Lawful Evil

a lawful evil character imo is more pragmatic then idealistic, he will help people but not for "good" but for reputation a willing slave is more useful than one that hates you

By original Gygaxian interpretation of alignments, you can go full smitebot and remain LG.

But hey, do whatever, the man is dead so it's not like he's gonna stop you.

Played a Lawful Evil Artificer once, his end game was bringing all world's nations under the heel of mercantilism.

>How would you play a lawful evil character
To err is human, to punish divine.

By being lawful, they inherently have a code of honor that they rigidly stick to.

>Lawful Evil is "Fuck you, got mine.
Not quite but close. Its
>fuck you, got mine, you ain't getting yours

I had an LE Warlord, title not class, that came from a clan of mercenaries called the Red Rivers that had existed for 700 years so far, outliving the home country of the first Warlord. I based them off of Sparta and the Jomsvikings. They raise their children working out and using practice weapons (sword, spear, shield, crossbow) as soon as they can hold them, and play games like Go and others that teach them skills. They are only allowed to marry other warriors of both genders, and are encouraged to marry outside the clan to prevent inbreeding. They occupy an independent coastal city-state next to the mouth of a good sized river, with a population of 42,000 clan members, though most never left, as to support the clan. It is independant because the country next to it can't afford the death tole of trying to enforce their laws on them.

All were indoctrinated to serve the Warlord, and the Warlord was to serve the clan. The Clan's prosperity rises with the river of blood, and falls when it dries, so to bring about a golden age for them, would be to start a world war. False flag attacks, bribing nobles and bandits, spreading lies, and other bad things were pretty regular actions, but the law he followed was never broken. They have a book they live their lives by that justifies and guides their actions, written by the generations of Warlords to pass the most useful knowledge down, filled with military tactics and personal accounts, and eventually grew further into the law of the clan, and then into almost a holy book that they quote directly, and it forbids no action in pursuit of prosperity or against the clan's enemies. Discipline and Obedience make "Lawful", Selfishness and Victimizing make "Evil".

I put work into the RR's backstory, there is much more, but LE is just doing what you want while being those four things at once, and not even towards what everyone else is or thinks you should/would for Lawful.

Lawful doesn't always mean that he follows the law of the land. It's possible he has a strict code of honor or moral code, or follows the laws of his homeland. Evil just means you are selfish.

So, you could play a guy who wants a reputation as the best duelist in the land. You challenge people to personal combat for the slightest offense, but follow the rules of the duel to the letter. You enjoy killing people, but know that you are better off having the law of the land on your side by dueling than killing in cold blood. You enjoy the challenge of playing fair, and frown upon those who use cheap tricks while in the duel.

Or, maybe you are a wizard who is trying to build a collection of magical antiquities, but do nefarious things within the law to get what you want: Exposing another collector of fraud to bankrupt him and steal his collection when his possessions are sold off to pay debts, convincing someone that an ancient relic is valueless because it's a clever fake so you can find a cheap way to take it off his hands, or getting in to a formal relationship with an elderly person so that when they die they will bequeath their valuables to you and not their descendants.

I'm just roughly sketching, but there are many ways to go about playing it. The hard part is always playing within the rules you set for the character.

An astonishing amount of people don't understand this. Part of the reason I hate most paladin players.

Make them charismatic and charming as fuck but ultimately selfish, shallow and mostly hollow inside. Have them fight for the vanity of fame but have them never be satisfied resorting to steadily more extreme methods to seek the adoration they crave.

>By original Gygaxian interpretation of alignments...
The original spectrum is only between Law and Chaos and they're also very specific extant forces in the universe. Good and evil don't enter into it at all, it's more yin and yang.
Alignment is also largely inherent and practically immutable, you're born knowing a special secret language shared by others of your alignment, and you also *just know* what your alignment is and what that implies.

Alignment has changed between every single iteration of D&D and even sometimes in the same edition. People knowing their specific alignment lasted up to third edition before that was cut. And that's fucking crazy!

1) LE does not equate boundless ambition, have played many characters that go by the 'necessary evil' part rather than the ambitious character.
2) Plenty of LE characters will prefer to be the shadow behind the throne rather than the ruler itself. The High Councilor or whatever equivalent title can hold as much effective power as the person on the throne without many of the drawbacks.

Played a LE Drow Crown Paladin once

He would have done anything if it meant continuing Drow society as it was and maintaining the status quo (homebrew setting wherein Drow society wasn't fucking retarded)

If he was ordered to by the proper authority he'd do anything, literally anything.

Was extremely prejudiced against any othe race/society, completely dedicated to his.

I'm playing a 5th ed re-fluffed barbarian whose LE. Back story wise, one of the other PC's is a good cleric from her village so when he left on his !QUEST! She went along with him as kind of a yandere/tsundere guardian angel with an axe. Her main goal is to keep him safe, even if that means taking actions behind his back he wont be happy with. We've built an interesting dynamic where because he's more chaotic then her he does potentially dangerous things behind her back for the sake of good. As the only person in the party who's not overtly magical shes doing pretty well for herself.

That's more Orange and Blue than LE. Pretty cool though.

Just play a stereotype capitalist. Exploitive but legal.

A cheerful, easy going Mercenary with a code: He'll murder anyone for the right price, but he won't kill anyone unless it helps him do what he's being paid for.

Lawful because he's got his own little set of rules he follows and believes in the strength of discipline and order.

Evil because he'll be happily laughing and swapping stories with you, then if someone gives him twenty gold to do it he'll cheerfully strangle you with your own entrails and not lose a second of sleep for doing it.

Thank you, but I disagree. The RR are still human, still exposed to the laws of other lands so that they don't break the wrong law at the wrong place and harm the clan's well being. They know that the things they do are evil, and some, especially new members who weren't born in the clan, feel sympathy for the family they slaughter and loot from, as parents and people themselves. But, they aren't clan members, and there are only so many resources to go around, and the Warlord's will is as absolute to them as any emperor or king would like his to be.

It isn't Blue and Orange, they just accept the path they walk, because every time the clan enters times of peace, they suffer or stagnate. They do what they must, and are simply raised to not feel bad about it, because the ones that do try to stop. Heres an example of the conditioning methods.

One of the ways they cement the idea of the Warlord's authority, is the tradition of power transition. To become the Warlord, the Inheritor must kill the current one or gain achievements surpassing his father's. Then they call a clan meeting, and the entire clan kneels to the new Warlord if they accept him, or stand if they think he isn't worthy of leading them. If you change your decision, you're killed on the spot. Everyone still standing then fights the Inheritor to the death, together or in a duel by their choices.

This sends several messages. The first, if he wins, is that the Warlord is better at killing than you. The second, is that it is acceptable for him to kill you. The third, that he will if you disobey him, and the fourth that if you break the law of the clan(like by standing after you see how many other people are, you coward) is that everyone else you know will kill you for it, too. It also cleanses the clan of potential deserters and traitors. They pile the bodies on a funeral pyre and have a feast after. That sends the last message, that all of this is normal.

A classical Adam Smith capitalist solely draws power from the wishes of constituent consumers. It cannot ever be exploitative.

However, there are corrupt people who seek to manipulate the market apart from consumer wishes (i.e. false advertising), but they are de facto not capitalists. They're removing human capital from the market.

Nope, he is correct. Alignment is definitely intended as a straitjacket.

I mean... do you guys even get the point of alignment? Its not a personality template, its what side of a cosmic struggle you are welded into. Hence, what you are aligned with.

Capitalism is just the means of production being primarily maintained by private individuals or groups, socialism is just the means of production being primarily maintained by public groups. As government is almost always coercive at some level except in hippy fairy tale land, the former does tend to be more voluntary and less coercive than the latter.

I once played a Lawful Evil Lamia Wizard(The snakegirl kind) in a campaign that was actually designed for a mixed alignment party. She was super cheerful, dangerously clever, and manipulative.

My character's job in the party was to be the puzzle solver. I solved puzzles and dealt with magical traps, while also doing all of the management issues such as handling money and other business transactions. I was the character that mapped the dungeon, tracked loot, and made sure I was well informed about every plot point. Everyone knew I was also quite evil, and would dispatch disloyal subjects in a heartbeat, so they tried to remain on my good side. In return I supplied them with magic items at 70% of the market price, while pocketing the difference in crafting costs.

Anyone who betrayed me was conveniently not told about magical traps, or even left out buffs when it came time for combat. I even once sent an INVOICE to the lawful good cleric when he destroyed my skeleton secutarii that I lawfully brought with my everywhere as a LEGALLY LICENSED NECROMANCER. 250 gold pieces per skeleton based on the material costs and perceived opportunity cost loss, via me spending time I -could- be using to make magic items for the party, to instead remake my skeleton secutarii.

>finding alternate buyers after having agreed to obtain the McGuffin for a specific person
>lawful

I played a LE Mercenary type that was willing to do any job. Contracts and rules governing the acts of murder, kidnapping, and blackmail.

I didn't follow the laws of the land, but I kept a strict guideline of what was agreed upon and for what reason.

Example:
Group is looking for lost girl.
>Hired to find girl.
Find her, sell her back for more loot.
>Hired to find and return girl safely
Do so because it's what was agreed upon.
>Bribed to not fulfill contract?
No thanks, I have my reputation to think of.
>Burn down a tavern?
Sure. People inside will cost extra.. Per head.

It's basically rules for profit/self benefit instead of rules for Justice/Safety.
It also helps if you give your character something so evil even THEY wouldn't do it.. Helps make them less edgy and more believable.

i was thinking about creating a LE dwarf who follow's a set of commandment from his old clan, similar to the Sicilian Mafia. I don't want to copy it word for word, so does anyone have some code of conducts ideas?