A recovering villain

[atemu1234]

I'm a Villain, and Villains don't get happy endings.

Making a PC for a new campaign, he's supposed to have been an evil warlord, but was spared by his opponents. Recovering from evil, moving on, is something that he's working on. As such, I need to figure out how to roleplay this. Any tips?

[Lightlawbliss]

Making a PC for a new campaign, he's supposed to have been an evil warlord, but was spared by his opponents. Recovering from evil, moving on, is something that he's working on. As such, I need to figure out how to roleplay this. Any tips?

some possibilities:
The occasional "step in the wrong direction".

Have moments where you immediately suggest to do the evil solution and then go back and correct yourself, possibly with some phrase like "what would ____ do?" or "no, no, bad ____, good thoughts, good thoughts."

break into an evil laugh at moments evil laugh would be appropriate.

self punishment whenever you do something "evil".

occasionally run into old "allies" and have a hard time deciding what to do.

[Renen]

Simplest thing would be to have his 1st impulse always be "be selfish". But then "wait a second, this is immoral"

[Piggy Knowles]

Another alternative would be to go in full penitent mode, constantly holding yourself back in fear that you'll revert back to your old ways. Be a character with a huge list of rules, terrified of breaking them because you know that breaking them means slipping back to the old you. When you are forced to break those rules, have the character slip into being far more brutal and bloodthirsty than anyone else has seen you before, until something shakes you back into "good" mode.

[Renen]

You mean:
http://static2.hypable.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/quote5.png

[Piggy Knowles]

You mean:
http://static2.hypable.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/quote5.png

Yeah, I was thinking of a cross between that and:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VDT-ztTgtoY/S9QI2CXED8I/AAAAAAAAAXQ/4-avrNVEaG4/s400/kenshintitle.gif

[Alefiend]

Sounds like it will be a fun character.

Pop culture influences you can consider:

Take a look at Xena when she first appeared on Hercules: The Legendary Journeys, and then at early episodes of her own show. This was an important theme for the character those first years, and might give you a handle.
Harry Dresden, after the events of Changes.
Renen's example of Doctor Who is a good one. To get more of the spirit that drives that quote, watch Christopher Eccleston's season.
Elric, after he turned against Melnibone and led the armada that sacked his former seat of power, could serve as inspiration as well.


Play ideas:

Have him always commenting on what the BBEG is probably going to do next, "because that's what I would do."
Be very concerned about going anyplace where he used to do his bad stuff.
Quiet remorse, and reluctance to defend yourself against people who recognize you for what you were. They want to kill you, and you have it coming.
If you're not a leader in your group now, occasionally suggest actions that would be brutal but effective. Other times, be extremely compassionate toward the fate of people who might suffer for your decisions. You're conflicted, so some inconsistency makes sense.

[Renen]

Or you can play something that just makes it hard to tell whether he is good or bad or good or... erm...
http://cdn.myanimelist.net/images/characters/8/30505.jpg

[Azraile]

Contented in comic is a good example to follow. Share he's one of the 'good guys' but he dose thing the way a recovering villain would....he's just a hair shy of of villain anyway. Lol he got his magic by calling up a demonic spirit that tore his parents to shreds.... when he was like 8 or something. Shure he didn't know that's what the ritual did, but dang...

Yes got that i'm going to save people even if it damns me and everyone I know kinda thing that fits a villain trying to be good

[Azraile]

In short his evil past leaves him having no problem, no hesitation, in doing honorable things for the grater good.

Kind of person that shots the hostage to get to the kidnapper with out even thinking about it.

"Put down the gun or ill..." *blam* "holly **** you shot her, wha-" *blam*

[ScubaGoomba]

You should talk to the DM to see if he or she can work it into your interactions with NPCs. If he was a warlord, it's certainly likely people would recognize him and react appropriately. NPCs won't trust him and, as a result, may not trust the group, even if he alleges to have reformed.

A list of specific rules could be good; maybe he's particularly hesitant to hurt others in general? What class are you going with this? I'm assuming that, as a new character, he'll be pretty low in level which goes against the warlord idea. Maybe pick a supportive class that he's taken in order to help people and hurt as few as possible. Cleric or Paladin could be great classes to use for this concept. Maybe monk?

[atemu1234]

Or you can play something that just makes it hard to tell whether he is good or bad or good or... erm...
http://cdn.myanimelist.net/images/characters/8/30505.jpg

I got the other ones, but what anime is that?

[TandemChelipeds]

I got the other ones, but what anime is that?

Code Geass. In a parallel timeline, a japanese high schooler enlists with the army of an occupying force in an attempt to redeem it from within and regain his homeland's sovereignty. After an incident involving some terrorists, he's made the pilot of an elite prototype mecha called "Lancelot" and fights to drive the insurgents out.

He is not the hero of our story.

This is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00EjISW5vsU

[madtinker]

I could see a recovering villain get really frustrated with following rules and bureaucracy. He might try to take shortcuts, but ends up doing the wrong thing for the right reasons.

[atemu1234]

I could see a recovering villain get really frustrated with following rules and bureaucracy. He might try to take shortcuts, but ends up doing the wrong thing for the right reasons.

He was Chaotic Evil. What alignment he is now kind of depends on how I roleplay him. It just has to be good. I'm interested in playing him as the same guy but playing for the "good" team now. Maybe I should go with Chaotic/Lawful Neutral, because I'd like him to pull the doctor line (see above) right before he kills a prisoner or something.

[Azraile]

Like I said you should consider the CN type where he will do any evil act for the grater good. Like the doctor on his worst day ..... only like that 24/7

[atemu1234]

Like I said you should consider the CN type where he will do any evil act for the grater good. Like the doctor on his worst day ..... only like that 24/7

Which worst day? There have been a few.

[TandemChelipeds]

Like I said you should consider the CN type where he will do any evil act for the grater good. Like the doctor on his worst day ..... only like that 24/7

If you go this route, I highly recommend watching that Code Geass anime for inspiration. Lelouch Lamperouge, the protagonist, is pretty much this type of character stretched as far as it will go without falling into flat-out evil. He's basically a supervillain, who just happens to be fighting against the evil empire.

[Azraile]

Which worst day? There have been a few.

Genocide of genocidal races, worst days. Lol

[Red Fel]

Making a PC for a new campaign, he's supposed to have been an evil warlord, but was spared by his opponents. Recovering from evil, moving on, is something that he's working on. As such, I need to figure out how to roleplay this. Any tips?

Why yes, I think I'll chime in. Oh, don't look so shocked; being an exceptional villain means knowing how to do a redemption arc.

There are, in my mind, two kinds of "recovering villain": The heel-face-turn villain. He no longer wants to be the bad guy. He wants to be the good guy. The "I don't want to be that guy" villain. He's still Evil, but he doesn't want to be the particular flavor of Evil that he was.
The distinction is important. Both can be compelling, but in completely different ways. Allow me to explain.

First, a lesson in villainy. How a villain is redeemed, and the arc he follows to get there, is informed by his original flavor of Evil. For example, the redemption arc of a sociopath involves learning how to empathize with others; the redemption arc of the purely self-interested thief involves learning how to trust; the redemption arc of the honor-before-reason knight involves learning how to be merciful.

You've told us that he's a formerly CE warlord. The typical archetype for that kind of character is the brutal, savage, bloodthirsty killer; the man who hungers for violence and conquest. You say he was converted by an act of mercy. The question you have to answer, first and foremost, is this: How did that act speak to him? How was it formative? Was he inquisitive? Was the concept of mercy so alien that it made him curious? Did he experience cognitive dissonance from the idea that someone strong enough to beat him was weak enough to spare him? Did they pair their mercy with an act of compassion for a person who had never felt compassion from anyone?

Now, onto the redemption arc. As I mentioned, there are primarily two flavors. The first is the true redeemer - he wants to be Good. This is a hard one, because in order to play it well, you have to have the mindset of an Evil being wanting to become Good. For example, when opponents are spared instead of slaughtered, your character will want to understand why. Not in that annoying "Your human ways are alien to us" way, but in the manner of someone desperate to understand, struggling to grasp how he can be a better person. Expect to spend a lot of time sitting down with the party Cleric, asking him to teach you about virtue.

Things to work on would include acting without thinking (e.g. taking things, hitting people), then being told that what you did was wrong, and being really, sincerely sorry but not knowing how to express it. If the party rolls their eyes every time you steal candy from a baby, you're doing it wrong, but if you get the metaphorical feeling of someone patting your character on the back and saying, "You'll get there," you're doing it right.

The second flavor is the "new kind of Evil" character. He wants to help the heroes. Maybe he even wants to accomplish some Good. But unlike the previous flavor, he's still an Evil person, through and through. The goals have changed, but the person is still the same. He has no problem being Evil, he's just going about it differently. Maybe the act of mercy he received inspired him to learn from the party; maybe he became aware of another Evil character or BBEG with whom he'll need help in dealing; whatever the reason, he'll work with the party, but he'll do it his way. And his way isn't pretty.

A key thing to remember about this archetype is that Evil doesn't mean unfriendly. He may care deeply for the rest of the party. He may consider them friends. This friendship may cause him to engage in non-Evil conduct. But unlike the redeemer, who actively seeks to become Good, any alignment shift this character experiences is entirely accidental, and may even be actively resented by the character.

This character is the dirty hand. He does the things he knows need to be done, but that he recognizes that the party - inhibited as it is by morality - won't do. Consider the scene from Buffy where Giles kills Ben.In the episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, "The Gift," Buffy beats the crap out of an immortal evil goddess named Glory, who inhabits the body of a mortal named Ben. Glory retreats, and the battered Ben collapses. Buffy, exhausted and not wanting to kill a human, rushes away to attend to the gaping hole in reality that recently appeared. Ben is left behind with Buffy's Watcher, Giles. The following dialogue occurs.

Giles: Can you move?

Ben: Need a … a minute. She could’ve killed me.

Giles: No she couldn’t. Never. And sooner or later Glory will re-emerge, and … make Buffy pay for that mercy. And the world with her. Buffy even knows that… and still she couldn’t take a human life.

Giles: She’s a hero, you see. She’s not like us.

Ben: Us?
Then Giles kills him.
This is the kind of character who never leaves the darkness in his heart behind. The kind who, at the end of the campaign, could easily become King of Hell (or some equivalent), and leave the party with a smile and a friendly wave.

So, tell me: Which one strikes your fancy?

[atemu1234]

Why yes, I think I'll chime in. Oh, don't look so shocked; being an exceptional villain means knowing how to do a redemption arc.

There are, in my mind, two kinds of "recovering villain": The heel-face-turn villain. He no longer wants to be the bad guy. He wants to be the good guy. The "I don't want to be that guy" villain. He's still Evil, but he doesn't want to be the particular flavor of Evil that he was.
The distinction is important. Both can be compelling, but in completely different ways. Allow me to explain.

First, a lesson in villainy. How a villain is redeemed, and the arc he follows to get there, is informed by his original flavor of Evil. For example, the redemption arc of a sociopath involves learning how to empathize with others; the redemption arc of the purely self-interested thief involves learning how to trust; the redemption arc of the honor-before-reason knight involves learning how to be merciful.

You've told us that he's a formerly CE warlord. The typical archetype for that kind of character is the brutal, savage, bloodthirsty killer; the man who hungers for violence and conquest. You say he was converted by an act of mercy. The question you have to answer, first and foremost, is this: How did that act speak to him? How was it formative? Was he inquisitive? Was the concept of mercy so alien that it made him curious? Did he experience cognitive dissonance from the idea that someone strong enough to beat him was weak enough to spare him? Did they pair their mercy with an act of compassion for a person who had never felt compassion from anyone?

Now, onto the redemption arc. As I mentioned, there are primarily two flavors. The first is the true redeemer - he wants to be Good. This is a hard one, because in order to play it well, you have to have the mindset of an Evil being wanting to become Good. For example, when opponents are spared instead of slaughtered, your character will want to understand why. Not in that annoying "Your human ways are alien to us" way, but in the manner of someone desperate to understand, struggling to grasp how he can be a better person. Expect to spend a lot of time sitting down with the party Cleric, asking him to teach you about virtue.

Things to work on would include acting without thinking (e.g. taking things, hitting people), then being told that what you did was wrong, and being really, sincerely sorry but not knowing how to express it. If the party rolls their eyes every time you steal candy from a baby, you're doing it wrong, but if you get the metaphorical feeling of someone patting your character on the back and saying, "You'll get there," you're doing it right.

The second flavor is the "new kind of Evil" character. He wants to help the heroes. Maybe he even wants to accomplish some Good. But unlike the previous flavor, he's still an Evil person, through and through. The goals have changed, but the person is still the same. He has no problem being Evil, he's just going about it differently. Maybe the act of mercy he received inspired him to learn from the party; maybe he became aware of another Evil character or BBEG with whom he'll need help in dealing; whatever the reason, he'll work with the party, but he'll do it his way. And his way isn't pretty.

A key thing to remember about this archetype is that Evil doesn't mean unfriendly. He may care deeply for the rest of the party. He may consider them friends. This friendship may cause him to engage in non-Evil conduct. But unlike the redeemer, who actively seeks to become Good, any alignment shift this character experiences is entirely accidental, and may even be actively resented by the character.

This character is the dirty hand. He does the things he knows need to be done, but that he recognizes that the party - inhibited as it is by morality - won't do. Consider the scene from Buffy where Giles kills Ben.In the episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, "The Gift," Buffy beats the crap out of an immortal evil goddess named Glory, who inhabits the body of a mortal named Ben. Glory retreats, and the battered Ben collapses. Buffy, exhausted and not wanting to kill a human, rushes away to attend to the gaping hole in reality that recently appeared. Ben is left behind with Buffy's Watcher, Giles. The following dialogue occurs.

Then Giles kills him.
This is the kind of character who never leaves the darkness in his heart behind. The kind who, at the end of the campaign, could easily become King of Hell (or some equivalent), and leave the party with a smile and a friendly wave.

So, tell me: Which one strikes your fancy?

I'd have to go with Giles. I personally enjoyed that scene.

Edit: But I'd have to take cross-class ranks in Perform (Guitar) and Perform (Sing).

[Azraile]

There is also the forced to be good but really isn't. Which also includes the acting good but isnt.

Think my suggestion falls into a middle ground between the two types. The kind that TRIES to turn around, but can't shake the fact the are evil.... just end up with a truly evil antihero that wants to do right but dose so in the worst of ways.

[Red Fel]

I'd have to go with Giles. I personally enjoyed that scene.

Edit: But I'd have to take cross-class ranks in Perform (Guitar) and Perform (Sing).

Everyone should. Just ask Doctor Horrible.

Basically, then, you've got a character who never truly becomes Good. Be very firm on that point. Being Good means being selfless, compassionate, a shining paragon of blah blah blah. At least that's how your character will see it, and he doesn't want any of that; it's a sucker's game.

Your character may want friendship. It's okay to give him a few moments of vulnerability. Perhaps his background involves your typical "grew up on the streets" story.
Where I grew up... It was one of those towns what ain't got a name. Not that it even deserved one. People'd just as soon kick you in the teeth as say "Good morning." Didn't have no nice house, or good food, or people watchin' out for me. My pa taught me to take what you could from the people who couldn't protect it; my ma and her good left hand taught me what happened to you if you got caught. Ain't nobody ever given me nothin' for nothin'; everything I have, I have because I took it. Scared some people, beat others, killed others; did what I had to do. People gave me things because I made 'em, or because they feared me, or wanted to be my friend, but everything had a price tag attached. And everybody paid for what they took, even me.

And then this guy comes along. Coulda killed me. Prolly shoulda. I ain't no saint, that's for d***ed sure. World would've been a better place without me. And this guy coulda done it. And instead... He lets me live. He don't ask for nothin'. He don't make no demands, don't steal my cash or my horse. He don't mock me, don't torture me or crack wise about my swordplay. He just... Looks at me. And it ain't just pity in his eyes, or I'd've knocked him down, even if he cut me in two while I tried. Don't nobody pity me. It was like... He was looking at me like I was a person.

In my whole life, ain't nobody looked at me like I was a person. Like I was an animal, or a monster, or invisible, sure... But never like I was a person. I wanted... I wanted to feel that again.

So maybe he has a soft side. But that doesn't make him a Good person. He still kills people. Takes what he wants, and sees no problem with that. He'll tone it down for the party - not because he wants to be good, but because he wants to be around them, and making trouble for them will make it difficult for them to keep him around.

By the same token, he does what he believes needs to be done. Remember that, as an Evil character, he has a different metric of right and wrong than the party has. He believes that the ends justify the means. If the party is facing a hostage situation, a Good character will do what it takes to save the hostages; an Evil character knows that the only way the hostages will be truly safe is if the hostage-taker is dead, even if that means a few hostages have to die to get there.

Your best roleplaying tool is doing things that make the party forget that you're Evil, and then doing things to remind them. I don't mean mood whiplash or a moral revolving door. I mean doing things that are nice, but not technically Good - taking care of kids, treating a dog nicely, showing your emotional vulnerabilities to the party. And then, when confronted with a moral situation, doing the Evil-but-effective thing. Again, I don't mean cartoonishly Evil that serves no purpose - I mean cold, calculated, ruthlessly efficient bad guy stuff. Stuff that will make the party stare at you in shock - but this guy played with a puppy! - until you remind them of the E on your character sheet.

If necessary, you can approach N. It's not illegal; it makes great development. But you can never truly approach G; a Good character is one who has limits, whose morality creates lines he cannot cross. Your character cannot create those lines; he refuses to limit himself. Why should he? His lack of limits ensures that his friends can succeed. Isn't that the best gift he can give them - victory, at any price?

[Azraile]

They are right about code geas as a good e xsample for an evil goodguy but he is lawful evil not choatic evil

Chaotic evil also believes in people being free and being able to do what they want. Including being free to be good or evil

But this also means he would likely kill prisoners for example.... not because there bad people and he's trying to act good but because there more free dead than spending life in jail..so there better of...he's being helpful lol

[Renen]

To be honest, the protagonist of Code Geass is (in my opinion) chaotic neutral.
He has a noble goal in mind, but (and I actually agree with most if not all of his methods) he uses any method to achieve his goal. Hell, his master plan involves dominating thw whole world in order to cause a utopia (and the good kind, not a dystopia). So you can have someone who is partially recovered. He will have good... end in mind. But the means by which the end is accomplished could be very very questionable, but very very effective.

[Azraile]

Lawful neutral maybe..... but decently not chaotic anything. His main goal is more revenge too, utopia is more an ultimate circulation he would like to reach. People hold the guy up to much some times like the guy from death note. Yah there is some good somewhere in there goals, but they are acting out these actions for there own reasons not the grater good.

Code geas guy wants revenge for all that was done to the people of his nation. He wants people to pay for what they did and not in the Bing justifies kinda way but the eye for an eye way.

The death note guy becomes convinced he knows what's better for people and sees himself as a god of justice a decider of what is wrong and right.... and on that path to the kinda guy that kills people for jaywalking.

These people are not good poeple.

[atemu1234]

I'm debating having this as a backstory: He's a sociopath, a cold-blooded killer. He managed to gain significant political power simply by being ruthless. But he never really understood good or evil, he had no empathy for anyone. But he was forces to telepathically connect to one of his victims, experiencing something akin to empathy for the first time. He hasn't really stopped being bad (he has no clue how) but he's begun to gauge his actions based on the people he adventures with's standards.

[Red Fel]

To be honest, the protagonist of Code Geass is (in my opinion) chaotic neutral.
He has a noble goal in mind, but (and I actually agree with most if not all of his methods) he uses any method to achieve his goal. Hell, his master plan involves dominating thw whole world in order to cause a utopia (and the good kind, not a dystopia). So you can have someone who is partially recovered. He will have good... end in mind. But the means by which the end is accomplished could be very very questionable, but very very effective.

Yeah. That's the thing about the protagonist of Code Geass - to him, everybody is a pawn, to be manipulated into his ultimate objective, or to be removed from the board if they become an obstacle. Any "warm and fuzzy" he has is purely an act. (Except for one person, but that ended... Badly.)

This character? You want him to have a nice side. A real one, not just an act. He's not manipulating the party towards his goals, he's enjoying the benefits of being around people and learning to respect them as equals. He may not appreciate their limitations, but he'll respect them, at least until he finds that his way is the best way. You're not looking at somebody who wants to lead the party around by the nose; if anything, it sounds like the other way around.

An extreme caricature of this concept is actually Belkar; he's a devious, bloodthirsty little monster, but the party keeps him around because (1) he's useful in a fight, and (2) it's better than letting him run free unsupervised. You want to tone that down, just a bit. Not quite so murderhappy. Specifically, you want to add (3) they actually like him, and (4) he's not a complete monster. Yes, you want to be useful, and yes, you want them to realize that in some ways you're simply a caged beast, and they hold the leash, but you also want the rest of the party to see your PC as a person, not just a weapon, and to hold the leash because they care, not just to protect the world at large from your wrath.

Going back to Giles, who in the illustration above was, at best, Neutral, the party kept him around because he was useful and because they cared about him. He was father-figure, mentor, friend. He knew all the books, researched the magic and the demons and what-not, had the valuable contacts. They were upset when they found out about his misbegotten youth, but forgiving because of who he was to them. He did some frankly disturbing things at times, but he did it all to protect them. In at least one case, he directly opposed one of them (although, to be fair, she was pretty freaking Evil at the time). Giles was a good friend, but not a good person. In fact, much of the person he became was based upon trying to be a better person than he had been in his youth ("Ripper"). That's good inspiration for this character; he can never change his goal-oriented mindset, can never truly be a decent human being, but he can at least surround himself with good people and help them to do good.

And occasionally he'll slip up and murder someone helpless. But it was for the greater good, and the party doesn't have to know, right? Right?

[Azraile]

What your talking about is called anti social personality disorder go watch Dexter... lol. This is exactly the type of thing you are talking about. People with APD can't really be "good" there brain is not wired in a way they understand the archetype.

People with this mental condition do not feel any emotions that relate to other people or thing. They are incapable of love, carrying, ccomrodery, and the like..... there minds do not have nor do they understand these emotions therwvtotaly alien concepts. These people are often quite smart though and will learn to mimic these emotions but they will never fell them.

Beck even a telepathic bond would not work the way you might think.... it wouldn't make them feel empathy for them.... it would make them feel emotions because with the bond this person is an extension of themselves. People with APD have normal emotions in relative to themselves. If you do something nice for them they are happy but not grateful. If you hurt them or damage there property they will be angry but not hateful. Positive and negative it don't matter they can't feel an emtiom tied to another person.. just themselves.

Look it up... it fits perfectly. And the show is a grate e xsample as its about a guy with APD that was adopted by a cop after his parents were killed. He showed sings of APD and violent murderous tendencies at an early age. So he rose him to channel these urges unto killing bad people. So he grows up a serial killer that kills serial killers. Lol

He tries throughout the show to be a good person and a normal person and even tries to have a family.

[Flickerdart]

He was Chaotic Evil. What alignment he is now kind of depends on how I roleplay him. It just has to be good. I'm interested in playing him as the same guy but playing for the "good" team now. Maybe I should go with Chaotic/Lawful Neutral, because I'd like him to pull the doctor line (see above) right before he kills a prisoner or something.
Have you considered sliding the other way on the alignment grid? After all, this isn't just a person who was working for bad guys and is now working for good guys. This is a person who was evil to the core. It's really easy for him to realize that the goals he used to have are wrong, but it will be a lot harder for him to fix his methods, because death and destruction is very much a part of him, most likely a part that he enjoys and is very good at.

He's also probably not very good at knowing what's Good. Being steeped in evil for so long, he has to have someone tell him that killing or torturing prisoners is wrong, because it's just the way things have been done and he has no reason to suspect that they do it differently over in Goodlandia. Read some stuff about different cultural norms some time - how Germans as a society are very reserved and find Americans to be obnoxiously loud and much too forward - and then apply that to this guy, who lived in a Chaotic Evil society that, I would imagine, didn't really have much in the way of peaceful relations with other nations.

Since he thinks Chaotic Evil acts are normal, he expects others to perform them too. Thus, when greeted with warmth and honestly, he would be paranoid and rude, because in the world he's used to, politeness is a sign of submission and the appearance of hospitality is a trap. He's very likely to refuse a hot meal and a soft bed from even the people he just saved, because while he understands that he should be doing good deeds, he has absolutely no reason to believe that anybody else (save, perhaps, for the people who turned him onto the path of righteousness) would do the same thing.

Honestly, I think you would be wrong to change his alignment, at least at first. He may want to do better now, but until he's internalized it, he should remain Chaotic, Evil, or both. The source of any Good actions he performs is external, not internal. Without his new allies, he wouldn't know the first thing about how to do good deeds, and wouldn't know that he doesn't know.

[Seto]

@Red Fel : I thoroughly enjoy your posts about Evil and roleplaying in general (though I do disagree from time to time). Probably already told you that. But if you're a Buffy fan on top of that... well... They just became the most awesome thing ever ! :smallbiggrin:
BUFFY FOR THE WIN !!

[Azraile]

wiki on disorder

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

wiki on show

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dexter_%28TV_series%29

[Slipperychicken]

Questions:
What did the warlord do that was so bad? A complete list of vices and crimes would be excellent.
Why did the warlord do those things in the first place? How did he justify/rationalize it?
What happened to make him try to change?
Why didn't he try to change earlier?
How did others perceive the warlord before his attempt at redemption?
How do others perceive the warlord during his attempt at redemption?
Are there allies, rivals, peers, friends, or family members who think he's weaker for trying to be redeemed? Are there people who respect him more now? Who are they?
Who believes his attempt at redemption is a ruse? Who thinks he's sincere?

[Renen]

Yeah. That's the thing about the protagonist of Code Geass - to him, everybody is a pawn, to be manipulated into his ultimate objective, or to be removed from the board if they become an obstacle. Any "warm and fuzzy" he has is purely an act. (Except for one person, but that ended... Badly.)


He actually really cared about 3 people. For one it went badly because he made a mistake (and caused a massacre), for another because he was not paying attention to people around him (and caused said person to get shot) and he never stopped caring about his sister. And its kinda funny, he was actually completely **** at manipulating those 3 people, because he cared. I called him out as chaotic, because aside from his one goal, he didnt have any other rules really.

[Trilby]

I'm debating having this as a backstory: He's a sociopath, a cold-blooded killer. He managed to gain significant political power simply by being ruthless. But he never really understood good or evil, he had no empathy for anyone. But he was forces to telepathically connect to one of his victims, experiencing something akin to empathy for the first time. He hasn't really stopped being bad (he has no clue how) but he's begun to gauge his actions based on the people he adventures with's standards.

Ok, what you're describing here sounds a lot like Hannibal (from the TV show), only without all the murdering. And working with and being fascinated by an empath (Will), instead of experiencing it himself. In the series there's an extended flirtation from both Will and Hannibal, to lure the other to their side, fully knowing what the other is. Eventually, though, neither wants to can change, so... we get a compelling horror/drama out of it. Dat finale... :smallbiggrin:

If you want an example of the psychology of being a bad guy, having (had) fun with being a bad guy, and attempting to understand those crazy 'good guys' around you, Hannibal really is trying to, at first, blend in (if only not to get caught). I'd give that show a couple of hours, in order to get into the mindset. How to actually make the change and stick with it though, that's something you won't get from Hannibal. It is however, a great example of a psychopath fascinated with someone other than himself.

[atemu1234]

Ok, what you're describing here sounds a lot like Hannibal (from the TV show), only without all the murdering. And working with and being fascinated by an empath (Will), instead of experiencing it himself. In the series there's an extended flirtation from both Will and Hannibal, to lure the other to their side, fully knowing what the other is. Eventually, though, neither wants to can change, so... we get a compelling horror/drama out of it. Dat finale... :smallbiggrin:

If you want an example of the psychology of being a bad guy, having (had) fun with being a bad guy, and attempting to understand those crazy 'good guys' around you, Hannibal really is trying to, at first, blend in (if only not to get caught). I'd give that show a couple of hours, in order to get into the mindset. How to actually make the change and stick with it though, that's something you won't get from Hannibal. It is however, a great example of a psychopath fascinated with someone other than himself.

Frankly, to answer a few questions about the character, here's what I've got:

I decided to opt for a freudian excuse, if one that doesn't really excuse all his evil actions. Born in a wartorn commonland between three relatively small empires, his family was enslaved and put to work mining iron. He was three when this happened. His mother was killed when he was four, his father when he was five, and all the family he had left was his younger brother.
The guards for his particular mine decided that they would recruit him to act as a taskmaster. He was spared from being whipped simply because he was willing to do so to others. He remained, at this point, (age 14) relatively stable and moral, doing no more than he had to do, and sneaking food to his brother and some other prisoners.
When he was seventeen, he was found sneaking food (see above) and was ordered to kill his brother. When he refused, he was chained to a wall and his brother was tortured to death just a few feet away from him.
Following this, he was not the same. He probably had something akin to a psychotic break; no longer able to deal with the evil and harm around him, he internalized it. Not caring for his own life, he attacked the guards. Through shear luck he managed to kill a guard and steal his weapon, and managed to kill most of the people stationed there. But rather than turn the slaves free or simply blame the guards (knowing one of the slaves had ratted him out, not knowing which) he then killed the prisoners.
This bloody conflict earned him a reputation. He was known as "Non Peradona" in the nation to which he was enslaved, and his reputation soon attracted followers. These followers soon became soldiers, and these soldiers became an army. Soon he amassed enough power that he was worse than even the nations he was enslaved by, carving a kingdom from the flesh, blood and bone of civilians and enemies alike, killing everyone in his path.
But a nation from the north, Tawnos, soon heard of his exploits and sent an army to stop him from advancing further. One of the generals (another of the PCs) lead the final charge, and was able to enter single combat with him. Non Peradona almost won, but a cleric cast a homebrewed spell, "Baleful Telepathy", forcing him to link with his opponent, see the horrors his actions had wreaked, and it broke him. He was taken prisoner, and was remanded into the custody of the paladin who defeated him, to "rehabilitate" him. He still has little to no morality of his own, using the paladin who he adventures with as a sort of "moral compass".


That's what I've got so far.

[Vhaidara]

1. Red Fel, you have a truly terrifying amount of insight into the mind of an evil character.

2. I feel your character could very strongly follow the progression of CE->NE->LE->LN->LG, stopping when you feel he's gone far enough. I would personally be inclined to stop him at LE for a while. At that point, he's learned to control himself and be more methodical. His goals are loftier, but he is still desensitized to the violence that he uses. He might not realize he's going to far until someone calls him on it. As in, legitimately doesn't realize he's gone from yelling at the prisoner he's interrogating to striking the prisoner until he pulls back his fist and the paladin grabs his arm.

[atemu1234]

2. I feel your character could very strongly follow the progression of CE->NE->LE->LN->LG, stopping when you feel he's gone far enough. I would personally be inclined to stop him at LE for a while. At that point, he's learned to control himself and be more methodical. His goals are loftier, but he is still desensitized to the violence that he uses. He might not realize he's going to far until someone calls him on it. As in, legitimately doesn't realize he's gone from yelling at the prisoner he's interrogating to striking the prisoner until he pulls back his fist and the paladin grabs his arm.

I feel like CN should be somewhere in that progression: he's learning morals, not laws, after all. He doesn't want to be a paladin, he wants to learn what it's like to not be evil. Probably something in the paladin reminds him of his brother or something like that. The lawful evil makes sense, though, but one doesn't need to be a devil to be a noble demon, after all (that pun made me want to kill myself, but still).

[Vhaidara]

Meh, that was probably my bias toward LE showing. And it doesn't have to be him learning laws. It's him learning to be smarter about things. It partially goes off of the difference between the codes for a Paladin of Slaughter ("KILLMURDERMAIMBURN!") and for a Paladin of Tyranny ("I'll get the job done, no matter who or what is in my way").

[atemu1234]

Meh, that was probably my bias toward LE showing. And it doesn't have to be him learning laws. It's him learning to be smarter about things. It partially goes off of the difference between the codes for a Paladin of Slaughter ("KILLMURDERMAIMBURN!") and for a Paladin of Tyranny ("I'll get the job done, no matter who or what is in my way").

Nah. I kind of want this character to be legitimately trying to change, for a change. I'm sick of having static characters; I want to finally have one that really develops over the course of a story.

[XmonkTad]

But a nation from the north, Tawnos, soon heard of his exploits and sent an army to stop him from advancing further. One of the generals (another of the PCs) lead the final charge, and was able to enter single combat with him. Non Peradona almost won, but a cleric cast a homebrewed spell, "Baleful Telepathy", forcing him to link with his opponent, see the horrors his actions had wreaked, and it broke him. He was taken prisoner, and was remanded into the custody of the paladin who defeated him, to "rehabilitate" him. He still has little to no morality of his own, using the paladin who he adventures with as a sort of "moral compass".

Ah, here is your key. What exactly did he see when he was under the effect of "Baleful Telepathy"? Was it a single innocent he saw getting murdered or tortured, or was it the total sum of his crimes being made visible?

If it's just one incident, what was it? How did it reach a man so far gone?

If it was the "sum" of his crimes, why didn't he just kill himself when he found out? Why go on living when your whole existence has been revealed to be a nightmare?

If he is using the paladin as a moral compass, how "off" is his own moral compass? Can he be left alone without beating or murdering someone? This is pretty much the defining personality trait of your character, so (a lot of) your RP will revolve around how you act as soon as the paladin steps away, or what it takes to cause you to fly off the handle even when the paladin is around.

[atemu1234]

Ah, here is your key. What exactly did he see when he was under the effect of "Baleful Telepathy"? Was it a single innocent he saw getting murdered or tortured, or was it the total sum of his crimes being made visible?

If it's just one incident, what was it? How did it reach a man so far gone?

If it was the "sum" of his crimes, why didn't he just kill himself when he found out? Why go on living when your whole existence has been revealed to be a nightmare?

If he is using the paladin as a moral compass, how "off" is his own moral compass? Can he be left alone without beating or murdering someone? This is pretty much the defining personality trait of your character, so (a lot of) your RP will revolve around how you act as soon as the paladin steps away, or what it takes to cause you to fly off the handle even when the paladin is around.

He's a complete sociopath, with no morals. At all. While some might say this is true neutral, he's also got a tendency to committing evil acts. He was forced to view the entirety of his crimes, not just the paladin's point of view. But for the first time, he also viewed himself. It reached him because he wasn't always like this, and he didn't kill himself because he is mildly repentant, but doesn't know how to repent (because without the paladin around, he has no morals).

[Slipperychicken]

I decided to opt for a freudian excuse, if one that doesn't really excuse all his evil actions. Born in a wartorn commonland between three relatively small empires, his family was enslaved and put to work mining iron. He was three when this happened. His mother was killed when he was four, his father when he was five, and all the family he had left was his younger brother.

So what does he say if someone asks him why he did it? What does he tell himself?

[atemu1234]

So what does he say if someone asks him why he did it? What does he tell himself?

He has legitimately moved on from using his brother as an excuse; it was basically an exploited trope for him mentally, he viewed himself as avenging his brother's death, but once he was forced to face his own actions, he basically realized he could not justify what he did. In my imagination, personality-wise, he is quite frankly broken. He doesn't know what to do to make up for what he's done (but he is not suicidal) and is legitimately trying to learn what "good" is. He is so thoroughly damaged from traumas, however, it is impossible to not feel a little sorry for him, even if he doesn't deserve it.