56 réponses à ce sujet

[Elrith Galadon]

I know that there is the Path of Evil campaign and Hunt Through the Dark series, but I was wondering if there are more lying around. The game itself seems really eager to push the PC to "good" alignment - I had a hard time picking the skills set for my drow - and then it's hard to play a Drow-ish evil character, as opposed to Bishop, who seems to be just contrary for the sake of it. Annoying. I wanted to play Quenthel Baenre type, not "kill everyone who looks at me funny while cackling madly" type. So far, no dice.

 

Anyone know such mods? There was one for NWN1 (Drow Librarian's Tale... alas it was never finished), but NWN2 seems to have less mods developed. I suppose I could have played The Shrouded Sun as an evil-aligned character, except I was a priestess of Lolth and I start off working in the mines. That was a little... odd. 

[andysks]

My work will have at least 3 possible endings and side quest always offer an evil path. I personally never play evil but I guess others do and this is why I do it. But.... it still has quite some way to go before completion .

[Arkalezth]

Not many, unfortunately. Even some of the modules that *allow* evil choices seem to make more sense for a good/neutral character (Risen Hero, for instance).

 

MOW works fine for evil characters, if you have it, but it's not an unofficial module. I think the "Dark Waters" trilogy has some extra options if you're lawful evil too, though I haven't tried them. "Isle of Shrines" has different plots for each alignment. "Crimmor" should be fine too. "Dark Avenger", "Fate of a city"...

 

There likely are others, but I can't think of many from the top of my head right now. And none of those I mentioned is directed to evil characters in particular. Just viable for them.

[rjshae]

To me it seemed like an "evil" module would be unnecessarily restricting your audience. Yes, it would be different in flavor and you would be able to get away with topics you normally wouldn't. But the number of players who want that style is smaller. It might be more of a challenge, but a deliberately "neutral"-style module might be interesting where you play the anti-hero character, skirting with the law and interacting with a diverse array of character types for more subtle reasons than saving the day and rescuing the princess.

[Arkalezth]

Right, but you'll still end up saving the day and rescuing the princess, whereas those "subtle reasons" will only exist in your head (that's in the best of cases; it often won't make sense at all) and not in the module. In other words, if a module requires some complicated mental gymnastics in order to come up with a decent explanation for your evil character being there, then it's not suited for evil. And there are many cases like this.

 

To me it seemed like an "evil" module would be unnecessarily restricting your audience.

 

Why "unnecessarily"? For starters, you'd be offering something different. To me, that alone is reason enough. And really, if a module builder is here for the audience, perhaps s/he should move on to a different game.

[kamal_]

I know that there is the Path of Evil campaign and Hunt Through the Dark series, but I was wondering if there are more lying around. The game itself seems really eager to push the PC to "good" alignment -

It's not the game that pushes the pc to good as much as it is the standard narrative structure. The antagonist is driving the action, the protagonist responds. Normally, the antagonist is the bad guy. Allowing the evil character to drive the action is difficult. Unless the evil pc is content playing a henchman/hireling evil character, in which case they carry out orders and thus fit into a more normal narrative structure.

[rjshae]

Why "unnecessarily"? For starters, you'd be offering something different. To me, that alone is reason enough. And really, if a module builder is here for the audience, perhaps s/he should move on to a different game.

 

I think most gamers like playing the hero rather than the evil villain; that's why I say 'unnecessarily'. *shrug*

 

As for the audience aspect, I disagree because at present there isn't really a good substitute for a detailed, party-based D&D adventure builder like this. (DA:O didn't cut it for me.) I suspect that's why many of us persist, despite the age of the engine.

 

One idea I had for a reversed role game was an "overlight" campaign in which a party of underdark characters journeys to the surface to accomplish some end. But I couldn't get the plot to work in my head because the number of opportunities for non-combat interaction would be limited.

[grotbag1]

A SoZ-party mod featuring an unruly band of Underdark plotters could be fantastic fun.

 

I actually think low-level full party creation could work a lot more effectively in terms of coming up with a good 'evil' module. Because then that does prevent the problem Iveforgotmypassword talks about, where the evil player always wants more than the plot can possible provide (well, why can't I murder Lord Nasher and seize Neverwinter for myself?).

 

When you're playing in the guise of an assembled group of several cut-throats, hedge necromancers, thieves, murderers and cultists, restricting the extent of the player's possible villainy can make a lot more sense.

 

Because no matter whether the party's been hired as mercenaries in an ongoing war or they're all seeking revenge on the local lord who sentenced them to death, it then allows the plot opportunities to be a more low-key kind of evil, centred around the entire group getting what they might just about be able to unanimously agree that they all want, rather than the more unilateral and limitlessly villainous 'Hey, why can't I eat this guy's soul? Actually, why can't I eat everyone's souls?'

[Dann-J]

Isle of Shrines has separate story lines for good, neutral and evil characters.

[Elrith Galadon]

If you want a module to suit a certain characters behaviour that you have in mind the only way you'll ever get that is to make it yourself or take a module and edit all the conversations and journals etc. to create your own path, which would be a lot faster and probably not so hard in a module with not too many thousands of words of dialogue.

As kamal says it's the standard narrative structure that drives a story and to make an evil path ( no pun intended ) that is actually worthwhile with reasons to go on with the pc's journey other than making money and being sadistic is very difficult. What is the motivation behind evil and when does it stop ? Because somebody's not going to be happy with what you've done and it's going to never end because there is no conclusion to evil deeds unless you turn the whole world bad with all good destroyed ( that's a pretty massive module ). Unlike the destruction of a particular group of baddies because once they're gone everybody's happy and gets on with their lives.

 

Well, it's just that most modules are extremely "good" driven, and while I have an awful time playing evil characters (I don't think I've ever actually played an evil character in good/neutral aligned module before), it's getting a little dry. I'm not seeking to become the next King of Shadows, but I was re-reading War of the Spider Queen series (which is what Hunt Through the Dark is based on) and I thought it would make a really good mod... if I had the sufficient skills. Quenthel, Danifae, and Pharaun are really interesting characters that are ultimately evil-aligned, who all end up in the Demonweb Pits for reasons other than money and destruction. Thayans and Zhentil Keep are two other organisations that are evil-aligned but seem to have other motives than gold and bloodbath. 

 

It would be difficult to do an evil-aligned character in an otherwise neutral/good aligned world, but doing it in the Underdark or Zhentil Keep or Thaymount wouldn't be that hard, I think, since everyone is evil. Byers' Haunted Lands involve the Thayans without everyone trying to destroy everything. It seems doable. Maybe it requires a good writer?

[Lugaid of the Red Stripes]

I think kamal's point about the evil antagonist driving the story is spot-on.  For many of these kinds of stories, being good is really simple, you either just out and kill the bad guys, or you otherwise thwart the big bad's evil schemes.  Having the player execute their own evil schemes is a whole lot more complicated.  You could set it up with the PC as the loyal servant of some evil master, but then the PC would have to loyal/lawful, or otherwise sympathetic to the evil cause.  Without an evil boss-questgiver, the PC is essentially just making up the plot as they go along.  That might be fun for a sandbox-type game, but it's hard to build a dramatic and suspenseful plot when it's actually the player who's writing the story.

[Arkalezth]

I think he means that playing evil would be easier in an evil society (i.e. you'd just be like everyone else).

 

I agree with Kamal somewhat, but evil PC =/= antagonist. You can be evil and still be the "hero" or fight against another big bad guy. This is viable in some modules, but not in others, if every possible action and dialogue option is clearly good aligned.

 

Don't take me wrong; I'm not complaining and there are plenty of amazing good-only modules, not to mention that this is not a paid job, but it'd be nice to have more modules where you could play evil and don't feel out of context or a retarded/psycho. Perhaps most players prefer to play good, but some of us like (or prefer) to play evil as well.

[Tchos]

I've tried to play evil, on occasion, but genius evil is not well supported in modules with alignment shifts, since my actions are near-indistinguishable from good, as it tends to serve my purposes.  Regardless, it just makes me feel good to be the Big Damn Hero, so I more often slip into that role despite my efforts.

[andysks]

As Tchos says. I often start as evil, and reached a point where I actually do it for testing myself and see how far I will go this time before turning to good. Last run on ToEE I managed to last until deep into the temple where I actually released the prisoners. Couldn't last any longer .

[kamal_]

I think kamal's point about the evil antagonist driving the story is spot-on.  For many of these kinds of stories, being good is really simple, you either just out and kill the bad guys, or you otherwise thwart the big bad's evil schemes.  Having the player execute their own evil schemes is a whole lot more complicated.  You could set it up with the PC as the loyal servant of some evil master, but then the PC would have to loyal/lawful, or otherwise sympathetic to the evil cause.  Without an evil boss-questgiver, the PC is essentially just making up the plot as they go along.  That might be fun for a sandbox-type game, but it's hard to build a dramatic and suspenseful plot when it's actually the player who's writing the story.

Pretty much exactly what I felt in plotting things for Path of Evil, and why I wound up describing it as "story-lite".

[kamal_]

"Crimmor" should be fine too.

 

There likely are others, but I can't think of many from the top of my head right now. And none of those I mentioned is directed to evil characters in particular. Just viable for them.

Without spoiling things too much, Crimmor sees the player as a "fixer" for the Shadow Thieves, making it very suitable for evil characters. However Ed Greenwood says the Shadow Thieves of Crimmor behave in a nontypical way for their organization, and I implemented that. Some players found it jarring, I prefer to think of it as intelligently evil. It works fine for neutral/good characters as well, in fact those alignments get an entire in story alternate take on the questline.

[Dann-J]

When it comes down to it, evil is essentially selfishness, while good is selflessness. The majority of real people tend to be somewhere inbetween.

 

It's more than possible for a person to be likeable, nice to others and do good deeds, and yet still be evil, if the only reason they do those things is for personal gain.

 

The reverse can also be true - many an attrocity has been committed in the name of the 'greater good', by people who genuinely think they're doing what is best for others. The road to the hells can be paved with good intentions.

 

In Isle of Shrines I made the evil storyline all about greed, rather than child-eating psychopaths. The good storyline was about the quest for knowledge, rather than saving the world from 'bad guys'. The neutral storyline was about doing what was necessary just to survive.

 

I recently found a series of videos on Youtube of someone playing through the neutral storyline. It's weird watching someone else play your own module! However it's good to know that players are actually using some of the loot you designed (even bothering to read the item descriptions), and discovering the various secret locations and encounters you spend so much time creating.

[Elrith Galadon]

When it comes down to it, evil is essentially selfishness, while good is selflessness. The majority of real people tend to be somewhere inbetween.

 

It's more than possible for a person to be likeable, nice to others and do good deeds, and yet still be evil, if the only reason they do those things is for personal gain.

 

The reverse can also be true - many an attrocity has been committed in the name of the 'greater good', by people who genuinely think they're doing what is best for others. The road to the hells can be paved with good intentions.

 

In Isle of Shrines I made the evil storyline all about greed, rather than child-eating psychopaths. The good storyline was about the quest for knowledge, rather than saving the world from 'bad guys'. The neutral storyline was about doing what was necessary just to survive.

 

I recently found a series of videos on Youtube of someone playing through the neutral storyline. It's weird watching someone else play your own module! However it's good to know that players are actually using some of the loot you designed (even bothering to read the item descriptions), and discovering the various secret locations and encounters you spend so much time creating.

 

Evil doesn't mean antagonist, and it is a wishy-washy concept. I did go "???" with Bishop just tagging every good guy as stupid. Okay, Casavir isn't really the brightest of the lot, and to be honest quite often I wanted to whack some sense into my party while playing the OC, but it just so appears that roleplaying game developers immediately tag some weird label of "stupid buffoon knight" onto at least one character... or maybe that's a trend Gaider started. Either way, they're about as flavourful as cottage cheese.

 

I didn't really find MoTB or OC campaign's bad ending to make much sense (most of the bad endings can only be explained away with the reason of "just because"). I guess this stems from my heavily story-focused style of playing. Reading through a few novels with "evil" characters being protagonists, I found that they all have much more interesting backgrounds than goody-two-shoes. I think Bishop would fit the bill in regards to this case, except his character was so badly written for me that I lost all interest. 

 

Self-serving and evil alignment are extremely wishy-washy. Gann never seems to do anything for altruistic reasons, but he's neutral. 

 

I think evil's got confused with bad/renegade and the whole alignment thing is flawed. I've never had any goody goody stuff in any of my modules and I've sanctioned the massacre of paladins, killing of unicorns and monks on drugs committing robberies. But it's all done for a good cause and a reason that is definitely not evil which is self serving, sadistic and quite frankly not nice in any shape or form.

Surely evil is the domain of serial killers, mass murderers, rapists and child molesters so it's rather nice to think that nobody wants to write that sort of thing and most people would rather play good/neutral characters.

 

Serial killers... is debatable. I'd qualify my Knight-Captain as a spree killer in some instances. She left a trail of dead behind her (she had good intentions and she saved Neverwinter, but I doubt the Watchmen she killed would appreciate it). She, for certain, is a "mass murderer". As for child molester, Casavir might well qualify for that category in quite a few playthroughs. And my Knight-Captain lies through her teeth. She wiggled out of almost everything by lying. She'd make an excellent politician...

 

Evil alignment is defined (very roughly) as "self-serving". Neutral evil, for example, is defined as pure pragmatism. But that does not mean sadism. Ammon Jerro's evil-aligned, but apart from killing his descendent (which he didn't know until it was too late), all he's done is pretty much save Neverwinter. Raistlin Majere is evil, but that's because he's put one purpose above all else (which would put Karsus in evil alignment too... maybe Dragonlance works differently). Artemis' code of conduct doesn't really fit the bill either (can't really recall him doing anything for his own pleasure... he was just really dedicated to his trade). 

 

There's Cyric brand of evil (but he's crazy), and then there's Mask brand of evil. Most evil campaigns I see seem to want to make the PC into some weird devotee of Cyric type, but there are plenty of "evil" types that are intelligent, law-abiding, and self-serving. 

 

I do see now, though, that writing a non-blah evil character is much harder than writing a good character. I don't think people wanting to play good characters being the issue here, since Raistlin is still the reigning king (queen?) of the series popularity contest... but writing a character as intricate as he is would be hard. 

 

But I am getting a little tired - after 14, 15 years of PC RPGs - of playing "Batman". Having more Joker mods would be nice... 

[Arkalezth]

Snip.

Agreed 100%. Pretty much exactly my point, but better explained.

[rjshae]

I tend to see evil quantified as something that threatens the survival requirements of an individual or a group. I.e. something resulting in death (murder), inhibiting people from supporting their metabolism (food/water/clothing/shelter/motility/senses/&c.), or preventing reproduction (forced sterilization or maiming). But that does make it all a matter of perspective, of course. In the D&D sense, Law-vs-Chaos is favoring the requirements of the group or the individual, respectively.

[Nemo_Studio]

Not to tooth my own horn, but my module "Legend of Verssavis, Chapter one"  has many outcomes that are modified by an "evil" alignment.

[Dann-J]

Not to tooth my own horn, but my module "Legend of Verssavis, Chapter one"  has many outcomes that are modified by an "evil" alignment.

 

I always thought 'toothing your own horn' was some sort of yoga position.

 

Then again, I also thought 'pilates' were asian pirates.

 

(I'll get me coat...)