Taking Another Whack at Surface Evil RP. Who Wants In?

[Darkwind]

DG- That is great that you have a way you'd like to do things. But I will say again this VERY much smacks of---

'This is the way YOU must roleplay because...' <insert reason here> It is a BIG problem on this server, and your post seems to only further that point. Boxed inside of unbreakable paradigms.

Skip over to the alignment thread next to this one and you will see many people who utterly disagree with your stance. The hair stands up on my neck anytime someone tells me that I must play a certain way because. If you wish to play archetypes with all the nuance of a bull in a china shop that is your right. But it is diametrically opposed to your opening statement just so you know.

Some will want to rule and others will just want to destroy. And yet others again will want to sow chaos more than anything.

These are the goals of saturday morning cartoon mustache twirler evils of the binary sort you describe. But then you go on to state that you prefer this? Mixed messages...

Do you truly think a lawful evil thief is going to clearly announce who he is and what his intentions are overtly? Or will he attempt to gain your confidence and trust? Because -you- cannot imagine this character or playing it does not mean it doesn't exist or cannot be masterfully RP'd. Sorry but we will have to agree to disagree on this point.

Too many people here like to dictate how things should be according to their worldview, again, my libertarian sensibilities recoil in horror at it, and it is prevalent sadly.

[Steve]

My wish is to play a character fully aware of this nature of evil. Embracing it unapologetically.

I don't think it's fair to accuse DG of "pushing" his RP onto others, when he specifically states HIS PERSONAL PREFERENCE.

And...a Character that is aware of their own evil-minded nature MAY CHOOSE to openly embrace that, or, keep it in secret check in order, in either ways, achieve X, Y and Z. Right?!? The BGTSCC sandbox is big enough for each to play their own.

"Righteous" as a term, in D&D, is imho much more aligned to Good, than to Evil. Sure, Evil-minded Characters can be morally justified, but their Evil Ways are defined by:

Evil implies harming, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient or if it can be set up. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some malevolent deity or master.

It is disingenuous, in D&D terms, to role-play an Evil Character who thinks they are Good. I know the RP is appealing, but what you end up doing is metagaming your own Toon! LOL. It's funny, but true.

D&D is literally setup so that Evil Aligned ARE Evil, and Good Aligned ARE Good. It is, again, that aspect of caricature that I like to bring up, where just like Races and Classes put a Character in a box (of sorts), so does Alignment.

And that is the fun of it ladies and germs!!!

[SoThereIWas]

On the off-topic talk of good and evil concepts and 'how to RP', well read the bellow that I have written just for this as strictly a personal opinion piece .....

_____________________________________________


Symphony to the devils when beaten black and blue,
Sympathy for the devils is what mortals do,

Wipe away those tears,
Shelf your fears,

Lie to yourself as done to the rest,
It is after all what devils do best,

Symphony to the devils when beaten black and blue,
Sympathy for the devils is what mortals do,

The fire in our souls,
It's what he knows,

Through tyranny and strife,
They fight for their life,

It's a concept from the beginning,
and after listening,

Symphony to the devils when beaten black and blue,
Sympathy for the devils is what mortals do . . .

~SoThereIWas

_____________________________________________

Now back on-topic to the thread at hand... @Tekill

Let me get this correct... You plan to do some gangster like idea of lowlifes trying to make a fortune and rise to the top of power by doing depraved things? Sounds like fun!

I do hope you have fun with it, and all the rest that are joining in.

[Deathgrowl]

DG- That is great that you have a way you'd like to do things. But I will say again this VERY much smacks of---

'This is the way YOU must roleplay because...' <insert reason here> It is a BIG problem on this server, and your post seems to only further that point. Boxed inside of unbreakable paradigms.

Skip over to the alignment thread next to this one and you will see many people who utterly disagree with your stance. The hair stands up on my neck anytime someone tells me that I must play a certain way because. If you wish to play archetypes with all the nuance of a bull in a china shop that is your right. But it is diametrically opposed to your opening statement just so you know.

I said nothing at all like what you're suggesting here. I stated my preference, as Steve pointed out.

Some will want to rule and others will just want to destroy. And yet others again will want to sow chaos more than anything.

These are the goals of saturday morning cartoon mustache twirler evils of the binary sort you describe. But then you go on to state that you prefer this? Mixed messages...

Do you truly think a lawful evil thief is going to clearly announce who he is and what his intentions are overtly? Or will he attempt to gain your confidence and trust? Because -you- cannot imagine this character or playing it does not mean it doesn't exist or cannot be masterfully RP'd. Sorry but we will have to agree to disagree on this point.

Too many people here like to dictate how things should be according to their worldview, again, my libertarian sensibilities recoil in horror at it, and it is prevalent sadly.

Lawful evil thief is a curious example to come up with. But no, of course he isn't going to announce that he is evil to the world. I never said that was appropriate. I never even suggested it. My point is that the thief in almost all likelyhood knows that he is evil - whether he announces it or not - and he is likely content in that knowledge.

Or he wishes to redeem himself! But wishing to do that requires that knowledge anyways!

I am sorry your "libertarian sensibilities" recoil in horror at things I didn't say, though.

[Darkwind]

Lawful evil thief is a curious example to come up with. But no, of course he isn't going to announce that he is evil to the world. I never said that was appropriate. I never even suggested it. My point is that the thief in almost all likelyhood knows that he is evil - whether he announces it or not - and he is likely content in that knowledge.

Or he wishes to redeem himself! But wishing to do that requires that knowledge anyways!

I am sorry your "libertarian sensibilities" recoil in horror at things I didn't say, though.

Ok, I think I grok your point better now w/ Steve's input. It is the line between the metagame and the IC motivation I think were the confusion came in. I.E. Steve saying that the character can 'pretend' to be good, but knows in his heart of hearts he isn't. This was your point about the RL morality play stated a different way.

As for offending my libertarian sensibilities, I have a flair for the dramatic so there's that... (which infiltrates my RP as well as you may imagine)

[enginseer-42]

My wish is to play a character fully aware of this nature of evil. Embracing it unapologetically.

I don't think it's fair to accuse DG of "pushing" his RP onto others, when he specifically states HIS PERSONAL PREFERENCE.

And...a Character that is aware of their own evil-minded nature MAY CHOOSE to openly embrace that, or, keep it in secret check in order, in either ways, achieve X, Y and Z. Right?!? The BGTSCC sandbox is big enough for each to play their own.

"Righteous" as a term, in D&D, is imho much more aligned to Good, than to Evil. Sure, Evil-minded Characters can be morally justified, but their Evil Ways are defined by:

Evil implies harming, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient or if it can be set up. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some malevolent deity or master.

It is disingenuous, in D&D terms, to role-play an Evil Character who thinks they are Good. I know the RP is appealing, but what you end up doing is metagaming your own Toon! LOL. It's funny, but true.

D&D is literally setup so that Evil Aligned ARE Evil, and Good Aligned ARE Good. It is, again, that aspect of caricature that I like to bring up, where just like Races and Classes put a Character in a box (of sorts), so does Alignment.

And that is the fun of it ladies and germs!!!

I mean again. Not particularly.

Evil and Good are Evil and Good. But that doesn't necessarily make Good, good. Or Evil, evil.

It's more about the color shirt you wear, and the code of conduct that comes with that uniform than it is about actual morality.

[Steve]

On that note of organizations to build toward...take your pick:

• - Knights of the Shield
  - The Iron Throne

Both are ripe for the storybuilding, and both already have NPCs within Baldur's Gate to "access" for building up role-play. They both provide both merchant-brigand activities, as well as advancement in hierarchy via deeds, using either brains or brawn. Both utilize LE, NE and CE to their advantage, and neither are outlawed...yet.

You don't even need to be Official about it, just make it a background point to begin to amass Coin, Treasure, Experience, and Political Value. These are all goals that can be achieved under the ruse of "adventuring," so gindz-lootz to yer hearts content!!!

[chad878262]

It should be noted that even in FR, PCs can be evil without knowing it (at least in the beginning). A follower of Helm could just as easily swing to LE as LG for example. There are plenty of Helmite Paladins running around, but while Helm may not allow Blackguards, he does allow LE clerics, yes? If you are a Guardian Helmite follower and while protecting sacred ground you capture an attacker and torture him in to giving the location of the groups base of operations you may not be in the good graces of Paladins, but I'm pretty sure other Helmite's and Helm himself is not going to take issue.

It can very much be about approach/ends justify the means for SOME types of characters and some lines of RP. Now, at some point the character absolutely will have to come to terms that what they are doing is in point of fact, objectively evil, but in the MOMENT over the course of serveral moments, they can make evil choices without considering themselves to be evil. That's why alignment points are given by DMs usually in small doses. To represent that a character has done something that pushes them toward one axis or another. It will take a lot of evil actions though before the LN character becomes LE. Probably about ~10 DM interactions where you are actually showing the brutal/evil nature of actions in the fall toward evil alignment. Similarly redemption from this doesn't come from one act, but a change of mindset and careful management of actions over time.

In general, I agree with everything DG stated. Just wanted to call out that just like people know certain things in the real world, it does not make them any less likely to make the 'wrong' choices in the moment. As kids, everyone is taught drugs are bad, but many still succumb to peer pressure and experiment, a few going to far and eventually dying. Objectively, most criminals know that the things they do are wrong, they just don't care or feel they have no other choice or whatever and most keep on doing them. So I guess the point is there is certainly the option for an evil PC that doesn't consider himself evil, even if it is that PC fooling himself/lying to himself over something that in FR would be a point of fact, not opinion. I could see a character 'negotiating' with his internal self over how slaying all those refugee's (including women and children) was necessary for the greater good since his town doesn't have the resources to support them so many more would die by sharing with them over time. He knows such an action is 'evil', but still doesn't consider himself evil because look at all the people he saved in the long run. I imagine people are just as likely to lie to themselves on Faerun as they are on Earth.

[Steve]

Lawful is often associated with having a code, moral code, from which you don't deviate. Chaotic is the behavior of "flipping" and reasoning the behavior to suit the general morals of Good or Evil.

For sake of argument, no, our Characters don't walk around thinking and saying "I'm Lawful Evil!" Alignments are terms using language that we can define, we can reason OOC when objectifying character in this Game. It would much more be a character thinking and saying: "Life is mine to control, uphold, support or deny at whim...yet, such actions as XYZ, I would never justify or cross." As just one example.

For a character to "not know" if they are good or evil, at least in the beginning, would mean they "begin" as Neutral (true, Lawful or Chaotic). Then, as they gain experience, their actions would shift their Alignment, sending them on a path which may open up a profession/calling to another Class or Prestige Class.

But we don't play the Game organically this way, we meta the Character from the beginning, as well, we are hindered from making our own Alignment shifts (because of mechanical abuse).

It's not a perfect sandbox! But it has enough variety to suffice.

[chad878262]

What I mean to say is you could have a Lawful Evil Helmite (from my example) who considers himself Lawful Neutral or even Lawful Good. The RP would simply have to take in to account WHY he thinks himself Lawful (whatever) instead of Evil. This is where 'negotiating' with oneself comes in. Perhaps the character thinks there are redeeming 'good' things that outweigh the evils done which balance the scales, so to speak.

My point was only that just because evil and good are real forces as opposed to subjectively defined as in our world doesn't mean everyone *knows* their alignment. We as players might know it, but the PCs don't have to. Just like in the real world where there are right and wrong actions defined by a given society, some of those who do wrong know they are wrong and are ok with it, others know they are wrong, but tell themselves they did it for the right reasons or otherwise are somehow still not themselves wrong, even when they know something they did/are doing is wrong.

So again, you can have a PC that you KNOW is evil, doesn't mean that PC also knows he/she is evil.

[Deathgrowl]

As I pointed out earlier, if you have a little bit of knowledge religion, you are (in forgotten realms) quite aware of what sort of morals your actions tend towards. If you are a helmite that tortures (even if the intention is "good"), you're practicing evil methods. If you're a priest of helm, you are very much aware of what alignment your spells have, for instance.

[Steve]

That would be the same as saying our characters don't know that Angels are Good, Devils are Evil. In D&D, unlike RL, the aspects of Good and Evil are concrete. They exist, physically.

We, as Players, RP our Characters as Good or Evil or something in between, but you meta (cheat) the game if you play GoodEvilNeutralonThursday aligned Characters. Alignment has concrete repercussions, a fact you cannot deny because it is written into the Rules, mechanics and requirements of the game.

Not upholding that setup in this game would be like playing checkers but saying one random piece is a Queen and can move in (meta)extra directions unlike any other piece...because you as the Player have justified that because the game boards are the same in both Chess and Checkers.

Another way to look at it is: if you want a Character to act as if they don't know what good or evil actions are/to take, then play a Chaotic Neutral Toon that defines their own subjective universe.

Because whether one lies it or not, Alignment has concrete consequences for the very existence (Class; powers; etc.) of the Character.

[chad878262]

As I pointed out earlier, if you have a little bit of knowledge religion, you are (in forgotten realms) quite aware of what sort of morals your actions tend towards. If you are a helmite that tortures (even if the intention is "good"), you're practicing evil methods. If you're a priest of helm, you are very much aware of what alignment your spells have, for instance.

And yet there is no flashing sign in front of the PCs face that says "EVIL"... Practicing 'evil methods' does not mean that you are evil, or at least I could see how one would believe it so. Perhaps that torture led to a successful capture of the entire [insert bbeg] group, thus saving countless lives of [insert group being protected]. Perhaps the PC also does charitable work with the local homeless shelter or orphanage or whatever, maybe they are one of those types that does all kinds of good stuff, but is brutal to the point of evilness. Is there some cosmic way that they KNOW whether the totality of their actions makes THEM good or evil? If you do some of both, like probably every human does, you probably still have no clue what the sum of your actions makes you, personally. Sure, a Paladin KNOWS they are Lawful Good, because if they weren't, they'd be fallen. A Blackguard KNOWS they're evil... some other classes know what alignment they are, or perhaps what alignment they are NOT (Barbarians KNOW they don't care a lick about laws and value personal freedom, etc.) However, for the most part, PCs have no way to undeniably validate for themselves what alignment they are.

[Deathgrowl]

Clarification: I'm not saying you can't play a morally delusional character. I'm saying that it's unlikely that all evil characters are delusional.

[Planehopper]

There are a ton of examples in Forgotten Realms lore that offer conflicted heroes and villains bending from the dogmatic view of alignment in AD&D/core rules black and white. The FR lore is much more humanistic/real when it comes to bad people doing good and good folks doing bad.

There are also stories and examples of clueless people with very little understanding of the cosmos and good/evil. If anything, I think expecting every adventurer to understand such black and white dogma is a little too much of us using meta of the cosmos, and putting that knowledge in play in game.

In the end, we are all going to play our characters the way we see fit and, with exception to huge violations of alignment principles, its all going to be fine. This is a topic people love to debate and is never quite settled.