Hidden Villain in my Party (and what his alignment would be)

[Elder Tom]

Hi, everyone!

I need some advice. We're a group of 9 people (which is A LOT), but only 3 of us want to DM, so instead of doing three individual story arcs, we decided to connect them together to form one big story. To hook the first arc with the second (of which I'm the DM), we were thinking of making my PG a hidden villain in the party.

The story would be something like this: the benevolent king of a peaceful kingdom is almost killed in an assassination attempt. He quickly becomes paranoid, and is convinced by a "secret admirer" that without him his kingdom will crumble and that only he is capable of ruling it. The admirer tells the king to gather up the most brilliant wizards, clerics and druids in the realm and have them work on a way to make him immortal, so that he may never step off the throne. Of course, this experiment is risky and unethical, and most refuse, so the king has them captured in secret and forced to work for him. However, a team of prisoners manages to escape and forms a rebellion in the city. This is where the party of heroes kicks in. They are under the employment of the king, and they have to find the rebels and capture them (but they don't know what the rebellion is REALLY about). Hopefully, since it is a group of mostly good-natured people, they will change their mind upon discovering the truth and go against the king.

The plan is to have my Bard be the secret admirer (and the one who attempted at the king's life). He is extremely devoted to the art of storytelling, so much that he is willing to spread disorder and chaos to "create a story"; he is also using the king to get immortality for himself, since he genuinely believes that without him, the realm will eventually go back to its boring, uneventful peace. Upon the end of the first DM's arc, my Bard will reveal himself as the man behind the whole thing and become the main antagonist of my arc.

Do you think this could work? It's slightly complicated, but we thought it could provide a nice plot twist at the end and help tie our arcs together. Also, what alignment would fit the Bard? I was thinking Neutral Evil, but he really thinks he's doing a favor to the realm by shaking things up, so I don't know if that would fit him.

Thanks for the help!

[Gurka]

Well, take his own point of view out of it. Alignment in D&D is semi objective, in so much as it is based on the subjective view of somebody who is lawfully good.

My thought is that he qualifies as lawful evil, since his actions are a means to an end, not the end themselves. In my mind, alignment falls out like this...

Lawful - the end is what's important, and if it be a worthy goal, any actions (even where questionable) that forward that goal are justified. This person will kill few to save many, or do good deeds to allow the opportunity to do greater evil.

Chaos - your actions now are what matter most. No greater ideal can justify actions which betray your core beliefs. This person never passes on the chance to do evil (no matter how great or petty) if they see opportunity and the ability to get away with it. This person can't sacrifice an innocent even if doing so would save many more later.

Kirk is chaotic, Spock is lawful.

Neutral however weighs each situation uniquely, and does whatever seems correct at the time.

The good and evil part is pretty self explanatory I think.

[Hytheter]

Do you think this could work? It's slightly complicated, but we thought it could provide a nice plot twist at the end and help tie our arcs together. Also, what alignment would fit the Bard? I was thinking Neutral Evil, but he really thinks he's doing a favor to the realm by shaking things up, so I don't know if that would fit him.

Just because you think what you're doing is right, doesn't mean it is. Deliberately causing widespread mayhem and enslaving people are pretty evil acts no matter your justification.
So definitely evil. Law-Chaos wise, you could potntially posit that his devotion to the "laws" of storytelling gives him a lawful slant, but I'd say Neutral is closer to accurate.

Alignment isn't really that important though anyway, so it doesn't really matter if what you put down isn't quite accurate.

[MaxWilson]

Alignment isn't really that important though anyway, so it doesn't really matter if what you put down isn't quite accurate.

This. I don't even write alignment on my character sheets in 5E. I have opinions sometimes on a given character's alignment, but none that are worth recording as game stats.

[Gurka]

This. I don't even write alignment on my character sheets in 5E. I have opinions sometimes on a given character's alignment, but none that are worth recording as game stats.

Mostly I agree with the two above, reserving alignments for NPCs, particularly of the supernatural variety.

It might still be appropriate since that character will BE an NPC, however. Certain abilities and spells still interact with alignment, so it's probably good to decide on ahead of time so your based are covered.

[CubeB]

I honestly would say Neutral Evil. He is mainly concerned with his own end. That is, his story and immortality.

He is willing to overthrow the rule of law and stability and doesn't really want to replace it with tyranny, so he probably isn't lawful. Plus, he's not just engaging in petty evil, so he's too directed for chaos.

The good news is that a lot of effects that targeted alignment in past editions are now focused on explicitly supernatural things. A paladin's divine sense won't unveil your secret. Nor would you be trapped by a Magic Circle.

[MaxWilson]

Mostly I agree with the two above, reserving alignments for NPCs, particularly of the supernatural variety.

It might still be appropriate since that character will BE an NPC, however. Certain abilities and spells still interact with alignment, so it's probably good to decide on ahead of time so your based are covered.

Which spells do you have in mind? Note that Detect Evil no longer functions off alignment, and neither does a Paladin's detection ability. Someone recently mentioned that Sprites can detect actual alignment but I haven't verified in the MM...

[Celcey]

It seems to me he's a True Neutral. He may be causing bad things to happen, but he's not doing it for bad reasons. He just wants to further his own goals, and this happens to be the best way to do it.

[Shining Wrath]

This can work very well. Congratulations on your creativity.

As to the alignment of the bard, I suggest asking some questions about him.

What are his virtues? I'd say he's clearly patient, a long term thinker, and brave.
What are his vices? Betrayal of a Lord (the King), also the party (in the end) - per Dante, we're talking lowest circle of hell for that one. Astonishingly self-centered, where bringing an entire kingdom down in flames is not too small a price to pay for him to gain immortality. There's a certain arrogance involved in thinking he can run this scheme and escape notice by all those clerics and wizards.
What lawful characteristics does he have? He's got to have some organizational skills to pull this off, maybe he's got good self-discipline.
What chaotic characteristics does he have? He's improvising on the fly, he's totally unimpressed by the idea of loyalty to the kingdom or any other organization.

I'm voting for either neutral or chaotic evil. I'd also play him as a bit of a loose cannon in the party - the guy who does things before the rest of the party has reached a decision.

[MadGrady]

I would agree that alignment here is not as big a concern, although the point about certain spells does bend towards picking something for sure.

Apart from that, I love the entire concept that you put forth. It sounds like a really engaging and deep backstory that has all sorts of awesome and fun roleplaying possibilities.

I wish you the best of luck, and I hope it turns out well.

[Rezby]

go read the first few chapters of Guilded Age. Your bard sounds like an evil version of Payet Best (who is only a really present main character for chapters 1-5 or so, anyways)