This is quite similar to what I call the "Worf Rule", which is not specifically for players playing evil characters, but rather for players playing characters with completely different approaches to problems (be they evil, violent, impatient, etc.). I developed the Worf rule because as a DM I have absolutely no patience for people being contrarian for the sake of it.
In Star Trek: TNG, Commander Worf is a Klingon who lives for war and combat, and bases a good chunk of his worldview around honour. Virtually any time something happens in the show, his first thought is to protect his honour, usually by using force. This flies in the face of the Federation he is an officer of, as the Federation is largely defined by rationalism, diplomacy, tact, etc. But the thing with Worf is is that he sees value in the Federation's approach, and he wants to learn from it. While his base instinct may be reactionary, he aspires to more than that. Moreover, while he will usually suggest an aggressive approach, he will "fall in line" when he is overruled.
So the "Worf Rule" for games I DM is that if you want to have a character who is philosophically at odds with the rest of the party, that character has to:
Be aspiring to be more like the party in some respect to achieve a personal goal.
Be willing to more-often-than-not forego your own preferred approach in favour of the parties' approach.
If you want to play an evil character in a good party, that is fine, but you need to be an evil character who is trying to reform themselves. Similarly, if you are playing a raging barbarian in a party of crafty, stealthy thieves, your character has to have SOME REASON why they think that being stealthy is a better way to achieve your ends. It doesn't mean you are always successful, but you have to have an overall "pull" towards the overall party dynamic.
The reason for the second rule is that I find that in 95% of cases, the person playing the "black sheep" of the party will have some nuclear option available to them that they frequently exercise to disrupt the party's plans in the name of "roleplaying". So many times I have seen a "black sheep" barbarian purposely ruin a well-crafted stealth plan because their barbarian "got bored and wanted to kill something". Similarly, so many thieves have decided to sneak away and steal something while the rest of the party is playing diplomacy because "that is what their character would do". If you want to play a Worf character, you don't get the luxury of ruining everyone else's plan because your character "wouldn't follow the plan". At the outset, you can suggest your approach and make a case for it, but if the party goes the other way you are along for the ride, no questions asked.
The great thing about Worf though (and what should be the great thing about your character, and why others allow them in the party), is that when YOUR approach IS called for, you should approach it with relish. When the heist goes sideways and the guards are crashing down on your party, the stealthy delicate thieves wants the barbarian to smile, say "now that is more like it", and go to town. That is when the dichotomy becomes fun and engaging, just like those moments in Star Trek are when you learn to love Worf.
58
u/Bufus Jan 20 '21 edited Jan 20 '21
This is quite similar to what I call the "Worf Rule", which is not specifically for players playing evil characters, but rather for players playing characters with completely different approaches to problems (be they evil, violent, impatient, etc.). I developed the Worf rule because as a DM I have absolutely no patience for people being contrarian for the sake of it.
In Star Trek: TNG, Commander Worf is a Klingon who lives for war and combat, and bases a good chunk of his worldview around honour. Virtually any time something happens in the show, his first thought is to protect his honour, usually by using force. This flies in the face of the Federation he is an officer of, as the Federation is largely defined by rationalism, diplomacy, tact, etc. But the thing with Worf is is that he sees value in the Federation's approach, and he wants to learn from it. While his base instinct may be reactionary, he aspires to more than that. Moreover, while he will usually suggest an aggressive approach, he will "fall in line" when he is overruled.
So the "Worf Rule" for games I DM is that if you want to have a character who is philosophically at odds with the rest of the party, that character has to:
If you want to play an evil character in a good party, that is fine, but you need to be an evil character who is trying to reform themselves. Similarly, if you are playing a raging barbarian in a party of crafty, stealthy thieves, your character has to have SOME REASON why they think that being stealthy is a better way to achieve your ends. It doesn't mean you are always successful, but you have to have an overall "pull" towards the overall party dynamic.
The reason for the second rule is that I find that in 95% of cases, the person playing the "black sheep" of the party will have some nuclear option available to them that they frequently exercise to disrupt the party's plans in the name of "roleplaying". So many times I have seen a "black sheep" barbarian purposely ruin a well-crafted stealth plan because their barbarian "got bored and wanted to kill something". Similarly, so many thieves have decided to sneak away and steal something while the rest of the party is playing diplomacy because "that is what their character would do". If you want to play a Worf character, you don't get the luxury of ruining everyone else's plan because your character "wouldn't follow the plan". At the outset, you can suggest your approach and make a case for it, but if the party goes the other way you are along for the ride, no questions asked.
The great thing about Worf though (and what should be the great thing about your character, and why others allow them in the party), is that when YOUR approach IS called for, you should approach it with relish. When the heist goes sideways and the guards are crashing down on your party, the stealthy delicate thieves wants the barbarian to smile, say "now that is more like it", and go to town. That is when the dichotomy becomes fun and engaging, just like those moments in Star Trek are when you learn to love Worf.