Don't hate... Appreciate....

[Leo Luncid]

One thing I really like about Cantr II is how difficult the game can be. You can have fun by just having your character
stay in one place his/her whole life chatting endlessly, or by being a lawful villian controlling regions across the land.
Since you can choose what path the character should take, you can choose how difficult the character should live through.
But I have been thinking: what could be the most difficult goal any character could take? By just taking one look in
the world of Cantr II, one answer came to mind: being truly evil. Now what I mean by being truly evil is being evil in
character; no Capital Rule Breaches, no glitches, and no benefits of the bugs.
Maybe it would be informative if I could catagorize all the evil characters by alignments and then by possible types
in those alignments. Well, here's the list then. But before you read all that, I just want to apologize if any of this
offends you at all. Also, correct me if I'm wrong about anything:

Chaotic evil- See the word "chao" in chaotic? If you just add the "s," it will then become "chaos," which is what
chaotic evil characters can turn a place into. They're the least appreciative of the evil characters,
whether they're breaking the CR or not. Unfortunately, they may be the most of the evil characters in the Cantr world.
Let me reason with you through a few examples of CE characters:
-Thieves: They steal and run, simple as that. They usually seem cowardly, always taking things.
I bet most of them were never successful in thier attempt.
-Barbarians/Pirates: They both ambushers; they always seem to want victory on thier side no matter what. They
kill innoncent people, they don't play fair, and they just do it for the heck of it.
-Annoying Newspawns: Oh, they could be the worst. Vandalizing, cursing, ooc talk, anything that just annoys us all.
Nuff said.

Neutral evil- They, overall, do things that're bad. They just do what really suits them. They could do things unfairly,
like barbarians and pirates, but they may do it if the results actually benefits them. They could be selfish and go on
their own. If these NE characters could succeed their greatest goals in character, they may very be renown throughtout
those who experienced them:
-Spokesmen: This is what I would like to call those evil characters would could influence many with the use of
thier tongue.They could decieve others so that they could get what they want. Or they could actually convince people to go
on the dark side. Good-aligned players may complain, but players of evil characters could give them a pat on the back.
-Evil loners: Quite possibly the least appreciative of the neutral evil characters. They give others a bad mood,
do what they can to achieve their own dreams on their own. Sometimes they gain help, but not frequently. They could end up
as leaders of a guild, champions of tournaments, and so forth.

Lawful evil: To me, they're the hardest characters to be in character. They could be the most appreciative out
of all the rest. They could control regions all in respect and fairness. They could let others know that they're making
a siege and give them a one Cantr year start. They may not even kill innoncent people. But they could force them to
work to the bone, torture them, and punish them too much. They could do that as long as they got their loyal followers
at their side. If you think about it, it will be very, very hard to have those characters reach their greastest dreams.
But, to some players (hopefully), they think it's all going to be worth it, because those characters could create massive
scars in the world of Cantr II that could tell everyone what they did to create those scars; in others words, those
characters can be very renown for Earth years to come.

What's my purpose in all this? You should appreciate those successful evil characters (especially the lawful ones) because of how those players
of those characters did all the blood, sweat, and tears to make those evil doers that successful, even if they did kill
your characters. Sure, your goody goody characters could challenge and defeat them all they want, just, if they do defeat them, be sure you're going to give the evil you defeated credit for making you better than them.

You know what I mean? Good.

[Russell of Los Angeles]

Yeah. I think by "appreciative" you mean "appreciated". I think I appreciate a well played evil character. It's harder to appreciate a poorly played character, evil or not. I don't think annoying newspawns are necessarily evil. Annoying a player and annoying a character are two different things. Newspawns may be welcomed by characters but annoy players. Lawful evil characters may bring nothing but grief to characters but appreciated by other players.

[Leo Luncid]

Good point. I see this topic has been viewed about 80 times, so thanks for replying.

[Russell of Los Angeles]

Yeah. I notice the number of views for a thread I recently started too. 50 views and no replies? I guess it's normal. Other threads have 1000s of views and just a handfull of replies. And I'm the kind of forum user who causes it, too. This is only my 13th post. But I've been lurking and reading a lot of threads for a long time.

[AoM]

Lawful evil people tend to live longer and have a better chance of seeing their goals met, so long as they play their cards right. Often the people in this category don't see themselves as evil though.


Those more chaotic folk tend to end up as pirates, thieves, mercenaries for hire... scum and villainy, that sort of thing. It's a hard life for these types, because you need a group to get anything done right in this game and most newspawns tend to follow a natural code of ethics from the get-go.

[Surly]

To be honest, chaotic evil groups never last long because of the lack of any loyalty. A truly CE person will not hesitate to doublecross even a 'friend' for personal gain, and as such tend to be loners.

Lawful Evil... there are very few LE groups in the game. Lad would possibly have counted as LE, and maybe TBR... and possibly the organised pirate gangs. As chaotic as they seem, they seem to obey their own internal law. Of course, I might very well be wrong...

Anyway, I would like to see more LE groups and less CN/CE people. But that might just be personal preference...

[AoM]

I think it's perfectly possible to have a CE group stick together. Not out of loyalty, but out of necessity.

[Surly]

Yes, possibly, if they think they are using the others. However, there is no social structure and any common purpose will tend to be limited. If they have a specific aim and work together to achieve it on multiple occasions, that does not seem CE to me.

[Blackdeath]

I agree, there needs to be more LE groups in Cantr, but its hard starting from scratch.

[Confutus]

Trying to build something that requires the cooperation of multiple characters, such as a government, a religion, a university or company is hard. Going around wrecking what other people have built up with long patience and hard work? That's too easy.

[glitterdown]

I hate how D&D structures end up everywhere.
Can't role-playing happen in its own framework, without everyone trying to force their favorite system on us?

Cantr ain't D&D, and it's better for it.
I don't want to play a halfling thief, or an elf mage. I don't want to hack-and-slash Gelatinous Cubes, and I definately don't want to have debates about their fallacious alignment system.

[olaf]

Woah, I'm not sure which game you're playing... more more specifically, why our experiences have been so different, but I personally haven't had anyone try to persuade me they are halflings or gelatinous blobs...

[Leo Luncid]

I hate how D&D structures end up everywhere.
Can't role-playing happen in its own framework, without everyone trying to force their favorite system on us?

Cantr ain't D&D, and it's better for it.
I don't want to play a halfling thief, or an elf mage. I don't want to hack-and-slash Gelatinous Cubes, and I definately don't want to have debates about their fallacious alignment system.

Well, one thing that really interests Dungeons and Dragons (D&D) is how real close it can be to reality. Well, not our reality, but you know... I do wish there are roleplaying games like Dungeons and Dragons but with a different theme.

But I'm being off-topic here. And yes, I did get that alignment thing off of D&D.

[ratm]

I have a character who doesn't view himself as evil (though he is) but he likes to cause chaos. His favourite target would be the president of Quillanoi or some such authoritive figure. That doesn't mean he isn't loyal to his friends, he just hates structured governments.

[AoM]

Leo, there are many RPG's like d&d, but with a different theme. A vast amount.


@surly: The way I view it, LE works within the Lawful structure, CE ignores laws if they don't suit them. A gang of pirates loyal to each other out of necessity or fear and working towards a common goal is CE to me.

But I agree with the sentiment that d&d alignment systems are bogus, and limiting of the human spectrum.

@glitterdown: You must allow for the fact that Gary Gygax' creation was the grandaddy of the genre, so its lexicon is going to filter in eventually. I'm certainly not trying to push d&d on you by simply refering to it.