The Tzimisce, and that's what you were playing, were part of the Sabbat, the villain side of the normal Vampire the Masquerade game. They were NPCs at the start. It was a lot of fun when they released the rules for playing as one, the idea was that it would be for stories of Evil people doing Evil things.
Ever have someone in the game who wanted to play a character that was one of the Kindred? Those were the good guys. That would be a Good person in an Evil game. It might have been fun, but the moment they got found out, I'd bet everyone else at the table would have taken joy in tearing that character to shreds. It's the inversion of an Evil character in a Non-Evil campaign. The difference of course being that if the Evil character gets found out, the good guys won't harm them much.
The thing with leaving the Alignment box blank is perfectly fine. It's better than arguing with someone because you felt that they weren't playing their Alignment correctly. I might tell people who wanted to ignore the Alignment system to go ahead and do that. I never argue with people about it anyway.
I do have an essay where I give the clearest definition of what I view the Alignments to mean. It goes into details about how restrictive the whole thing was in first edition AD&D and goes into how it evolved, all that sort of thing. It runs to 5 pages, I only inflict it on people who ask, and I warn them ahead of time how long it is. I once considered posting a short version of it somewhere in the forums, but I'd probably get torn to shreds.
The Tzimisce, and that's what you were playing, were part of the Sabbat, the villain side of the normal Vampire the Masquerade game. They were NPCs at the start. It was a lot of fun when they released the rules for playing as one, the idea was that it would be for stories of Evil people doing Evil things.
Ever have someone in the game who wanted to play a character that was one of the Kindred? Those were the good guys. That would be a Good person in an Evil game. It might have been fun, but the moment they got found out, I'd bet everyone else at the table would have taken joy in tearing that character to shreds. It's the inversion of an Evil character in a Non-Evil campaign. The difference of course being that if the Evil character gets found out, the good guys won't harm them much.
The thing with leaving the Alignment box blank is perfectly fine. It's better than arguing with someone because you felt that they weren't playing their Alignment correctly. I might tell people who wanted to ignore the Alignment system to go ahead and do that. I never argue with people about it anyway.
I do have an essay where I give the clearest definition of what I view the Alignments to mean. It goes into details about how restrictive the whole thing was in first edition AD&D and goes into how it evolved, all that sort of thing. It runs to 5 pages, I only inflict it on people who ask, and I warn them ahead of time how long it is. I once considered posting a short version of it somewhere in the forums, but I'd probably get torn to shreds.
I was a camirilla Tzmisce and while the Camilrilla and the sabbat are at war and while the Camirilla try to maintain some sort of humanity you can’t exactly call them good and evil, they are more evil and worse :). But we had a player who player a vampire who was trying to find ways to lift the curse, we had a player who did not like feeding from humans directly so tried to drink from blood banks. I owned a nightclub and would consider that my farm, I wouldn’t kill humans but would pick one each night to feed from.
As I have said I think alignment is a personal thing, I don’t think we are opposed in our thoughts we just both approach it slightly differently which to me is great, if we all had our fun the exact same way it would be really dull on forums such as this :).
Aha. That makes sense, and it sounds like a fun game.
Typically, you call the protagonist in a story the "good guy" and the opposition the "bad guy". A Tzimisce in the Camellia (I finally remember what that side was called, Kindred are what they call the members of the Camirilla) is an "anti-hero". I guess that's what you would call an Evil character in a Good game. Nothing at all wrong with playing an anti-hero, it's actually something with a long and glorious tradition and when played well, everyone has fun. BioWizard gave a great example of how that can be done.
I agree, if everyone though the way I did, I'd get bored to tears.
I don't let players be Evil in my game, I want all of them to be real heroes, and I'll be fine with NPC anti-heroes as part of the story. I've used that concept before. I don't like "shades of gray" and make sure people are clear on what the aspects of Alignment are. This is of course, a General Rule. I'll allow for specific exceptions, with experienced players. I'd almost certainly let you play Evil. I think you'd do it well.
I think its probably a moot point because I personally have never seen anyone play an evil character appropriately. It requires a great deal of finesse and forethought but most players just perform randomly evil acts and call it a day.
I am actually doing this now. I am playing a lawful evil - Paladin making his way along the path to become a Blackguard. His background is a soldier and actually has used his silver tongue and martial skill to keep his team alive. He has his goals but is not out to smite all good but has a specific mission. He is not a murder hobo and is an agent of order. The biggest issue he does have to hide his deeper evil alignment but considering he works well with the party and his knowledge of tactics has saved them on more than one occasion has bought him some space.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"You are a beginner once, but a student for life." - Firearm Instruction Adage.
You could play an evil character who goes along with the adventure, helping people and saving monsters, because the monsters they fight are competition. They want to be evil overlords and take over the world someday, but they know that they need to grow in power. What better way to do that is there than to go on quests to find treasure, gain the people's trust, and take out the competition? The problem with this one is that once they get to higher levels, they might decide to start conquering cities and showing their true colors.
Yes I just had a lawful evil character who had reasons for not doing things that were evil inless they knew they had 100% chance of getting away with it .
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The Tzimisce, and that's what you were playing, were part of the Sabbat, the villain side of the normal Vampire the Masquerade game. They were NPCs at the start. It was a lot of fun when they released the rules for playing as one, the idea was that it would be for stories of Evil people doing Evil things.
Ever have someone in the game who wanted to play a character that was one of the Kindred? Those were the good guys. That would be a Good person in an Evil game. It might have been fun, but the moment they got found out, I'd bet everyone else at the table would have taken joy in tearing that character to shreds. It's the inversion of an Evil character in a Non-Evil campaign. The difference of course being that if the Evil character gets found out, the good guys won't harm them much.
The thing with leaving the Alignment box blank is perfectly fine. It's better than arguing with someone because you felt that they weren't playing their Alignment correctly. I might tell people who wanted to ignore the Alignment system to go ahead and do that. I never argue with people about it anyway.
I do have an essay where I give the clearest definition of what I view the Alignments to mean. It goes into details about how restrictive the whole thing was in first edition AD&D and goes into how it evolved, all that sort of thing. It runs to 5 pages, I only inflict it on people who ask, and I warn them ahead of time how long it is. I once considered posting a short version of it somewhere in the forums, but I'd probably get torn to shreds.
<Insert clever signature here>
I was a camirilla Tzmisce and while the Camilrilla and the sabbat are at war and while the Camirilla try to maintain some sort of humanity you can’t exactly call them good and evil, they are more evil and worse :). But we had a player who player a vampire who was trying to find ways to lift the curse, we had a player who did not like feeding from humans directly so tried to drink from blood banks. I owned a nightclub and would consider that my farm, I wouldn’t kill humans but would pick one each night to feed from.
As I have said I think alignment is a personal thing, I don’t think we are opposed in our thoughts we just both approach it slightly differently which to me is great, if we all had our fun the exact same way it would be really dull on forums such as this :).
Aha. That makes sense, and it sounds like a fun game.
Typically, you call the protagonist in a story the "good guy" and the opposition the "bad guy". A Tzimisce in the Camellia (I finally remember what that side was called, Kindred are what they call the members of the Camirilla) is an "anti-hero". I guess that's what you would call an Evil character in a Good game. Nothing at all wrong with playing an anti-hero, it's actually something with a long and glorious tradition and when played well, everyone has fun. BioWizard gave a great example of how that can be done.
I agree, if everyone though the way I did, I'd get bored to tears.
I don't let players be Evil in my game, I want all of them to be real heroes, and I'll be fine with NPC anti-heroes as part of the story. I've used that concept before. I don't like "shades of gray" and make sure people are clear on what the aspects of Alignment are. This is of course, a General Rule. I'll allow for specific exceptions, with experienced players. I'd almost certainly let you play Evil. I think you'd do it well.
<Insert clever signature here>
I think its probably a moot point because I personally have never seen anyone play an evil character appropriately. It requires a great deal of finesse and forethought but most players just perform randomly evil acts and call it a day.
I am actually doing this now. I am playing a lawful evil - Paladin making his way along the path to become a Blackguard. His background is a soldier and actually has used his silver tongue and martial skill to keep his team alive. He has his goals but is not out to smite all good but has a specific mission. He is not a murder hobo and is an agent of order. The biggest issue he does have to hide his deeper evil alignment but considering he works well with the party and his knowledge of tactics has saved them on more than one occasion has bought him some space.
"You are a beginner once, but a student for life." - Firearm Instruction Adage.
You could play an evil character who goes along with the adventure, helping people and saving monsters, because the monsters they fight are competition. They want to be evil overlords and take over the world someday, but they know that they need to grow in power. What better way to do that is there than to go on quests to find treasure, gain the people's trust, and take out the competition? The problem with this one is that once they get to higher levels, they might decide to start conquering cities and showing their true colors.
Yes I just had a lawful evil character who had reasons for not doing things that were evil inless they knew they had 100% chance of getting away with it .