Evil Character Conundrum

Evil players are shitty snowflakes 99% of the time. Anyone who's not willing to make a good character tends to be one.

>>51951221
You aren't being too strict, 99% of the time the evil guy in a group of good characters is obnoxious and lolrandum for everyone else. Have you tried talking to him?

>I know you want to play McStabby but that wouldn't be fun for everyone else
>You want to create chaos, so imagine the party is meeting the king and you stab someone because it's what your character would do
>Now best case your party is outlaws, more likely they all die
>that's not fun

Have him play a bard, he'll be party face so he still gets plenty of focus but less destructively

>>51951359
Yeah, I did talk with him. He decided to go with the Vengeance Paladin. The diet-coke of evil paladins I suppose it will have to do. Friend then asked if he could go evil before I told him no. Others players weren't happy about it; especially the cleric in the party. Suppose I should keep an eye-out and play it by ear.

You can be a good guy and create chaos/ be against the law of the land quite easily.

Robin Hood did it, any generic western hero wandering into a town with a corrupt sheriff did it, any cop who gets his badge confiscated by the boss for being a wild card and going after the mafia head honcho with powerful connections did it, most superheroes in regular modern day settings did it.

All of these character archetypes can be considered some forms of "Good" on the D&D alignment chart (which is pretty shitty but whatever). Pretty much all of them go against the law of the land in some way, cause all kinds of collateral damage (generally trying to avoid killing innocents, of course) while gaining support from the common man.

Most "evil" players don't want to do that. They want to rape a bunch of innocent victims, piss on an orphan, burn a village and laugh about it.

>>51952011
You see evil wrong.
Good = Caring about everyone
Neutral = Caring about yourself, your family, and your friends
Evil = Caring about only yourself, and maybe very few other people
or
Good = Solving problems with as little harm as possible
Neutral = Solving problems in a way that puts you and those you care about at the least risk.
Evil = Solving problems in the easiest/most efficient/most rewarding way possible
An evil person wouldn't burn down a village for shits and giggles just because he's evil.
In most cases, (wellmade) evil characters will have some ulterior motive or goal, which may even be good.
A big part of what makes them evil is how they go about accomplishing that goal.
For example:
Getting a friend out of prison by helping the king is a good thing to do.
Getting a friend out of prison by slaughtering everyone between him and his friend's cell is not a good thing to do.
Curing someone's disease by buying a "Cure Disease potion" is a good thing to do.
Curing someone's disease by selling their soul to the demon of disease/robbing the potion store/threatening to kill a cleric if he doesn't help them is not a good thing to do.

>>51951221
It's never a good idea to let someone be an evil character when they're new to RPGs.

>>51951221
The rule of thumb is that evil characters are shit, unless the entire party is playing them or cool with them being around.

Evil campaigns can be fun, as long as everyone is in on it.

>>51952603
What if a player came to you asking to play a evil character seeking redemption?

>>51952901
Then I'd tell them to start as Neutral.

>>51952378
And yet every single person playing an evil character was an edgelord who demanded payment upfront from helpless villagers begging for help, described killing things in disgusting detail and wanted to murder NPCs because they felt they were no longer of use.

>>51953160
>Then I'd tell them to start as Neutral.
Best way to do that, I'd say.

>>51951221
What happened to the first Tim?