That player who wants to play a cleric of an evil religion

...

remember to sage and hide garbage posts.

He's pointing out the samefagging, retard.

Hence "you just need to not be a dick about it." At least, not towards the party.

It doesn't really matter who your Cleric is.
What matters is his plan.

LE is the only accurate alignment, everything else is stupid bullshit that is made up

...

>At least, not towards the party
Not just that. Not within the range of sight and other senses of the party. None of my good characters would stand and do nothing when party member is obviously mistreating others, even if they're but random NPCs. At best they'd refuse to work with the guy, no matter how many common goals would be shared.
Also many LE players heva this stupid impression that "not being a dick" is just about their acts, so if they won't do any physical evil deeds they are still entitled to cuntish demeanour and being smug, annoying asshole.

>That player who wants to play a Chaotic Evil Drow ranger
>Makes a Chaotic "Good" wood elf ranger instead
>That party who don't just fucking turn on him when he attacks them randomly

(You)

ITS WHAT MY CHARACTER WOULD DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

why do people think that spamming a thread they don't like is acceptable behavior?

But Islam is a religion of peace. That's quite obvious if you look at any of the 54 islamic countries of our world.

It didn't even get to that. For context, an example:
>Party ambushed in in a forest by cackling imps
>Elf hears their laughter first
>Nat 1 on Nature check
>Must be pixies or something
>Imp flies out of the woods
>Dwarf Monk nails it with a dart
>Elf shoots dwarf in the back of the knee for attacking innocent woodland fairies
>Crits, nearly killing him
>Still refuses to fight the imps
>Two sorcerers in the party roll well on damage, saving the day
The party confronted him after the fight, but in-character accepted that that he meant no real harm. I don't play with that group any more

Good, fuck 'em

Did something happen on /pol/ recently, because I've been definitely seeing an influx of /pol/ posts on Veeky Forums for some time now. What gives?

GMs are entirely within their right to disallow classes/races/alignments during character creation. If the players don't agree with that then that's fine, but they're still going to have to follow it if they want to play in the campaign.

Your group obviously doesn't trust anyone, then. I have only played chaotic alignments in my most recent group, but everyone knows more or less what to expect from me and trusts (correctly) that I won't go lolrandumb and fuck up everything.

Hell, if I were GMing for a new group, I would be wary about any evil or chaotic characters... but I also have a killer streak of not holding back consequences for whatever choices that players make, even if it would suck for everyone involved.

You reap what you sow, and being in a group of protagonists doesn't make you untouchable in a game with rules for death.

My best character I ever had was a Chaotic Neutral Cleric to a Chaotic Evil deity. I did my job. I killed the surface elves when I could do so without getting caught (though the DM did accuse me of trying to get 'XP from killing creatures' out of it). I fed my enemies to spiders. I even helped the party remove corruption from the order of paladins (which were blaming my people unjustly for ALL the problems when we're only responsible for half).

/pol/ has always been cancer. You shouldn't be surprised that it's metastasizing.

You're the once forcing real life politics into a thread about D&D you autistic fuck

>OP image is literally /pol/shit
>"Thread about D&D"

Nice try

>why do people think that spamming a thread they don't like is acceptable behavior?

Are you new to the chanz? The hot new thing is to make a blatantly /pol/ thread on a regular board and then samefag it by pretending to be a stock libtard for a few posts until you attract some other /pol/tards. Then it's a self-perpetuating cycle of faggotry. At some point an actual libtard might get sucked in, which makes it even easier to keep the thread bumped.

>any time I see a pic that even remotely hints in such a manner that I might possibly suspect that it might disagree with my political opinion it is my duty to start fucking screeching like hillary clinton on election night

Wow, so now that we've cleared up who the bad guy is here, why don't you take your retardation to the politics board where you belong?

This is why I posted regarding the thread topic, but fully disregarded OP's image. Half the time, image is unrelated anyway.

Should have thrown a few "cucks" in there for good measure. Wasted opportunity, famdingo.

Making such a call doesn't make the DM shit right from the get go. The only time I've ever imposed class/race/alignment restrictions has been due to shitty players ruining it for everyone else. Is it possible for someone play a sensible evil character without causing unnecessary conflict every session? Of course it is. But it's a rare occurrence and the pay off isn't worth it considering how quickly a careless evil character can fuck things up for everyone else.

>I'm not the problem, everyone else is!

I sure wish you millennials weren't so comically childish.

Should we then engage with the nominal thread topic and keep ignoring the /pol/ troll?

Having an evil Cleric in the party sounds like a bad idea, but it's not automatic shit trip. Say, a LE could still be a functional human being if a little cunty towards others.

Nice job outing yourself by trying to escalate your bait.

>I'm not the problem, everyone else is!
Sorry user, I didn't even read your post. I just saw buzzword buzzword buzzword and assumed you were a generic /pol/tard. Seems I assumed correctly.

I've been in parties that have had a lawful evil cleric or a neutral evil cleric. It's something that can go very wrong, but if there's a good, responsible player behind it, then it can be fine. Once had a Hades cleric in my group who ended up on a redemption arc and shifted to LN from LE

I love it when people take advantage of the single alignment deviance from their deities. I've had a LN cleric of Hextor on the back burner for a while who's stern but guilty of feeling compassion from time to time.

wew we are getting to /k/ levels of a board easy to bait.

Why can't you fuckers just admit when you've been caught? You're not fooling anyone.

>why doesn't this troll admit he's a troll and stop trolling? It doesn't make any seeeeeeeeense!

Yes, but I thought that there is a reason for outbursts of such metastazing compared to the usual level, which is what I'm asking here. What's the reason that it grows faster than usual?

Only a shitty troll doubles down when they're called out. A good troll cuts their losses and makes better bait.

go back to /pol/.
And on a less serious note, becuase not every one wants to rp the goodie two-shouse palladin/cleric and want to try something new? Or they think that there is more fun in playing someone who is evil and follows a evil god, giving some depth to their cherecter aside from "deus vult, help all the orphans get through college". I dislike evil cherecters, but when done right they have a fuck ton more depth than good ones because it's always easier to justify being good.

Why would you think OP was a good troll?

Trump replaced Breitbart boss Bannon with his Jewish son-in-law, bombed Assad's forces as retaliation for a chemical attack, is playing high stakes nuclear chess with North Korea and is being an even bigger warhawk than Hillary would have been.

Basically, Trump completely broke with the alt-right and /pol/ is borderline suicidal. They're shitposting everywhere because they feel like they're losing control.

>Trump replaced Breitbart boss Bannon with his Jewish son-in-law

That is endlessly entertaining. Mostly the reports of Bannon calling said son-in-law a cuck. Which is something I can 100% believe the boss of Brietbart would say and makes the replacement very predictable.

I don't. I'm just lamenting the quality of troll we're stuck with.

>an even bigger warhawk than Hillary would have been
Citation needed. You know that if Hillary was elected it wouldn't be just 'throw a few bombs on a desolate airport which doesn't change shit because they have plenty of others'.

>They're shitposting everywhere because they feel like they're losing control.
Wouldn't they eventually get banned permanently? Even proxies can only get you so far before the ban hammer hits.

>/pol/ is borderline suicidal. They're shitposting everywhere because they feel like they're losing control
Did /pol/ actually think they were ever in control of anything?

>government officials calling each other cucks
I think the cuck meme is finally on its deathbed. Allah be praised.

Did you see the Meme Magic bullshit? They were acting like they singlehandedly pulled of a ritual spell to get Trump in and the Day of the Noose or whatever it is was going to be tommorow.

/pol/ is like a parallel world inside Veeky Forums. There are a lot of people in there that still haven't been perma-banned (because they only visit /pol/), and there's always a lot of new blood streaming into /pol/ from alt-right Facebook groups and subpleddits.

I can't really bring myself to do some nasty things, which is why I don't play as certain characters.
I don't think I can do justice in roleplaying if my character is doing:
>torture to no one of significance
>torture that leaves permanent physical damage unless I am going to kill that person, and even then he or she would have to have it coming
>rape unless it's sodomy with an object against someone really bad (I don't want to get shit on my dick or get too involved with the action, and it has to be gender neutral, but if I hate someone enough, I might have an evil character do it with a broomstick or something)
>leaving someone to die slowly (they might be able to escape and rip our asses open, anyways)
>killing innocent people deliberately
>impractical and cruel killing

For some reason I am ok with even a good character I'm playing using mind control as long as it's for the "greater good" and doesn't do anything "unnecessary", even though in real life I am absolutely horrified at the idea of subverting or killing one's ego regardless of the individual. Brutal death against bad people depends on how bad they were.

I'll continue next post.

Ahhhh, thank you for a respectable answer. I was excepting something along the lines of "cuck" or "faggot" I'm also still a bit salty with yesterday when somebody called me a gutless faggot because I see both sides of the extremes (left and right) as fucking retarded.

Anyways, I have thought of evil characters I'd be comfortable playing as:
>pragmatic evil that is merely amoral because morality is nothing but a tool to him/her
>evil guy that kills non-combatants from a distance in massive numbers; character doesn't see them die up close (might contradict what I just said, but I am running out of time)
>self-righteous individual

They are pissed at anyone who doesn't march in lockstep with their philosophy.

Look at it from their side.

They're useless faggots outside of society, without a job, without friends, without loved ones.

To them, only an extreme solution can get them out of their problems. Preferably a solution that is impossible to implement, because anything that is possible means work. And work means taking action in the real world. Which should be avoided at all costs.

Your refusal to go with that reminds them that there's a world out there. That hurts them. Them calling you a gutless faggot is just deflecting behaviour.

>not playing an evil campaign and seeing how traumatized everyone is afterwards
It works wonders for people's desires to play evil. Just make sure its a proper evil campaign and children are killed, PCs raped, etc.

>CG
>saying LE in good partied is the 'mosr' cancerous memes ever
Chaotic anything is a pretty cancerous 'meme'
I'd prefer PCs who have clear codes over "lol I just do random whatever I want" any day, regardless of good or evil.

They tend to hate 'centrists' (to them meaning anyone who's not a radical), because they think if you aren't constantly screaming about your opinions, shitposting memes and detailing discussions, then you mustn't have any opinions at all. They can't comprehend having a discussion that doesn't involve politics. I swear they're the most boring people on Earth, like an autistic kid who can't talk about anything except trains.

Except these trains are full of jews.

That's all fine and dandy, but are they multi-track drifting trains full of jews?

Thank you, you three rational and polite anons. Your statements have helped me figure out a bit more about how /pol/ (both the right and left side) works.

Welcome to nu/tg/.

>evil gods don't have clerics
>evil gods don't have paladins
>evil means edgy
You are an absolutely shit GM.

...

Honestly I have some problem with good and evil as a whole. I'm not trying to be some edgy amoral teen, I just find it too simplicistic to enjoy.

In the homebrew setting we play demons are simply hellbent in returning the world to the primordial chaos - many of them however have accepted that the world is merely an expression of it while others have no hurry for it to end since they believe entropy will, eventually, take care of it. Many of them are simply edonistic bastards more than evil.
Devils are hellbent (eh) on bringing some form of order to the world and hostile to the gods that in their eyes betrayed them. They are fanatical more than an embodiment of tyranny.
Yugoloth are mercenaries - less backstabby than the originals but still pretty assholish.

Gods have good and bad aspects - the god of pain is actually one of the nicest ones, since it teaches empathy and learning from one's mistakes, for example.

>evil gods don't have clerics
Come on user, if you're going to make the effort to post, at least try to make it fit.

Such good numbers wasted on such a bad post.

I've always wondered if the Wahabbist Web has the same kind of memes as this, only with what passes as a moderate Muslim wojack saying not all Americans are bad.

All religion is evil, so...

To tell you the truth, the way you're describing them, I don't sound so different from those guys.

I have a job, but it's a dead end one. I have lost friends due to my behavior, but I turned out differently because I knew it was my fault for fucking up, not them for rejecting me. My parents are disappointed in me and I feel like I am responsible for stressing out my family and being a bad role model for my younger siblings (thankfully no divorce so far).

I have resorted to apathy because I feel powerless to stop the madness. I see others make fools out of themselves and wonder if I am not safe from foolishness, either, since I did lose friends from my quasi-autistic behavior.
Even though my views are apparently Left-winged, I feel utter contempt for many individuals in the social justice movement. I still see the Alt-Right as the greater evil, but I can't help but sigh in despair and rage when I hear shit about "manspreading" or "milk-hate speech".

I would add my voice to the conversation, but when I see insufferable SJWs say stupid shit, I am reminded of my off-color jokes and moments of anger that alienated my former friends from me and instead I sulk in the shadows as an user, hoping that my controlled typing and deliberate restraint might make /pol/acks see the world the way I see it.

Being evil doesn't even entail being a dick. A smart evil adventurer recognizes when people are useful and makes sure theystay onside, so they don't do shit like cheating their party members or openly sabotaging quests or whatever. And the best way to get more than your fair share is to be outwardly accommodating and pleasant, so they have incentive to be good companions.

How does one play chaotic right?
I have always seen the difference between neutral and chaotic as whether or not the law is a factor.
Neutral considers it, but is willing to break it if he or she feels justified or safe from trouble.
Chaotic will make active attempts to break any laws he or she doesn't like, but doesn't necessarily need to be out in the open about it. A chaotic character can appear on the surface to be a law-abiding individual, but do some highly illegal things in the shadows, whether good or evil.

He clearly eats the tip of the strawberry.

It's a great way to use some of the interesting, evil deities in non-evil parties & sometimes a nice source of personal strife.

Yeah, I also fell close into the MRA/pol trap, but my depression was what saved me. I understand intimately that I'm the root of my own problems, rather than looking for someone to blame for my failures.

Also, for some reason social justice types are really, REALLY bad at communicating concepts. Like, to a dumbfounding degree. It's like they want their concepts to be reacted to with kneejerk mockery.

A lot of talk about RPG alignment equates 'evil' and 'psychopathic,' maybe because otherwise a majority of PCs would be evil. But, like, the governor of Arkansas is trying to have a bunch of people tortured to death with poisons his state acquired through fraud because he thinks it's in his best interests politically, and I suspect he'd be squeamish if you asked him to kill a dog, and no doubt he's personally extremely generous and pleasant. There's probably a broader point about the kind of evil we see so often we don't even recognize them as such, so when we have to imagine 'real' evil it's always cartoonishly crude.

>He clearly eats the tip of the strawberry
Yeah, I don't understand how anyone could miss that.

Strong sense of personal freedom is also a way to view the chaos end of the alignment; you and/or what you stand for are more important to you than rules or laws.

>thinking Islam is terrible is somehow a /pol/ thing
Really?

Casting out obvious bait is a /pol/ thing.

I'm an ex muslim, Islam is pretty terrible. I had to leave my family because they reported me for leaving Islam.

I'd agree if people said Muslims aren't terrible, but Islam is.

>My bait didn't work, better try something else

Fuck off back to your board faggot

Kinda this.
While Evil character can work unless the party is mostly neutral or worse it can lead to conflicting interactions.

That said having an evil alignment character behave but run off from time to time to get out his evil nature is probably the best way to go about it. Having to make a party knowingly clean up after their dick evil companion knowingly makes for an interesting campaign.

>knowingly
Ment unknowingly

Bait

>thinking religion, specifically Islam is bad is bait
I bet you're the kinda person who hates criticism of Islam but will rag on other religions.

I bed you're the kind of /pol/tard that thinks Veeky Forums is /pol/.

I'm not a /pol/tard faggot, I'm not white enough for /pol/.

Plenty of non-whites on /Pol/, shitposting breaks all boundaries.

Algerians aren't welcome

I laffed.

Seriously, because a handful of crazy lefties on the internet (who nobody listens to except themselves and /pol/) declared that they were scared shitless of /pol/, the board decided that this meant they had an actual effect on the election.
Now that it's clear that they're delusional, they're shitting everything up, and then pretending that no, no, every board's just always like that.

>if i dislike someones personality i will attack them
>im good aligned

Oh please. If she planned on being a two-term president, there's no way in Hell, she would be more aggressive than Trump.

In general, liberals fucking hate military action. If you were to ask a Democrat to name something they didn't like about Obama, they would more than likely mention drone strikes and our continued presence in the Middle East. We even had liberal groups orchestrate anti-drone protests and liberal slanted media slamming Obama for drone strikes in his latter term.

If a Democrat were to start a major war in the first term of their presidency, or even just be as aggressive as Trump has been without starting a major war yet, Democrats would not vote for them a second term.

I'll end my /pol/posting here.