Echoes from the Pit: The Evil Thread

[Darklord Xavez]

Hello. I have started this thread for one reason: to discuss evil characters. Here is where people can post questions about the darker side of life in D&D and post answers to those questions as well. Roleplaying in particular, because mechanics is pretty much the same for every character. But, before you post, I will say one thing: NO TALKING ABOUT The Book of Vile Darkness. What is mentioned in that book will STAY in that book. I will begin by pitching a question: how does one play a neutral evil bard? Would he fascinate a group of people and then kill them or would he fascinate them and let the rogue pick their pockets?
-Darklord Xavez

[Geiger Counter]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4xE8wwigWM

there is also the dirgesinger, libris mortis
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/li...lery/84714.jpg

[Darklord Xavez]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4xE8wwigWM

there is also the dirgesinger, libris mortis
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/li...lery/84714.jpg

The first one is creepier. By far. Thus, that is how a neutral evil bard would work. In addition, libris mortis is a fun book.

[slyfox99]

I started my last game with severa; survivors of a badly defeated army entering a village, looking over their shoulders and saying, "Finally! I think they've stopped chasing us!"

Only to have the locals come up to them and say, "Some goblins have stolen our children... Might you help us?"

As for the main question on this thread, I dislike evil parties. They always seem to actually be neutral parties or unaligned parties, interested in turmimg a profit and doing nothing trule EEEEE-VIL!

I had a friend I used to play Vampire: the Dark Ages with, who always played a Tzimisce because of the combat advatage that the zhulo form gave him, and every town he went to, he would try his hardest to become a medeival pimp.

He wondered why I quit Storytelling in that game....

[CockroachTeaParty]

What is it with Disney and cartoons about vermin? Ever see the one where Mickey huffs bug spray and hallucinates vividly about giant insects? Mouse be trippin' balls!


Hmm... I'd have to echo the sentiment of being against evil parties. I've never seen one gel. The inherent hatred and paranoia of evil characters makes it difficult for PCs with different backgrounds to work together for any amount of time, unless there's something much more powerful cracking the whip. Players are often bad at seizing their own initiative, and being evil ups the demand to formulate your own plans even more.

[Bibliomancer]

The best evil parties emerge from the corpses of standard parties.

The first campaign I ran had a neutral rogue who became evil when they set a building on fire and barred the doors of a large inn containing government agents to get back at those agents for not paying them for delivery of hippogriff eggs (they forgot to check the bottom of the packs, which consisted on platinum on top of silver), even though the agents simply did not pay them the sum of the money the party had stolen from the local treasury a session ago. The rogue (Elmyra) ended up killing off a few other good characters and causing me to split the campaign into good and evil halves, with each player having one character in each party. Eventually, they would have to choose between the two in a final showdown...but we didn't get that far.

In any case, that party (the evil half) was truly evil. One of their first missions as a fully evil party was to collaborate with Mindflayers to enslave an elven village.

I guess the main thing I learned was that you shouldn't bother pushing your players towards evil, because they'll be able to find it just fine on their own. After that I started playing Eberron, where you can be evil and still normal if you have a powerful patron.

[Superglucose]

As for the main question on this thread, I dislike evil parties. They always seem to actually be neutral parties or unaligned parties, interested in turmimg a profit and doing nothing trule EEEEE-VIL!

Ugh quite the opposite here. I'm sick of evil parties because apparently "Evil" is a code-word for "Completely unable to work with others, form alliances, or do anything other than sadism." I've never seen an evil party with the goal that is not "Kill everything and everyone and then light them on fire for fun." Everyone wants to play Black Mage and it gets absolutely horribly boring.

[Thurbane]

I have plans in my campaign for a BBEG who is obsessed with restoring Geryon to his status as an arch-devil. Since Geryon is currently a vestige, this won't be easy. I'm thinking he'll be a Sorcerer/Binder/Anima Mage/Fiend Blooded, and researching some kind of power ritual for Geryon to use his body as a vessel to return to the physical realms...

[Benejeseret]

Two examples from my games:

1. I have been DMing an evil psion-based game (LE) set in ancient Eberron in which the party members are the first Inspired. Set on forging their own empire and conquering the continent. One of the key things was that they had to appear/seem to be good and the saviours of humankind so that the people would flock to them, giving up religion and magic to follow the Inspired to build monoliths and Riedra itself.

2. My favourite LE bard was Wren Larkvonstein. Based on a dark version of snow white. She was death-touched (race) with the harbinger variant.

[Darklord Xavez]

Ugh quite the opposite here. I'm sick of evil parties because apparently "Evil" is a code-word for "Completely unable to work with others, form alliances, or do anything other than sadism." I've never seen an evil party with the goal that is not "Kill everything and everyone and then light them on fire for fun." Everyone wants to play Black Mage and it gets absolutely horribly boring.

Yeah, I agree. That is why I always play a lawful evil character when I am evil. Otherwise there is too much backstabbing. I also give my evil character some funny quirks, such as a soft spot for cute animals.

[Blackfang108]

Yeah, I agree. That is why I always play a lawful evil character when I am evil. Otherwise there is too much backstabbing. I also give my evil character some funny quirks, such as a soft spot for cute animals.

I have one that seems to have a soft spot for kids, at least to the other players.

He's just Goal-Oriented. That kid WILL die, but we aren't powerful enough to draw attention to ourselves in a city that is the earthly stronghold of Hireoueous. At least, not yet.

I will PERSONALLY burn that city-state to the ground. I will then [Exlative Deleted] every single [Exlative Deleted] until [REDACTED] and then [REDACTED] the [Exlative Deleted][Exlative Deleted][Exlative Deleted].

[Yukitsu]

The best evil characters are ones who are evil for a realistic purpose. Ones who just commit random atrocities, or want to take over the world for taking over the world's sake are one dimensional and boring.

[Darklord Xavez]

The best evil characters are ones who are evil for a realistic purpose. Ones who just commit random atrocities, or want to take over the world for taking over the world's sake are one dimensional and boring.

That is why Chaotic Evil is the worst possible alignment.
-Xavez

[Darklord Xavez]

I have one that seems to have a soft spot for kids, at least to the other players.

He's just Goal-Oriented. That kid WILL die, but we aren't powerful enough to draw attention to ourselves in a city that is the earthly stronghold of Hireoueous. At least, not yet.

I will PERSONALLY burn that city-state to the ground. I will then [Exlative Deleted] every single [Exlative Deleted] until [REDACTED] and then [REDACTED] the [Exlative Deleted][Exlative Deleted][Exlative Deleted].

I hear what you're saying. My character would do that and then rebuild the city in his own image.
-Xavez

[Yukitsu]

I disagree. A chaotic person can do something for a reason. They just won't adhere to justifications as to the means they attain it. For example, I recently played a chaotic evil freedom fighter, and it worked out fairly well. I would kidnap people who sold others into slavery, or who were corrupt governers and extract information from them before murdering them to help free the weak.

I have to mention here that when I see chaotic, I think of a person who has no code of honour or ethics, and who refuses to adhere to any laws or rules when they feel like it would make their life even moderately easier. This character didn't fight law for a codified reason, but for an intelligible, rational one. If the opression wasn't hurting people, this character wouldn't continue fighting them merely out of principle, there had to be a rational behind things.

Chaotic people can and should have an intelligent reason behind what they do. The D&D book states explicitly that a chaotic person is not just as likely to jump off a bridge as they are to walk across it. It's simply a world view as to whether things have to be done in a certain codified way, or if it should be determined by the individual as the situation warrants. At least that's my view of chaotic. Obviously, the laurels of chaotic evil will change by definition of chaotic.

Edit: As a caveat, I will agree that chaotic evil, chaotic neutral and lawful good are the most commonly poorly played and RPed alignments out there. That's more an issue of the players misinterpreting the way those alignments should work IMO.

[Blackfang108]

I hear what you're saying. My character would do that and then rebuild the city in his own image.
-Xavez

Oh, no. That City's not getting rebuilt. It's getting removed from all recorded history.

The rest of the world will be rebuilt in my God's Image. (Maybe. Depends on how much Nerull threatens me.)

That city? Not so much.

[Optimystik]

Here is where people can post questions about the darker side of life in D&D and post answers to those questions as well.

But, before you post, I will say one thing: NO TALKING ABOUT The Book of Vile Darkness. What is mentioned in that book will STAY in that book.

1) Out of curiosity, why?

2) Are other sources of D&D Evil up for discussion? Champions of Ruin? Savage Species? Exemplars of Evil? The Fiendish Codices?

[slyfox99]

This is why I like the alignment system in 4e better. Most people in the real world probably work out as Unaligned, so it stands to reason most people in the fantasy world do, as well.

[Thurbane]

1) Out of curiosity, why?

One would assume because some of the topics in BoVD aren't appropriate for a family friendly forum. Certainly not all, though.

2) Are other sources of D&D Evil up for discussion? Champions of Ruin? Savage Species? Exemplars of Evil? The Fiendish Codices?

Well, if not, this is likely to be a very short discussion thread.

[opheliagonemad]

Hmm...In my experience, Evil parties can work, they just have to have some overriding goal to overcome the evil, at least long enough for the game.

In the first evil game I was a part of, I was a NE druid--of the reptile worshipping, cruel nature type. I had hooked in with a mostly evil party that was trying to run a criminal empire (orphan slaves and the lot) because we had a mutual rival/guy who'd screwed us over. And they were going to let me have a huge chunk of land devoted to reptiles. We weren't a very serious game, though, and a large portion of it was devoted to knocking down an evil plot that was in the way of our own evil plots.

In our second evil game, I was the "enhanced interrogator" Favored Soul of Loviatar for an evil police force, maintaining the trade in the Underdark.

[SethFahad]

I will begin by pitching a question: how does one play a neutral evil bard? Would he fascinate a group of people and then kill them or would he fascinate them and let the rogue pick their pockets?
-Darklord Xavez

He would fascinate them and let the rogue pick their pockets, and then kill the rogue and empty the rogues pockets.

[Semidi]

For evil parties, I find it works best to make everyone work with each other to make their concepts "fit" better. For instance, if everyone in the party worships Bane some other evil God or a something like that, then you have a good excuse to work together as well as long term goals. It's good to start off with long term objectives to keep everyone's focus and allow the party to be actually evil rather than just kind of mercenary.

I personally like to play evil characters (and good characters, I've really played everything) because I like to get into an alien mindset and think in different ways.

[Kylarra]

He would fascinate them and let the rogue pick their pockets, and then kill the rogue and empty the rogues pockets.

And then turn in the rogue for a bounty.

[Optimystik]

One would assume because some of the topics in BoVD aren't appropriate for a family friendly forum. Certainly not all, though.

Why would one assume that? BoVD has been discussed here many times, and even features in OotS itself. Further, the part of it that would be relevant to this thread - the nature of Evil - is actually one of the tamer parts of the book.

Well, if not, this is likely to be a very short discussion thread.

I'm inclined to agree; but why would those books get a pass, and not BoVD? (Especially when at least two of them reference BoVD directly.)

[Thurbane]

You're obviously missing my point: I'm not saying I agree with the OP, just hypothesizing his reasons. Anyway, my guessing at someone's reasoning is hardly worth arguing over, especially when most of my post is actually in agreement with your POV.

[Optimystik]

You're obviously missing my point:

I wasn't actually - I know you were attempting an explanation of a stance you personally don't agree with - I was just putting forward my rebuttal on the off-chance that he chimed in to say your proposed reasons did align with his.

[Darklord Xavez]

He would fascinate them and let the rogue pick their pockets, and then kill the rogue and empty the rogues pockets.

Nice one.
-Xavez

[Darklord Xavez]

1) Out of curiosity, why?

2) Are other sources of D&D Evil up for discussion? Champions of Ruin? Savage Species? Exemplars of Evil? The Fiendish Codices?

1. Because almost none of the topics in that book are suitable for a family audience. Kids play this game, you know!
2. Besides that and Book of Exalted Deeds, anything is fair game here.
-Xavez

[Darklord Xavez]

Why would one assume that? BoVD has been discussed here many times, and even features in OotS itself. Further, the part of it that would be relevant to this thread - the nature of Evil - is actually one of the tamer parts of the book.



I'm inclined to agree; but why would those books get a pass, and not BoVD? (Especially when at least two of them reference BoVD directly.)

The other books can be discussed because there's not so much stuff that could scar a small child for life in one place. Still some though.

[Darklord Xavez]

Hmm...In my experience, Evil parties can work, they just have to have some overriding goal to overcome the evil, at least long enough for the game.

In the first evil game I was a part of, I was a NE druid--of the reptile worshipping, cruel nature type. I had hooked in with a mostly evil party that was trying to run a criminal empire (orphan slaves and the lot) because we had a mutual rival/guy who'd screwed us over. And they were going to let me have a huge chunk of land devoted to reptiles. We weren't a very serious game, though, and a large portion of it was devoted to knocking down an evil plot that was in the way of our own evil plots.

In our second evil game, I was the "enhanced interrogator" Favored Soul of Loviatar for an evil police force, maintaining the trade in the Underdark.

Any evil person I play has a reason as well. My current LE gestalt sorcerer/wizard (so many spells!) is evil because his parents were wrongfully killed by a group of paladins, and evil is really the only alignment that would want to rid the world of every single paladin (and their gods).
-Xavez