We used to play groups of lawful/neutral evil characters in AD&D 2E. Other games we played monsters bent on world domination. After all of this, would you play/support a game set in an evil empire?
Nazi Germany where you support the state
Attila the hun's men taking over the world
USSR agents of the KGB
and such like...
Just. A thought
Personally, when RPGing I'd rather be playing heroic types than bad guys. If the game is a tactical or strategy type game, I am more willing to play the bad guys but still prefer the good guys.
I feel like most evil campaigns are usually annoying edgelord nonsense. Like almost everything with the right group it could be done well but I had my fill of Raistlin knock-offs in my teens.
I can't see the fun in playing murderous Nazis or KGB agents. A bunch of backstabbing Drow or some internecine plotting between Hobgoblins, orcs and bugbears could be fun with some adults at the table.
Depends on the actual nature of the characters, the situations, the gameplay, the choices, the victims, etc.
Many forms of those I just find terrible and loathsome and don't want to game. I especially don't like games or stories/films where the players/audience are supposed to accept PCs/protagonists who do horrible things and have excuses or are just supposed not to look too deeply at what terrible inhumane things they do and how sloppy the characterization is about it. If it's done well and interesting, fine. Even better if there are real looks at the humanity of the situation and there are actual sympathetic characters. But if it's an excuse to enjoy being and glamorizing or giving a pass to horrible people, I probably don't want to do that.
I have tried indulging it many times, and have been surprised sometimes to discover where my lines are. Sometimes an idea sounds interesting but just turns out to be really too horrible, like the campaign for PC not-vampire blood drinkers (GURPS Bales) which led naturally to figuring out how to keep a captive farm population of human blood slaves - that was quickly just too terrible for me to want to game.
I have also been surprised just when mostly-likable PCs who have been around for a while do something awful. I find I tend to really lose sympathy for people who do despicable things. It can still be interesting to game, but I don't want to brush it over, as I find that's cheapening the whole thing and that I find it much more interesting to take it seriously.
Nazis? Well, I don't mind playing Nazis in military wargames, also because they're often the underdogs taking on overwhelming odds, and they get some nice equipment. But roleplaying nasty Nazis off the battlefield doing horrible things to civilians and prisoners? No thanks, unless it's being villains in some larger more interesting story.
Attila's huns... well again it depends on the gameplay. I don't mind the military aspect but I don't really want to roleplay massacring civilians.
Agents of the KGB, probably not, depending on the characters and missions. I don't really want to game being someone terrible doing terrible things to not so terrible people, unless I'm GM and it's part of some redeeming more interesting and less sadistic game.
Many monsters and dragons and villains actually have a sympathetic side/perspective. I tend to like to have most/all of the characters have some level of perspective I can believe in and relate to or make sense of. If some of them are really just horrible, I probably don't want them to be PCs unless there's more to it that makes it interesting despite that.
The Lady Killers (Alec Guinness, not Tom Hanks) is one of my favorite films. :-)
I ran a Cold War KGB X-files campaign using CoC.
That was a lot of fun.
The closest I'd come to that (that lasted for any amount of time) was a FASA Star Trek game where we played Klingons.
JG
Quote from: rway218;949868We used to play groups of lawful/neutral evil characters in AD&D 2E. Other games we played monsters bent on world domination. After all of this, would you play/support a game set in an evil empire?
What's your point? Thousands upon thousands of people are playing a game as agents of an evil empire that destroys worlds casually (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warhammer_40,000_Roleplay) and it's been quite successful:).
That's much more people than post in that forum, so I think you can safely assume the answer to be an almost unanimous "you know, that wouldn't be a problem";).
Quote from: AsenRG;950082an evil empire that destroys worlds casually
Even in the Grimmest of the Grim Grim Dark, that's a satirical trope. Exterminatus is used when the planet is gone anyway...conquered by Chaos, infested by Orks, about to be absorbed by Tyranids (the strategy is to make them expend resources to take a planet, then blow it up before they can replenish the resources), etc...
But yeah, too many 40k fans aren't aware that the current state of the Imperium is a BAD thing. :D
Quote from: CRKrueger;950096But yeah, too many 40k fans aren't aware that the current state of the Imperium is a BAD thing. :D
The problem with questioning the Imperium's morality in the 40k universe is Option B is humanity's destruction. It's not like the High Lords of Terra don't know the Imperium utterly sucks for its citizens. But how do you turn around an entire culture/bureaucracy on untold worlds during their frantic fight for survival?
That's why I like Dark Heresy, Chill and CoC. Your PCs try to do Good Shit which might require Bad Shit to prevent Worse Shit. They are up against an ocean of evil, but can only fight one drop at a time, but each mission is either one more drop for Good or one more drop for Evil depending on their actions.
Quote from: CRKrueger;950096But yeah, too many 40k fans aren't aware that the current state of the Imperium is a BAD thing. :D
And that, Green One, was my point exactly;).
Not for a prolonged campaign, but I have played into one-shot evil games. The first was something of a last man standing, everything was fair game. I played an insane, Dr. Frankenstein Necromancer. It ended as you expect, lots of backstabbing and beers.
The second game was really an introduction to the world of Midnight, a tremendous setting from FFG. We played a squads of orcs hunting for freedom fighters. The next game we rolled up our own freedom fighters and it was "game on" for a great two year campaign.
I share many of the thoughts above, when I play fantasy games with friends I enjoy playing towards the good end of the pool. I think a factor of the good is collaboration and sacrifice, which is a natural complement to most roleplaying games I've played. It doesn't mean you don't have to make hard decisions in game, but the idea is to work together for a team win.
Quote from: rway218;949868We used to play groups of lawful/neutral evil characters in AD&D 2E. Other games we played monsters bent on world domination. After all of this, would you play/support a game set in an evil empire?
Nazi Germany where you support the state
Attila the hun's men taking over the world
USSR agents of the KGB
and such like...
Just. A thought
I vastly prefer playing the good guys but I will happily play in a game that's all about just which shade of grey are you? Like WoD games in general and Mage in any version in particular. Straight evil? I can't do it straight, it has to be for laughs to get me engaged on any serious level. Or I'll do it as a one shot or short campaigns (like 4-6 sessions).
40K's Imperium was the first thing to come to mind for me as well...
In High School we'd play one-shots where everyone was some sort of monster... usually bands of trolls or goblins... sometimes working for an evil wizard. Kinda like My Life With Master minus the meta bits. So I've got no qualms about playing the bad guys, I just need to figure their point of view and why they don't see themselves as 'evil'... or why their evils are necessary.
Most any 'Empire' I write up nowadays is going to be shades of gray anyway... no pure alignment stuff.
I've run a Star Wars game with bounty hunters that were sanctioned extensions of Imperial law enforcement.
I've played in Exalted as loyal members of the Dragonblooded houses serving the Realm.
I've also played an Abyssal Exalted game where the players started off loyal to a Deathlord before going rogue.
We played a tongue-in-cheek game of D&D 3e where we were product testers for the Red Wizards of Thay (this was when they went to trying to take over through trade).
We played a more serous game of espionage/politics in D&D 2e where the PCs were agents of the Zhentarim.
I've never been particularly interested in games where the PCs are the evil guys, at least not those kind of evil guys.
Earthdawn has the Theran Empire (a mix between Atlantis, Rome, and the Melnibonians from Elric), and there is a deep philosophical conflict between the empire and the local Dwarven Kingdom of Throal over slavery, which touches on the background of the Orkish kingdoms. I've played one or two "Theran agents" games, but they were mostly one-shots.
Quote from: RPGPundit;950586I've never been particularly interested in games where the PCs are the evil guys, at least not those kind of evil guys.
Wait, you have never played Warhammer 40k?
Quote from: AsenRG;950678Wait, you have never played Warhammer 40k?
I never played the 40K rpg, no.
Quote from: RPGPundit;951206I never played the 40K rpg, no.
That's surprising, I have the impression most people have. Are you avoiding it because of Reasons? Or did it just never come up?
Eh, define "evil"? Most empires are sort of morally iffy to start with - the word in itself sort of implies a state of affairs that was created and is maintained by one powerful central region stomping heavily on a bunch of weaker outlying regions (if a bunch of regions are sticking together on their own volition, it's probably a "coalition" or some such).
Having that said, empires also tend to have enough going for them that you can imagine a character who supports one while still being sympathetic - they do represent law and order, if nothing else, and in a sufficiently chaotic and dangerous world that can be a powerful thing. So yes, I can imagine playing a character who supports an empire, and therefore in extension imagine playing a character who supports an evil empire.
There'd have to be some limits to the evil, though. The Nazis were just too batshit crazy for me to even put myself in the same mindspace as them, and while I don't know enough about the Hunts to be sure, I have the general impression that they mostly looted and burned a lot, and I think I'd get bored with that pretty soon. (an assumption I'm basing on the fact that I have never been able to finish a Chaos, Vampire or Orc campaign in Total War: Warhammer - making the world steadily worse the more I succeed just depresses me...)
I could imagine playing a KGB agent, depending on what I'd be expected to do - putting people in front of firing squads for voicing unpopular opinions would be too evil for me, but taking part in spy drama against American agents? Sure, that I could get behind. I'd even be fine with my character doing firing-squad-related things "off screen," as long as the meat of the game was the morally neutral stuff.
So I guess I don't mind evil as a background, but I don't particularly want to have it front and center? Which admittedly comes pretty close to answering "no, not really" to the original question, now that I think about it...
Quote from: AsenRG;951364That's surprising, I have the impression most people have. Are you avoiding it because of Reasons? Or did it just never come up?
I found its approach completely uninspired. I loved the WFRP 2e rules. I thought breaking up 40K into three mini-games was awful.
Quote from: RPGPundit;952541I found its approach completely uninspired. I loved the WFRP 2e rules. I thought breaking up 40K into three mini-games was awful.
As a matter of fact, I agree, but since I don't care for any of those games, bar one, it just never became a problem:D!