RPG Thoughts: Touch of (Kinda) Evil

Campaigns in which the PCs are supposed to be ‘evil’ certainly can be bad, but not necessarily so. ‘Evil’’ might mean fighting the status quo instead of committing horrible acts on innocents.

In a Facebook thread (I have broken down and started posting there regularly because that’s where everyone is) a friend of mine spoke of an “evil” campaign which sounded more like a “do what is necessary to attain the goal” campaign in which the PCs weren’t trying to betray each other or inflict suffering needlessly. It was a reminder that morality is not objective but very, very subjective.

I related the time my half-orc Rogue organized the goblins instead of slaughtering or imprisoning them and got their agricultural commune started. Sure, the locals thought this crew was evil, but really they were just desperate. The rules said that all goblins were evil, but my half-orc Rogue is thinking ‘those rules said the same thing about mum! Fuck you, rules!’

Here’s the point: I think evil campaigns can work and can be fun, if evil is accepted as subjective and does not include acts that are personally abhorrent.

Like, property theft is treated as inherently evil in our Western societies. One can avoid a charge of murder if your life is in jeopardy but not theft—just go fuckin’ starve, you useless POS. Is this because the wealthy and powerful considered there might be times when they needed to murder someone to protect their property, but knew they would never need to steal a loaf of bread to survive? I’m just asking questions . . .

We should all accept Robin Hood or Hong Gil Dong as heroes because they fought against tyranny and tried to help the common folk. But as our laws are set up, they are necessarily villains. Property theft is always a crime. If evil is objective, Robin Hood and Hong Gil Dong are the bad guys. We know that’s not true. We know that evil is subjective.

Now, here is the counterpoint: the evil campaign that is actually a heinous campaign in which the characters are actually villains, increasing suffering, stealing from the poor, exploiting the weak, needlessly murdering in order to advance their own narrow interests is bad. I don’t want to yuck anyone’s yum, but this just seems wrong to me. I encountered this at a young age. I think some of the people in the campaign were having fun—looking back, it may have been them creating a narrative in which they had real power and could victimize others after feeling very powerless and being victimized in their own lives. Still, it wasn’t fun for me. It was—in fact—disturbing. I left and never played with that group again.

But that’s not necessary. And one doesn’t even need to be Robin Hood. Think of ‘heist’ stories, in which the goal is for the characters to get rich. The target of those heists is generally someone rich and/or powerful. Those stories don’t target the poor or the desperate. And in many of them, the intent is theft without harm. Violence is seen as failure. To me, there’s not much wrong with that kind of story. Keep that going.

I also question if that’s even evil rather than self-interested. I guess I’m kind of supporting criminal campaigns rather than evil campaigns. I’m comfortable with that.   

So, you know, do crimes. Have fun doing crimes. Just don’t hurt the innocent. Burn down the pillars of power, not the hovels of the starving masses. Destroy the status quo, maybe even make them suffer a little, just not too much.