How do you play an evil character at the table without ruining everyone else's fun with an "I kill everyone" deus ex...

There's no problem with evil characters when people have an OOC agreement not to mess with each other. Have fun with it.

>Im going to bring about a better world for the plebs
>One crucified noble at a time

The idea is that he's a Warlock in D&D and is after power (his sole motive, since I imagine that the kind of person to make the necessary pacts to become a warlock has little else in mind).

There will be political intrigue elements in the campaign which I plan to be how I do most of the evil, but I'm having a hard time imagining an endgame. (ie, congrats, you succeeded, everyone hates you)

I suspect I'll just end up being slain as a plot point which is probably fine with me.

Make an unscrupulous character with goals that don't directly conflict with the direction of the party. That's just how I like to do it, there are plenty of ways to do evil without being "I kick kids and dogs for fun" evil.

Depending on the patron, you can succeed in a way that people aren't aware of.

If your patron is a devil or a faerie, if you manage to subvert a major political figure via a pact/contract, you have succeeded without necessarily displacing the major figure. Only anyone privy to the pact/contract will know as this important person now carries on the patron's will.

Be supportive of the party and its goals but achieve them through immoral and vile means, possibly behind their backs.

Nothing like going on a grand crusade to drive back the Orc tide and their demon-worshipping shamans only to find out your greatest ally was himself also serving one of the Darker Powers and using profane magic or necromancy to pull victory from the jaws of defeat for the good people of kingdom whitebread.

Oh shit, that's a good idea

>is after power (his sole motive
I think you could further refine this into a specific goal, like ruling the realm or smashing specific enemies.

> I imagine that the kind of person to make the necessary pacts to become a warlock has little else in mind
Someone could easily have tried to get warlock powers for a reason, perhaps to protect something important to himself, to work toward some larger goal or other, or to exact revenge on someone who could normally kick his ass. There's also the idea that the pact might have been made in desperation, before he realized he was in over his head.

If I ever find myself in a game I had an idea for a lawful evil character who's primary motivation was to kill his half-siblings and father for believing that he wasnted anything to do with the throne even though he was the seventh son and the only child of his father's 5th' concubine.

He would kill people only when it served his purposes to do so but would otherwise find out everything he could about the people he killed and as a form of repayment seek to do something for the family of those he killed but only if he felt they were obviously innocent.

This would serve two purposes: 1. it would allow him to do whatever he could to preserve his travel companions because aside from himself, they were more important then anyone else regardless of that person's station, 2. He purpetuates his own myth and hype as a upstanding and virtuous sorts who found companions and friends in the survivors of his victims and also aswage his own sense of guilt for having killed them.

In essence, he's like a more evil Yuri Lowell who was not at all afraid to kill anyone if it's convient.

It worked well for one of my players. He ended up creating a villain for the next campaign by his actions.

That's all very depressing.

What you need to think about is why you need more power for what purpose, power for the sake of power can quickly lead to apathy, disinterest in our friends and family, the misuse of drugs which all together leads to self destruction.

You need a plan, something to spark the fire in your bowels be it an evil partner, a mortal enemy or establishing an evil new world order.

Something to really bring out the fight in ya.

First we must satisfy our base needs of violence, co conspirators, and infamy then we all move forward self actualize and become better villains.

What are you, my evil therapist?

No one is evil for evils sake. Well, shitheads are but you probably don't want to be a shithead. Without a plan or a motivation, you're just a jackass

Is 'because it's fun' a decent motivation?

That underground arena thing sounds awesome. Might have to take that for a spin.

But edgy ending ruins a perfectly good story.

Plenty of people probably play evil characters without realizing it. It shouldn't be too hard unless you take it too far.

>edgy
Evil, you ponce. I like that story. It perfectly illustrates the differences between players playing at being evil and actually being evil.

>"edgy"
man this meme has gotta stop

Honestly it seems to me that the guy was just fucking with everyone for shits.

Not really. That's generally just jackass behavior.

>Evil, you ponce
Pointlessly evil.
He doesn't give any sort of justification why his character has chosen now to stab the girl.
It just happens at that moment for ~BONUS SHOCK VALUE~.

I played an evil, savage brute in a game. It was GURPS, there's no alignments, but he was the kind of person that would kill someone without hesitation or remorse, and would take things he wanted.

To make him work with the group, I deiced that he liked and enjoyed the company of one of the other characters, and desired their approval. While this did not change the nature of the beast it did mean that he avoided things he knew would offend, repulse or sicken the person he cared about.

The GM gave me a few great chances to go evil as fuck on people that had kidnapped his companion.

Alright, this is gonna sound edgy as fuck, but consider a really Evil person's perspective:
>Other people are stupid, and I can trick them into doing what I want
>Playing games that involve tricking other people (Diplomacy, some kinds of poker) are fun, because it shows how brilliant and far above them I am
>It's fun to find someone who can actually keep up with my mind games, because it keeps me sharp and gives me a marker to beat
>So I'm going to put myself into the highest level of power I can find and make fucking with people's heads my profession
>My endgoal is to play Risk with the world. With that many people after my neck, I'll never be bored again.

This.

It was after the PC Party had grown to like her, and surely in character he knew this. There was no reason to stab her, in character or out, since it sounds preeetty likely that none of the other party members would particularly like him for that.

It's basically "LOL SO EDGY" evil for no real reason, in something that could quite possibly get him killed for... Well. Shock value. That's it.

It was all just part of a long setup to help distinguish the difference between casual, emotionless evil acts of no consequence, and an act of evil that actually resonated.

> the point

> your head

being evil is "edgy" news flash

The group wanted an evil campaign. It's weird that you're complaining about him being edgy for no reason, when you're not really complaining about the other three characters at all, who could basically be defined as edgy for no reason.

Yes. But it was pointless evil, is the thing. There was no in character reason to do that, and it was actually to his detriment to do so. He may have done it to make a point, but that doesn't change the fact that at the end of the day, it was done mostly for shock value.

If there is an NPC the party likes, and a PC stabs her for no real reason, then you would rightfully call "That Guy", even if he said it was to make a point OOC.

>There was no in character reason to do that

Why was he stalking the girl to begin with?
The guy was a psycopathic stalker, and you're wondering why he would kill a girl that no longer was his exclusive idol, but the center of attention within his group?

Evil people can have friends. Be friends with the other characters. Just like, their shitty friend who they try to help out, put up with, are in denial about, or don't realize is evil.

That was never stated nor implied to be his intent. And even then, I think "Three powerful people who know my name and likely where I can be found like this person" seems to be a good enough reason to not stab her in the throat.

Also, "It's what my character would do" is rarely a good reason to be "That Guy" when he had plenty of other outs that didn't involve you know, killing an NPC who was described as "a sort of mascot for the group".

"Oh, he's an asshole.. he'd kill a guy with a shovel for cutting him off in traffic."

"But he'd also kill a guy with a shovel for stealing from me or trying to hold me up with a knife, so.. Kinda good to keep around".

While this sounds like your getting it, it's not for this grand game of evil that we are committing nefarious plots, it is for the people who are a part of it.

Remember, just because you are an antagonist it doesn't mean you have to antagonize everyone around you the best part of our journey are those closest to us both friends and enemies.

I've seen too many evildoers come apart once they've isolated themselves. So please learn a path of aiding those around you, of helping them help you of turning their inner strength upon the justices of the world.

It isn't always easy being evil but it is always right(for some of us).

From the very start he called her his intended victim. Someone he planned on getting to know.

And, ultimately, the character probably thought he would be able to get away with it, especially because it was never said that the other characters (only the players) knew his character was even stalking the girl.
What we've got is a lot of metagaming going on from the other players, alongside the narrator's own metaplot that is inconsequential in-game, but hits the rest of the group quite hard.

When the little girl doesn't show up for school, what exactly are the other three characters supposed to think? That their companion murdered her, without knowing he had been stalking her? Of course, the players will know, but the only character that knows the whole story would be the rogue.

James Bond

Son of a bitch.

The Party has two casters, and sound fairly high level. That means they have a good bevy of resources for finding out just who did this, mostly magical in nature. They have quite a lot of options for finding out what happened to her, and none of them end up particularly well for him.

And even if that wasn't the case, it doesn't make him any less that guy for doing it in the first place.

My character in a nutshell.

I like killing people. People like when evil people get killed. I kill evil people and other people approve of me. Win win.

I think Alarak from legacy of the void is a good example of this.

It's really not hard to be evil, you just put a goal in mind and carry out actions that will get you there at any cost.

I'm currently playing a NE necromancer whose goal is to end all war, forever. His party companions are a tool to help aid him toward this goal, as it allows him to travel unmolested for the most part. He's the butt of most of the jokes as he's "creepy" and generally made fun of by the party, but he steels his will as he's got to fulfill his ambition by any means necessary. When he becomes a lich he'll let each and every one of them go as he'll wage war on the world against all fronts, out of respect for their journey together. If any of them raise a stink, he'll slay them where they stand.

Obviously he'll tread carefully and only do what he thinks I could reasonably get away with.

IMO evil just means sacrificing others for your own gain. "neutral" characters may do this occasionally, but only to people who are evil, like killing an orc leader solely for the bounty, or they may have limits to what they will do, and balance their selfish actions with helpful ones.

Being evil doesn't mean you have to slaughter you friends, or present yourself as "edgy", or even be sadistic, which is only the most DIRECT form of evil. It just means you're an unscrupulous motherfucker who wants something, and are not afraid to trample anyone in your way to get it as you determine is smart for you.

If we're talking hypothetical, the rogue's probably of a similar level, and knowing the capabilities of his allies (and their fondness for the girl) would probably have taken the necessary precautions, or will take the necessary actions to protect himself. When it comes to killing unsuspecting people who think you're their ally, rogues are pretty good at that.

But that's all besides the point. You're right, in that the player committed a dick move, but we're talking about a roleplaying game and an evil campaign, and that player managed to not only give everyone a taste of evil above what any of them had done, he made the campaign a lasting experience. Do you think they'll ever forget about that girl?

It's not going to be a pleasant memory, but I don't think the point of evil campaigns are to fill the group with pleasant thoughts.

>but I don't think the point of evil campaigns are to fill the group with pleasant thoughts.

Actually, I think that's exactly what it's for. Since Evil Campaign or no, it's a game.

And Games are for having fun, not having that one asshole stab the parties favorite NPC in the throat just because he wanted to "give everyone a taste of evil above what any of them had done".

More damningly so, he said he didn't want to do an evil campaign in the first place in the very first post... And yet, when the party turns to a "neutral, if not partially good aligned party", he instead decides to stab someone in the throat who the party liked.

So he joined a game that he didn't really want to be in, and when the game became something more that he wanted, he immediately decides to be an asshole and stab an NPC the rest of the party likes in the throat.

He may have made it into a lasting experience, but I think the memory will be more "That guy was an asshole" than "That guy showed us what evil really was"

It's the difference between being evil and having affectations of being evil

Dude, he was literally going to kill her from the start, he just took his sweet time because he's a psycho who wants to know exactly what kind of person he's offing.

It's not his fault the party realized that it's really hard being evil to someone who has a personality

It shouldn't be.

The problem with RPGs is that they are set up in such a way that most of the time, you have to go out of your way to do evil things. In reality, people do an evil thing because they want to and it benefits them in some way.

That's the problem when there are always dungeons full of bad guys and treasure which good guys can, with a clean conscience, go into and murder everybody and take everything.

Think about how many people would play evil characters if all the gold and armor and fancy weapons were owned by normal people who don't deserve to get murdered.

Oddly enough, yes. 'Because it's fun' can be a decent enough motivation as long as you figure out what the character finds fun about it. Does he enjoy murder because it's cathartic? Or maybe he enjoys feeling powerful and strong and that leads him to capture opponents and torture them. Once you figure out what the character finds fun about his actions, you can then make that character feel like an actual person instead of just a murderhobo.

The guy probably didn't want to join because he had a different idea of what evil was. Perhaps, we can call it a less superficial one. You're right, in that he's an asshole, a horrible person, and that any player that pulls that sort of stunt deserves to be kicked out of the group and never invited again, but the one good thing you can say about him is that he doesn't approach evil casually.

In one move, he went from the least evil to the most evil character. That's a heck of a distance to run.

As far as games go, tragedy shouldn't be absent from them, and bad feelings can be as welcome as good ones if they're poignant enough. That horrible, complex feeling of "No, this didn't have to happen, why would someone do this, can we undo this, she didn't deserve to die, I hate whoever did this, none of this makes sense, why, tell me, why" is exactly the kind of response you can expect from the evil act of a psychopath.

The guy played the game wrong, but he certainly did evil right.

There's nothing wrong with being a murderhobo. Going around and killing people and stealing their things and getting drunk in taverns is an entirely believable set of behavior for an "evil" person.

The problem is when the game tells you that you're a hero of righteousness while you're murderhoboing.

Just be a regular adventurer.
That secretly is a serial murderer and must compulsively kill certain types of NPCs every time you are in a town

To those complaining about the ending being edgy or pointless:
Evil is demonstrated quite well in two ways by it.
One is the killer who got to know every detail about his intended target and took what he wanted when he damn well wanted it.
The other is the treatment of the other players by the Rogue's player.

>regular adventurer
They're already serial murderers. They just compulsively kill outlaws and nonhuman sentients.

I played an evil doctor once. He was a supreme healer and an amazing diplomat. However he was power hungry and was extremely self-serving. After working at a clinic he managed to lure someone with a cybernetic prosthetic into his lab and then pretend to take a blood sample, only to inject a needle full of air directly into a major artery. After that he made the dismemberment look like a machinery malfunction.

He tended to carry a locket which he would longingly stare into. When they finally killed the bastard and opened the locket to see what made him such a bastard there was no picture of a family or friends or a dog or anything like that... There was a mirror.

>any player that pulls that sort of stunt deserves to be kicked out of the group and never invited again
You kick the GOOD roleplayers out of your group?

>end all war, forever.
>wage war on the world against all fronts
I mean I know it's traditional for villains to be hypocritical but still I'm curious. Is it the standard "people can't do thing I disapprove of if I kill everyone"?

Not the guy, but nations can't clash with each other when there's only one nation left.

"You see Skeletor, when you act like hero, you get praise, gold and fame, and this stuff is useful for our further goals of world domination"

One nation will find a difference between its members. Capital vs Province, South vs North, Urban vs Rural, Religion vs Religion...

Fuckin' nice

There is two ways to do it.

One way is to have the guy be as amoral as they come, if you take the douchebag action that non sensible person in the party agrees with, he is with you 100%. Have him butt heads with the one doing the right, talk about how he is only a paladin to feel good about what he is doing. Got a disruptive element? Talk to the party head to find a way to dispose of the problematic guy. Trying not to directly butt heads but make it clear you don't give two shits about them and only work under a nothing personal approach

Pic related.

The second option is the hardass approach. Enforcing harsh punishments for doing stupid things (like beating up a party member if he did something stupid). Holding no respect for anyone who tries to act entitled or do something that would proverbially fuck everyone over and upfront about it. Make them be easily bought off and will listen so long as you don't fuck what's close them over.

>evil doesn't always mean cruel or hell, even mean
It means exactly that. Being self-interested isn't enough to be evil, unless you consider most people evil

I'm playing a lich in the same group we have a cleric in and we're doing fine.

There also used to be a paladin, though I joined in to replace him, which makes the harmonic group relations even more surprising.

...

Your character might genuinely enjoy the company of the party despite thier different world views or at the very least, they might selfishly recognise that they're better off with a party of people slowly growing into demi-gods at thier back.

I always found Crowley from Supernatural (hurrdurr) be a pretty good example of (lawful) evil. He's the King of Hell, tries to get people's souls, tortures and kills people but still helps save the world because if shit goes sideways he's fucked aswell. He's also not incapable of caring about others.

You need to have a goal that aligns with the party's, otherwise you're going to be a fun killer.

Don't get into too many arguments with the LG paladin, recognise that by playing an evil character, it's on you to be courteous and stand down when you're outvoted.

The party doesn't need to know that you're evil. If you want to do something nefarious to further your agenda, let your DM know and they might incorporate it into the campaign. Example: my group had an evil wizard who ended up being the antagonist of the campaign. When the shock twist came, the player had already prepared a new NG character, and the DM simply took over as the wizard. You don't need to go this far with it, obviously, but you get the idea.

4. deus ex machina means something else

the ultimate end was good, but the whole bit preceeding it with the shifting of alignments wasn't really that interesting or believable.

All in all 7/10 though

I started my character with the idea that he was neutral evil, meaning in his case that he just has little empathy for others and is very self-serving.

I feel like the most important thing that people miss when they're trying to do an evil character is that the other PCs are very, very useful to have as "friends."
In my character's case, he cares little about their feelings but he cares to an extreme degree if they were to die, as that would be an inconvenience to him since they are one of the things that helps him get things done.

I did meet an NPC who I chose to have him grow a close attachment to for various reasons, and she is now his platonic friend/confidant/co-owner of their guild. She happens to have a strong moral compass, and he doesn't like it when she's upset at him, so he does "good' things to keep that connection.
I think there's some good room for character development in evil characters.

>Not finding a well-meaning but naive youth
>Not using your high CHA stat and Charm magics to cause them to rise to power
>Not making yourself Grand Vizier

>Evil people have friends too.
Yes, your general outlook may be evil. But you might still douse yourself in kerosene and run through a burning house to try and save your daughter.
In fact, one might argue that you're willing to go much further to save their own and the people they consider friends than the LG paladin, or some other goody two-shoes.
>You're not necessarily out to eat the world.
Even though you might have an evil alignment, that's more of a general proclivity than mission statement. If you putter along on your own, you might do somethings to expedite whatever goal you're working towards that others might consider ... unnatural. But that's just the way the chips fall.
>Even if you're evil, you will usually still have qualms and morals.
A corollary to this is that you may have a code of honor that you prefer to follow, and that may be important to you. The traditional way this is delineated, is that LE is "evil with a plan", NE is "selfish or egotistical evil", and CE is "I burn kittens for my lunch / The Destroyer".
Pasta from Reddit

What you're describing is not really evil. That's somewhere on the darker part of the neutral line; that's diet evil. Evil Vista. The New Zealand to Evil's Australia. I'd be hardpressed to even call you damned.

Adventuring is your court-mandated community service.

>if you don't kick toddlers and eat babies at every chance you get, you're not really evil!

I'm currently playing an evil barbarian. She's in it for money, personal fame and other selfish reasons, but it doesn't mean she can't and doesn't form relationships with the party that do not involve backstabbing.

Remember that Evil in DnD means Selfish first and foremost. What it doesn't mean is "hurr durr I hate everyone". Chaotic Evil isn't necessarily "serial murderer" or a "mindless gibberer", it can be some extreme Objectivist who only does what he wants but never kills anyone ever. An evil character can perfectly function in a normal party, but chances are he won't be sticking his neck out to save a bunch of random orphans unless it furthers his goals somehow.

Better than being an evil retard that goes
"HURR THE FERRYMASTER WHO HELPED US CROSSED THIS RIVER IS USELESS NOW SO I STAB HIM IN THE BACK"

"HURR INSTEAD OF WAITING ON MY CLERIC TO CONVINCE THE JUDGE THAT I CAN BE AN INDENTURED SERVICE TO THE LORD OF LIGHT I BREAK OUT OF MY CELL KILLING 3 GUARDS"

"HURR NOW I COMPLAIN TO THE GM WHEN THE GROUP HUNTS ME DOWN AND KILLS ME SO THEY ARENT GUILTY BY ASSOCIATION"

Unless the OP meant literally unleashing a god from a machine that kills everyone, then he is correct.

this
I played a NE fighter who was basically a mercenary for the party only doing things that ended up with him having gold or getting some sort of reward.

To add to this:

In this thread the general assumption is "even if an Evil character willingly works for the party, he's just biding his time to betray everyone". But an Evil character doesn't necessarily want to betray the party. He doesn't necessarily hatch some grand evil plan, no more than every Neutral character needs to hatch a plan to kill every Good and Evil person to create balance or something.

An Evil character simply needs to put himself before others to some extent, or follow an egoistic philosophy. He is probably craven and sociopathic to some degree, or appears as such to others, but he definitely doesn't have to be a supervillain. He can easily form meaningful relationships with the party and even sacrifice himself for his friends and close ones, as long as he goes THOSE ONES ARE MINE.

If you do good things just to kill people you're allowed to kill (and get paid for it) does that make you evil?

Yeah because you are not doing good for the betterment of society but for a selfish and morally wrong reason which is to enjoy killing

You're evil not because you're a edgelord or whatever, your mind just works that way.

When someone says "Take care of the villagers" you go - "Okay, boys - Line them up, get ready to fire." - and you look honestly confused when they say "Good lord, I didn't say kill them!"

Or in a heart-wrenching scene of death, you start going through the pockets of the corpses. "Guys, they're already dead. They won't need their trinkets."

At the same time, you do the dirty work that no-one else will do. You kill the prisoner when he's no longer useful, and you assassinate those who the Good guys won't.

Just have a goal and be willing to do whatever it takes to achieve it when the opportunity arises. I've had evil characters in good-majority parties before work out great. He didn't care if they wanted to go around do-gooding as long as he got his share of payments and loot and didn't interfere with whatever he did behind their backs and only know about because of player knowledge, and they didn't ask questions because he was helpful and put on a friendly, "wacky" alcoholic-elf-wizard facade. Being evil doesn't preclude one from being cooperative or helpful, it can just mean that when it comes to attaining what you want or achieving your purpose, other people's ideas of morality aren't going to hold you back, although you might keep as much of that hidden as possible to continue any beneficial relationships. Hell, you might even like the guys.

You see, being evil is sometimes about being a complete dick in the most disturbing ways. It's like if you have a woman at swordpoint begging for the life of her children. You don't sneer and go "Fool, they'll make a new pair of boots for me!"

No, real evil is when you go - "If you want them back, come and take them from me." And when she fails, you go ahead and kill them, because she clearly didn't want it enough. You were completely honest when you said "Come and get them". The dickery is that there was no way she could have won, but you took this completely unfair offer at face value.

Or when you say "The truce will be declared at 12:00." When the other side starts gathering at 11:50, you bomb them one last time, because you're still at war until ten minutes later.

I had a real fun time playing a CE lovable oaf. He didn't really understand why sometimes people would stop playing with him, and just kind of went along with the party as kind of a bludgeon.

But that wasn't why he was evil. He was evil because he just didn't care. He knew that his playmates would break, but that was less important than him having fun. He never missed them.

That plus his petty and spiteful harming of people who weren't in the party. Or that he wasn't afraid of. Yeah, I also made him a coward when it counted.

But since I played him like picture related a lot of the time, people didn't really notice. They thought it was cute I would always forget names and call people George . . . Until eventually they realized "George" tended to die. A lot.

It was a fun game. We had a Dastardly Dick (bard), a Captain Hammer (Paladin of Zarus), a rather generic evil "healer" slash Dr. Frankenstein and my luvable Lennie.

We pretty much used PF for character creation and then winged like half of it for fun. Turns out we are shit at caring about rules.

How come the Paladin didnt Smite your shit in after a Detect Evil ping that would atleast cause him to keep an eye on you and eventually catching you in a gruesome act?

And if you only hurt evil people, how is that anything above a Neutral Evil idiot character?

but then OP would be quite retarded

We are talking about an OP who doesn't understand how to build a character that doesn't fall into the broadest of categories and one dimensional characteristics. Of course he is retarded.

Evil people can align with good people on certain goals.
Lawful evil is the most privy to doing such things, because most threats adventurers face are the sort that would create anarchy across the land, but, anyone on the evil spectrum can fight alongside good if their way of life is threatened.

A CE Highwayman might team up with a Cleric, a Paladin, whatever, in order to slay a Vampire Lord and his bastard children, that are feeding on his usual victims before he can get to them.

A LE mage will naturally prepare spells and get ready to crush a Lich's undead army approaching his tower, because he knows the Lich is beyond reasoning with mortals like him, and the dead have no mercy.

So on, so forth.