake of enlightenment.

The character I built this on was an Archivist/Death Delver, and so just wanted to KNOW things.

Ryu_Bonkosi
2013-11-09, 04:57 AM
I like playing my evil characters in such a way that others forget I am evil, until I do something horrible and the DM says: "Your alignment becomes Evil" and I have to point out that I already am.

TandemChelipeds
2013-11-09, 04:46 PM
The character I built this on was an Archivist/Death Delver, and so just wanted to KNOW things.

I want to play a character like that one of these days. Though really, it sounds more Chaotic Neutral to me.

TheFool
2013-11-09, 09:53 PM
While not evil per se, I have a tendency to roleplay trickster characters that are victims of a slow descent into inhuman amorality. It's so much fun! By the end of a campaign, my character will may very well have gone off the deep end.

I think the best example of that is when I was playing a Werewolf: The Apocalypse game as a trickster with ties to the Fae. She was inadvertently responsible for unleashing the Queen of the Unseelie upon the world. Eventually in an act of desperation she sold her soul to the Queen to save the rest of her party. When she next reappeared she was... different. More a dark force of nature than a person.

I thought it was a pretty cool character arc.

Daimbert
2013-11-10, 05:21 AM
I want to play a character like that one of these days. Though really, it sounds more Chaotic Neutral to me.

Couldn't be, as the character was Lawful, as he followed all agreements he made to the letter. Just don't make the terms vague at all, as he'd take advantage of that to screw you over if it benefited him. To the point where you never, ever left it with "Our agreement will be mutually beneficial" since, as a Death Delver, he was quite willing to interpret "You ending up dead" as a benefit to you and so technically fulfilling the terms of the contract. So if the Chaotic part was important, then it really doesn't fit [grin].

Note that he had no interest in benefit to others, and was indeed totally self-interested. He had an overwhelming interest in knowledge, but had no interest in sharing that unless it benefited him. So there doesn't seem to be ANY sort of noble leanings in him to get him to Neutral ...

Velarias
2013-11-10, 05:51 AM
Personally I like the serial killer type villain. Polite and funny and charming in public, but if you let your guard down, your done in torturous fashion. A complete maniac who's only goal is to hear your agonized screams and to delight in your exquisite pain.

I think my pcs are in for a nasty surprise.:smallcool:

Also a quick question when is a villain to evil?

Mastikator
2013-11-10, 05:54 AM
I try not to define my characters as good or evil, rather I go by specific character traits like generous or deceptive. The second last character I played was greedy, impulsive, sadistic, homocidal, manipulative and shallow, he was a young fire dragon trying to impersonate his interpretation of a human priest, so he tried to seem like he was judgmental and sanctimonious.
The other players liked him, but their characters didn't, and towards the end the started suspecting there was something off with this priest. They freaked out when they found out I was playing an almighty dragon all this time in a low fantasy setting. They were a bit miffed at the DM for allowing it too.
I hoped they would go "ooh, now it all makes sense", but instead they went "you were a freaking dragon, what the hell man!".

In retrospect I regret nothing.

Frozen_Feet
2013-11-10, 06:23 AM
I want to play a character like that one of these days. Though really, it sounds more Chaotic Neutral to me.

Stops being neutral when you start dissecting people to see what makes them tick. :smallwink:

Jay R
2013-11-10, 09:02 AM
Stops being neutral when you start dissecting people to see what makes them tick. :smallwink:

Especially if they're still ticking.

The Oni
2013-11-10, 04:39 PM
...And protesting that they have no vested scientific interest in finding out what makes them tick so could you please put down the hacksa- AUUUUUUGH

Acatalepsy
2013-11-10, 06:21 PM
Unpredictable psychotic bloodlust is always a charming feature. I'm thinking of Kruger from Elysium here. In a party that contains Good (or squeamish Neutral/Evil characters), they key is to be useful enough that you can't really be thrown out. That also means that there has to be a degree of pragmatism in your character - or, if not, you as the player need to make them be pragmatic if only for their own crazy reasons - so that you don't disrupt the game.

But within those bounds - going nuts is what that type of character is meant to do. Keep your enemies (and your own party) a bit on their toes. Sometimes you just sit there and glare menacingly, being the bad cop, or even smile and laugh with them when there's nothing to stab or incinerate. For a bit, they can forget who - what - you are. And then it gets into the heat of combat or the middle of a dungeon (or a 'run) and you remind them (a) why they keep you around and (b) why the don't like having to keep you around, preferably with a big sadistic grin on your face.

Mr. Turniphead
2013-11-10, 07:41 PM
I thoroughly enjoy playing evil characters.

Though I love playing all the alignments for different reasons, there is something fundamentally interesting about playing someone who is evil.

One of my characters that sticks out for me was a Chaotic Evil elven Barbarian. His character was essentially an id, he wanted a good fight, good food and drink, and good women. He was driven from home because he couldn't stand how slow elven society moved, he wanted to get out and see the world. He was a Darwinist though, and often brought himself into conflict with people, whom he would happily crush into the dirt. He ran with a primarily good party, and when he encountered them for the first time, challenged the Paladin to a duel. When he lost (Well done, smite evil :smallwink:) he resolved to stay with them.

What I liked about his character was that he provided a very blunt perspective to the party dynamic. He was not devious, he did not lie, he would simply decimate whatever he thought deserved it unless someone he perceived as stronger than him, (the paladin) told him not to. By the end of the game he was closer to Chaotic Neutral.

Character development is what I like to base my evil characters around, I start with a base of ideals and morals and I let the other members of the party determine whether or not they improve.

andresrhoodie
2013-11-11, 01:12 AM
I like my evil characters to be more of an organized sociopath then a random thrill killer type.

They have very detailed plans and behaviors that are utterly ammoral.

ddude987
2013-11-13, 12:20 PM
Personally when I roleplay an evil character I like them to be more towards the neutral side than the eeevvill side. Apathy towards life makes them cold and allows them to kill people without regret, but rarely without purpose. Rampaging murder-hobos just doesn't appeal to me. Killing just for thrill seems more chaotic than evil to me.

One character I did play, named Lorph, that was the murder-hobo type was easily described with a reference to the game super meat boy. Remember those buzz saws in the game that when you run into them you make a squishing sound? Lorph was the buzz saws.

illyahr
2013-11-13, 05:41 PM
I play the corrupter. No unnecessary killing, no drawing attention to myself. Very helpful, very cheerful, and willing to perform phenominal acts of good to provide for the greater evil. Played an Incubus who had himself willingly bound to the service of a Paladin after "throwing" myself at his mercy. I even made a blood pact that I would not use any of my Incubus powers unless it was in self-defense or he told me to use them.

Ordering a demon to use its powers on a target is an evil act. :smallamused:

My DM threw us against a Great Wyrm Black Dragon Avatar of Falazhure because she was tired of me messing with the PC's/NPC's.

I turned into a female drow, the dragon critically failed his will save, and I ended up giving birth to a female drow half-fiend half-dragon that I named Onyx. Good times. :smallbiggrin: