Quote Originally Posted by Keltest View Post
Only if you assume that "evil" players are A: willing to cooperate and compromise (which they are definitionally not) and B: are outspoken in a way that good players are not. Furthermore, you have to assume that "good" players are incapable of having open and honest dialogue whenever they see problems, and are unwilling to proactively pursue better options if theyre available.
A) blatantly wrong. There is nothing in the OP's definition of evil (or *any* same definition of evil I've ever heard, for that matter - see current thread on "can evil cooperate" for more details than "uh, yeah") that makes evil unable to cooperate.

B) you've clearly missed, like, the entirely my conversation to say that. Lemme try again:

Good is encouraged to wear blinders and believe that they have done good, no matter how much sewage they're dumping in the game.

Evil is encouraged to punch anything wrecking their fun in the face.

Yeah, evil inherently proactively makes the game better; good does not.

C) that's the thing - "good" is psychologically encouraged to wear blinders and believe that they're doing good. They're not encouraged to "see problems" the way that evil is. And it's pure hubris for good to believe that they know what other people find fun - especially compared to how much more reasonable it is to expect someone to know what *they* find fun.

D) "unwilling to proactively pursue better options if theyre available"? Hmmm… seems like a trick question. Good's problem is usually in recognizing the potential for and searching for better options, than in actually choosing them… but, when they're presented, midi humans IME still *don't* choose them, which is just *one* of the reasons why I consider 90+% of humanity to be evil.

I mean, I intentionally joined every gaming group I could, played every system I could, to learn everything I could about role-playing. At my peak, I was in 6 games a week. I read articles about gaming & human psychology. I participate in discussions on the best site I've found (shameless plug for the Playground). I run SaMoLo sessions for my games. Trying to learn is hard work.

Defending what you enjoy is much easier. Which is why, IME, it's much more successful at producing good games compared to most people half-hearted efforts at being "good".

Quote Originally Posted by Evoker View Post
Unless your point is that any evil player who's "too evil" would be kicked from the table, and that would improve the quality of the game.
Bingo!

Evil has an active, selfish interest in the game continuing / not getting kicked from the table. And the other evil players have an active interest in converting or kicking anyone whose fun endangers or prevents their own fun.

Evil encourages open, effective communication to defend one's fun. "Dude, stop stepping on my toes! That's not fun!"

Good sucks it up and bears it for the fun of the group.