The Antagonist?

[Crimson]

I often like to play the antagonist (mainly in online Amber games now as FtF gaming isn't very popular where I now live). My antagonists tend to be a little on the evil/diabolical side. I tend to make my antagonists likable characters that do their seedy, underhanded things in secret but I've also enjoyed playing downright evil bastards who practice their evils openly and wantonly.

I'm just curious if anyone else enjoys playing the 'bad guy'. I always seem to have way more fun with a villain than I do with a hero. The only problem I've ever really encountered is other players that tend to avoid all conflict whatsoever (moreso online than FtF). To me conflict is what drives a game. To be honest most of these people just wanted to use the main 'plot' as the antagonist and tended to shun the 'PC antagonist' for being unfriendly despite the player being very friendly.

I guess what I'm wondering is if there is anyone else that enjoys playing the 'bad guy' and what, perhaps, they do to make it more enjoyable for all involved.

[Nihilistic Mind]

I think it's important when you're a GM. I remember having trouble with it when I first started GMing, but it's generally not an issue anymore :devil:

In Amber, I'm surprised that people would avoid player to player conflict unless the game happens to call for cooperation... The system is meant to pit the PCs against each other, thus creating a character that has villainous and antagonistic traits should be welcome for the sake of drama.

For the most part, in my FtF game, players tend to work together reluctantly and are very paranoid about situations where they have a need for cooperation. We haven't had a PC who outright came out and said "I swear that I will see my sword run through you until all life leaves your body!" to another PC, but as a GM I would welcome that. Probably as a player too.

When it comes to my online game, I'm considering getting another player to play on the 'other side' as a Lord of Chaos. Since the campaign is occurring during Eric's early reign and the PCs are sons and daughters of the elders, that would clearly label them as antagonists. (http://amberconarizona.theiforum.com/the-fires-of-greymoor-f18.html)
Let me know if you're interested

[RPGPundit]

There are good guys in Amber?

Well, seriously though, in my campaigns the number of players who play "nice" characters are usually a small minority (though not necessarily a bad choice of strategy).

RPGPundit

[Crimson]

In Amber, I'm surprised that people would avoid player to player conflict unless the game happens to call for cooperation... The system is meant to pit the PCs against each other, thus creating a character that has villainous and antagonistic traits should be welcome for the sake of drama.

That's my logic entirely. It seems to me, however, that a vast majority of the people want to play the literal hero. They want to be the good guy and save the day. I've been playing Amber for around 15 years now and I always saw the potential for being the villain. Conflict = RP in my books... but some people are just so anti-conflict that it makes it impossible to play with them. For awhile, before it closed, I referred people like that to the My Little Pony MUSH.

There are good guys in Amber?

Well, seriously though, in my campaigns the number of players who play "nice" characters are usually a small minority (though not necessarily a bad choice of strategy).

I would imagine there can be decent people in Amber. Lord Rein, for example... though he's not an elder/royal.

[Nihilistic Mind]

I usually see the 'good guys' in an Amber game as PCs who have not decided what they want. Once you start striving towards a particular goal, you have the traits necessary to become someone else's antagonist and make the game a whole lot more interesting.
The good guys are usually rare because they tend to be easier to manipulate. I'd say that if a player is avoiding conflict for his character, he might be even easier to manipulate than a so-called good guy.

Merlin strives to be a good guy, IMO, with that whole 'balance of the powers' thing.

Corwin tries hard to make himself sound like the good guy too and to make Eric to be the bad guy. For a while, anyway. He eventually admits that things are what they are, etc...

And lol, My Little Pony MUSH...

[gabriel_ss4u]

Ya ever see the matrix - where that helicopter crashes into the sky-scraper's windows, and there is a reverb-effect, like a ripple in reality - until the matrix concedes to the action and allows the reaction.
"I" was that ripple, usually trying to stem the flow of chaos or epic damage from overflowing into my neat little scenarios... that was then.
I have grown quite a bit, and watching those early WB Batman cartoons (1st season) - and watching all the damage that happened in Gotham. Explosions abound, and damage control was not important - it made for more action-packed adventure.
I took the hint and started allowing 'whatever', just to see the pattern of Chaos infect all. My GMing days where I corralled players into adventures is far in the past, and I, as any good GM, has learned that evil players are a fun way of letting loose some chaos. I DO enjoy playing them, as there is always a need for a deviously demented do-badder. My favorite are the 'Jurt-like' comedic evil-doers. Soooo evil, they are a danger to themselves.
Evil evil evil!!!

[jibbajibba]

I am currently playing my first Amber good guy. I can only ever do this in a PBEM cos my play group would never believe it for a moment.

But I will always go for subtle over demonstrative. When I get to play Amber, and to be fair I usually GM, I am the guy that leaves the Silver rose on the body of the dead guards, that rips apart the body of the other PC's love interest and then agrees to pledge myself to tracking down her killer at all costs. I plan random traps just to eliminate siblings that might at a point in the future be a threat to me. Though of course if they are that stupid they were probably never a threat in the first place.

This one has always stuck with me as the essence of our games it come from brother Prometheus's  (All hail Prometheus the All Powerful) first ever character quiz (and I always thought Prometheus was one of the better ones)

"Is it better to be loved or feared? - It is always better to be loved. People never expect those they love to stab them in the back...."

[finarvyn]

There are good guys in Amber?

Just had to echo Pundit's comment!

You could certainly argue that there aren't really "good guys" and "bad guys" in Amber, unless you count "good=Amber" and "bad=Chaos".

Most of the main characters in the series could have been viewed as either good or bad depending upon the viewpoint of the observer. Everyone but Corwin thinks that Corwin has a lot of potential to be the nastiest of the bunch, yet we sympathize with his witty charm and the knowledge that we're on his side. Was Eric an opportunist who siezed the throne, or was he a hero trying to defend Amber?

Many of the characters could have been either one.

[Sargon]

My last amber game had a trio of Amberites who I referred to as "the girl scouts."  They were raised in a shadow a bit like the buffy the vampire slayer universe, and they were monster slayers, so when they learned that the universe was a whole lot bigger, they stayed "good", at least as they saw it.  
  I generally run a more cooperative game than default, but this one, the one with the girl scouts wasn't.. not by the end.    The primary antagonist early on in the game was Flora, and after the group defeated her, Flora managed to charm one of the girl scouts into becomming her lover/protector/etc.  The other two had intended to execute flora for what she'd done to Fiona.  it got rather... ugly. :>