Evil--What's your take?

[07paul87]

I'm curious as to how players RP their evil characters, and how the rest of the server feels about the evil population.

Players with good PCs: Do you like the antagonism? Do you ever feel like evil characters are griefing more than offering up fun RP? At what point do you get fed up with evil?

Players with evil characters: Why do you play evil PCs? What kinds of subtle evil things do you do? What do you do to keep RP fair and fun for all? For those evil-types who are organized enough to have long-term goals, how do you keep the interest alive, both for yourself and the others involved with the plot?

This thread is the same as the others; I'm largely bored, eager to start playing here again, and simply curious.

[Gamling]

If you take a look at the server rules you can find out the policy on PVP, etc. As for evil characters griefing/antagonizing, well... if it's IC it's fine. Most OOC flak comes from good guys who get in an evil players way, and get pooped on for it.

And for that it takes a certain kind of person with patience and a good nature to play evil people, since it is an issue with good characters players taking things a bit too seriously and even metagaming in some cases as is my experience. Not to say everyone who plays a good guy is like this.

All in all people play to have fun, and how can you have fun if everyone is getting along, sitting in a tavern drinking? Well, maybe some people do but the point is to go out and kick ass, so differing ideals is necessary on this server.

[supersuperlative]

I have a number of good pcs (one of them a paladin) and although only counting in the half dozen or so, my encounters with evil pcs have been well RPed and not grievance ridden in any way.

I've always been greeted with some form of RP and the expected "You're not welcome"-type dialogue, but I've also had plenty of chance to return banter of my own and then flee if I so chose. Those involved in encounters that had characters well above my character's level were very sporting and even after some initial fisty cuffs for appearance's sake, once clear I intended retreat, followed merely as an escort to ensure he left their lands.

That said, there's been many more times that I've encountered the less obvious forms of evil (from OOC assumptions and knowledge) and they've been well-played, and refreshing to see folks on the server keen to bring a myriad of shades of black (and grey).

I guess that just like there's the infamously unimaginative Lawful Stupid character in terms of LG there's the polar opposite for Evil, both of which would likely have very short life-expectancies. Thankfully I haven't encountered any black-cloaked, top hat wearing fiends twirling their moustaches as they tie damsels to railway tracks. Yet. LOL

Keep up the good work Team Evil.

(That's if I'm allowed to call it "good" work)

[07paul87]

Ugh, campfire RP is not my strong point. I frequently make a few macros for common actions/phrases my PC uses to be able to RP while in combat. One of my favorite characters was a minotaur who didn't speak common on another server. Most of his emotes were: *Stamps foot,* *Snorts,* and my personal favorite *Lowers his head and charges!*

I do my best to remain within the rules, especially since I usually play evil characters. Some people may feel that the rules are too lax, though.

As an example, my halfling thug Sago Trumperstomper would frequently assault other players if they refused to pay him a tax for using whatever road he happened to be hanging out on. I frequently received tells afterwards that I didn't follow the rules, that I was griefing, ect. Some people were especially indignant when I asked them to give me all of their gold or their weapon once they respawned (as per the server rules). I feel confident that I followed the rules perfectly (outside of one incident due to a miscommunication), but others may not agree.

Anyways, this isn't a rules thread; I'm primarily interested in the climate of the server, how the current player base feels about various evil plots, and maybe pick up some awesome ideas/RP tips for my own character (coming soon!)

[Cornuto]

IMO evil' folks would probably subscribe to something similar to Nietzsche's views on morality (copy-pasted summary below). As such they wouldn't see themselves as evil, but rather would find the label meaningless.

On the Genealogy of Morals, sometimes translated as On the Genealogy of Morality, consists of three essays, each of which questions the value of our moral concepts and examines their evolution.

The first essay, “‘Good and Evil,’ ‘Good and Bad,’” examines the evolution of two distinctive moral codes. The first, “knightly-aristocratic” or “master” morality, comes from the early rulers and conquerors, who judged their own power, wealth, and success to be “good” and the poverty and wretchedness of those they ruled over to be “bad.” Nietzsche associates the second, “priestly” or “slave” morality, primarily with the Jews. This morality originates with priests, who despise the warrior caste and condemn their lustful power as evil, while calling their own state of poverty and self-denial good. This slave morality turns master morality on its head. Driven by a feeling of ressentiment, or resentment, slave morality is much deeper and more refined than master morality. Its crowning achievement is Christianity: Christian love is born from hatred. While slave morality is deeper and more interesting than the casual self-confidence of the masters, Nietzsche worries that it has rendered us all mediocre. Modern humans, who have inherited the mantle of slave morality, prefer safety and comfort to conquest and risk. The slave morality of the priestly caste focuses the attention on the evil of others and on the afterlife, distracting people from enjoying the present and improving themselves.

Nietzsche illustrates the contrast between the two kinds of morality by reference to a bird of prey and a lamb. Nietzsche imagines that the lambs may judge the birds of prey to be evil for killing and consider themselves good for not killing. These judgments are meaningless, since lambs do not refrain from killing out of some kind of moral loftiness but simply because they are unable to kill. Similarly, we can only condemn birds of prey for killing if we assume that the “doer,” the bird of prey, is somehow detachable from the “deed,” the killing. Nietzsche argues that there is no doer behind the deed, taking as an example the sentence, “lightning flashes.” There is no such thing as lightning separate from the flash. Our assumption that there are doers who are somehow distinct from deeds is simply a prejudice inspired by the subject–predicate form of grammar. Slave morality detaches subject from predicate, doer from deed, and identifies the subject with a “soul,” which is then liable to judgment. While slave morality is definitely dominant in the modern world, Nietzsche hopes that master morality will have a resurgence.

In the second essay, “‘Guilt,’ ‘Bad Conscience,’ and the Like,” Nietzsche suggests that our concept of guilt originally had no moral overtones, identifying a similarity in the German words for guilt and debt. A person in debt was “guilty” and the creditor could make good on the debt by punishing the debtor. Punishment was not intended to make the debtor feel badly but simply to bring pleasure to the creditor. Punishment was cruel but cheerful: there were no hard feelings afterward. A society with laws is like a creditor: when someone breaks the law, they have harmed society and society can exact punishment. The concept of justice in effect takes punishment out of the hands of individuals by claiming that, in a society, it is not individuals but laws that are transgressed, and so it is the laws, not individuals, that must exact punishment. Reflecting on the many different purposes punishment has served over the ages, Nietzsche observes that all concepts have a long and fluid history where they have had many different meanings. The meanings of concepts are dictated by a will to power, where concepts are given meanings or uses by the different wills that appropriate them.

Nietzsche identifies the origin of bad conscience in the transition from hunter–gatherer to agrarian societies. Our violent animal instincts ceased to be useful in a cooperative society, and we suppressed them by turning them inward. By struggling within ourselves, we carved out an inner life, bad conscience, a sense of beauty, and a sense of indebtedness to our ancestors, which is the origin of religion. At present, we direct our bad conscience primarily toward our animal instincts, but Nietzsche urges us instead to direct our bad conscience against the life-denying forces that suppress our instincts.

The title of the third essay poses the question, “What Is the Meaning of Ascetic Ideals?” Why have people from various cultures pursued an ascetic life of self-denial? Nietzsche suggests that asceticism enhances the feeling of power by giving a person complete control over him- or herself. In many cases, then, asceticism is ultimately life affirming rather than life denying. Ascetic ideals manifest themselves differently among different kinds of people. A sort of philosophical asceticism leads philosophers to claim that the world around them is illusory. This is one way of looking at things, and Nietzsche applauds looking at matters from as many perspectives as possible. There is no single right way to look at the truth, so it’s best to be flexible in our viewpoints.

Nietzsche sees asceticism as being born of spiritual sickness. Those that find the struggle of life too hard turn against life and find it blameworthy. Nietzsche sees the majority of humanity as sick and sees priests as doctors who are themselves sick. Religion addresses this spiritual sickness partly by extinguishing the will through meditation and work but also through “orgies of feeling,” manifest in the consciousness of sin and guilt. We condemn ourselves as sinners and masochistically punish ourselves. Science and scholarship are not alternatives to the ascetic ideals of religion. They simply replace the worship of God with the worship of truth. A healthy spirit must question the value of truth. Nietzsche concludes by observing that while ascetic ideals direct the will against life, they still constitute a powerful exercise of the will: “Man would rather will nothingness than not will.”

[Doubtful]

I'm a huge fan of the more subtle shades of evil that RP has to offer - The schemers, manipulators and planners will almost always get preference when it comes to deciding what events to run (this goes for team good as well).

The main problem with simple minded evil (and good) is that it tires quickly.

Imaginative, varied and compatible evil is always great fun for everyone. Repetitive simple evil isn't.

Never forget their is a broad spectrum of evil, this whole 'Team Good' and 'Team Evil' stuff really turns me off. Good and evil are broad concepts. Play them as such.

[07paul87]

The main problem with simple minded evil (and good) is that it tires quickly.

Imaginative, varied and compatible evil is always great fun for everyone. Repetitive simple evil isn't.

Never forget their is a broad spectrum of evil, this whole 'Team Good' and 'Team Evil' stuff really turns me off. Good and evil are broad concepts. Play them as such.

I kind of agree. There's a lot of fun to have with the "small" evils, but it doesn't serve well as the *entire* basis for a character. It definitely felt right with Sago, where he started off performing petty crime for a few gold and thrills, but ended up getting involved with some larger plots.

I'm hoping that my future character will be able to get a decent movement going to involve a bunch of people. I've also got some potential alliances/non-compete agreements bouncing around in my head, assuming the RP goes well enough. Unfortunately, I've yet to really get a large-scale plot in motion.

[Standur]

The main problem with simple minded evil (and good) is that it tires quickly.

Imaginative, varied and compatible evil is always great fun for everyone. Repetitive simple evil isn't.

Never forget their is a broad spectrum of evil, this whole 'Team Good' and 'Team Evil' stuff really turns me off. Good and evil are broad concepts. Play them as such.

I will concur with the above. There are far too many shades of grey to simply stay black or white. I have only played on the server for a short time but my favorite good/evil role play came with a PC that while under disguise easily overwhelmed my PC insisting a message be delivered. Only a few minutes later the same PC showed a great deal of concern and compassion toward my character when he arrived at the Second Wind Inn rest area bloodied and battered. The role play made my evening.

[07paul87]

Pure good and evil characters should have at least a couple of layers to them. Even though my characters are pretty much all evil, they still had a moral compass (excluding the orcs. Simple and awesome). Hraligar's respect was earned by quite a few non-dwarves, and he would actively go out of the way for them. Everyone else could be "Sod'd by a durned orc," though.

[roguethree]

IMO evil' folks would probably subscribe to something similar to Nietzsche's views on morality (copy-pasted summary below). As such they wouldn't see themselves as evil, but rather would find the label meaningless.

But there's an evil domain, smite good/evil, evil spell descriptors, Blackguards and Antipaladins . . . while Joe Swordguy might not know where he stands, anyone with any sort of divine connection knows that what he or she's up to is morally reprehensible; they just don't care / can't help themselves / owe a debt / and so on. The universe has verified gods and heaven and hell; good and evil clearly have meaning to both parties.

[07paul87]

But there's an evil domain, smite good/evil, evil spell descriptors, Blackguards and Antipaladins . . . while Joe Swordguy might not know where he stands, anyone with any sort of divine connection knows that what he or she's up to is morally reprehensible; they just don't care / can't help themselves / owe a debt / and so on. The universe has verified gods and heaven and hell; good and evil clearly have meaning to both parties.

I always thought it would be great to have a truly low magic/low fantasy PW. (Pretty much) everybody gets on with their regular mundane lives, with only a select few knowing about magic or how to make it. That would circumvent a lot of divine quandaries.

[Azareil]

As a new player, my view on this might be a bit skewered based on how little I may have seen. I don't want to come off as complaining at all because I'm not, it's just something I've noticed. I find there to be two sides. Good and Evil. There doesn't seem to be any shades of gray.

I've not had much experience with the actual bad guys. During my first week, for three nights in a row they kidnapped people and did the exact same thing each night and each night the good guys went and killed them. Granted, I haven't seen anything of the sort since and it was very out of place as I was told, which it's proven to be.

The simple fact is, lore wise, unless it's changed here, Banites are not going out and kidnapping people and doing outright evil things. They're the iron fist in a velvet glove type of evil, seeking political power. Sadly, I do not think that sort of RP is even possible here so Banites are forced into being like Bhaalites.

[Peridan]

There doesn't seem to be any shades of gray.

The shades of grey are there, believe me. They just don't like to do a song and dance number to attract the attention of the forces of righteousness.

[Kaybrie]

The shades of grey are there, believe me. They just don't like to do a song and dance number to attract the attention of the forces of righteousness.

This.

[Azareil]

Well I'm glad they're there. I've just heard a lot of "Team Good vs. Team Evil"