WHY does your evil character put up with your party members?
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
WHY does your evil character put up with your party members?
WHY does your evil character put up with your party members?
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Payment. The noble in the party pays him a good sum each month and he gets forty percent of the party loot for himself.
They're pretty chill, watch his back, and will do stuff for him that he can't do himself. He's looking to put himself on top, but his nearest and dearest count as "him" most of the time.
Because I like them. Just because I am evil doesn't mean I don't have friends, value my allies, or I am somehow incapable of cooperation for mutual gain. I'm *evil*, not fricking stupid.
I'm not evil because I am some kind of slavering monster that tortures and murders innocent people compulsively to show how evil I am. I am evil because I am *willing* to torture and murder innocent people if it gets me what I want.
I like you.
She's lonely and the party genuinely cares about her. Which is why even though she doesn't give a rat's ass about the sunshine and rainbows spiel, she at least wants to appear like she's on board with it and (attempt to) keep her violent schizo breakdowns secret and/or directed against even worse animals.
Evil is an allignment, not a compulsion. Sometimes i need locks picked or minds read and im more powerful when i have a guy for that. Also its like four people who have to die first before my enemies can get to me
Because we are all equally evil
work-release program
No my character, but one in a game I'm running puts up with the rest of the party because he'd die without them. Going it alone has no benefit, especially in dangerous places, but I imagine he'll eventually come in to conflict with the cleric and paladin(the druid already wants to off him).
A better question would be why the party puts up with evil characters, surely.
Evil characters don't mind good characters, at worst they're annoyed that they have to pass up a good opportunity so the rest don't get their panties in a twist, or that the party is wasting efforts/resources helping others. It's an objection to inefficiency really.
Meanwhile good characters are outraged by evil characters. How do you put up with the butthole who keeps suggesting they should just kill a guy and take his money or rape anyone who catches their fancy, that they should desecrate corpses and shrines or torture captives?
That is the better question. The only time I can see a good party tolerating an evil party member is either under duress or extreme practical reasons. In any normal situation just jumping the guy should be the most valid course unless you've got a hippie paladin in the party.
>How do you put up with the butthole who keeps suggesting they should just kill a guy and take his money or rape anyone who catches their fancy, that they should desecrate corpses and shrines or torture captives?
To be fair not even
would put up with that shit: Just because this is a sandbox doesn't mean we want you to shit in it.
Lawful evil guys here: if someone like that was in the party, and refused to reign in their behavior, I'd probably just kill them unless there was a very good reason not to. Not because I was morally outraged at their vile actions, but because them being unable to exert some basic fricking self control was putting me and the others in danger by inevitably bringing all kinds of heat down on our heads. To say nothing of the fact that such a person who so obviously can't resist the urge to do this stuff can't be trusted to not do it to *us* if they think they can get away with it.
If a character is defined by being a ruthless bastard who does horrors as necessary and never loses sleep over it, putting down a rabid dog is going to be a quick and easy decision.
>I'd probably just kill them unless there was a very good reason not to. Not because I was morally outraged at their vile actions, but because them being unable to exert some basic fricking self control was putting me and the others in danger by inevitably bringing all kinds of heat down on our heads. To say nothing of the fact that such a person who so obviously can't resist the urge to do this stuff can't be trusted to not do it to *us* if they think they can get away with it.
>If a character is defined by being a ruthless bastard who does horrors as necessary and never loses sleep over it, putting down a rabid dog is going to be a quick and easy decision.
Exactly, it also why we try and sort out the "Deus Vult" shits from church leadership; Even if we agree with the sentiment, you're still rocking the damn boat too hard!
Usually because they don't know the evil character is evil, deny they're evil (out of personal sentiment), or compromise their values. The classic, 'he's a son of a b***h, but he's our son of a b***h.' You can debate whether people like that have any claim to being good if you want, I don't really care to.
Because they all have loose enough morals to entertain his ideas and they sometimes realize that his way is "correct" for the situation at hand. He's also a squishy little shit and he can use them as scapegoats to disperse blame or meatshields when that does work out. The system we play doesn't have a full-on alignment system, but if I had to pin it down, the character in question is NE with instances of CE behavior and the party members are TN, LN, and CN/CG. Not a single one of them is actually a concretely good person and their moral compass is one of convenience. To him, they're all at least malleable enough to budge on the details when it comes to getting his way. The only major opposition to him in the party was the CN/CG character who had a stark hatred of him and had considered just firing an arrow into his back on multiple occasions had their present situation not called for more tact.
In the game I'm running, the out-and-out evil character is accepted because he's pretty effective at what he does. He's pretty a classical dark priest with his own motivations that happen to not clash too badly with the party. They overlooked his descent into depravity for a while solely for the fact that having a guy that can spread a poisonous miasma, awaken the dead, and fire blasts of dark power is pretty good to have around when you're dealing with freakish abominations. He's less than helpful in tenuous political and social situations, but he knows how to hold his tongue so as not to stir the shit for the most part. His presence is unnerving though and he's nearly cost them alliances or safe haven more than once just by virtue of how outwardly fricked up he looks, and recent developments have proven that he's probably not long for this world. However, in the recent stretch of sessions, him being an amoral dickhead actually came in handy for motivating an orcish warband to give the party a hand in exchange for some shifty favors.
> Success
My character is evil by the means he's willing to take, but shares the other PCs' objectives.
He just have to be told "no" when he takes a knife out during interrogations, or offering to poison a water supply... that sort of stuff.
Same reason evil people hang out with non-evil people in real life, because it benefits them. And if they're smart, they pretend to not be evil most of the time. After all, from the evil character's perspective, good guys are gullible morons that are are less likely to betray you than another evil person, and they're easy to take advantage of so that you can betray them when convenient.
Usually as a means of practicality. He's a lawful evil bloke who failed his old master one time too many and the party is buying his line about trying to reform. He very much wants to be back on top and topple his old employer so he can call the shots. He's been slowly winning over the goody-two shoes party members with his "enlightened dictator" philosophy and might even succeed in corrupting them. He is getting a bit worried that sentimentality for these guys might make him lose track of his ultimate goal if it comes down to it.
Combine the power of friendship with the power of evil.
Because I'm playing a monstrous, feral little kobold that has become selfishly attached to the group even if he is chaotic evil. The group has three magicians that heal him and power him up during fights, so they're quite useful but they also rely on his protection as he can skeletonize an adult human faster than a swarm of piranhas.
It's an uneasy partnership, sort of like a group of campers managing to befriend a wild animal by giving it lots of food, and now it's following the group. Honestly the party would be wise to put my character down at some point
I was the GM, not a player, but I had a definitely evil vampire that was fond, in a way, of the party because they were 'interesting.' He didn't like being defied but he enjoyed the novelty of an enemy who could actually pose a challenge.
Because she's utterly infatuated with one of them and another one is so horrendously OP that pretty much everyone is forced to conform with whatever his current interpretation of the "good" way to do things is or he'd obliterate them in one turn.
They put up with *her* because she's really good at making their enemies die.
They are not fricking me over for my past life choice.
My god is ordering me to help them in order to ensure the world continues on a tranquil path of growth so it will be ripe when it’s time for consumption.
Give me one reason he wouldn't.