Effects of Neutral Evil alignment on a mostly Neutral party

[Sacredsword37]

My friends and I are panning a D&D game and they're mostly chaotic neutral. The character I'm making would be best fit as neutral evil (in my opinion), but one of my friends claims that my being evil would make it so our party couldn't get anything done. I just want to know how much, if any, of a problem I would cause.

[Red Fel]

My friends and I are panning a D&D game and they're mostly chaotic neutral. The character I'm making would be best fit as neutral evil (in my opinion), but one of my friends claims that my being evil would make it so our party couldn't get anything done. I just want to know how much, if any, of a problem I would cause.

How much of a problem do you intend to cause? That's really what it boils down to.

If you intend to kick every puppy and murder every orphan you see, then yes, you might cause a problem. (Of course, if they're playing CN, it's entirely possible that they're playing CE-in-everything-but-name, in which case your NE will be a drop in the bucket by comparison, but whatever.)

If, on the other hand, you're playing a smart, team player, who recognizes that working with the party is the best way to get things done, then congratulations! You're playing Evil right, and you probably won't cause any problems.

That said, watch out for this friend. Some people are so convinced that Evil characters (or Paladins, or Rogues, or insert-concept-you-hate-here) will ruin everything, that they will actively mess with you just to prove themselves right. This friend might not like it if you prove him wrong.

Just remember this simple rule: You don't get to tell me how to play my character. You don't get to tell me what I do or don't do.

Play a quality Evil character and everyone can have a good time.

[Geddy2112]

Seconding Fel.

Being neutral evil does not create inherent problems. Certainly evil actions can lead to problems. Nonevil societies generally frown on murder and torture, and even outside of civilized worlds few things appreciate it when you try to kill, harm, or really do anything evil to them.

You can still be capital E mustache twirling evil, the kind that sees puppies like most people see cockroaches and treats humanoids like pawns on a chessboard on a good day. The kind of person who won't lose a wink of sleep after committing atrocities that would make demons blush. You can be all of that and still be a totally functional team player who works with others and is a well adjusted member of society(at least on the surface).

[Mordaedil]

Bishop early on in the NWN2 campaign is a pretty good example of how you can play evil without being extremely obvious about it, or a murdering psychopath. His character kinda weakens later on, but his early stuff is how I feel you could play an evil character along with the group without being a **** to the rest.

The fact that the rest of the party is neutral means that they they aren't extremely opposite to you anyway, you're just a tad more dour than they are.

[Particle_Man]

Can you describe your character and why you think NE is the best fit? [/Eliza]

[Kaizerbuns]

It can be dangerous depending on where the party travels but other than that it's not an issue unless you play it like one.

Being Evil doesn't hurt unless either you're hurting the party by doing your evil or the group wanders into Lawful Stupid Paladin land, then it becomes Everyone's problem

[ShaneMRoth]

According to the rules as written in 3.5, the good and neutral alignments are standard for players and the evil alignments are for monsters and villains.

There are some players, such as Fell, who can handle playing an Evil character.

It is my experience that most players aren't able to handle it.

The worse that could happen is that you could bring the entire game to a premature end, just by how you approach playing your Evil character.

[frogglesmash]

If you think you think that you can play an evil character without being disruptive, and the rest of the players are dead set against it then just lie to them (the players, not the DM). Two them your playing a neutral character, then act neutral instead. Besides, no evil character openly announces their evilness.

[OldTrees1]

If you think you think that you can play an evil character without being disruptive, and the rest of the players are dead set against it then just lie to them (the players, not the DM). Two them your playing a neutral character, then act neutral instead. Besides, no evil character openly announces their evilness.

I would advise against OOC lying, it is a catalyst for OOC problems.

You are involved in a group activity where you are expected to work together with everyone's interests at heart. OOC lying to the other players with the intent to deceive them is prone to either be a symptom of prior dysfunction in the group or to be a cause of later dysfunction in the group.

[Matrota]

The thing with playing neutral evil characters is that it shouldn't be any issue unless you have someone with a strong moral sense. Neutral characters aren't good aligned either, so they should be fine getting along with good or evil characterspirits regardless. That's why they're neutral.

Just remember that when playing an evil character, your party members should not experience your evil themselves. You can threaten, torture, and blackmail anyone else, but your party should not have that happen to them. And don't betray them either, they're your meat shields and loyal puppets. You are a monster to your enemies, and a reliable ally to your party.

[Particle_Man]

Another option is just play a character as neutral in alignment, to go along with the group.

Alternatively, start as neutral, play the character as you see fit, and wait for the DM to say "You know, your actions seem to be indicating that you are evil, maybe we should change your alignment". In the latter case, the other players have had a chance to see your character in action and judge whether that character is or is not a threat to group cohesion and group fun.