Why no Evil characters?

[Gordo]

We are the heroes of the story. Also, modern Dungeons and Dragons is moving away from alignment and race designations.

Woke sadness. I think I read "races" will now be called "species".
Pathetic.

[droid327]

Now I've heard everything.

Star Wars is a universe specifically designed to explore the idea of the fall to and redemption from evil. So evil is still evil, but its a necessary step in the thematic journey to good. Also, KOTOR is a game specifically designed to let you play on the 'bad guy' side too

DDO's thematic ancestor is LOTR, which has a much different approach to exploration of good and evil: they arent as fluid as in Star Wars. Those that are good are (mostly) inherently good, those that are evil are inherently evil, and the conflict between the two is external (ie between good and evil characters) rather than internal (ie the personal struggle against temptation and fear).

And so, DDO is not a game that allows you to play Evil. If they ever did, it'd have to be a completely separate game mode where you could roll a Monster character and play Monster quests where you actually are evil, doing evil things. But, of course, that'd be a project far too large to ever see in DDO

[JollySwagMan]

Because gaining power by killing vast numbers of sentients and reincarnating to do the process over and over is somehow holy and good?
There is not a consistent reasoning for this, really.

[Just_a_Dude]

I played in an evil campaign once. It was a lot of fun, until people started playing their alignment. The Chaotic Evil Wizard wanted something in the Neutral Evil Fighter's inventory, so the Wizard started throwing poison darts at the Fighter, during a fight. Needless to say, the Fighter died. The party lived, but the Lawful Evil Cleric saw what happened and killed the Wizard as punishment. The group basically fell apart, both in the game and IRL.

[Oxarhamar]

Now I've heard everything.

Yep there’s a difference between having Evil or a fantasy alignment like Sith it’s pretty straight forward

[Talon_Moonshadow]

It was never really clear to me why having a Evil character alignment was never allowed? Especially when alignment was a major part of pen-n-papers character development. Which had a ton of trickle down effects on everything from gearing to spell resistance.

Would hope that the Devs didn't omit Evil as a political / social choice in an attempt to appease someone's parents. Yet I've the feeling that is indeed the case here...

Anyone who knows more on the "why" behind this is welcome to constructively comment.

-Smoke

Because every evil character died trying to kill Jeets and take his stuff, when they first met on the beach.......

Or died when Korthos fell to the Dragon, because they refused to help.

Didn't help Garison get his pack back.....

etc.

[Oxarhamar]

Because every evil character died trying to kill Jeets and take his stuff, when they first met on the beach.......

Or died when Korthos fell to the Dragon, because they refused to help.

Didn't help Garison get his pack back.....

etc.

Lol

+1

[Dilbon]

But good characters are still happy to do Purge the Heretics.

[LightBear]

It was never really clear to me why having a Evil character alignment was never allowed? Especially when alignment was a major part of pen-n-papers character development. Which had a ton of trickle down effects on everything from gearing to spell resistance.

Would hope that the Devs didn't omit Evil as a political / social choice in an attempt to appease someone's parents. Yet I've the feeling that is indeed the case here...

Anyone who knows more on the "why" behind this is welcome to constructively comment.

-Smoke

I let Dr. Justin Sledge lecture you on that one:



The consequences are real.

[Bjond]

KOTOR has Sith, last time I checked they are evil. Same rating as DDO.

BioWare has often done an exceptional job of mixing it up with good & evil story-lines. SWTOR is still one of the outright top MMOs for story content, including a lot of what most anyone would call evil -- such as permitting you to randomly (at will) torture your apprentice .. just for the fun of it.

technically similar it’s definitely different from evil

The "Satanic Panic" lives on. OMG, did we have fun with that one as kids growing up in it. Heaven help the parent that bought it, 'cuz we'd put 'em through Hell out of sheer teenage perversity.

Sadly, it kinda still lives on with ratings boards even today. Certain key words trigger them.

[cdbd3rd]

This is incorrect

They aren’t doing away with alignment or race

Race is being changed to Species

& they are doing away with entire Race being a homogeneous alignment so that any Species can be any alignment...

OMFG. I was hoping you were joking, but sure enough.... "long overdue change" my rearward facing assets.


------


Alright listen, anyone who has known me for the decade and a half I've been almost living here - I'm a huge proponent of "An it harm none, do as thou wilt." But there's hard line when it gets to the "Do as you want and force everyone else to do the same." [Granted, I do tend to lean a little *okay, a lot* in my opinion of PvP... but there's reasons. Anyway...]

-a slightly modified clip of something I wrote elsewhere:
Removing alignments from all 'races' (lol) so everything can be any alignment. -- Sure, as DMs we've always had the option to make exceptions to the rule and have small subsets of a mobs that are ... well, exceptions. [Eberon has been a large example of this. A *few* exceptions to their 'species'.] Can you imagine a dungeon delve under this new <expletive> design? "You meet a group of Hobgoblins. You don't know if they're good Hobgoblins or bad Hobgoblins. Since all of you Species representatives are good, then you shall not attack first, giving these Hobgoblins automatic initiative." *dice rolls*


I'll stop typing now. Already stepping too close to the edge of rules I agreed to abide by.

[GoldyGopher]

It was never really clear to me why having a Evil character alignment was never allowed? Especially when alignment was a major part of pen-n-papers character development. Which had a ton of trickle down effects on everything from gearing to spell resistance.

Would hope that the Devs didn't omit Evil as a political / social choice in an attempt to appease someone's parents. Yet I've the feeling that is indeed the case here...

Anyone who knows more on the "why" behind this is welcome to constructively comment.

-Smoke

The short answer given by a former Executive Producer.

The contract between SSG (formerly Turbine) and WOTC does not allow for it, DDO is a "heroic" game. Even if it did SSG does not want to handle all the problems when someone griefs another player all in the name of it is my character's alignment.

[Cavalier]

Because Evil is dumb.

DarthHelmet would be in disagreement with you there, sir.

[C-Dog]

But good characters are still happy to do Purge the Heretics.

"The self-righteous SMITE you!"...

[Nugaot]

Because time is a flat circle, and most of you still confuse Evil for Stupid and Suicidal, I will just repeat what I said last time this topic came up.

But beyond even that - the game is not set up to truly allow evil roleplay. The quests are almost all set up to assume some level of benevolence from the character. There is no way to enforce the consequences of evil actions the way a DM would be able to in tabletop play, which is a critical balance element for evil alignments in PnP. And if you played through a life with the usual quests, you'd have done so many good deeds that any decent DM would have changed your alignment to Neutral by like L7.

Aside from the utterly asinine argument that Evil alignment players would use it as an excuse to "role-play" by being a troll in-game, this is the most foolish (and all too often regurgitated) assertion about Evil alignment in DDO.

DDO is a video game where you commit mass slaughter of sapient races, oftentimes Humans, and take everything that isn't nailed down. You're rooting through abandoned packs and scraping moss off the walls everywhere you go. All this in service of becoming more powerful, that you might murder larger groups of stronger people, again and again.

It is actually an uncommon sight to see players taking "Good" options in quests. How many Hardcore Korthos PUGs did you join this season? How many of them rescued all the captives in "Sacrifices"? Or did they leave the majority, rescuing only the Mayor's daughter? After all, that's all you're being paid for. Did they murder every other sentient creature in the dungeon? Who will feed these captives now? Surely the Devourer cult was keeping its prisoners fed, if only barely. Now they are left alone to rot in an abandoned dungeon. Nice job, hero.

This is obviously only just one example, but one does not have to look very hard to find others. Basically ANY quest which has an optional to rescue prisoners or slaves, you can almost guarantee they won't all be found. It's time consuming and the rewards aren't worth your while, purely from a gameplay perspective. Much like in real life, taking the high road requires time, effort, and self-discipline. Being a good person is oftentimes a thankless task. The reward is in knowing you've made a meaningful difference in the world, and when you're rescuing the same captives for, like, the 40th time, and your reward is less xp than your daily dice roll and a line of text above their head, well, it's hard to say you've made much of a difference at all, really.

But sure, what's a few prisoners? You're out there saving the world from destruction, right? Kind of, sort of? Evil people have a vested interest in the world's continued existence, too. After all, "that's where I keep all my stuff!" At best this is a Neutral motivation, and certainly not one that would put Good and Evil PCs at odds with one another. It's a very common trope in fantasy stories where villains or otherwise unscrupulous characters will work with the heroic protagonists in pursuit of a common goal, like preventing total annihilation or social collapse.

There are also several quests where the player character is tricked into helping obviously (or not-so-obviously) malicious actors. Purge the Heretics and Running with the Devils come to mind. And sure, in RwtD you give them their comeuppance, but Purge the Heretics? Gnomon goes on to help the Drow release the Spinner of Shadows from Khyber and nearly pulls apart the very fabric of reality. And him telling you to go murder a bunch of huddled masses, living in the sewer doesn't ever tip you off? It's an Evil quest, period.

Eberron is a setting in which one of the very core principles is that the sapient races are all just people with different cultures. When you go into the City of Arzag-Khor, guns blazing, dumping fireballs and holy smites on everything in sight, are you the good guy? Or are you the invading barbarian hordes, attacking the peaceful city? Never mind the fact that Stormreach, the City built on top of Arzag-Khor, is a relatively recent development, created by opportunistic settlers that openly mock democracy and joke about being "honest pirates". The Hobgoblins were here first! You're not a good person for killing hundreds of them!

I'm not saying they need to add Evil to DDO (though it would be nice to have the option) I am saying you're Evil already, the game just doesn't let you openly declare it on your sheet.

[C-Dog]

DDO is a video game where you commit mass slaughter of sapient races, oftentimes Humans, and take everything that isn't nailed down. ...When you go into the City of Arzag-Khor, guns blazing, dumping fireballs and holy smites on everything in sight, are you the good guy? Or are you the invading barbarian hordes, attacking the peaceful city?...

The counter-argument would be that the premise for the world "we" inhabit is that "humanity" (inc all "civilized" races) is at war (perhaps undeclared, but mutually understood) with "monster" races. Many "monster races" are not portrayed as having anything like "civilians" - any and every member is a (potential) combatant. No such thing as a "peaceful" monster or civilization, or member of same, even if they are not currently engaged in acts of war at the moment.

Having a hobgoblin city under your feet is a "bad thing", its very presence is a threat to life. And if someone is going to die, better theirs than ours. (Any "spoils of war" are simply culturally accepted at that point, something that has been traditional IRL for millenia.)

Or so the prevalent world-view would tell us. The fact that War is Hell, for all concerned, does not contradict a "heroic" waging of such - in that context.


"Evil" characters would as easily side with the others (or perhaps even more readily do so), and feel zero loyalty/affinity to their "home" culture/civilization, so it becomes a coin toss which side they would be on. That is a pretty standard definition of "evil".

[Memnir]

Alignment notwithstanding:

[C-Dog]

Alignment notwithstanding:
...

"YOU want some?... You want... just a little?..."

[Coffey]

Because Evil is dumb.

And pliable.

[Nugaot]

The counter-argument would be that the premise for the world "we" inhabit is that "humanity" (inc all "civilized" races) is at war (perhaps undeclared, but mutually understood) with "monster" races. Many "monster races" are not portrayed as having anything like "civilians" - any and every member is a (potential) combatant. No such thing as a "peaceful" monster or civilization, or member of same, even if they are not currently engaged in acts of war at the moment.

Having a hobgoblin city under your feet is a "bad thing", its very presence is a threat to life. And if someone is going to die, better theirs than ours. (Any "spoils of war" are simply culturally accepted at that point, something that has been traditional IRL for millenia.)

Or so the prevalent world-view would tell us. The fact that War is Hell, for all concerned, does not contradict a "heroic" waging of such - in that context.


"Evil" characters would as easily side with the others (or perhaps even more readily do so), and feel zero loyalty/affinity to their "home" culture/civilization, so it becomes a coin toss which side they would be on. That is a pretty standard definition of "evil".

The fact aside that you have entirely missed the premise of Eberron as a setting...

Real life in this example is a poor analogy. I am sorry to be the first to tell you that there has never been a war in all of history that did not involve children, the elderly, and other non-combatants. If the premise is that there is a sentient species that is wholly made up of violent warriors, then there is no real-life analog to be found.

Of course, if you were able to pay attention to the game, you'd have to notice that player characters actually encounter a great number of civilian "monsters" of all stripes, some friendly, others simply neutral. We have worked with kobolds, minotaur, giants, hobgoblins, and many others. Did they give us Evil quests, that we are now morally worse people for having completed? Or did they contract you to complete a service, and alignment never entered into the equation?

It is worthwhile to note that the NPC who gives the quest Tear of Dhakaan is himself a hobgoblin.