Page 1734 - Operational Subjective

25th Aug 2022, 6:00 AM in What About Discord?
<<First Latest>>
Operational Subjective
Average Rating: 0 (0 votes)
<<First Latest>>

Author Notes:

Newbiespud 25th Aug 2022, 6:00 AM edit delete
Yeah, sorry, I'm still having way too much fun writing two malevolent megalomaniacs pushing and scheming back and forth. Heroes? What are those?

Notice: Guest comic submissions are open! Guidelines here. Deadline: January 27th, 2023.



NobleCuriosity 25th Aug 2022, 6:04 AM edit delete reply
I’m having fun reading it!
FrostLock 25th Aug 2022, 7:12 AM edit delete reply
I will say, you having so much fun writing these pages does also do a really good job of highlighting why SpikeGM and Discord were even friends to begin with. Despite playing characters who are just barely hiding their contempt for each other, it really does feel like the players are having fun.
Digo 25th Aug 2022, 8:32 AM edit delete reply
I never run evil campaigns because I can never find players this committed to the craft of proper scheming and dialogue.

It's usually just murder-hobodom burning down the world for giggles, and that's not fun for me.
CCC 25th Aug 2022, 3:17 PM edit delete reply
The big problem, as I see it, is that the characters need a carefully crafted aim to prevent the game from collapsing into a PvP mess where the winner is the one who is best at character building. You'd probably need an Antagonist or an Aim that's bigger than any individual in the party to encourage cohesiveness...

I've never played in a proper Evil campaign. I have, however, played borderline-evil characters in supposedly Good campaigns. (No, I never turned against my party. Evil guys can work with the good guys sometimes, too).

My favourite was probably the Rodent Army campaign. Mice were taking over the world, and we were in the plucky Rebel Alliance type army, fighting to save the world from the forces of the mice... I was playing a Squirrel (the only one in our little group of PCs). The description for squirrels said that they would be "a little nuts" - my squirrel was a LOT nuts. Completely paranoid, he believes *all* the conspiracy theories and that the mice are behind *every last one*. In his mind, the utter annihilation of the Mice is the _only_ aim worthy of pursuit, and boy did he pursue it. They say that anything goes in love and war - this was war and, to my squirrel, _anything_ went if it ended up killing mice.

Half of the dangers he saw were imaginary, but he still worked like anything to keep them off the rest of his squad and he was always expecting an ambush.
Digo 27th Aug 2022, 7:37 AM edit delete reply
Oh I provide those bigger aims, but the issue is you need the right mindset to make it work. And that takes more effort than most players are willing to put in.
MythicFox 26th Aug 2022, 7:05 AM edit delete reply
Yeah, like CCC said, you need a certain degree of structure to make an 'evil' game work. Paizo put out an Adventure Path for Pathfinder 1e that I think nails it pretty nicely, called Hell's Vengeance. The TL;DR version of the premise is that the characters are mercenaries hired/recruited by an evil queen to put down a rebellion. I mean, there's a bit more to it than that -- there'd have to be, given that it's a level 1-17 campaign over the course of six volumes -- but that's the broad gist. But, again, it has structure. The characters have a clear goal (put down the rebellion), incentives to achieve that goal (wealth, power, and influence) and someone who can keep them in line (the aforementioned evil queen, who binds them with an infernal contract that magically enhances them as long as they stick to the terms).

But really, that's the thing, isn't it. There's evil campaigns, and then there's *chaotic* evil campaigns. And they really are kind of different.
Warlock 26th Aug 2022, 3:04 PM edit delete reply
Probably one of the best examples winds up being Warhammer 40k's Black crusade, where sure, you can aim to become a daemon prince, but you have to push the crusade fast enough to get there... and that requires help. which is all part of that "aim is bigger than a single character" bit. But it's even worse still - If tabletops are cooperative roleplaying games, a GM should be asking the question: "Why does your character support the other PCs in their goals, besides indirectly helping your own?"

A player which cannot see the other members of the table as more than cannon fodder easily falls into that "chaotic stupid" subset - Chaotic evil is fine, but Main Character Syndrome is not.
Classic Steve 25th Aug 2022, 10:32 AM edit delete reply
Should be "jeopardize."
Newbiespud 25th Aug 2022, 11:20 AM edit delete reply
I'd say it's stopped looking like a real word to me after all this repetition, but truthfully it never looked like a real word in the first place.
Roguim 25th Aug 2022, 3:11 PM edit delete reply
And Evil always get the best and funniest part.
And i wonder if the player ate being honest or try to listen what SpikeGM and DiscordDM are talking....
Chaos vs Logic 26th Aug 2022, 12:37 PM edit delete reply
A god of chaos can be logical... Is that even plausible in D&D? Is like a fire dragon living in a volcano suddenly began to sell Ice Cream to adventurers
Warlock 26th Aug 2022, 3:18 PM edit delete reply
It's tricky. One can argue that an avatar of chaos has to have *Some* semblance of order. I suppose the better question is how Discord phrased it. "Calculating" infers the ability to "quantify" something - a purely artificial construct required as a fundamental building block of logic. But chaos is more than just the antithesis of order. Consider this instead:

There's a lovely youtuber who goes by Dael Kingsmill who redefines "chaos" and "lawful" as "passion" and "reason" - the idea that if actions are caused by desire to do things (emotional impetus) or because of purposeful thought (disciplined). A pirate following a code can count for lawful, if they act with mind to that code (even if they break local law). Same with good and evil being replaced with altruism and selfishness - and honestly, this is perhaps best to describe things about playstyles. (video here: - Morality in Julius Caesar & an alternative alignment system)

A god of chaos, as long as they are being passionate, can be still logical, as long as the logic doesn't override the passion to do something. Doing something, even if they know it'll go badly, is part of the fun after all. But interpret it as you like.
Wolfier 26th Aug 2022, 4:04 PM edit delete reply
Only in DnD can someone define capital city conquests as "warmups"

Would be cool to see a full-blown siege in this universe, wonder how that would work.
Jennifer 26th Aug 2022, 5:03 PM edit delete reply
I'm starting to wonder what the girls are doing in the other room. Hopefully they're plotting merrily away themselves...
Freelance 27th Aug 2022, 5:57 AM edit delete reply
I mean, if you want a beautiful example of cold and calculating logic behind chaos, just look at Heath Ledger's portrayal of Joker in _Batman: The Dark Knight._. For all his claims of just wanting to be chaotic, he certainly seemed to have the contingencies to make things fall his way.