I've been persuaded to play a Warlock by the GM in our next D&D game. We have a large group 6 players and a GM, and the games already been going for a little while (I'm starting at 3rd level). All the traditional slots are take, fighter, Fighter/Rogue, Cleric, Wizard (Evoker), Druid/Monk. So there wasn't much left without treading on others toes, or being second fiddle.
The alignment restriction for Warlock is Chaotic or Evil. Since I generally don't like playing chaotic characters the GM has allowed me to go Lawful evil (with a little 'e'). While the GM is okay with I'm wondering if the rest of the party are going to kill me as soon as they know my alignment.
How would you react to a LE joining the party?
You'd need to give us more info, like the alignment of the other party members and whop the clerics god is.
LE can mean lots of different things. You could be someone who craves structure so they follow the letter of the law for fear of impinging on the integrity of rules.
Or, you could be someone who uses rules to their advantage such as Scrooge.
As a fellow player, I'd be fine as long as there was an in-game reason to work with them (that's true of pretty much any character). And, I'd have to trust the player not to do stupid things that ruin the game and then claim that they just did it because they're evil.
Quote from: BagpussI've been persuaded to play a Warlock by the GM in our next D&D game. We have a large group 6 players and a GM, and the games already been going for a little while (I'm starting at 3rd level). All the traditional slots are take, fighter, Fighter/Rogue, Cleric, Wizard (Evoker), Druid/Monk. So there wasn't much left without treading on others toes, or being second fiddle.
The alignment restriction for Warlock is Chaotic or Evil. Since I generally don't like playing chaotic characters the GM has allowed me to go Lawful evil (with a little 'e'). While the GM is okay with I'm wondering if the rest of the party are going to kill me as soon as they know my alignment.
How would you react to a LE joining the party?
First I would try to figure out the LE characters goals and motivations, if these traits are not in conflict with the goal of the party, I usually let them be.
But then again, I like playing LE characters, they have such a marvelous range. They always gets the job done, regardless of the consequences, and they do not mind a little "Collateral Damage", after all, they're only civilians. :D
LE characters do not need to be treacherous wordtwisters (like devils are often portraid), part of their alignment is Lawful after all, which can give them traits such as loyalty and honor. A LE character knows how to keep friend and allies, after all, you never know when you might need a favor. But since they are evil, they are not adverse to break laws if they know they can get away with it, and it suits their goals.
I think at least two are good aligned, but no paladins or else I wouldn't even consider it.
If you work with the group I never care what your alignment is. If you don't work with the group then it makes a convienent excuse for your 'accident'.
Quote from: BagpussI think at least two are good aligned, but no paladins or else I wouldn't even consider it.
Good can work with evil, particularly if their goals happen to coincide.
As people have already stated Lawful Evil can be law abiding and honorable. If you play the evil part relatively low key I don't think your going to have any problems.
Well the evil was basically going to be greed for wealth and power (Hey normal D&D motivations) and a disregard for the life of the others. Not going to murder folks as that would be unlawful, but not likely to save a town unless there was some reward involved, or the rest of the party decide to and he considered it better to stick with them in the long run.
Quote from: BagpussWell the evil was basically going to be greed for wealth and power (Hey normal D&D motivations) and a disregard for the life of the others. Not going to murder folks as that would be unlawful, but not likely to save a town unless there was some reward involved, or the rest of the party decide to and he considered it better to stick with them in the long run.
That sounds more NE to me.
Neutral evil you'ld more likely murder and steal if I thought I could get away with it.
I'm also planning that with maxed out Bluff and Beguiling Influence I can pass off any Know Alignment effects used on me as an unfortunate curse.
I like thinking about comic book characters whenever I want inspiration on alignments. So with that in mind...
Victor von Doom. Doom is the epitome of LE. Ordered in thought and in goals, and completely ruthless in treatment of his enemies: an extreme case of the ends always justifying the means.
As others have said, it'd depend on the boldness of the evil.
One character I played was an absolutely remorseless killer and assassin/bounty hunter. He would not kill for no reason, but he would coldly kill anyone who was less trouble dead than alive. This could include random townsfolk or even PCs.
However, he included the hassle of dealing with pissed off party members and armed city guards, as well as the potential posses, in his estimates of "less trouble dead". He also understood that, as a hired killer, he was marked as one of dubious trustworthiness. The only way to establish his credentials was to always deal squarely with people and never turncoat for more money.
Finally, he was smart enough to realize that a lot of evil extraplanar entities would not make good additions/rulers of the Prime Material (sorta "That's where I keep all my stuff!"). While he would accept various small jobs from them, he was very willing to oppose their grand machinations pro-bono (although he never turned down profit).
The end result was a character that actually worked quite well with good PCs. The character would rarely risk destabilizing a group that was helping him meet his goals (good living, basically). I considered him evil, rather than neutral, because he really had to moral objection to murder. Pure pragmatism is what kept him in check.
We recently had a Lawful Evil Drow Wizard-Warlock in our Gestalt game. He had the same goals as the rest of the party, but he was exceptionally cruel... He didn't go out of his way to mess up the party's Good-driven agenda, but he did go out of his way to infict exceptional pain upon any enemies he got his hands on.
Lawful evil characters make better team players than chaotic neutral ones, in my experience. LE (played properly) can be reliable, honorable dicks. I'll take a honorable asshole over "my alignment dictates I behave like a lunatic" any day.
Quote from: EnkhiduI like thinking about comic book characters whenever I want inspiration on alignments. So with that in mind...
Victor von Doom. Doom is the epitome of LE. Ordered in thought and in goals, and completely ruthless in treatment of his enemies: an extreme case of the ends always justifying the means.
very good analogy. phantom rep+
LE are good team players, or they aren't do the L part right. (Which has always been my quibble with devils as portrayed in D&D -- I love the setting of Hell, mind you, but it doesn't strike me as terribly LE).
You can even be nice and personable. You just don't have the moral qualms of the good guys...
Quote from: Vermicious KnidI'll take a honorable asshole over "my alignment dictates I behave like a lunatic" any day.
Whether that's now CN should act is a topic unto itself. ;)
As to the original topic, I'll echo that as long as the person is working within the party and didn't do anything my character considered extraordinarily heinous, I don't think I'd care.
Straight out of the SRD for you.
QuoteLawful Evil, "Dominator": A lawful evil villain methodically takes what he wants within the limits of his code of conduct without regard for whom it hurts. He cares about tradition, loyalty, and order but not about freedom, dignity, or life. He plays by the rules but without mercy or compassion. He is comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but is willing to serve. He condemns others not according to their actions but according to race, religion, homeland, or social rank. He is loath to break laws or promises.
This reluctance comes partly from his nature and partly because he depends on order to protect himself from those who oppose him on moral grounds. Some lawful evil villains have particular taboos, such as not killing in cold blood (but having underlings do it) or not letting children come to harm (if it can be helped). They imagine that these compunctions put them above unprincipled villains.
Some lawful evil people and creatures commit themselves to evil with a zeal like that of a crusader committed to good. Beyond being willing to hurt others for their own ends, they take pleasure in spreading evil as an end unto itself. They may also see doing evil as part of a duty to an evil deity or master.
Lawful evil is sometimes called "diabolical," because devils are the epitome of lawful evil.
Lawful evil is the most dangerous alignment because it represents methodical, intentional, and frequently successful evil.
The problem with the book definition of LE is that it is so... humourless. It's quite possible to be LE and still be a nice enough guy.
Quote from: CyberzombieThe problem with the book definition of LE is that it is so... humourless. It's quite possible to be LE and still be a nice enough guy.
True, a lot depends on your play style and your DM. I think the vast majority of gamers run their characters as Lawful Evil even if their not actually that alignment. Basically out for money, glory and xp. And will do whatever they can get away with do procure these.
Quote from: KnightcrawlerTrue, a lot depends on your play style and your DM. I think the vast majority of gamers run their characters as Lawful Evil even if their not actually that alignment. Basically out for money, glory and xp. And will do whatever they can get away with do procure these.
I thought about bringing that up, but I thought it might be a thread derailment. :D I know I've run plenty of characters that were LE (or maybe even NE) while their character sheet said NG...
Quote from: CyberzombieI thought about bringing that up, but I thought it might be a thread derailment. :D I know I've run plenty of characters that were LE (or maybe even NE) while their character sheet said NG...
This is one of the reasons most of my characters in teh last couple of years have been true neutral. That an a DM that has made large use of
Protection from Good and
Protection from Law spells.
And I don't really think that its a thread derailment, the OP is about alignment and party interaction.
You lot are all so willing to shake hands with the devil. I'm going to cross post this at EN-World and see if I get the same reaction. :)
Quote from: BagpussYou lot are all so willing to shake hands with the devil. I'm going to cross post this at EN-World and see if I get the same reaction. :)
Do not speak that evil name. :D
Quote from: BagpussYou lot are all so willing to shake hands with the devil. I'm going to cross post this at EN-World and see if I get the same reaction. :)
The devil is a nice enough bloke, but he's prone to leaving you holding the bag (Hell, that is).
[/Sandman]
Quote from: BagpussYou lot are all so willing to shake hands with the devil. I'm going to cross post this at EN-World and see if I get the same reaction. :)
Hey I already have a spot reserved at his poker table.
Quote from: Sobek... He also understood that, as a hired killer, he was marked as one of dubious trustworthiness. The only way to establish his credentials was to always deal squarely with people and never turncoat for more money...
I remember, a few years ago, reading some story hour or another with the line (from a PC to an NPC) "You're scum. But you're scum that stays bought. I can respect that."
One of the Lawful Evil characters I liked was Audi Ibn Jhad from "Rose of the Prophet". He fought back to back against members of his own church because he had sworn an oath to protect the person his church was going to kill.
Quote from: KnightcrawlerTrue, a lot depends on your play style and your DM.
True. I have a player in my Eberron game who is playing a Valinar Warmage, and really playing up the glory-hound aspect. With the Eberron "squishy alignments", I almost had her talked into running an Evil character. That could have been doubly amusing because I'm letting her husband "playtest" some stuff from BoED.
We heartily approve of LE characters in play. They help keep the "good" characters honest. "Good" characters usually look out for number one. If they have someone who actively takes that roll, rather than just falling into it, it gives them some incentive to actually act like a hero.
Quote from: Xavier LangOne of the Lawful Evil characters I liked was Audi Ibn Jhad from "Rose of the Prophet". He fought back to back against members of his own church because he had sworn an oath to protect the person his church was going to kill.
I will second the example of a LE character. Too many people play evil characters as lawful stupid or evil stupid. Evil does not have to be a rampage and fuck everybody over.