Evil campaign ideas [3.5]

[The Neoclassic]

I have two close friends who want to play in an evil, mid-level campaign DM'd by me. As usual, I'll be using my homebrew setting. However, I need three ideas to present to them so they can pick which sounds like the most fun. Right now, I'm drawing a blank though. Also, while this will be an evil campaign, they don't have to be kitten-eaters. That could work too though, perhaps...

So: Two PCs, evil campaign, starting level 6-13... IDEAS! GO!

[Dusk Eclipse]

...world domination? or maybe since they are already mid-level how about the chars got some reputation as criminals/murderers/whatever and they are being chased by a church/paladin/goverment

[hamishspence]

Ideas:

They are OverZealous Evil- inquisitor types, whose approach to anything that smacks of corruption is "Kill It With Fire" and have no concept of "unacceptable collateral damage" but are heroic, brave, dedicated to fighting evil. Just not very good at self knowledge.

This is one possibility. Its a bit like the previously posted one, except they are the paladin/government-type chasers of criminals.

[Lord_Gareth]

Let's see what I can pull out -

Eternal Justice - An ancient solar, long ago sealed, has been awakened by a church devoted to a good deity, acting under the impression that it was sealed away by great and powerful evil entities. The truth is much less pleasant; the solar has long ago gone mad with grief and rage, and sees the entire world as tainted with evil. Completely immune to the magics of good-aligned characters and far too powerful for any ordinary warrior to stop, the desperate priests kidnap the players and beg for their aid before the situation grows completely out of control.

[Temet Nosce]

Ideas:

They are OverZealous Evil- inquisitor types, whose approach to anything that smacks of corruption is "Kill It With Fire" and have no concept of "unacceptable collateral damage" but are heroic, brave, dedicated to fighting evil. Just not very good at self knowledge.

This is one possibility. Its a bit like the previously posted one, except they are the paladin/government-type chasers of criminals.

That sounds more like a LG campaign, then an evil one. In fact, it fits it perfectly, due to the whole "let no guilty go unpunished" thing.

Anyways, I'll give three suggestions

LE, Evil For Hire: The players are carefully ordered individuals with specific goals, who rent out their services with care and discretion for certain duties which might upset more typical groups, and which are inappropriate for less controlled ones. (Killing off children who might be future chosen ones but can't be seen to be killed, arranging for the exposure of overly insane evil groups that are threatening the status quo, kidnap/replacement and torture of popular figures)

NE, The Game: The players are invited (or forced, up to you) to participate in the highest stakes form of gambling on their plane. It's run by a figure known only to be from elsewhere (up to you who), and the reward is a wish (not like the spell, but as in a literal wish), but it's unknown whether teaming up is acceptable. The victory conditions? Killing off all the other players. Alternatively, if you really want to shake things up the players could run such a thing (although the reward would necessarily be lesser, maybe freedom or something... and the players could make money rigging bets)

CE, Vae Victus (Woe to the Conquered): Conquer the world. Demand more gold. Proceed with conquering everything else afterward. Come on, you know you want to (I wish I could convince a DM to run this for me, in the decade I've gamed I've never met anyone actually willing to run a world conquest campaign).

[talltwin36]

I have been running an evil game for a group for about 3 years now. We meet once a month. 6 characters, 3 players, started at 4th level and are now 9-10th leve.

One mission they had was to kill the head of a Paladin order. Another longer mission was to convince 6 of 8 provinces of a CE country to assist them in attacking a neighboring country.

They have had to find a powerful evil artifact.

msquared

[hamishspence]

That sounds more like a LG campaign, then an evil one. In fact, it fits it perfectly, due to the whole "let no guilty go unpunished" thing.

But the point is, the general rule is that Good people who go overboard, slide down the slippery slope to evil, even if they still fight "villains" and still believe they are good.

Its quite a common trope, and various D&D books include paladins falling in the process of acting like this.

If your character would make a 40K inquisitor, or Necromunda's Klovis The Redeemer, stand up and applaud their zeal and ruthlessness, then they probably aren't LG or even LN any more.

[Masaioh]

I have two close friends who want to play in an evil, mid-level campaign DM'd by me. As usual, I'll be using my homebrew setting. However, I need three ideas to present to them so they can pick which sounds like the most fun. Right now, I'm drawing a blank though. Also, while this will be an evil campaign, they don't have to be kitten-eaters. That could work too though, perhaps...

So: Two PCs, evil campaign, starting level 6-13... IDEAS! GO!

Could you please explain some houserules for those of us that are unfamiliar with your setting?

The amoral, possibly psychotic worshipers of an evil deity, devil or demon is always fun, or maybe the party could be an organized crime syndicate?

[Talya]

I have two close friends who want to play in an evil, mid-level campaign DM'd by me. As usual, I'll be using my homebrew setting. However, I need three ideas to present to them so they can pick which sounds like the most fun. Right now, I'm drawing a blank though. Also, while this will be an evil campaign, they don't have to be kitten-eaters. That could work too though, perhaps...

So: Two PCs, evil campaign, starting level 6-13... IDEAS! GO!

Piracy on the high seas. Being evil helps, but you don't have to be a jerk.

Similarly, any group of well organized amoral thieves works well...make it a heist story. Everyone loves a heist story. Or assassins. Quentin Tarantino D&D!

[hamishspence]

there are many strains of evil. From "driven to evil" where a character embrases evil methods toward a possibly admirable goal, because they feel they have "no choice" to the aforementioned kitten eater who thinks all good is abhorrent and it is "better to reign in hell than serve in heaven"

the plain ruthless pragmatic criminal type, with a career in piracy, also works.

[Temet Nosce]

But the point is, the general rule is that Good people who go overboard, slide down the slippery slope to evil, even if they still fight "villains" and still believe they are good.

Its quite a common trope, and various D&D books include paladins falling in the process of acting like this.

If your character would make a 40K inquisitor, or Necromunda's Klovis The Redeemer, stand up and applaud their zeal and ruthlessness, then they probably aren't LG or even LN any more.

Nonetheless, they'd still fall under LG (although oddly enough they wouldn't really fit very well under good... just the specific LG part, then again going by the definition of good no adventurer really fits it). So long as they continue to act as they think good people are supposed to, oppose evil, and punish those they think are guilty they're LG as that's basically the entirety of what LG is.

Further, they're definitely not LE as their motivation is doing what they think is right, rather than self interest. LE isn't just a convenient dumping ground for zealots, it has specific requirements of its own to meet, and where they fit most of the LG ones they fit almost none of the LE ones.

[hamishspence]

BoVD, FC2, and Champions of Ruin stress act-based morality- regardless of whether they think they are good, if they are routinely committing evil acts (and they are Lawful) then they are evil.

Even if they are brave, self-sacrificing, kind, and generous as well.

Basically, a career of atrocity makes for an evil character regardless of why they are doing the atrocities.

[Temet Nosce]

BoVD, FC2, and Champions of Ruin stress act-based morality- regardless of whether they think they are good, if they are routinely committing evil acts (and they are Lawful) then they are evil.

Even if they are brave, self-sacrificing, kind, and generous as well.

Basically, a career of atrocity makes for an evil character regardless of why they are doing the atrocities.

By that standard every adventurer in D&D in evil (since atrocities are the nature of the job), which kind of renders this conversation irrelevant.

[hamishspence]

By atrocities I mean thinks like torturing the innocent children of villains, burning whole villages to the ground with people in them rather than risk that the few who have been corrupted by demons escape, ordering excessively severe punishments for those who have committed only minor evil acts, etc.

Not the usual run of adventurer behaviour- stuff that is excessive even by their standards. An attitude that large amounts of collateral damage is acceptable. And so on.

Tome of Magic had a witch binder character, LE, who is like that- believes that they are still good, because they are "fighting evil"

[Temet Nosce]

By atrocities I mean thinks like torturing the innocent children of villains, burning whole villages to the ground with people in them rather than risk that the few who have been corrupted by demons escape, ordering excessively severe punishments for those who have committed only minor evil acts, etc.

Not the usual run of adventurer behaviour- stuff that is excessive even by their standards. An attitude that large amounts of collateral damage is acceptable. And so on.

Tome of Magic had a witch binder character, LE, who is like that- believes that they are still good, because they are "fighting evil"

So, somehow there's an arbitrary spot where you become evil which conveniently ignores adventurers? I mean come on, I've been in games where LG characters killed Orc babies to prevent them from growing up evil. Adventuring will inevitably result in some kind of atrocity, if we're really judging evil by that scale then good PCs would be essentially nonexistent.

Alignment already makes almost no sense, bringing up arbitrarily becoming evil whenever a character does anything which might be interpreted that way (even when it would normally fall under their alignment) makes it even worse. You pretty much have to judge alignment by a characters view of themselves, otherwise it becomes meaningless.

Consider, even ignoring that I know of no list of acts which will turn you evil or good... how would you rule on the interaction of the two lists? Which acts supersede the others? What about acts that aren't on such lists? Can you switch back and forth act by act?

[The Neoclassic]

I'm not getting into the starting up alignment debate here, just clarifying for the following:

Could you please explain some houserules for those of us that are unfamiliar with your setting?

I run a semi-fuzzy alignment system. Alignment consists of motivation, intent, action, & consequence. Someone who consistently does more minor evils than they go minor good acts, or whom commits fewer but more serious evil actions- or has seriously evil motivation, for example, would be evil. So, Mary the Younger, who appears to be a good and honest woman but beats her children in private and is allowing her business's waste to pollute the neighboring town's well, would be evil. Gary the Mad, who openly seems a decent guy but secretly is plotting and planning to overthrow the kind & effective king, is also evil. Helen the Honorable, who burns goblin villages, killing all present regardless of alignment or age, based on the (false, in my setting) belief that all are inherently morally inferior beings, may think of herself as a good person but is evil.

On the other hand, Warren occasionally cheats customers, but treats his family kindly and gives all of the excess money to feed the poor. Sarah rarely has a polite thing to say to anyone, but she never manipulates or is purposefully cruel to people for selfish- or any other- purposes. Samuel is dedicated to stopping the kobolds who are overrunning the farmlands, but he is only killing those directly threatening a village and whenever possible, takes the orphans to be raised by the more open-minded good church in the area. All these characters are nonevil.

Now, this is just how I view the alignment system. Argue all you want, but I'm not changing my mind. I'm not going to tell you how to run your game and don't tell me how to run mind- the simple black n' white divide or "Heroes can kill anything with green skin guilt-free!" approach doesn't appeal to my tastes. Information above only provided to clarify how I use/define evil for my campaigns. Also, evil characters absolutely may (and often do) refuse to commit one or more acts which are evil (rape, torture, killing of children, treason, etc.) If you eat enough kittens, it doesn't matter how many innocent virgins you allow to walk through your palace unharrassed- you're still plenty evil.

[JonestheSpy]

Well, I'm pretty fond of the idea of putting such characters in traditional "save the countryside/world/mulitverse style campaigns, but they're acting not out of altruism, but the need to save themselves by saving everyone else. They're not nice about it.

Let's characters roleplay evil all they want, without they and the DM having to constantly ponder "What evil thing happens next...?" It can also be amusing for players to see how far they can push it - balancing between the powers that be putting up with them because they're on a crucial mission and saying "to hell with it, better to kill 'em and risk the consequences".

[Ravens_cry]

That sounds more like a LG campaign, then an evil one. In fact, it fits it perfectly, due to the whole "let no guilty go unpunished" thing.

No, it fits a lawful stupid, Miko-esque, rectal foremast insertion, campaign.
Acting like a frothing zealot with no comprehension of mercy is not Good.
*tangent off*
Evil Campaign idea
Joining a cult, now you must prove that you are actually willing to serve the cult and not just faking it, might be a good start for early level adventurers. Have multiple choices so that players can fit something that fits their idea of Evil best.

[BenTheJester]

You could do the reverse of the usual. You are usully good-aligned adventurers in a good-aligned dominated world.

Why not be an evil-aligned party in an evil-aligned dominated world, such as, a tyranny already in place.

So you would be doing the "same" adventuring as before, but it'd be 1000x more fun because you are evil.

I hate it how almost everyone who runs an evil campaign put you as an "always running from authorities" kind of party.

[Talya]

So, somehow there's an arbitrary spot where you become evil which conveniently ignores adventurers? I mean come on, I've been in games where LG characters killed Orc babies to prevent them from growing up evil.

Yeah, but those are evil acts.

Adventuring will inevitably result in some kind of atrocity, if we're really judging evil by that scale then good PCs would be essentially nonexistent.

Adventuring is not evil, by nature. Killing isn't evil by nature, so long as the killing is justifiable.

[Dusk Eclipse]

If you are in an evil-aligned world why not chase the "few" good aligned npc?

[BenTheJester]

If you are in an evil-aligned world why not chase the "few" good aligned npc?

same reason you don't chase the "few" evil aligned npc in a good-aligned world.




I consider gnolls/orcs/all those basic monsters roaming the land to be trash to destroy in any world anyway

[Zaydos]

I mean come on, I've been in games where LG characters killed Orc babies to prevent them from growing up evil.

I've actually had my players encounter this problem. They found out they had killed the orcs' parents and took the orphaned to NPC followers and told the NPCs to take care of them. Killing babies should be the last resort for good creatures, that said I've seen them try and convince one PC to smash the dragon egg he had bought because it almost certainly contained a horribly evil dragon... after having raised a rust dragon (alignment LN or LE) to be LG and contemplate raising a baby white dragon while they were saying it (I think it was fear as to the power of a purple dragon which might get away to cause untold havoc while a white dragon is weak). I will agree alignment is ambiguous but good characters don't go around killing babies.

As for an evil campaign I always like the Evil characters saving the world because they don't want it destroyed (so that they can conquer it themselves). Another one is plain out world-conquest, and I just thought of robbing the graveyards of metallic dragons. I also like the idea of necromancers, on the run from "legitimate" wizards' schools because of their use of black magic.

[madtinker]

How about a revenge quest? somebody killed somebodies father/mentor, or betrayed by a somebody (soldier left to die by comrade, survived, etc.) and instead of righteous indignation the revenge has tainted their view of human nature until they hate everyone. Or they could have some gross deformation that makes everyone afraid, and they have discovered fear brings respect, so they make everyone fear them.

I guess those are more character ideas than campaign ideas, but if you let them make the evil characters and then throw them in the world it might work out alright.

[Hyudra]

Sins of the Father

The PCs are siblings, the children of a tyrant who ruled the northwest. Their father is dead and his ashes burned and scattered to the winds. His landholdings have been divided up by the heroes who slew him, and civil warfare is rampant. Whether by politics, raising an army of loyal troops, assassination or outright physical challenge, their task is to retake their father's lands and regain control of the populace.

Blasphemy

As cultists of Vecna, the PCs are looking for secrets to exploit for their own ends. With this in mind, they have taken to joining the temple of Heironeous. With the help of a dark baptism of secrets to mask their alignments, the cultists are posing as paladins in training. Their assigned task is to corrupt their fellow priests, bring down the temple and gain any power they possibly can.

Gone to Hell

A campaign taking place in Baator, with the PCs as damned souls who have retained some of their memories. They've got to survive, ascend the devilish heirarchy and collect the crystallized fragments of their memory that the devils have bartered away on the blackest of the black markets. Of course, it can't be too easy - that's why there's a complication. To make their stay in hell more poignant, the devils left part of their memories intact - so the PCs remember that they absolutely despise one another (The PC's cause of death was simultaneous murder at the others' hands), yet they must stay in close proximity to the other lest they lose the remnants of their identities and become mindless lemures.