How Chaotic is Chaotic Evil? Or let's be the guy who pretends he's good

[whisperwind1]

Hey all so I have this idea for an Eberron character, and I thought it would be funny to play a straight up evil character. I've never one it in the context of D&D and since one guy is already evil, I thought why not add one more to the party (DM's ok with it btw)? But I want to make sure the character isn't going to be disruptive, so i'm asking what qualifies as Chaotic evil (the chosen alignment)?

The Character is an elf rogue/master spy who is something of a freelance agent of Valenar, with a very specific MO. His personal mission is to go around, seek out those who are or have done wrong to Valenar, and ruin them. I don't mean kill, I mean undermine, sabotage and otherwise destroy them socially. He does this to anyone worse crossed Valenar, regardless of alignment, morality, status or anything else. Let's say there's this wealthy merchant who sold weapons to a faction that used them in battle against the Valenar Elves. He's a businessman and otherwise nice guy, dedicated family man and tries to avoid morally questionable things. My character would bomb his warehouse, poison his stocks and circulate documents implementing him in fraud (even if he's innocent). Or a Paladin of the Silver Flame declares Valenar elves to be heretics and calls for people to strike at them for their raids. My guy would arrange for evidence to come to light that this guy is secretly a satanist or worse and get him excommunicated.

Is this the behaviour of a Chaotic Evil character? Keep n mind he behaves like an entirely nice guy around the party and is reasonable in all things. No one is supposed to know about what he does.

[Feint's End]

If evil at all this sounds like lawful evil. Chaotic evil guys are more random ... They don't have an agenda. This guy however has his own rules of evil. Sounds lawful to me.

However you should note that alignment discussions are always borked because the system is pretty bad.

[Segev]

The CE-with-an-agenda is still a free-wheeler in his pursuit of it. He can forgo immediate gratification for longer-term gain, but even the most manipulative and clever of them will be playing Xanatos Speed Chess rather than running a Xanatos Gambit.

They do tend to be the poster-children for "might makes right;" if they care about "right" and "wrong" at all, they tend to have a philosophy that states that they're strong and therefore they have the right to do whatever their strength enables, and those who are weak have no right to complain. The only right to complain is inherent in the power to stop what you're complaining about.

They can have plans, even long-term ones. They just don't tend to rely on structures more sturdy than "I will BREAK you if you don't do things my way," because they have limited faith in anything that is not backed up by threat of force.

They are fine with lying and deception, and building houses of cards out of the same, but they're aware that they have to make everybody else believe that there are swords of damocles hanging over everybody's heads if they don't comply with his schemes...or that they're all getting what they want.

Unlike the LE guy, he isn't going to expect all his schemes to play out in an orderly fashion. While both might have plans within plans and backups galore, the CE planner is planning to wipe out those plans of his which start being problematic, rather than intricately designing each to interact like clockwork with redundant backup gears.

The LE guy MIGHT foment chaos in order to make room for his new order. The CE guy MIGHT build complex structures in order to ensure an easier time breaking them down.

But in the end, the CE guy doesn't care about anything other than being on top of the steaming pile of destruction, while the LE guy actually wants a functioning structure to manipulate when all is said and done.

[Telonius]

I'd call it Neutral Evil with strong Chaotic leanings.

Whenever trying to figure out the alignment of a specific character, my big questions are: How far out of his way would he go, to uphold (or flout) traditions and hierarchies? How far out of his way would he go to hurt (or help) people?

He's pretty clearly evil; he goes quite a bit out of his way to cause pain. As for the Law/Chaos side of thing, he doesn't seem to have a clear leaning one way or the other. He's willing to put up a front to get along in society. (That doesn't necessarily mean lack of chaos, it just means he isn't Chaotic Stupid.) He's willing to do things that aren't honest (planting evidence) as long as it's not traceable back to him. I think that's really the key that prevents him from being Lawful; not so much that he's unwilling to break the law, but that he's unwilling to be caught breaking the law. So I guess the question would be: just how far would he be willing to go, assuming nothing can be traced to him? Answer that, and you probably have your answer for Neutral or Chaotic.

[dascarletm]

I believe your character definitely qualifies on the evil aspect, however Law vs. Chaos is a little hazier.

I can see this character concept being played out as LE, NE, or CE depending on how you go about your goals. I always like to ask players a few different questions to help them get a feel of law vs chaos.

Do you have any internal rules or code when it comes to how or who he ruins these people? Of course he has a bit of a "code" if you will: Ruin those who seek to harm the Valenar. However the motivation around this code and how you uphold it will be the driving factor here.

You can be working for an organization or a cause and still be chaotic, but usually that means you are doing it for your own reasons. Lawful people follow rules, traditions, orders, etc. because they are rules, traditions, etc. They like structure and order in their life, and they provide that for them, they want to fit. Chaotic people can follow these things, but they do it because they personally enjoy or like the thing at hand.

The biggest folly people have when it comes to describing chaotic is they think it means you are random or don't follow rules or something like that. Chaotic people think for themselves. They make their own decisions. To be chaotic is to make decisions based on the situation, and to never do something "because."

Three brothers, all named Johnny, have sworn their sword to King Johnny. Each for different reasons. Johnny Chaotic does so because he believes that the king is a person he wants to help, and swearing an oath is just some formality to let him do what he wants. Johnny Neutral feels similarly to Johnny Chaotic but also sees some value in the authority given to King Johnny due to his title. Johnny Lawful may put some stock into his feelings towards the king, but he is mostly concerned with his right to rule. The king gives Johnny Lawful, Johnny Neutral, and Johnny Chaotic the same order. Johnny Lawful does it because he has sworn an oath, and he must uphold his word, his oath. Johnny Chaotic thinks to himself on the order. If he finds it something he agrees with then he will probably do it. If it is not something he would agree with he will either deceive the king and make it seem to be accomplished or he will renounce his oath and leave. Johnny Neutral will take stock in both aspects.

[whisperwind1]

I'd call it Neutral Evil with strong Chaotic leanings.

Whenever trying to figure out the alignment of a specific character, my big questions are: How far out of his way would he go, to uphold (or flout) traditions and hierarchies? How far out of his way would he go to hurt (or help) people?

I'd say when the character sets out to wreck his target's life, he wants to make it as complete as possible in the time he has (part of an adventuring party) He'll go straight for the thing that will cause the most damage and drive it in like a jackhammer.

[whisperwind1]

I believe your character definitely qualifies on the evil aspect, however Law vs. Chaos is a little hazier.

I can see this character concept being played out as LE, NE, or CE depending on how you go about your goals. I always like to ask players a few different questions to help them get a feel of law vs chaos.

Do you have any internal rules or code when it comes to how or who he ruins these people? Of course he has a bit of a "code" if you will: Ruin those who seek to harm the Valenar. However the motivation around this code and how you uphold it will be the driving factor here.

You can be working for an organization or a cause and still be chaotic, but usually that means you are doing it for your own reasons. Lawful people follow rules, traditions, orders, etc. because they are rules, traditions, etc. They like structure and order in their life, and they provide that for them, they want to fit. Chaotic people can follow these things, but they do it because they personally enjoy or like the thing at hand.

Really he doesn't have a specific MO, he sees what's there and takes the thing he assumes will cause the most damage. As for WHY he does all this in the first place, its tempting to say that he just enjoys the challenge of it. Like all Valenar Elves he considers himself a warrior, just on a different battlefield and with a different sort of opponent. He's doing this to prove that he is superior, that he's the proverbial "best there is at what he does" for his own gratification.

[Telonius]

I'd say when the character sets out to wreck his target's life, he wants to make it as complete as possible in the time he has (part of an adventuring party) He'll go straight for the thing that will cause the most damage and drive it in like a jackhammer.

So, Disjunction? :smallbiggrin: But yeah, from that it sounds like there's not too many depths he wouldn't sink to, and not too many taboos he wouldn't break. That sounds pretty chaotic to me.

[NecessaryWeevil]

If his motivation is the protection of his nation, is he necessarily evil?

[dascarletm]

If his motivation is the protection of his nation, is he necessarily evil?

Yes This is more characters