PDA

View Full Version : So You Made Friends With An Evil PC Or NPC



Bartmanhomer
2020-03-27, 09:44 PM
So let just say you're playing Pathfinder and you're playing a Neutral Good Female Human Fighter that you met an NPC who happens to be a Lawful Evil Male Dwarf Paladin Of Tyranny and two seems to have a good connection and be friends. So anyway she introduced the dwarf to the rest of the adventuring party, a Chaotic Good Male Gnome Bard and a Chaotic Good Female Elf Barbarian. So the party really likes the dwarf. So anyway the Dwarf told them the truth about his life and his alliance with Asmodeus as his patron deity. The whole party didn't seem to be too concerning or even alarming about the dwarf. They were very ok with him accepting the dwarf even though they have a few disagreements about the plans to what to do with the treasure (such as taking the treasure or give it to charity.) The adventure turns out great and the dwarf didn't even betray the team at all. I'm pretty sure everybody been to a similar situation like this one. What's your story?

Quertus
2020-03-28, 01:06 PM
Well, when I write an alignment on my character sheets, it's usually "evil", so most people who've gamed with me could probably answer your question.

Myself, I don't care much about "alignment" per se, so… shrug? I'll think about it, and see if my senile mind can remember successfully befriending anyone "evil". Doubtless several other PCs qualify, at the very least.

As a GM, the first campaign I ran, the PCs insisted on befriending just about everything they could. This was 2e D&D, and the lowest Charisma in the party was a 15, so this was… an amazingly successful and campaign-shaping strategy. They had representatives of numerous opposed factions in their oversized menagerie of followers, so they got multiple perspectives on their plans, my world-building, etc. This included an Assassin, a Demon, a Beholder, and two(!) Evil Dragons. Almost every one of those wanted to kill at least one other NPC in the party, but was held in check by their friendship with the PCs - who legitimately maintained their positive relationships, actually caring about all those NPCs.

Once, they left a large number of prisoners in the NPCs hands while they took care of something else nearby. A little while later, they made a "listen" check to hear a body drop in the distance. They rushed back, to see the Assassin standing over the fallen body of one of the prisoners. "What? He tried to escape.". (The Assassin knew that he had no hope of overpowering the prisoners *he* was in charge of, so he a) preemptively poisoned them to weaken them, and b) more thoroughly poisoned the prisoner who tried to escape. He may have "encouraged" that individual to escape, in order to discourage the others.).

The evil NPCs never actively betrayed the party - in part because the charismatic PCs continuously reinforced their friendship (by caring about them, treating them well, listening to and actively soliciting their opinions on various matters that the party was planning). If things continued in the direction that they had been going, it was possible that the NPCs might have triggered the end of the world (accidentally in one case, intentionally in another), but, otherwise, they were model party members.

Bartmanhomer
2020-03-28, 01:26 PM
Well, when I write an alignment on my character sheets, it's usually "evil", so most people who've gamed with me could probably answer your question.

Myself, I don't care much about "alignment" per se, so… shrug? I'll think about it, and see if my senile mind can remember successfully befriending anyone "evil". Doubtless, several other PCs qualify, at the very least.

As a GM, the first campaign I ran, the PCs insisted on befriending just about everything they could. This was 2e D&D, and the lowest Charisma in the party was 15, so this was… an amazingly successful and campaign-shaping strategy. They had representatives of numerous opposing factions in their oversized menagerie of followers, so they got multiple perspectives on their plans, my world-building, etc. This included an Assassin, a Demon, a Beholder, and two(!) Evil Dragons. Almost every one of those wanted to kill at least one other NPC in the party, but was held in check by their friendship with the PCs - who legitimately maintained their positive relationships, actually caring about all those NPCs.

Once, they left a large number of prisoners in the NPCs' hands while they took care of something else nearby. A little while later, they made a "listen" check to hear a body drop in the distance. They rushed back, to see the Assassin standing over the fallen body of one of the prisoners. "What? He tried to escape.". (The Assassin knew that he had no hope of overpowering the prisoners *he* was in charge of, so he a) preemptively poisoned them to weaken them, and b) more thoroughly poisoned the prisoner who tried to escape. He may have "encouraged" that individual to escape, in order to discourage the others.).

The evil NPCs never actively betrayed the party - in part because the charismatic PCs continuously reinforced their friendship (by caring about them, treating them well, listening to and actively soliciting their opinions on various matters that the party was planning). If things continued in the direction that they had been going, it was possible that the NPCs might have triggered the end of the world (accidentally in one case, intentionally in another), but, otherwise, they were model party members.
Wow, that's wonderful. I guess alignment doesn't matter in your situation :smile:

Quertus
2020-03-28, 09:16 PM
Wow, that's wonderful. I guess alignment doesn't matter in your situation :smile:

"Alignment" definitely takes a distant back seat to things like "personality", or even the Magical power of "friendship".

Still trying to remember a definitely evil PC. Well, there were several "all evil" games that I remember; most had stupid-evil PCs plotting to betray the party from the start. Oh, and the hilariously dysfunctional party of the Paladin, the Assassin, the Undead Hunter, and his dear childhood friend the Undead Master. And my character.

That party should have been relegated to the trash bin before the first die was rolled, but, contrary to all expectations, they actually kinda worked. When the Necromancer fell into a trap which held a powerful evil outsider, when it threatened to kill the Necromancer if we didn't release it, the party had no trouble convincing it we were serious when we said, "eh, kill him", and eventually bartered with the creature to make it pay for its freedom. Basically, my character cast "Protection from Evil", then the Paladin walked up next to me. As the creature kept counting the rounds that my spell was lasting, and concluded that I was a powerful epic Wizard, it grew increasingly less brazen and more subservient. At the time, I was clueless as to why, and only realized it in retrospect. Once it was willing to talk, we just nudged it towards killing "bad" people (like they do all the time in the Blood War anyway).

ngilop
2020-03-28, 09:51 PM
Was the NPC actually Evil.. or was evil just written on the sheet?

Im my time of playing RPGs I have seen and experience way more of the latter than the former.

If somebody is truly evil and somebody is truly good, there is going to come a point where the moral standing of each is incompatible with each other.

FOr example:
My character sees nothing wrong with killing kittens and then nailing bodies on peoples door frames Player B's character thinks that is horrendous.

I could use an actual example but 1) it think its against forums rules to actually speak on real evil and 2) I am pretty sure most people would not think it is evil.

denthor
2020-03-29, 12:29 AM
Chaotic good human 3rd fighter who likes to drink.

Neutral thief who likes money NPC

Neutral Evil Ranger. NPC

3.5 edition

Party buries an evil sword that has the power of possession. The sword likes 1/2 orcs

Thief gets busy her a drink. She mentions the sword. All 3 set out to retrieve it. Problem is she doesn't remember a thing sober. Kept rolling nat 1 sober 2 drinks in nat 20 and 19.

The ranger wants to kill her and keep the money unknown to her. I blurt out I only need 5% of the gold. She is alive. Party keeps planting items they keep retrieving them .

I was not greedy just drunk and stupid.

Quertus
2020-03-29, 02:42 PM
Was the NPC actually Evil.. or was evil just written on the sheet?

Im my time of playing RPGs I have seen and experience way more of the latter than the former.

If somebody is truly evil and somebody is truly good, there is going to come a point where the moral standing of each is incompatible with each other.

FOr example:
My character sees nothing wrong with killing kittens and then nailing bodies on peoples door frames Player B's character thinks that is horrendous.

So… different RPGs, let alone different cultures IRL, will define "good" and "evil" differently.

Any character where I've bothered writing "evil" on the sheet, no GM I recall has ever forced me to change that to "good". You can chalk that up to my GMs being idiots, to alignment in any system being terrible, or to my characters actually being evil.

Characters - even ones of the same "alignment" - will eventually come into conflict. And that's some of the best parts of RPGs! How does the party resolve the issue when one pragmatic optimizer thinks that the best solution is to drug the princess so that, when the Dragon eats her, it'll be easier to kill, while another pragmatic optimizer thinks that the princess might not choose to come back to life after that treatment, and thus it might be better to risk fighting the Dragon at full strength than to risk the King's displeasure at losing his daughter, and a third pragmatic optimizer thinks that the risk of the dragon is too great, period, and that the party should find a safer country to adventure in, at just until they have many more levels under their belt.


I could use an actual example but 1) it think its against forums rules to actually speak on real evil and 2) I am pretty sure most people would not think it is evil.

If it makes you feel better, I consider the bulk of humanity to be evil, so, sight unseen, I'm guessing that there's good odds that I'd consider it evil, too.

Democratus
2020-04-13, 10:45 AM
A rule of thumb we use at my table is: Alignment is how you treat people you don't care about.

Friends, family, etc. can be treated very well by even a Chaotic Evil character. But woe betide anyone outside her immediate circle of 'Give a #$%!'.

Glorthindel
2020-04-14, 05:46 AM
A small funny anecdote from when I played an Evil character in a good party: We were looting the room of a vampire, and I found a rune-covered glass globe. Picked it up (I was the rogue, and had just cracked the lock on the cabinet it was in), figured out it was pretty valuable, and handed it to the Wizard to check for magic. Turns out it was a Lich's Phalactary, and in the game system we were playing (Hackmaster), any good or neutral character that touches a Phalactary has to make a save verses death. I was Evil, so it hadn't affected me, but as soon as the Wizard touched it, he dropped dead. That may have caused a bit of an incident :smalltongue:

Satinavian
2020-04-14, 06:43 AM
Was the NPC actually Evil.. or was evil just written on the sheet?

Im my time of playing RPGs I have seen and experience way more of the latter than the former.

If somebody is truly evil and somebody is truly good, there is going to come a point where the moral standing of each is incompatible with each other.

FOr example:
My character sees nothing wrong with killing kittens and then nailing bodies on peoples door frames Player B's character thinks that is horrendous.

I could use an actual example but 1) it think its against forums rules to actually speak on real evil and 2) I am pretty sure most people would not think it is evil.
In D&D you are evil if you regularly do evil deeds. Like casting spells with an Evil descriptor. So someone like an udead-focused necromancer will automatically be evil, regardless how he behaves otherwise.

Similar is true for most evil characters. Just one habit that is considered evil by the rules done consistantly is enough to get the label. They might be otherwise perfectly nice people. They might even be (and usually are) as opposed to (other) sociopathic behavior as everyone else. Which is why this whole team good vs team evil is such a nonsense. There is no team evil.

Elbeyon
2020-04-14, 09:31 AM
In D&D you are evil if you regularly do evil deeds. Like casting spells with an Evil descriptor. So someone like an udead-focused necromancer will automatically be evil, regardless how he behaves otherwise.

Similar is true for most evil characters. Just one habit that is considered evil by the rules done consistantly is enough to get the label. They might be otherwise perfectly nice people. They might even be (and usually are) as opposed to (other) sociopathic behavior as everyone else. Which is why this whole team good vs team evil is such a nonsense. There is no team evil.Yeah. It's good to have a couple [Good] spells around in case a character needs to switch to Good alignment. Just cast enough Good spells to counter any evil of the days. A Good alignment necromancer has a much easier time with Paladins.

hamishspence
2020-04-14, 03:35 PM
Just cast enough Good spells to counter any evil of the days. A Good alignment necromancer has a much easier time with Paladins.

That's not exactly how it works. Casting [Good] spells lacks the moral weight that casting [Evil] spells does.

Fortunately, each [Evil] spell doesn't have very much moral weight in itself.

It is possible to mix Good and Evil deeds, and remain Neutral (if your Evil deeds are always done with good intentions - the desire to help innocents who need helping) - but just casting a [Good] spell won't simply "balance out" an [Evil] one.

Neutral necromancers of the "creating undead" kind exist, but they're not exactly common - and they need to be out-and-out heroes to avoid being corrupted all the way into Evil alignment, by their evil magics.

Elbeyon
2020-04-14, 04:04 PM
Since casting a [Good] or [Evil] spell has a concrete affect on a person's alignment, it is only a matter of how many [Good] spells they need to cast to switch to a Good alignment. Protection from Evil is a fairly easy to get [Good] spell that is spammable with unused slots or during downtime. Sometimes a quick team switch is all a character needs to get along with their fellow good guys.


That party should have been relegated to the trash bin before the first die was rolled, but, contrary to all expectations, they actually kinda worked. When the Necromancer fell into a trap which held a powerful evil outsider, when it threatened to kill the Necromancer if we didn't release it, the party had no trouble convincing it we were serious when we said, "eh, kill him", and eventually bartered with the creature to make it pay for its freedom. Basically, my character cast "Protection from Evil", then the Paladin walked up next to me. As the creature kept counting the rounds that my spell was lasting, and concluded that I was a powerful epic Wizard, it grew increasingly less brazen and more subservient. At the time, I was clueless as to why, and only realized it in retrospect. Once it was willing to talk, we just nudged it towards killing "bad" people (like they do all the time in the Blood War anyway).That's a pretty cool story.

Psyren
2020-04-14, 04:35 PM
Since casting a [Good] or [Evil] spell has a concrete affect on a person's alignment, it is only a matter of how many [Good] spells they need to cast to switch to a Good alignment. Protection from Evil is a fairly easy to get [Good] spell that is spammable with unused slots or during downtime.

You can certainly houserule this way if you want, but that's not how it works in D&D by RAW:


Good spells don’t have any redemptive influence on those who cast them, for better or worse.

1000 castings of Good Hope or Holy Word won't make up for you eating a baby any time soon.

Elbeyon
2020-04-14, 04:40 PM
You can certainly houserule this way if you want, but that's not how it works in D&D by RAW:

1000 castings of Good Hope or Holy Word won't make up for you eating a baby any time soon.Interesting. I didn't know that text existed. I was wrong. Is there anything about casting [evil] spells not making a person evil? Or, is there a double standard?

Saint-Just
2020-04-14, 05:53 PM
Interesting. I didn't know that text existed. I was wrong. Is there anything about casting [evil] spells not making a person evil? Or, is there a double standard?

Double standard. There is even a class (malconvoker) whose core ability is not to be affected alignment-wise even if they cast spells summoning fiends (but not other evil spells). If this was a default assumption (or achievable in some easier way) that class would be useless.

I find it pretty illogical, especially given extremely arbitrary list of spells getting label [Evil], but the this is both the RAW and seemingly RAI.

Psyren
2020-04-14, 06:20 PM
Interesting. I didn't know that text existed. I was wrong. Is there anything about casting [evil] spells not making a person evil? Or, is there a double standard?

It's a double-standard, and a justified one - being a good person (especially in the cosmic capital-G sense) is supposed to be harder.

Besides which - a world in which there exists a calculation of crafting X pro:evil wands to get away with something like murder or sexual assault doesn't seem like the kind of world D&D designers would want to create, even unintentionally.

Satinavian
2020-04-15, 03:40 AM
It's a double-standard, and a justified one - being a good person (especially in the cosmic capital-G sense) is supposed to be harder.

Besides which - a world in which there exists a calculation of crafting X pro:evil wands to get away with something like murder or sexual assault doesn't seem like the kind of world D&D designers would want to create, even unintentionally.
Instead they wrote one where you using a Protection from Good wand you found to get around mind control has basically the same influence as doing such crimes.

There are many many reasons to become mechanically Evil. Lots of them seem rather silly or trivial to outsiders like us.

Saint-Just
2020-04-15, 04:05 AM
Instead they wrote one where you using a Protection from Good wand you found to get around mind control has basically the same influence as doing such crimes.

There are many many reasons to become mechanically Evil. Lots of them seem rather silly or trivial to outsiders like us.

Well, if Good people try to mind-control you it's for you own good.

Right?

Right, guys?..

hamishspence
2020-04-15, 04:58 AM
Is there anything about casting [evil] spells not making a person evil? Or, is there a double standard?

BOVD:

Sometimes a nonevil spellcaster can get away with casting a few evil spells, as long as he or she does not do so for an evil purpose. But the path of evil magic leads swiftly to corruption and destruction.

so "Evil magic + non-evil purpose" is compatible with Neutrality, at least up to a point.


Heroes of Horror:

In literature, film, and comic books, an antihero is a protagonist who commands the sympathy of the reader (or viewer) while displaying flaws, failures, and questionable moral values. An antihero might have some great tragedy or dark secret in her past, or she might make use of evil means toward an ultimately good end. In D&D, such a character is probably neither good nor evil but a flexible neutral.

Dread Necromancer
Alignment
Not all dread necromancers are evil, although the best of them could easily be described as evil-tolerant. No dread necromancer can have a good alignment. Performing evil acts is a basic feature of the class, but some dread necromancers manage to balance evil acts with good intentions, remaining solidly neutral (most PC dread necromancers fall into this category).



So a little evil magic, + good purposes, and it's possible to be Neutral - but difficult.

Satinavian
2020-04-15, 06:13 AM
It's a double-standard, and a justified one - being a good person (especially in the cosmic capital-G sense) is supposed to be harder.
Making good hard aand evil easy is a possible way to do this. And sometimes D&d follows this idea (far from always. Alignment is inconsistent like nothing else.)

But if you actually follow that premise you have the consequence that people loose good or gain evil for pretty minor things. And that an evil tag suddenly doesn't mean much anymore. Also the struggle to maintain good alignment can only be a part of the game if people actually care about being good instead of just doing what seems to make sense and feels appropriate regardless of how cosmic forces feel about it.

Psyren
2020-04-15, 08:18 AM
Instead they wrote one where you using a Protection from Good wand you found to get around mind control has basically the same influence as doing such crimes.

See hamishspence's BoVD quote.



But if you actually follow that premise you have the consequence that people loose good or gain evil for pretty minor things. And that an evil tag suddenly doesn't mean much anymore. Also the struggle to maintain good alignment can only be a part of the game if people actually care about being good instead of just doing what seems to make sense and feels appropriate regardless of how cosmic forces feel about it.

No one is saying you have to care about the alignment on your sheet (unless you have a class feature that cares, obviously, which means you're being held to a higher standard than the majority of people anyway.) But even if you don't have such a feature, alignment can affect how some NPCs and effects in the world treat you. As long as you don't expect to have your cake and eat it, i.e. routinely commit evil acts without consequence, you can still adventure and even be a hero. Roleplaying a character who believes that good ends justifies the means with which they are achieved can be compelling, and they don't even have to be wrong about that.

Satinavian
2020-04-15, 08:55 AM
See hamishspence's BoVD quote."Can get away sometimes" is far from saying it it save. Routinely casting evil spell will end at an Evil alignment like routinely doing other evil things will, where a single act might not.

No one is saying you have to care about the alignment on your sheet (unless you have a class feature that cares, obviously, which means you're being held to a higher standard than the majority of people anyway.) But even if you don't have such a feature, alignment can affect how some NPCs and effects in the world treat you. As long as you don't expect to have your cake and eat it, i.e. routinely commit evil acts without consequence, you can still adventure and even be a hero. Roleplaying a character who believes that good ends justifies the means with which they are achieved can be compelling, and they don't even have to be wrong about that.It is less about whether the player cares, more about whether the character cares. If there is no in game motivation to actually strife for the "good" label then enduring trials and hardships to maintain/become good is pointless.

And no, alignment would usually not effect how NPCs treat a PC. Because without a special spell or similar feature, no one would know anyway. That includes the PC who would usually never know his own alignment btw.

Also it is not about good ends justifying the means. It is more about having ends and not exactly caring about whether those are good or not. Most PC motivations don't have much of an alignment angle. Things like protecting one's family or getting recognition in your field are not exactly uncommon motivations.

And the alignment restrictions ... that is not the same as higher standards. A bard getting an orderly life is not exactly failing his standards. And considering the only time that has ever been a problem in any of my groups was with a LE cleric of a NE god fearing to slip into LN territory, it was not exacly a rule that benefitted the game very much.

Psyren
2020-04-15, 11:12 AM
"Can get away sometimes" is far from saying it it save. Routinely casting evil spell will end at an Evil alignment like routinely doing other evil things will, where a single act might not.

Yes, that's exactly my point :smalltongue: Working as intended.



It is less about whether the player cares, more about whether the character cares. If there is no in game motivation to actually strife for the "good" label then enduring trials and hardships to maintain/become good is pointless.

Generally if you need "motivation" to be a good person then that itself says something about your character :smallwink:
Less facetiously though - characters are warned against being evil all the time (by various good faiths), it's up to those characters whether they take those warnings seriously (or even believe them), as well as what behaviors they choose to enact or change even if they do.


And no, alignment would usually not effect how NPCs treat a PC. Because without a special spell or similar feature, no one would know anyway. That includes the PC who would usually never know his own alignment btw.

Yes, those would be the NPCs I'm referring to - Paladins and the like. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

And some effects do care about your alignment, like certain spells. The player may not know their own alignment, but if an unholy blight spell doesn't do anything to them (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0011.html), then they have empirical evidence that it might not be what they think it is. Most people might not run into such effects in their lifetime, but adventurers are not most people.


Also it is not about good ends justifying the means. It is more about having ends and not exactly caring about whether those are good or not. Most PC motivations don't have much of an alignment angle. Things like protecting one's family or getting recognition in your field are not exactly uncommon motivations.

And the alignment restrictions ... that is not the same as higher standards. A bard getting an orderly life is not exactly failing his standards. And considering the only time that has ever been a problem in any of my groups was with a LE cleric of a NE god fearing to slip into LN territory, it was not exacly a rule that benefitted the game very much.

Eh, I play PF where Bard's don't have an alignment restriction for exactly the reasons you describe, but I'm assuming most 3.5 bards wouldn't want to end up in Mechanus anyway, which probably has strict rules for playing instruments outside like it does for everything else.

But I agree with you, it's quite possible to roleplay a character who doesn't care how the universe considers their actions. But not caring about your alignment isn't the same as not having one.

denthor
2020-04-15, 12:50 PM
Interesting. I didn't know that text existed. I was wrong. Is there anything about casting [evil] spells not making a person evil? Or, is there a double standard?


For a spell to change your alignment it must have the word evil in the spell description usually at the top box text or in the text.

Example in the text is create undead. Say rarely does a good cleric use this spell multiple uses of this spell cause you to go evil.

Necromancy is not all evil --spectral hand for example hurts you in casting.

Ninjadeadbeard
2020-04-15, 05:18 PM
I ran an Arabian Nights style setting a few months back, and one of the NPC companions the party picked up was a Lizardfolk paladin. An EVIL Paladin. He was a Mamluk warrior and a survivalist, perfectly willing to let others suffer and die if it meant he lived. But, while the party was nominally Good, the Tabaxi fighter was... eh. She always plays Chaotic Neutral lunatics. So, she got along well with the guy. The party never truly trusted him, but the fighter grew close to him, even sharing loot.

Then, the day came when the party had to take on a Tortle Wizard. And they lost. Badly. One of the most bitter and tear-jerking TPKs we've ever seen, and it was all because of bad rolls and a few bad decisions. They managed to kill the target with a suped-up one-hit-kill weapon... but the damage was done, and the BBEG's minions would finish them off.

When it came time for the Fighter to die... the Paladin used their secret Companion ability. They took the hit, and fell. His last words to her?

"See...? I was your friend..."

The fact that she died due to a blood feud before she could get back to base made it even more heartbreaking. Despite how it ended, the players enjoyed the adventure, and still remember that guy fondly.

PopeLinus1
2020-04-16, 04:07 AM
Everyone who plays dnd with me has already befriended someone who is evil so...

Psyren
2020-04-16, 11:43 AM
For a spell to change your alignment it must have the word evil in the spell description usually at the top box text or in the text.

Example in the text is create undead. Say rarely does a good cleric use this spell multiple uses of this spell cause you to go evil.

Necromancy is not all evil --spectral hand for example hurts you in casting.

Well, creating or animating undead is also an evil act regardless - but I can't think of any of those spells that aren't [Evil] anyway, so it's a moot point. Even just summoning them got the tag.

aglondier
2020-04-27, 07:03 AM
Two past evil character in a good party experiences come to mind.

In the first I played a LE priestess of Death. The other players conspired to dope her drink with love potions keyed to the party paladin. So, she fell for the good guy, and I went through the rediculously painful process of alignment change... until the party rogue made the rather foolish error of mentioning the potions...
One atonement later, the party are flensed and animated, with their souls screaming for release... lots of fun.

The second was a FR game set in the Dalelands. My paladin had just died, so I decided to play something a little different. A Red Wizard of Thay. Moeran Tam, evoker, and descendant of you-know-who. Neutral Evil, and a part of the recently formed propaganda arm of Thay.
My job? Go to the Dales, join a band of heroic adventurers, and reassure the common folk that Thay was not an enemy.
Really did not expect to have to be the one telling the rest of the party how to 'hero'. I particularly remember having to convince them not to slaughter a village of commoners...

On the other hand, as a GM I have had fun messing with pally players with a bad habit of spamming detect evil, by having the 'evil' necromancer actually be Lawful Neutral...they wrote ironclad contracts that gave significant benefit to the other party, in return for service after their natural passing...

King of Nowhere
2020-04-27, 10:17 AM
alignemnt does not matter, but being a paladin of tiranny... i don't know the specifics of your world, but that would be akin to being a member of the SS.
While it is certainly possible to adventure together towards a common goal, I don't see much chance of a friendship there surviving for long. not unless there is a lot of blindness on the good guy part.

It really depends on specifics, though. My players befriended a champion of Hextor, though the guy was less "EVIL" and more of a social darwinist and as much of a decent person as one can be while being a stalwart supporter of hextor.