New Evil Game

[tstewt1921]

I'm thinking of running a game for my players to where they play as evil characters, devils will be in charge as their hierarchy to keep the party "on track" so to speak. Do any other DMs have any advice or housekeeping things they do when running an evil party?

[Red Fel]

I'm thinking of running a game for my players to where they play as evil characters, devils will be in charge as their hierarchy to keep the party "on track" so to speak. Do any other DMs have any advice or housekeeping things they do when running an evil party?

Yes. Step one, get rid of the part I put in bold.

An Evil game requires a great deal of pre-game agreement between the players, and between players and DM. Obviously, there needs to be agreement not to screw one another over for kicks, but that's just the basics.

Here's the thing. You can give Good characters a quest - a monster to vanquish, a kingdom to save, a mission from a superior - and they'll generally go along with it. (Occasionally they won't, but that's fine, they'll find something to do eventually.)

Evil characters are different. Unless they're all LE, a rigid hierarchy isn't the way to motivate them. Evil characters are, by and large, self-motivated - they have goals they want to achieve. Frequently, Evil characters are defined as Evil by their willingness to go to great and terrible lengths to achieve those goals.

What you want to do, then, is sit each of the players down in advance of the game and ask what their characters want to achieve, and how. Then you, as DM, should try to weave a plot that gives everyone their chance. Whether it's revenge, discovery, conquest, or just plain bloodthirst, figure it out.

Having an NPC barking orders at them will only work (1) if they're all LE and obedient, and willingly go along, in which case the game will differ little if at all from a normal game, or (2) until they're strong enough to overthrow and devour their would-be master, claiming his power and dominion for their own, before then seeking vengeance upon all who sought to use them as pawns.

If either of those is your goal, then stick with the hierarchy idea. Otherwise, I'd suggest structuring the plot around what the PCs want, instead of what others want from the PCs.

[Geddy2112]

In my experience evil games tend to run the same as any other, minus the part where the party pretends they are anything but murderhobos.

All of the classic quests get reskinned and reversed. Save the princess turns into kidnap the princess. Stop the bandits attacking the town turns into robbing the town. Slay the dragon turns into...slay the dragon, or whatever other big monster is in the way of something.

Evil parties can have a zillion reasons to find mcguffins, talk to NPC's across an ocean, fight giant monsters, yadda yadda yadda. The methods tend to differ, but the song remains largely the same.

[tstewt1921]

What you want to do, then, is sit each of the players down in advance of the game and ask what their characters want to achieve, and how. Then you, as DM, should try to weave a plot that gives everyone their chance. Whether it's revenge, discovery, conquest, or just plain bloodthirst, figure it out.

.

I like the idea of them over throwing, that was my original plan but I like your plan of coming up with a goal for their characters and seeing how they would go about accomplishing it.

[SpicyBoi_Nezu]

I'm not the DM, but my party ran an "Evil" campaign awhile back, and one thing that my DM did to make the whole experience better, was to have us play as the soldiers under the Evil Empress's rule, where we were essentially the Black ops team, where we would do all of the horrific behind-the-scenes killing that wouldn't be known to the public. We were sent to opposing villages, where we would infiltrate them, kill their leader, and slowly pick off their "militia" and eventually burn down the entire village, this was especially fun because we went through each and every gruesome death in as much detail as possible, where each player would describe the way in which they killed said NPC. To be honest, we never really "Rolled for Initiative" we usually killed them in underhanded ways without initiating a proper fight.

I feel the best way to properly play an "Evil" campaign would be to allow the players to essentially do WHATEVER they want, because they are not bound by any laws. Depending on the party composition, they could play as a group of bandits, attacking, pillaging, and burning down villages, town, and passing merchants, gradually gaining more and more wealth as the slaughter. They could also be a group of mercenaries that get hired to do the more heinous jobs, where they get tasked with eliminating political officials, killing off anyone that dares question the actions of the queen.

Creativity is key when you are no longer bound by moral code, and that's what makes it so much fun.

[RedMage125]

Yes. Step one, get rid of the part I put in bold.

An Evil game requires a great deal of pre-game agreement between the players, and between players and DM. Obviously, there needs to be agreement not to screw one another over for kicks, but that's just the basics.

Here's the thing. You can give Good characters a quest - a monster to vanquish, a kingdom to save, a mission from a superior - and they'll generally go along with it. (Occasionally they won't, but that's fine, they'll find something to do eventually.)

Evil characters are different. Unless they're all LE, a rigid hierarchy isn't the way to motivate them. Evil characters are, by and large, self-motivated - they have goals they want to achieve. Frequently, Evil characters are defined as Evil by their willingness to go to great and terrible lengths to achieve those goals.

What you want to do, then, is sit each of the players down in advance of the game and ask what their characters want to achieve, and how. Then you, as DM, should try to weave a plot that gives everyone their chance. Whether it's revenge, discovery, conquest, or just plain bloodthirst, figure it out.

Having an NPC barking orders at them will only work (1) if they're all LE and obedient, and willingly go along, in which case the game will differ little if at all from a normal game, or (2) until they're strong enough to overthrow and devour their would-be master, claiming his power and dominion for their own, before then seeking vengeance upon all who sought to use them as pawns.

If either of those is your goal, then stick with the hierarchy idea. Otherwise, I'd suggest structuring the plot around what the PCs want, instead of what others want from the PCs.

All of this is gold. And it's perfectly in keeping with my advice, as well. I have run two successful Evil campaigns, both 3.5e. And by "evil" I mean "Villain", not "anti-hero" or other some such.

The thing about heroes and villains is...heroes are reactionary. Heroes save the world from what villains start. And if your campaign is about being a villain, your players need to have initiative. Not in the combat-action-order sense, but in the sense that they need to make the first moves. This can be challenging for some DMs and some players, as in this campaign, the burden is on the players, not you, to move the story forward. They declare what they are trying to do, and you describe how the world reacts to them. This can sometimes require a DM to be able to be quick on their feet, to devise mechanics for the world in it's "status quo" state that the villains may act upon. It would not do for every town and city guard to be complete pushovers, so devising decently-challenging obstacles to overcome is sometimes difficult to do on the fly. Keep in mind that it is okay to occasionally have some towns where none of the guards are anything higher than a level 3 warrior, so your evil party can have some early successes.

There's also the old cliché about evil characters turning on each other because "that's what my character would do". Which, by the way, is a jerkbag excuse that jerkbag players use to justify their jerkbag behavior, not a truism of evil characters. If you would prefer a game with little to no Player-Vs-Player action, make it clear before the game even starts. Evil characters are selfish, yes, but they also have goals and motivations. A character whose sole goal is "I want to take all the stuff from the people I work with" isn't going to survive long in a group with several other evil PCs there to punish them.

My key, every time, is to have a really in-depth Session Zero. Before anyone makes a character, have the players decide exactly what kind of "evil game" they want to play in. Have them develop at least a loose idea of what manner of evil plot they want to enact. Once they do that, you, the DM, can start writing out what kind of initial challenges and obstacles they will be facing in order to make this goal of theirs happen. The players, meanwhile, will create characters around this goal. They are basically tailoring their characters to the "plot hook" that they have created. By doing this, you eliminate the need for an external "disciplinarian" to keep them in line. They are making characters who already have a common, unified goal, one that they wish to pursue.

Examples: My first evil campaign, my players wanted to take down a Paladin Order, or at least one of their motherhouses. Since this is a fairly tall order, I had them make...I think it was level 16 characters. They decided to be devotees of my Chaotic Evil deity of Death and Undeath. One person made a cleric focused on reanimation of undead. Another made a necromancer (was going to take the lich template, but didn't want to pay the LA, but he did spend a good chunk of his WBL making his phylactery so it was ready). A few people made assassins, and one more went with a Half-Dragon/Half-Ogre Spiked Chain wielding Fighter who was mostly a brute that followed the cleric. Having spent their WBL, they decided they needed an army, and first thing they needed was more funds. So they hunted down a metallic dragon, killed it (animated its corpse as a skeleton), and used their newfound money to pay a few orc chieftains and giant tribes to assault a human city. Of course, they also had an army of undead. When the assault began, the cleric was posed in a cemetery, and once the undead were engaged in combat with the city's defenders, he released control of most of them, animated a bunch more, and sent them in to fight as well. The Assassins had also (through a significant bribe) managed to get the city's Thieves' Guild to smuggle the party themselves into the city. When the paladins sent most of their Order out to assist the defense of the city, the villains assaulted the motherhouse. They killed all the paladins inside, and the necromancer desecrated their altar by completing the lich transformation ritual ON IT.

Good times.

Now, keep in mind, my experiences were Evil games that had a limited lifespan. About 5 or 6 sessions, during which that one story arc would be complete. It is possible to have longer-running campaigns where characters start as favored minions or lieutenants, and eventually gain more power and influence. But either way, the advice from Red Fel and myself stands true.

[Cavir]

Having an NPC barking orders at them will only work (1) if they're all LE and obedient, and willingly go along, in which case the game will differ little if at all from a normal game, or (2) until they're strong enough to overthrow and devour their would-be master, claiming his power and dominion for their own, before then seeking vengeance upon all who sought to use them as pawns.

To go right along with what Red Fel said, check out the module Way of the Wicked. Evil party with a long term focused mission. Granted I'm just a player in a game of it (and not too far along), my OOC impression (I'm trying to avoid spoilers) is we might try taking out our master.

[tstewt1921]

To go right along with what Red Fel said, check out the module Way of the Wicked. Evil party with a long term focused mission. Granted I'm just a player in a game of it (and not too far along), my OOC impression (I'm trying to avoid spoilers) is we might try taking out our master.

I'll take a look at that, thanks!

[tstewt1921]

It seems to be unanimous in everyone's opinions, I think I'm going to give them the layout of the new island their on within the world, and then have them devise plans on what they want to do and see how the cookie crumbles.

Thanks everyone for the advice!

And if you have anymore please let me know!

[Quarian Rex]

The thing about heroes and villains is...heroes are reactionary. Heroes save the world from what villains start. And if your campaign is about being a villain, your players need to have initiative. Not in the combat-action-order sense, but in the sense that they need to make the first moves. This can be challenging for some DMs and some players, as in this campaign, the burden is on the players, not you, to move the story forward. They declare what they are trying to do, and you describe how the world reacts to them. This can sometimes require a DM to be able to be quick on their feet, to devise mechanics for the world in it's "status quo" state that the villains may act upon. It would not do for every town and city guard to be complete pushovers, so devising decently-challenging obstacles to overcome is sometimes difficult to do on the fly. Keep in mind that it is okay to occasionally have some towns where none of the guards are anything higher than a level 3 warrior, so your evil party can have some early successes.


The bolded part tends to be the most crucial part of any evil campaign, and the easiest place for the game to fall apart since, in many ways, it is the opposite of how most games are played. In most heroic campaigns the PCs can be left in the dark for most of it, accidentally stumbling onto someones evil plans or otherwise getting slapped in the face with a plot hook. The background and minor details are usually somewhat inconsequential, the hook is what's important.

In an evil campaign you have to put a lot more thought into the why of everything and be willing to provide this info to the PCs. I can't stress this enough. An evil campaign with a tight-lipped DM is a recipe for murderhobos. You need to fill in a lot of details that you normally never would. How does the King maintain power? Personal power or military might? If personal, magical or martial? What tools/equipment has he invested in (with the wealth of a kingdom) to solidify that power? If military, how does he support a standing army, how many are conscripts vs. mercenary, where is the money coming from, can the gold be interrupted, and how long till the army turns bandit when they stop getting paid? If he doesn't personally maintain the majority of the army then how is he maintaining control of the feudal lords who do? How many teaming up would it take to overthrow him? Does the king have heirs? Do they want to overthrow him? Is he raising wards of other kingdoms? Are any of his children wards/hostages to another?

What about towns? Just filling a town with level appropriate NPCs isn't nearly good enough. If the town guard are all 10th level, why? Why is a 10th level character taking guard pay in a crap job? Are they actually being paid 10th level character wages? If so, then how can the kingdom afford that? If not, are they magically compelled/charmed/blackmailed? Are they all equipped with appropriate gear for 10th level WBL? Why not? Are they all retired adventurers or does the kingdom have a method to power-level commoners? If retired, then where are the age penalties and vulnerable families? If power-leveling, can the means to do so be copied/stolen, and why hasn't it been applied to everyone?

These are all the kinds of plot lego that needs to be actually given to evil PCs so they can form plans and act against the world. Also remember that encounters should be more off balance than you are used to. When PCs act out their plans then easier encounters are very appropriate. Villains will try to attack the weak points because they want their plan to actually succeed. Replacing all the low-level/bribed/blackmailed guards with the Kingsguard and blanketing the area with magical traps that weren't there an hour ago just to make the encounter 'interesting' would do nothing more than undermine the masterminding (and interesting RP involved) that went into it. There are always exceptions, if the PCs rely on a single tactic people will eventually adapt, just try to deliberately avoid the normal DM tendency to try to auto-counter whatever the PCs attempt.

In balance to the above, the response to the villainous plots can be proportionally higher since their victims want to make sure that such a thing never happens again and want to send a message while doing so. This is where the PCs get hunted by powerful mercenaries/Kingsguard/royal armies and their defenses/ability to flee are tested.

This kind of campaign requires a different pace and a different level of communication between the DM and players. Keep that in mind.

[tstewt1921]

The bolded part tends to be the most crucial part of any evil campaign, and the easiest place for the game to fall apart since, in many ways, it is the opposite of how most games are played. In most heroic campaigns the PCs can be left in the dark for most of it, accidentally stumbling onto someones evil plans or otherwise getting slapped in the face with a plot hook. The background and minor details are usually somewhat inconsequential, the hook is what's important.

In an evil campaign you have to put a lot more thought into the why of everything and be willing to provide this info to the PCs. I can't stress this enough. An evil campaign with a tight-lipped DM is a recipe for murderhobos. You need to fill in a lot of details that you normally never would. How does the King maintain power? Personal power or military might? If personal, magical or martial? What tools/equipment has he invested in (with the wealth of a kingdom) to solidify that power? If military, how does he support a standing army, how many are conscripts vs. mercenary, where is the money coming from, can the gold be interrupted, and how long till the army turns bandit when they stop getting paid? If he doesn't personally maintain the majority of the army then how is he maintaining control of the feudal lords who do? How many teaming up would it take to overthrow him? Does the king have heirs? Do they want to overthrow him? Is he raising wards of other kingdoms? Are any of his children wards/hostages to another?

What about towns? Just filling a town with level appropriate NPCs isn't nearly good enough. If the town guard are all 10th level, why? Why is a 10th level character taking guard pay in a crap job? Are they actually being paid 10th level character wages? If so, then how can the kingdom afford that? If not, are they magically compelled/charmed/blackmailed? Are they all equipped with appropriate gear for 10th level WBL? Why not? Are they all retired adventurers or does the kingdom have a method to power-level commoners? If retired, then where are the age penalties and vulnerable families? If power-leveling, can the means to do so be copied/stolen, and why hasn't it been applied to everyone?

These are all the kinds of plot lego that needs to be actually given to evil PCs so they can form plans and act against the world. Also remember that encounters should be more off balance than you are used to. When PCs act out their plans then easier encounters are very appropriate. Villains will try to attack the weak points because they want their plan to actually succeed. Replacing all the low-level/bribed/blackmailed guards with the Kingsguard and blanketing the area with magical traps that weren't there an hour ago just to make the encounter 'interesting' would do nothing more than undermine the masterminding (and interesting RP involved) that went into it. There are always exceptions, if the PCs rely on a single tactic people will eventually adapt, just try to deliberately avoid the normal DM tendency to try to auto-counter whatever the PCs attempt.

In balance to the above, the response to the villainous plots can be proportionally higher since their victims want to make sure that such a thing never happens again and want to send a message while doing so. This is where the PCs get hunted by powerful mercenaries/Kingsguard/royal armies and their defenses/ability to flee are tested.

This kind of campaign requires a different pace and a different level of communication between the DM and players. Keep that in mind.

Those two paragraphs gave me so much to think about! Thank you so much! Luckily I have at minimum probably 6 months to prep this game. So I can make sure I have plenty planned out for them.

[Kesnit]

and the necromancer desecrated their altar by completing the lich transformation ritual ON IT.

My wife and I both commend the necromancer. Well played, sir/ma'am.

[Andry]

Years ago I ran a drow campaign based in Menzoberanzan. All the pcs were either members of or servants of an up and coming drow house. I made it clear to them what actions would cause trouble for the group (being a cleric of any deity other than Lolth, males being to uppity to the females etc.). Even though the character were varied in classes and races it worked out great. Each player came to me early on in the campaign and outlined the goals they had and how they improve their position in the house at the same time. While also looking on how to advance the power of the house. We ran the campaign from level 4-20 or so over 3 years. As it progressed I barely had to contribute much to the story as their plans took over the game. It was more of me reacting to them as anything else. Just make sure your players are mature enough to handle playing evil characters and also make sure everyone is on board with that.

[RedMage125]

My wife and I both commend the necromancer. Well played, sir/ma'am.

LOL, I'm glad you liked it. You may or may not like what the lich's end result was, however...

So, having despoiled the altar of a Paladin Order Motherhouse, the party has now attracted the attention of a group of adventuring heroes, whom I appropriately named "The White Hats". I did give the newly-formed lich an opportunity to hide his phylactery. What he DID was quite brilliant. He found an unobtrusive alleyway, cast Stone to Mud on the stone floor, sank the phylactery into the mud, and then cast Mud to Stone. He did not, however, cast any nondetection or anti-scrying spells on it.
Given that I had about 6 PCs (of I think it was 16th or maybe 17th level), one of whom (the cleric) had Leadership and had a Blackguard companion, and one more PC who ALSO had a +4 LA template (lich), I decided that a group of 5 18th or 19th-level NPCs with class levels would be an appropriate encounter. These were a Sun Domain Radiant Servant Cleric, a Sorcerer, a Frenzied Berserker Barbarian, a Cavalier Paladin, and I think a Bard. Well, these heroes bust into the foyer of the motherhouse. The Barbarian gets enlarged and goes up against the evil half-dragon fighter, who found tripping a creature your size with a STR score of 30-something to be nigh-impossible, and also learned that his level adjustment meant he had less hit dice (and less hit points) to take very many greataxes to the face. The Radiant Servant used a Greater Turning attempt and popped the lich in one shot (he seriously did not invest in any anti-turning gear or positive energy protection). The blackguard lost over half his hp in one Deadly Charge from the Cavalier. At this point, the Evil Cleric used Word of Recall, and the Assassins all buggered out.
So...the White Hats recognized a lich when they saw one, and attempted divinations to locate the phylactery. To their surprise, it was easily located, and inside the city. So they dug it up, and in a stroke of inspiration, instead of destroying it, they opened a Gate to the Positive Energy Plane, and tossed it in. Justice for the altar, ne?
Narratively, that lich (who was a wizard now without spellbooks and had not taken Spell Mastery) would re-form every 1d4 days, only to be destroyed in a matter of minutes by his environment.
He went quite mad.
Due to the events that I later used to update my world from 3e to 4e (and change from Great Wheel to World Axis cosmology), the Positive Energy Plane mixed with all the other Inner Planes to form the Elemental Chaos. Mind you, this was hundreds of years later. So that lich eventually found himself quite intact, quite mad, and filled with a newfound urge to simply destroy all of existence. He made for an interesting sub-plot boss in one of my 4e games in Paragon Tier. Complete Nihilist lich.

[tomandtish]

I'm thinking of running a game for my players to where they play as evil characters, devils will be in charge as their hierarchy to keep the party "on track" so to speak. Do any other DMs have any advice or housekeeping things they do when running an evil party?

The one thing I haven't seen commented on...

Make sure you have buy-in from your players. See the bolded part above? That's a lot different than "My players have asked me to run an evil game". Are they on-board?Are they ALL on-board?

Buy-in just doesn't mean they want it. If this hasn't been done before you probably need some ground rules. Is PvP on or off the table? How much violence is acceptable (and what types)?

And esp. if PvP is an option or the end result is for them to turn on each other... What mechanism do you have in place to handle things when/if tempers get heated?

Well-run evil games actually tend to require a HIGHER level of player maturity than non-evil games.

[Dragonexx]

The thing about heroes and villains is...heroes are reactionary. Heroes save the world from what villains start.

I'm going to have to disagree with that. It's perfecly possible to reverse the scenario, where heroes are the proactive ones, setting out to improve the world, while the villains react and try to stop them, most likely because the status quo benefits them in some way at the expense of others.

[Particle_Man]

A thematic option if they want is to be the original githyanki overthrowing the mind flayer overlords. Get some silver swords, make a deal with red dragons, etc.

[RedMage125]

I'm going to have to disagree with that. It's perfecly possible to reverse the scenario, where heroes are the proactive ones, setting out to improve the world, while the villains react and try to stop them, most likely because the status quo benefits them in some way at the expense of others.
Of course, but even YOU just said it, that would be "reversing the scenario". I of course was referring to common default tropes of fantasy adventuring. In which heroes are absolutely reactionary to villainous plots.


The one thing I haven't seen commented on...

Make sure you have buy-in from your players. See the bolded part above? That's a lot different than "My players have asked me to run an evil game". Are they on-board?Are they ALL on-board?

Buy-in just doesn't mean they want it. If this hasn't been done before you probably need some ground rules. Is PvP on or off the table? How much violence is acceptable (and what types)?

And esp. if PvP is an option or the end result is for them to turn on each other... What mechanism do you have in place to handle things when/if tempers get heated?

Well-run evil games actually tend to require a HIGHER level of player maturity than non-evil games.

I agree completely. It's one of the things I recommend laying out in the "Session Zero" that I recommended.

The second successful Evil Campaign I ran ended in a bit of PvP. The players wanted to overthrow a Thieves' Guild. Some of the PCs were members, others were..."contractors" of a sort that were promised rewards. When they finally defeated the man everyone knew to be the head of the Guild (name was Renal Bloodscalp), they were confronted with a new realization...that there was another man "behind the curtain", so to speak. One of the city's leaders. And he was too clever and resourceful by half to allow the PCs to confront him directly, so he sent his agent, and his agent was able to proffer rewards to the party warlock and cleric (vermin lord), effectively buying them out. Of the three that remained (Blackguard, Assassin, and Disciple of Baalzebul), he offered leadership. To be the NEW "Renal Bloodscalp". OF course...he only needed one of them...

Pretty epic 3-way PvP followed. Lots of great roleplaying in the way it played out, too. The Disciple of Baalzebul PC was the 1/2 elf son of the drow assassin PC, and had murdered his own human mother to gain his PrC. Turning on his father earned him a great deal of favor with his patron.

I don't normally favor any PvP at my tables, but this was the very end of this campaign, which only lasted about 5 weeks. It was always intended to be a one-shot, self-contained atoryline, and all the players ended up satisfied with the end, even the guys who got killed, as it was a fitting end for their character.