Dealing With Being Evil

[Inech]

I'm not sure if any of you play evil characters, but I wanted to pose the question of how to play an evil character and justify their actions. I mean, does an evil character know that it is doing evil? Is there a persuit of evil? I'm just having some trouble with my character and was hoping I could get some advice for it.

[Molalzsath]

Well, in my case, Molalzsath is an uruk. Justifying, or even thinking, isn't their strong suit. Killing is. As a Fallen, he kills for power. He doesn't think about the Nameless One, he just goes by killing means being stronger.

However, I think there are two types of retromud evil characters. Those who are in it for themselves, with no concern for others (D&D chaotic). And those who do it because they think they are on the winning side (D&D evil).

I've thought about what an evil character would be like if they really thought they were in the right, and thus good, and always wondered why for some time, D&D Evil characters couldn't have a Paladin equivalent. Apparently they can now.

I think RetroMUD's Evil Paladin is the Death Knight (more experienced players, correct me here), and they have motivations similar to what you've described.

Disclaimer: The closest I've come to D&D is playing Neverwinter Nights and reading stories.

[Moonsilk]

The way you justify it is the same way my charater justifies helping the heal those who do kill. Part of it is self-defense and survival, plain and simple. Another part is the guild does require certain actions as part of guild membership. The rest is the fact that it is time for some to die and they just need a little help reaching that end. My charater does have a slightly easier time though as she has no faith in any of the gods, even if she does believe in their existance.

[Urthdigger]

With my evil characters, they know what they're doing is wrong, but they just plain don't care. With my secondary character Stranger, it's that he's a sadist. He loves torturing people and causing pain and misery, both physical and psychological.

[Schrau]

Y'know, looking at Schrau's development since roughly directly after Exodus he's clearly sliding towards the evil end of the scale.

He's still as much a Sikkarite as any other flappy, but religion has never been that much of an issue with him, ("Why the hell should I expect forgiveness from any god? In fact, why should any god forgive me when there's no way that I'll forgive them."). On the other hand, he has a pretty good sense of who is good and evil (Or, more specifically, who has been naughty and nice) and will fight his chosen corner to the end if needs be.

The main thing with Schrau is that he takes the guild motto, lex via quislibet facultis, to heart. In his mind, any action is justified if it results in the punishment of a criminal. Schrau is a trained criminal by breeding and training, knows that the only real difference between freedom and punishment is not being caught. He has a unique insight in the criminal world, knows that it's dog-eat-dog in every case, and can go to some extraordinary lengths to be the biggest dog in the pound.

There's a lot of pettiness in Schrau's actions, a lot of small and malicious acts that a holier person would have avoided doing. One of the earliest instances had to be how he treated Cannis (Schrau never actually liked him, even after all they went through). Then there was the stuff "Bardur" did in Exodus (If the slaves he had to intimidate hadn't been Schrau's kinfolk, he probably wouldn't have been affected by it like he was afterwards, instead of a critical personality split he probably would have been assimilated by the Bardur personality). Astane's subsequent "execution" was Schrau avoiding what essentially would have been a fair fight that would have resulted in his death (See also Malgus' execution in Belief), and pretty much all of Cunning & Guile was Schrau being the conniving thieving bastard he was raised to be instead of a sentinel.

Some hard facts: He didn't really care about Cannis' wellbeing through their time together. He was caught up in the "zone" of orchestrating more and more elaborate deceptions as opposed to taking in Carla Ciabanni's safety into consideration, much less actually bringing Angelo Horas down. He pretty much acted like a bully throughout all of Thoughts of Chaos, only realising things were serious when Vehemoth actually snapped. He was more interested in being "right" about Havral's death than actually caring about her, even as he learned that she loved him. He also treated Seita like dirt and was willing to tear apart the Silver Eye regardless of what actual benefits it offered its members because, all justification aside, he "felt like it."

And he was hardly gracious through it all. Plus he didn't actually need to kill the two door guards as he escaped the Ocular Temple.

Anyway, what I have planned next may indeed top everything he's done so far.

And through it all he doesn't believe that he will be punished. He believes that everything he does, for all its shades of grey, is right. He's a right bastard, but if everything turns out for the best and the bad guys wind up with less bodily fluids and bits than they started the day with, he can just carry on in his spiral of maliciousness forever.

It'll probably take some real responsibility to bring it to a halt and even reverse the process. It's also hard to see from where that will come from: The guild essentially gives him free reign in his methods, and the only other distraction in his life is the village of Cartreth, which he has essentially distanced himself from after founding it.

Oh well.

[Loktai]

Maybe he gets a wee less free reign after he kills one too many people with connections to innocent folks, like the innocent statesman's not-so-innocent kid, or something.

[Kereth]

Ah... evil...

Where do I even start with Kereth? Obviously, he can hardly be considered a good aligned character. I mean, he's a thief, a murderer, and a druggie to boot. His has no respect for any code of law beside Cyllyl's, and he follows a religion that proposes the employment of reason in the stead of morality.

I think the trick to "playing an evil character," at least in Kereth's case, is to never consider concepts of right and wrong at all. Kereth, in most things, is a nice enough guy, but he just doesn't have a conscience. He is not above murdering small children and stealing their lunch money (probably throwing away those annoying paper bits). In his endeavors, the concept of whether something is morally 'right' just never becomes an issue. Cyllyl wants somebody dead, he kills them. He wants someone's money, he slits their throat.

That doesn't mean that he doesn't have guiding principles though. If he had nothing to base his judgments on, he'd be completely chaotic, even more so than he is now. Kereth protects the things he cares about, and only acts when it is in his own best interests or in the best interests of those that are important to him. Essentially reason in the absence of morality, but with emotional attachments thrown into the mixture, for a little fun.

Now add in an adorable personality, a short attention span, hallucinagenic drugs, and really sharp daggers and you have Kereth! Uncontrolled evil has discovered a whole knew way of being worrisome. . .