PDA

View Full Version : DM Help How do I corrupt my players?



Trekkin
2015-06-18, 04:33 PM
Right now I'm running a Pathfinder game loosely based around the Way of the Wicked for one of my two usual gaming groups (Group Alpha), and it's going so amazingly well that I'd like to run it for the other at some point(Group Beta). The only issue is that its an evil campaign, and the two react to evil very differently. Group A tends to be rather more stereotypically murderhobo; they're never cruel, but they can be a touch...expedient in their search for fame & fortune. Before the campaign started, we established a gentleman's agreement that we're playing villains, not monsters. Lay siege to the innocent town yes, torture the watchman no.

This works for Group A beautifully, but I have a feeling Group B, being both more concerned with morals and the bigger picture, would instinctively recoil from an adventure path that is, at least initially, "swear fealty to Asmodeus and burn down Camelot." They'd need a reason.

And this is what I need the Playground's help with: corrupting my players until they get past the stigma of "EVIL NOOOO" and start having fun being proactive instead of reactive for once. What circumstances would make you most willing to play a bunch of thoroughly Evil characters setting out to bloody Good's nose? Or, put another way, what's the most Lawful Evil thing you'd be willing to play through a campaign fighting for?

This sounds like a slightly odd question, I know, but the classical alignments are broad for a reason; I'm trying to figure out how to divorce the proactive, pragmatic, decisive and frankly wickedly cool parts of Evil from the more repugnant parts while still presenting them with a clear dichotomy with them on the bad side.

Any thoughts?

ShaneMRoth
2015-06-18, 04:41 PM
Consider the Magnificent Bastard (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MagnificentBastard) trope. Perhaps you could incorporate this concept in your campaign.

5a Violista
2015-06-18, 04:45 PM
Alternatively, (if they're good at keeping IC and OoC beliefs separate) you can have them play characters who incorrectly believe they're doing the right thing. This, obviously, requires some justification why the cosmic powers labeled "Good" and "Evil" are mislabeled.

Edit:
Like, maybe, calling to reference "necessary evil" trope. Could be a belief that there's supreme balance in the universe, and for every evil act they perform in secret, the universe is forced to display an outpouring of Good on other people. Or, that consorting with demons and devils is alright for the "greater good" and all that jazz.

darkscizor
2015-06-18, 04:49 PM
Well, some DMs explain their villian's actions in a way that makes them seem to be for tbe better good- make the PCs feel the same way. Maybe Camelot is a city being corrupted by greed and filled with poverty, making people want to start anew with a different city being built, and maybe Asmodeus isn't as bad as everyone thinks he is.

Then, when they've been tricked and there's no going back, when they've already burnt down Camelot, make them see what they did, with burned corpses in the street and every adventurer in the land north of NE hunting them down. They'll have no choice but to become evil.

Broken Crown
2015-06-18, 05:17 PM
Are you sure you want to do this?

I'm not familiar with "Way of the Wicked," but it sounds as though you're proposing running a campaign with a plot that requires the PCs to be evil, for a group of players that have a clearly expressed desire not to play evil characters. If you try to trick or manipulate the players, I imagine that they'll quickly get wise, feel betrayed and railroaded, and either walk out or sabotage your plot.

If you want your players to be proactive, give them a situation that will make them want to take action. Keep the setting, but kill the plot. Instead, give them a variety of plot hooks that are likely to interest them. They'll take the initiative when they find one they like. That then becomes the plot around which you can build events.

Conversely, nothing is more likely to kill their desire to take the initiative than forcing them into roles which they have no interest in playing. Why would you want to run a campaign that you know in advance your players won't like?

Trekkin
2015-06-18, 05:39 PM
Conversely, nothing is more likely to kill their desire to take the initiative than forcing them into roles which they have no interest in playing. Why would you want to run a campaign that you know in advance your players won't like?

Because I'm lazy.

The campaign as written could in theory be stood on its head and the PCs made chaotic good freedom fighters overturning the evil empire, etc...but that's been done, and more to the point I'd have to go through and rewrite a lot of characters. There's a fascinating and well-written story here, but the problem is that it starts (for reasons that I can't easily extricate from the story itself) at its most morally troubling and gets steadily better.

I'm not trying to trick my players at all. I'm trying to figure out how to most effacaciously accommodate their aversion to the "evil" bits without having to hack everything apart around it. At one pole, I could easily run the adventure as written; at the other, I could rewrite it from the ground up to suit them. I haven't time for the latter and they haven't the desire for the former, so I'm trying to find a happy medium as efficiently as possible.

Keltest
2015-06-18, 05:44 PM
They key to any evil player character is identifying "Whats in it for me?". What are they trying to accomplish? What do they get out of it? Evil doesn't have to be stupid, and they don't even have to do evil all that often. Evil is separated primarily by a disregard for other life, but that doesn't mean they have to go out of their way to antagonize everyone they meet.

They could easily be the villains with good publicity, using good and neutral works to build their reputations so they can take advantage of them later. What makes them evil is their willingness to cross the line when it comes up. They don't go looking for them, and they don't jump across them every time they find them, but they consider crossing it as valid a choice as standing their ground, and will weigh the pros and cons accordingly.

Steampunkette
2015-06-18, 05:59 PM
Simple enough.

The Lesser of Two Evils.

Either they can burn down Camelot with the power Asmodeus gives them, or Asmodeus can ride onto this plane with an army of devils to do it himself... and probably make it into his latest planar Outpost of Hell, complete with a contingent of Hellknights to hold the Fortress-City.

The players get the option of taking the evil power and the time given to them to empty the city of heroes, relics, and innocents, then burn the city down. It holds to the letter of the agreement, if not the intent. Otherwise you can shift the campaign, slightly, and have them trying to stop it from being burned if they go against Asmodeus.

Reskin the various encounters by changing names and descriptions, and have the players being the defense against the forces of evil Asmodeus sends... If they're unwilling to make the pact.

Though, really, once you introduce Asmodeus and make his offer I suggest pausing the game and sliding out of character to discuss your player's choices. If they are willing to go evil then go with it. If they aren't then try to find a middle ground that keeps you from a complete rewrite and keeps them from being railroaded.

Though if you're interested in -really- corrupting them, it's gonna take longer than "Here's Asmodeus and he's giving you an option." You should start with the option to do a minor evil to create a greater good. Take a look at Dark Sun's "Defiling" for an example.

dream
2015-06-18, 06:11 PM
Are you sure you want to do this?

I'm not familiar with "Way of the Wicked," but it sounds as though you're proposing running a campaign with a plot that requires the PCs to be evil, for a group of players that have a clearly expressed desire not to play evil characters. If you try to trick or manipulate the players, I imagine that they'll quickly get wise, feel betrayed and railroaded, and either walk out or sabotage your plot.

If you want your players to be proactive, give them a situation that will make them want to take action. Keep the setting, but kill the plot. Instead, give them a variety of plot hooks that are likely to interest them. They'll take the initiative when they find one they like. That then becomes the plot around which you can build events.

Conversely, nothing is more likely to kill their desire to take the initiative than forcing them into roles which they have no interest in playing. Why would you want to run a campaign that you know in advance your players won't like?
+1 This.

Don't be lazy. It can drive players from the hobby faster than a speeding train. Give them another, more heroic-themed adventure, even if you have to buy another module. The enjoyment of the players pays for the game itself.

Bard1cKnowledge
2015-06-19, 01:57 AM
Make them an offer they can't refuse, such as have the corrupting force tell the fighter he gets a kick butt shiny new sword if he murders a puppy

Bonus points if it wasn't a stray

Mystral
2015-06-19, 02:36 AM
Because I'm lazy.

Just buy a different module, mate. (And that is coming from someone who really does run that AP for two groups at once, at the moment.)

veti
2015-06-19, 03:48 AM
Simple, really. Stop rewarding them for being good.

Almost every campaign I've ever seen has inbuilt motivators designed to help and support people maintaining a good alignment. They'll get help and sympathy from NPCs, trust, very likely freebies and a support network - just for having the letter 'G' somewhere on their character sheet.

Take all that away. Build a world where everyone assumes the PCs are amoral gits who are out for no-one but themselves, and doesn't cut them an inch of slack no matter how much they protest. And where everyone around them is, very visibly, getting away with murder - sometimes literally - and nobody seems to care that much.

If the players really, really want to be good, they still can. It'll just be a bit harder, that's all.

Mystral
2015-06-19, 03:56 AM
Simple, really. Stop rewarding them for being good.

Almost every campaign I've ever seen has inbuilt motivators designed to help and support people maintaining a good alignment. They'll get help and sympathy from NPCs, trust, very likely freebies and a support network - just for having the letter 'G' somewhere on their character sheet.

Take all that away. Build a world where everyone assumes the PCs are amoral gits who are out for no-one but themselves, and doesn't cut them an inch of slack no matter how much they protest. And where everyone around them is, very visibly, getting away with murder - sometimes literally - and nobody seems to care that much.

If the players really, really want to be good, they still can. It'll just be a bit harder, that's all.

This would be impossible without completely rewriting the adventure path. Way of the Wicked is an AP about a group of Evil guys bringing down a lawfull good kingdom and the worship of its equally lawfull good patron god.

ShaneMRoth
2015-06-19, 06:09 AM
...
And this is what I need the Playground's help with: corrupting my players ...

If all else fails, you could offer them a fiddle made of gold...

zeuspeo
2015-06-19, 08:56 AM
Am I missing something here? surely the easiest way is to ask them?

something like "Hey I've got this adventure path id like to run, you start of evil, not baby eating evil but evil none the less"

If they want to play they are forewarned. in my experience Most players are ok as long as they know what they are getting themselves into. Most players enjoy playing evil if they know its coming as opposed to someone ruining a good campaign by going rogue.

If they arnt up for playing evil then you wont waste each others time.

Geddy2112
2015-06-19, 11:12 AM
Be upfront and honest with them, that this is an "evil" campaign but that the players do not have to be CE psychopathic murderhobo cannibal monsters.

Show them that Better Living Through Evil (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BetterLivingThroughEvil) is a thing and that Even Evil Has Standards (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EvenEvilHasStandards).

And just because the party is evil, they don't have to be fighting the most goody two shoes pacifist people and murder them with glee. The necromancer who uses evil to raise the dead but defends the town they call home out of duty. The crime lord who kills other criminals and violent people who threaten to disrupt the order. The person who sacrifices the needs of a few for the benefit of the many. The "end justifies the means" to save the world. Evil people can have very heroic goals and act very heroically, they are just evil due to an innate selfishness and disregard for the value of sentient life.

Segev
2015-06-19, 01:20 PM
What is your goal here?

Do you want to run this module because you think it's fun and they'll enjoy it?
If so, then sell them on the module, including the premise that they're playing bad guys.
Do you want to run a game where the players are the proactive instigators of plot?
If so, then you may be better off with a different module that requires pro-active heroes rather than pro-active villains.


If it's something else, identify that, too. Figure out what it is you want. If they don't want to play villains, don't try to trick or force them; run something else.

Slipperychicken
2015-06-19, 01:22 PM
Couldn't you just have the devil lie to them? He might pretend to be some other entity (maybe a non-evil god or a fae?) and say camelot is run by people who are doing bad things and need to be stopped.

zinycor
2015-06-19, 01:48 PM
Have you asked your players? maybe they will be willing to be as evil as you want them to be if you just ask them to make characters for that specific campaign

Kyberwulf
2015-06-19, 02:46 PM
The fiddle made of gold is a good way..

Just give them stuff... lots of stuff.. magical stuff.. then.. have people come for the stuff. Have them come asking for the stuff at the point of a fireball at first. When the players kill the guys, have them a lot of Magical gear. And slowly start having less powerful people start asking for the stuff, but still in a not nice way. TPK the players, then when you start off a new game... repeat. TPK the players again...

Eventually they will get so used to killing people in "Self defense" that they will just see killing people as the thing to do. Always make sure the people they kill have lot's of valuable gear.

Also, when you describe the actions of npc's, do so in a way that is...incomplete. Explain the action's of a king, but fail to neglect how much of a good person he is. Explain the actions of a evil henchmen in a way that makes him seem like he is a non kaniving, non power hungry individual. You as a DM will take on the roll of a PR agent, or a Media source. Then after awhile, let them in on the secret.

zinycor
2015-06-19, 03:46 PM
The fiddle made of gold is a good way..

Just give them stuff... lots of stuff.. magical stuff.. then.. have people come for the stuff. Have them come asking for the stuff at the point of a fireball at first. When the players kill the guys, have them a lot of Magical gear. And slowly start having less powerful people start asking for the stuff, but still in a not nice way. TPK the players, then when you start off a new game... repeat. TPK the players again...

Eventually they will get so used to killing people in "Self defense" that they will just see killing people as the thing to do. Always make sure the people they kill have lot's of valuable gear.

Also, when you describe the actions of npc's, do so in a way that is...incomplete. Explain the action's of a king, but fail to neglect how much of a good person he is. Explain the actions of a evil henchmen in a way that makes him seem like he is a non kaniving, non power hungry individual. You as a DM will take on the roll of a PR agent, or a Media source. Then after awhile, let them in on the secret.

That seems like a good way to get rid of your players xD

Maglubiyet
2015-06-19, 04:57 PM
Could you have a member or two of Group A join Group B for a time and have them lead the way? It might change up the dynamic enough to allow Group B to let their hair down.

Mystral
2015-06-19, 08:33 PM
Be upfront and honest with them, that this is an "evil" campaign but that the players do not have to be CE psychopathic murderhobo cannibal monsters.

Show them that Better Living Through Evil (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BetterLivingThroughEvil) is a thing and that Even Evil Has Standards (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EvenEvilHasStandards).

And just because the party is evil, they don't have to be fighting the most goody two shoes pacifist people and murder them with glee. The necromancer who uses evil to raise the dead but defends the town they call home out of duty. The crime lord who kills other criminals and violent people who threaten to disrupt the order. The person who sacrifices the needs of a few for the benefit of the many. The "end justifies the means" to save the world. Evil people can have very heroic goals and act very heroically, they are just evil due to an innate selfishness and disregard for the value of sentient life.

The first adventure of the series has the characters break out of a prison for horrible crimes they comitted and then unleash a barbaric horde on an unsuspecting kingdom by sabotaging a stronghold. The second adventure has the same characters resurrect a really powerfull daemon and take a plague able to wipe out said kingdom for good measure.

Don't think that'll work.

Cluedrew
2015-06-19, 08:51 PM
How do I corrupt my players?Now I understand you are probably not trying to turn your players into murders, just the characters, but I think you are approaching this from the wrong angle. Try and get player buy in. If you can then run the campaign, if you can't then don't. There are countless bad DM stories where the DM tries to force a particular story on the players, don't become one of those.

If you are worried about a knee-jerk reaction than maybe offer to play an evil one-shot. You can also use that to test the waters yourself, see if it works with the group. Maybe it wouldn't even if they gave it a honest effort.

In my opinion, if you want all the cool parts of evil, go for a ruthless good guy. Plus, there is the chance of "falling" which in this case makes it a win-win.

Braininthejar2
2015-06-20, 06:44 PM
Revenge is a good excusse to start cutting corners. Just don't overdo it - you want them to hate the antagonists, not you (and I've played with a GM who once made that mistake. It didn't end well)

Red Fel
2015-06-20, 07:24 PM
Ahh, when you want some classy Evil, just dial F for...

... wait, what? You want to run an Evil module for players who don't actually want to play Evil?


Are you sure you want to do this?

I'm not familiar with "Way of the Wicked," but it sounds as though you're proposing running a campaign with a plot that requires the PCs to be evil, for a group of players that have a clearly expressed desire not to play evil characters. If you try to trick or manipulate the players, I imagine that they'll quickly get wise, feel betrayed and railroaded, and either walk out or sabotage your plot.


+1 This.

And +2. Look, I love running Evil characters, Evil campaigns, you name it. "If they asked me, I could write a book," as the lyricist wrote. And if you wanted tips on how to persuade a group of Evil-curious players how to have tons of fun with the forces of darkness, I'd be right there offering juicy tidbits about to make a halfling fricassee.

But you're talking about running a campaign that I don't think your players want to play. I strongly, strongly advise you to sit down with them and talk to them about it. If this is really the module you want to run, and they don't want to play it, then I suggest stepping down as DM for this group and letting them run something else. This isn't the time to show unyielding conviction and principle, chief.

That said...


The first adventure of the series has the characters break out of a prison for horrible crimes they comitted and then unleash a barbaric horde on an unsuspecting kingdom by sabotaging a stronghold. The second adventure has the same characters resurrect a really powerfull daemon and take a plague able to wipe out said kingdom for good measure.

See, I get your objections. I do. The PCs have to do some fairly hideously Evil stuff. I get it.

But here's the thing: You can't make an omelet without committing a few genocides. Just brainstorm with your players about their ideal kingdom. Their dream of a better tomorrow. Then inform them that there's a charmingly idyllic LG kingdom squatting right on top of their better tomorrow, and that if they want to build there they're going to have to burn the place to the ground in a screaming blaze of hellfire first.

It is technically possible for the PCs to run as a group of well-intentioned extremists. Affable and pleasant individuals, with noble goals and ambitions, but who aren't afraid to get their hands dirty. Or in this case, disgustingly filthy with the blood of innocents. But you can persuade them that it's all for the greater good - their greater good, in any case.

That said, performing major acts of Evil isn't always for the faint of heart, or stomach. If they're quite determined in their moral rectitude, you'll find the module quickly derailed. And if that's the case, it actually becomes more work to try to run it. If laziness is your reason for running this module, you'll likely find yourself left with more of a hassle than you had intended.

Talk it out first. But I don't think you'll be running this particular module for this particular group.

Grooke
2015-06-20, 07:36 PM
Plays some "Cards Against Humanity" with them before right before discussing the campaign.


Edit: For clarification, you are trying to "corrupt" your players by convincing them evil isn't that bad out of the game, in order to get their approval to play an evil campaign right?

Braininthejar2
2015-06-20, 08:09 PM
Alternatively, play an evil module with non-evil players just for the fun of seeing how much they can derail it.

goto124
2015-06-20, 09:46 PM
Plays some "Cards Against Humanity" with them before right before discussing the campaign.

Bwahahah.

Also, if they express high levels of discomfort and unwillingness during this card game, it's probably best to avoid the evil campaign.

kardar233
2015-06-21, 12:28 AM
Now I understand you are probably not trying to turn your players into murders, just the characters, but I think you are approaching this from the wrong angle. Try and get player buy in. If you can then run the campaign, if you can't then don't. There are countless bad DM stories where the DM tries to force a particular story on the players, don't become one of those.

Trekkin, in light of your previous adventures I feel compelled to inform you that if the above comes to pass you will have won the GiantITP award for extreme irony.

denthor
2015-06-21, 12:36 AM
Since they are going to be abashed by being EVIL.. give them evil that is more than them.?
Give them evil magic items that give them power for destroying something good.

Have a devil propose a mission not for Asmo but for himself I am on a mission that requires a bow... could you retrieve it for me?
The bow is being carried by a group of good adventures that are going to a specific place to destroy for there own benefit.

Offer them a free recharge on all spells and hit points if they capture a specific city plus they get the wealth of the city. The city just happens to be newly formed training camp for Paladins.

Segev
2015-06-21, 12:49 AM
Run the whole thing in Grounchland (from Sesame Street)? The PCs are in prison for their many acts of niceness, which so offend the vile people of this land that they had to get rid of them. They're resurrecting not a demon, but an angelic figure put to death because its purity was so revolting to this kingdom. They're disseminating a CURE for a disfiguring plague that the powers-that-be find aesthetically pleasing (and keeps the lowest of the low from revolting - or being revolting, as the case may be).

It'd be risking being comical, but at least they can play good guys?

Trekkin
2015-06-21, 01:07 AM
Good points all, and thankfully the problem has more or less solved itself.

The thing that always confused me was that my players have at various times wanted to do evil things, some remarkably so, but they had a very specific aversion to playing "an Evil campaign" as opposed to simply a campaign in which all the players are Evil. Confused? I was too; thus the thread. I finally got it explained to me today that Group B's old GM had a very specific way of running Evil campaigns that contained several deeply objectionable elements, apparently feeling they added to the "realism" somehow. When I'd said "the more repugnant parts of Evil" in the start of this thread, I was paraphrasing them, and it turns out I was unwittingly paraphrasing their reference to things I'd never try including.

They're completely fine with -- and vociferously in favor of -- playing an Evil campaign that's more about scheming to take over the kingdom than playing an ersatz version of the game that shall not be named.

Cluedrew
2015-06-21, 07:08 AM
Run the whole thing in Grounchland?That sounds like a fun thing on its own, I mean overthrowing any old evil empire works as well but this could make a fantastic comedy campaign depending on how you spin it.


feeling they added to the "realism" somehow.I've heard this one before, so many times.

Segev
2015-06-21, 08:54 AM
I may regret asking, but... what did this other DM do that made "Evil Campaigns" repugnant to the players?

Trekkin
2015-06-21, 10:05 AM
I may regret asking, but... what did this other DM do that made "Evil Campaigns" repugnant to the players?

Graphic descriptions of horrible things, mostly. Apparently he was of the belief that to "feel right", the campaign needed to include the specifics of torture.

Broken Crown
2015-06-21, 11:40 AM
Good points all, and thankfully the problem has more or less solved itself....

They're completely fine with -- and vociferously in favor of -- playing an Evil campaign that's more about scheming to take over the kingdom than playing an ersatz version of the game that shall not be named.

Glad to hear it's all worked out for everybody. (Well, everybody except the innocent victims, but what's a few NPCs as long as the players and GM are having fun?)

Segev
2015-06-22, 10:03 AM
Graphic descriptions of horrible things, mostly. Apparently he was of the belief that to "feel right", the campaign needed to include the specifics of torture.

Ugh. The point of a game is to have fun. If your evil people aren't in to torture, they shouldn't have to do it themselves. That's what mind-controlled minions are for!

If players are playing Evil Characters, and they're not evil people themselves, you don't need to drive home how morally repugnant their PCs are; they know it. They want to play with certain aspects of it. Let them gloss over the other stuff.



Heck, evil can have standards. Being evil means never having to do what you don't want to, and never having to restrain yourself from doing what you do want to. (At least, not just because of petty reasons like "it would hurt somebody else" or "I'd feel guilty.") (Lawful can still make you restrain yourself, after all, but only for purely logical reasons.)

So if Evil McBadguy doesn't want to torture somebody, he doesn't have to.


</rant>

GungHo
2015-06-22, 10:41 AM
If you want to corrupt players, use Hot Pockets.

Characters can usually be gotten-to through the players.