Alignment Shift

[Cuthalion]

Not especially. Slightly chaotic, but, taking a guess, I'd say TN.

[asdflove]

Not especially. Slightly chaotic, but, taking a guess, I'd say TN.

Arrrrrrrrrrrg! Swear words!!!!! She's CE! What does she have to spontaneously kill a puppy to prove it?!?!

[Cuthalion]

Arrrrrrrrrrrg! Swear words!!!!! She's CE! What does she have to spontaneously kill a puppy to prove it?!?!

Character seems a decent bit like V.

No, but I still haven't really seen much evil in there at all. However, it would be a good way to end the discussion.

[asdflove]

Character seems a decent bit like V.

No, but I still haven't really seen much evil in there at all. However, it would be a good way to end the discussion.

*Le Sigh* I'll find a more reasonable way show that she's evil. I should have seen this coming when I aimed for affably evil.

[darklink_shadow]

It's not just me! :D

[asdflove]

It's not just me! :D

BUT other than you two, everyone I asked said they see her as evil, including several random people I hardly know from my school!

[darklink_shadow]

She hasn't taken a single evil action. You have hinted at an evil past, and she is on a mission to do evil, but she, herself, has done no evil I can see.

[Cuthalion]

She was sad when she saw the little girl. Not annoyed. Or worried. Sad. Regretful, am I right, about the girl losing her brother?

[asdflove]

She hasn't taken a single evil action. You have hinted at an evil past, and she is on a mission to do evil, but she, herself, has done no evil I can see.

How is being on the evil mission not doing something evil? She's trying to bring one the the most good people in that world to the side of evil. How is attempting that not evil?!? Cause honestly, this discussion is starting to piss me off.

She was sad when she saw the little girl. Not annoyed. Or worried. Sad. Regretful, am I right, about the girl losing her brother?

No, no you are not right, see my previous response to darklink_shadow.

It sure seems she is upset that her target has a sister. Maybe I misread, but she seems to be upset because it won't be nice for the little girl. And I guess the guy's friends? Why she thought a paladin wouldn't have friends... I dunno.

She almost seems LN. Her plan isn't very C. And taking orders lime she is without even being threatened is kinda N or L.

Plan? She doesn't have an actual plan. She's playing it by ear. No she's upset because a sister, and what are 2 obviously good friends would make her job much more difficult. Also, it's not that she didn't expect him to have friends, it's that usually, if her target has good friends like that, Nathan (Incubus guy from the first strip) usually tells her that, same with the sister.
You don't know why she takes orders so easily, because I haven't told you, and I can't lest I spoil a major plot point.

She actually was annoyed, and worried. Annoyed that the girl would make her job harder. Worried that the girl might make her job impossible.

[darklink_shadow]

Being on an evil mission doesn't prove guilt. Maybe she is being blackmailed, maybe this is all she hs ever known, and feels she has no choice.

[Prince Zahn]

Arrrrrrrrrrrg! Swear words!!!!! She's CE! What does she have to spontaneously kill a puppy to prove it?!?!

Funny, I recall the Giant asked the very same thing about Belkar.
If Asdflove says she is CE, then she is CE. There's nothing more to say about it. We haven't yet seen the evil within her, and that's okay - why? Because we're still early on, and there will likely be plenty of opportunities for Tiffany to manipulate people to enter dark situations and present it to them as "a gray area".

So if Love says Tiff is CE, give her the time and patience to prove it creatively
----------------------------
That being said, Love - I WOULD suggest you get a 2nd opinion on whatever evil acts you have in store for us (from RL, preferably), mainly on how to present it in the most dramatic way imaginable, and on proving her malevolence the way Tiffany would knows best - might I suggest you meet up with an appropriately malevolent friend, or I can loan you one of mine(I have like, half a dozen of them)
-----------------------------
Sounds good to everyone?

[darklink_shadow]

If you can't sell it, I'm not buying it. Your logic is dumb, Zahn.

I can't just say someone is something and just have it be true. That's a cop out and poor authoring. Love isn't a poor author, so I doubt she will go for your argument.

She just hasn't had Tiff do anything that mkes me thing she is evil. That doesn't make Tiff not evil, it makes her not convincingly evil. If she doesn't want any feedback, I won't give it to her anymore, but I'm not a poor enough reader to just nod and say yup to whatever I am spoon fed.

[D.KnightSpider]

And this is why I will never play DnD. Alignment Arguments are an interest killer. <_<

Anywho... after this last strip, I felt like I needed to comment. I think the big problem here is that Tiff never really had a defining character moment before she went undercover, which didn't let us see how she thought or reacted to things before she started making nice with the goody-goodies. We're left without a framework to determine what's her play acting and what's her true feelings. It makes her come across as very ambiguous.

The bigger personal reaction that I wanted to voice was that this last strip felt less like an installment of the story and more like you as an author throwing up your hands and saying: "THERE! She's murderous and impulsive. She's CE now! SEE? CHAOTIC! EVIL!?" (Good gravy, that's an overly long sentence. ) Which took me right out of the story. I could be entirely wrong about that, but that's what it felt like to me.

My advice would be to take the offered criticism and use it to improve, but not to let it impact the storytelling medium proper. When you feel the need to use the story medium to settle an argument, it really detracts from the storytelling experience as a whole.

I've been reading this strip from Day 1 and I have been enjoying it. I'd really like it not to get derailed by an alignment argument.

[asdflove]

Funny, I recall the Giant asked the very same thing about Belkar.
If Asdflove says she is CE, then she is CE. There's nothing more to say about it. We haven't yet seen the evil within her, and that's okay - why? Because we're still early on, and there will likely be plenty of opportunities for Tiffany to manipulate people to enter dark situations and present it to them as "a gray area".

So if Love says Tiff is CE, give her the time and patience to prove it creatively
----------------------------
That being said, Love - I WOULD suggest you get a 2nd opinion on whatever evil acts you have in store for us (from RL, preferably), mainly on how to present it in the most dramatic way imaginable, and on proving her malevolence the way Tiffany would knows best - might I suggest you meet up with an appropriately malevolent friend, or I can loan you one of mine(I have like, half a dozen of them)
-----------------------------
Sounds good to everyone?

THANK YOU!!!!!!! It hasn't even been a in-comic day yet and alignment discussions are happening. That bugs me. I encourage alignment discussions for this comic, but can it perhaps wait till character personallities are properly established?
-------
Yeah, though I thought her threatening to rip off Nathan's head sounded pretty evil, I had a very devious friend. I can't help but wonder if anyone is going to question Nathan's alignment.
I have a particular thing planned to prove she's evil.

And this is why I will never play DnD. Alignment Arguments are an interest killer. <_<

Anywho... after this last strip, I felt like I needed to comment. I think the big problem here is that Tiff never really had a defining character moment before she went undercover, which didn't let us see how she thought or reacted to things before she started making nice with the goody-goodies. We're left without a framework to determine what's her play acting and what's her true feelings. It makes her come across as very ambiguous.

The bigger personal reaction that I wanted to voice was that this last strip felt less like an installment of the story and more like you as an author throwing up your hands and saying: "THERE! She's murderous and impulsive. She's CE now! SEE? CHAOTIC! EVIL!?" (Good gravy, that's an overly long sentence. ) Which took me right out of the story. I could be entirely wrong about that, but that's what it felt like to me.

My advice would be to take the offered criticism and use it to improve, but not to let it impact the storytelling medium proper. When you feel the need to use the story medium to settle an argument, it really detracts from the storytelling experience as a whole.

I've been reading this strip from Day 1 and I have been enjoying it. I'd really like it not to get derailed by an alignment argument.

Actually I've had that scene planned since comic 1... My issue with taking the criticism to improve the story is that they just seem to be saying that she's not evil and offering no advice on how to make her seem evil.
I didn't think more scenes in hell would be worth it, since they had nothing from a storytelling perspective, but at this point I'm kinda wishing I had so there wouldn't be people questioning that she's evil.

Being on an evil mission doesn't prove guilt. Maybe she is being blackmailed, maybe this is all she hs ever known, and feels she has no choice.

It seems like that how? What did she say in the first strip... "What mortal sap am I going after today" and she said it with a smile on her face. How does that even remotely seem like she's being blackmailed or that she feels like she has no choice?

[Reddish Mage]

THANK YOU!!!!!!! It hasn't even been a in-comic day yet and alignment discussions are happening. That bugs me. I encourage alignment discussions for this comic, but can it perhaps wait till character personallities are properly established?

Please everyone. The official 3rd edition attempt to define "evil" is a single vague sentence.

"Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others.

It doesn't say how often a character does this to be classified as evil or how serious the evil or to whom. It is perfectly possible for a character to act like a normal everyday person, and only occasionally commit evil acts and then only with the right victim. There's nothing that says that "evil" characters have to be puppy-murdering comic-book villains dedicated to spreading terror and misery with their every breath. They don't even have to "seem evil."

Also "neutral" doesn't mean "she does evil sometimes and she does good sometimes."

People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent but lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others.

There's nothing that suggests that being knowingly and willingly dedicated to an evil cause is not enough for the EVIL label. I'd prefer to see what our author has envisioned come out naturally than to see the plot shaped at this point by others' expectation of "good" and "evil" built up by authors whose main interest is in creating contrasts to encourage identification with the good guys. Authors that by and large are not at all interested in normalizing the bad guys.

[Prince Zahn]

May I suggest putting the alignment debate on hold before it looses all relevancy to this thread? @darklink: if you wish to disagree with me, by all means do so. but at least do so respectably - calling me a "poor reader", for disagreeing on your opinion is only offensive and narrow-minded on your part. There are many, MANY different and legitimate interpretations of evil out there, and many DM's who deviate from 3e's definition of alignments as well. So humor me: why should your interpretation disprove that of the author in her world - ESPECIALLY as Love herself confirmed we hardly* seen anything yet?

*=edit.

Anyway - "if you look to your left you will see Nedan's Tower in the distance: according to folklore, this pogo-stick like structure was built in honor of epic figure Lorre McLegendary, who did the epic plot moment way back in the pre-mainstory era that without it our little urban adventure would never have stood today. Rumors say that inside this tower is a plot-twist of epic proportion just waiting to happen, but of course this rumors, hero characters. Don't let it stray you from your already busy protagonistic lives. ."

[asdflove]

May I suggest putting the alignment debate on hold before it looses all relevancy to this thread?

Please.

Anyway - "if you look to your left you will see Nedan's Tower in the distance: according to folklore, this pogo-stick like structure was built in honor of epic figure Lorre McLegendary, who did the epic plot moment way back in the pre-mainstory era that without it our little urban adventure would never have stood today. Rumors say that inside this tower is a plot-twist of epic proportion just waiting to happen, but of course this rumors, hero characters. Don't let it stray you from your already busy protagonistic lives. ."

This. This is why you're awesome Zahn.
There actually is going to be a big scene there later. Law of conservation of detail and whatnot.

[D.KnightSpider]

Actually I've had that scene planned since comic 1... My issue with taking the criticism to improve the story is that they just seem to be saying that she's not evil and offering no advice on how to make her seem evil.
I didn't think more scenes in hell would be worth it, since they had nothing from a storytelling perspective, but at this point I'm kinda wishing I had so there wouldn't be people questioning that she's evil.

Ah. You have my apologies for misunderstanding the situation. I wasn't trying to be a jerk. I was just afraid that the comic would lose its luster.

[asdflove]

Ah. You have my apologies for misunderstanding the situation. I wasn't trying to be a jerk. I was just afraid that the comic would lose its luster.

It's fine, really.

[Vizzerdrix]

Nice comic so far.

And don't worry about seeming evil. Proper evil is like a good stew. It has to simmer for a while before it is ready to be served.

[The Walrus]

Interesting comic so far.

However, the shifting font size for speech bubbles was somewhat distracting for me. Usually, font size is an indicator of how loud a character is speaking, so I kept wondering why Nathan was yelling "It's on the itinerary." and "That's fine. Come over here." Look at Rich Burlew's comic if you need an example.

As for why some readers answered no to "Does she seem evil yet? Or at least chaotic?", Tiff's threat is clearly hyperbolic and comes off as nothing more than a petulant complaint. If she herself had provided a reason why she might kill him ("If your interference causes me to screw this mission up, I swear to Tiaka* I'll kill you") rather than having Nathan provide three reasons why she wouldn't it might have seemed more evil. Or maybe if she had delivered the threat with a hand on Nathan's back as he was looking out the window?

Of course, I'm not trying to tell you how to write your comic. I agree that what happened in #11 seemed more in line with Tiff's personality than anything else she might have done. Although she doesn't seem like the type to do things like rip someone's head off, there are plenty more ways to be evil. I'm guessing hers comes in the form of a complete disregard for how her actions will affect others, combined with a tendency to throw salt in their wounds afterwards by bragging about her conquests.

*You're using the pantheon you displayed in the Oots Fanart Showcase 5 for this, right?

[asdflove]

Interesting comic so far.

However, the shifting font size for speech bubbles was somewhat distracting for me. Usually, font size is an indicator of how loud a character is speaking, so I kept wondering why Nathan was yelling "It's on the itinerary." and "That's fine. Come over here." Look at Rich Burlew's comic if you need an example.

As for why some readers answered no to "Does she seem evil yet? Or at least chaotic?", Tiff's threat is clearly hyperbolic and comes off as nothing more than a petulant complaint. If she herself had provided a reason why she might kill him ("If your interference causes me to screw this mission up, I swear to Tiaka* I'll kill you") rather than having Nathan provide three reasons why she wouldn't it might have seemed more evil. Or maybe if she had delivered the threat with a hand on Nathan's back as he was looking out the window?

Of course, I'm not trying to tell you how to write your comic. I agree that what happened in #11 seemed more in line with Tiff's personality than anything else she might have done. Although she doesn't seem like the type to do things like rip someone's head off, there are plenty more ways to be evil. I'm guessing hers comes in the form of a complete disregard for how her actions will affect others, combined with a tendency to throw salt in their wounds afterwards by bragging about her conquests.

*You're using the pantheon you displayed in the Oots Fanart Showcase 5 for this, right?

Sorry about the font size thing. I always make the Speech bubbles first and then just fit the text to it.

She did seriously mean that threat. She would have attempted to do it if he hadn't said the reasons why she shouldn't. But she would have failed. I am using that pantheon, but the main deities in play are Nedan, Stalla and Adena. Tiff's not one to provide reasons for anything she does. Her reason for being mad at him with that her told her absolutely NOTHING about the mission before sending her out on it.

Now, that would just be hurting her allies. If she succeeds at something, it usually means she pulled someone to the side of evil and if they're evil now, they're no longer an enemy, so no rubbing of salt into wounds would happen... Okay, it would rarely happen. Sometimes when she corrupts a paladin into to a blackguard, she likes to rub it in their faces what a goody-two shoes they used to be.

[The Walrus]

Ah, I think I see what happened. I didn't read comic 10 again before reading 11, and assumed that Tiff's glowing red eyes were due to being startled, and that when she asked Nathan "Why didn't you warn me!" she was referring to him suddenly teleporting next to her without warning. This made Tiff's threat seem slightly less credible than if I had read it knowing the real reason why she was angry at Nathan. However, the comic still has not convinced some readers that Tiff actually did an evil act in making her threat.

Now, you may have the right to determine facts about your character's motivations in your webcomic, but this does you no good if these facts are not made apparent to the reader. Given that Tiff's eyes had stopped glowing red by the time she delivered the threat, it made it seem like she had calmed down somewhat. Also, Nathan noted that the actual threat she made was unrealistic, and therefore didn't sound that credible. Had Tiff actually popped her claws out and said she would cut him open, for example, it would have been a different matter. Furthermore, you stated that Tiff wouldn't kill someone unless it was necessary:

Tiff is the type of evil who likes to crush people mentally, not physically. She likes to tear their good outlook apart and drag them down to her level. It's kinda her job, but she doesn't strive to kill others. She will if she has too, and will do it without regret or a second thought, but it's not something she goes out of her way to do.

None of this would have mattered much if it weren't for two facts:

1. The title suggested that something would happen in that specific comic showing that Tiff was evil. Therefore, it was important for Tiff to do something unambiguously evil in that comic.

2. You're writing in a serialized format. Spielberg's movies have lots of plot holes, but no one notices them while they're actually watching the movie, and thus they do not distract from the work. But webcomics like this have each installment analyzed critically. If darklink_shadow had been reading through this strip in an archive, I doubt any comment would have been made. This effect is especially prevalent in the earlier installments, where there hasn't been enough time to set things up yet.

So, if you want to avoid discussions about alignment at this point, it may be a good idea to not reference it in your comic's title. Of course, the likely reason you made the title that way was to address concerns readers had earlier. There are two reasons why people may not yet consider Tiff to be evil:

1. As the protagonist, she's a sympathetic character and thus readers will be inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt.

2. People are more convinced that someone is evil by actions than by states of being. Thus merely being a demon doesn't convince much. Going on a mission to make someone evil might be an action, but this really just shifts the problem further down the line, as "being a blackguard" is also a state of being and not an action. If Tiff's mission was to convince Lucas to kill someone, that'd be different. It looks like the next comic may fix this problem by spelling out what exactly she's supposed to induce Lucas to do, but up until then it's rather vague what exactly being converted to evil entails.

What I meant by the "others" whom Tiff would aggravate wasn't the people she converted but rather those hurt or disadvantaged by this, such as Lila for instance. Also, it would seem that if Tiff really might actually have tried to kill Nathan, that just because two people are both working for "evil" doesn't mean they can't be enemies.

All of the points I've made could be argued. But what separates a good webcomic from a mediocre one is often not any single huge flaw, but a number of arguable issues. It may be arguable whether a plot is unoriginal or not, or whether a given character is convincingly portrayed, or whether the pacing is too slow. Yet the combination of many such issues leads to mediocrity. Not being able to point out any unambiguous problems makes such works hard to criticize, especially if you don't want to get into an argument with the author. The reason I'm posting is that I believe that comics can be improved by an honest consideration of their arguable problems, by asking why people are arguing certain points in the first place rather than arguing those points with them.

[darklink_shadow]

Eloquent. But I think the attempt is wasted. Regardless, eventually something truly sinister will happen or it won't. For now we must either accept that the demon is evil because the author says so and wait for the evidence or we must abnegate our faith in the telling.

Put this argument to rest. She resists a discussion about it unless it echoes her opinion. Not everyone can levelly discuss their creations.

[asdflove]

Ah, I think I see what happened. I didn't read comic 10 again before reading 11, and assumed that Tiff's glowing red eyes were due to being startled, and that when she asked Nathan "Why didn't you warn me!" she was referring to him suddenly teleporting next to her without warning. This made Tiff's threat seem slightly less credible than if I had read it knowing the real reason why she was angry at Nathan. However, the comic still has not convinced some readers that Tiff actually did an evil act in making her threat.

Now, you may have the right to determine facts about your character's motivations in your webcomic, but this does you no good if these facts are not made apparent to the reader. Given that Tiff's eyes had stopped glowing red by the time she delivered the threat, it made it seem like she had calmed down somewhat. Also, Nathan noted that the actual threat she made was unrealistic, and therefore didn't sound that credible. Had Tiff actually popped her claws out and said she would cut him open, for example, it would have been a different matter. Furthermore, you stated that Tiff wouldn't kill someone unless it was necessary:



None of this would have mattered much if it weren't for two facts:

1. The title suggested that something would happen in that specific comic showing that Tiff was evil. Therefore, it was important for Tiff to do something unambiguously evil in that comic.

2. You're writing in a serialized format. Spielberg's movies have lots of plot holes, but no one notices them while they're actually watching the movie, and thus they do not distract from the work. But webcomics like this have each installment analyzed critically. If darklink_shadow had been reading through this strip in an archive, I doubt any comment would have been made. This effect is especially prevalent in the earlier installments, where there hasn't been enough time to set things up yet.

So, if you want to avoid discussions about alignment at this point, it may be a good idea to not reference it in your comic's title. Of course, the likely reason you made the title that way was to address concerns readers had earlier. There are two reasons why people may not yet consider Tiff to be evil:

1. As the protagonist, she's a sympathetic character and thus readers will be inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt.

2. People are more convinced that someone is evil by actions than by states of being. Thus merely being a demon doesn't convince much. Going on a mission to make someone evil might be an action, but this really just shifts the problem further down the line, as "being a blackguard" is also a state of being and not an action. If Tiff's mission was to convince Lucas to kill someone, that'd be different. It looks like the next comic may fix this problem by spelling out what exactly she's supposed to induce Lucas to do, but up until then it's rather vague what exactly being converted to evil entails.

What I meant by the "others" whom Tiff would aggravate wasn't the people she converted but rather those hurt or disadvantaged by this, such as Lila for instance. Also, it would seem that if Tiff really might actually have tried to kill Nathan, that just because two people are both working for "evil" doesn't mean they can't be enemies.

All of the points I've made could be argued. But what separates a good webcomic from a mediocre one is often not any single huge flaw, but a number of arguable issues. It may be arguable whether a plot is unoriginal or not, or whether a given character is convincingly portrayed, or whether the pacing is too slow. Yet the combination of many such issues leads to mediocrity. Not being able to point out any unambiguous problems makes such works hard to criticize, especially if you don't want to get into an argument with the author. The reason I'm posting is that I believe that comics can be improved by an honest consideration of their arguable problems, by asking why people are arguing certain points in the first place rather than arguing those points with them.

Oh, looks someone can give good advice on how to fix it. Now to address your points.

1. No! Don't be sympathetic for her! Yes she's a protagonist, but Lucas fills that role just as well throughout the whole story line! Infact the next strip won't have Tiff in it at all, since it will be following Lucas. (Which I guess will give you guys a chance to criticize my attempt to write lawful good. I hope I'm not pulling a Miko...)

2. It's not the fact that she's a fiend that I'm expecting you guys to think she's evil, but the fact that her entire mission is to make someone else evil. I will be further exploring what she's supposed to do with Lucas when it cuts back to her, several comics from now.

Ah. You see, she doesn't ever stick around long enough to that. Also, Tiff doesn't usually try and kill her team mates. I really am trying to make it more noticeable, but in a way that make sense within the story.

[asdflove]

updated

[Chameon]

Hello. Fan of the story. Seeing lots of discussion and notes that people don't think the main character is evil....yeah, I could see why you'd argue she's true neutral, but, at the same time, chaotic evil isn't (or at least to my mind isn't) about randomly wandering and bringing about damage through murdering every person you possibly can. Plus, as the comic goes out of its' way to say, she's not...well she's not good at violence. It'd be like trying to have a fighter play Chopin's Raindrops. Yeah, he could do it, with enough practice, and taking a twenty, but fact is, he wouldn't be good at it. Now, the ways this can be applied...well, chaotic evil charismatic tends to like having more of a portfolio, minions, etc etc to my knowledge, but hey, author-person mentioned they like ideas on ways to show chaotic evil, so, ways will be shown!

1: Butterfly Effect: Yes, yes, I know, people are going to tell me that setting down tendrils and prepping routes is a lawful thing...with charisma, it doesn't have to be. Hold up, before I get burned to cinders! If she doesn't obsess on her target TOO much, and instead tries to slowly make the baseline average for 'good' a little bit lower, encourages people to be a little bit greedier (and if it happens to hit her target and make his day a little bit less pleasant, so be it) then she adds a few more seconds of damnation to everyone, as everyone shows a little more fury. Convince somebody that somebody else is less then useful, or that taking that bribe won't hurt that many people (likewise, that taking that bribe doesn't NECESSARILY mean they have to actually follow through with their end of the deal).
2: Bad Instruments: She's a bard, there's plenty of enchanted instruments she could 'accidentally' get a hold of. In Pathfinder (yes, yes, I know, it's probably not in 3.5) there's this lovely little cursed item called the "Riot Pipes" she could pretend to be enchanted by and start causing some lovely little accidental riots, play it off as being the victim and needing Lucas that LITTLE bit more, and, if nobody catches on it's her doing it, even convince Lucas that humans / sapients / whatever you want to call the all-varied species are that little bit less kind/good.
3: Dark Pacts/Devils Deals: Yes, yes, I know, Demon, not devil....or was it the other way around? Regardless, she can't obsessively follow her target, being the devil on Lucas' shoulder works, yes, but you follow somebody 24/7, you're just going to freak them out or enrage them eventually, an example of something she could do to demonstrate her evilness is to start offering out dark pacts to some 'innocents'. Get a bit of extra oomph from free-soul gathering, badda bing badda boom, money get, evil get, possible awkward explanation that goes completely against her mission, get. Bonus points if she manages to twist it into a faustian pact that gets her a new contact for equipment. Although, in all honesty, this one probably requires the most intelligence not to make some over the top nonsense.
4: General light mayhem and chaos: She's a bard. Bards are known for their music/speeches/dances/whatever their spec is inspiring emotions, sanity, insanity, whatever is appropriate to the given bard. Alignment supposedly influences what music is available (from what I have heard and what little I have seen in NWN2), so, one simple thing she COULD do to prove she's evil? Play a few songs that simply inspire self-loathing, inspire an intense hatred in a race, or whatever, and let the results fall where they will. I'd suggest a different disguise if she's going to do THAT though. She also should have a few spells she can mess around with to appropriately influence the environment.
5: Revelation as to why she's from one of the circles of bad place: Well...yeah. Easiest solution would be a flashback as to what precisely she did/has done to earn a chaotic evil alignment, if anything at all. That said, as I recall, planar beings are actually a species unto themselves, and not spirits, so that doesn't work so well.

That said, all that advise given, I actually DO like her seeming ambiguous at the start, her alignment looking/appearing TN / etc, because the alignment wheel is NOT a perfect description of how the characters act all the time. For example, I had a cleric, touched by the gods, could hear them talking all the time, and as such was more then the slightest amount insane (on more then one occasion he jumped of a building for funsies), liked to play god with earthshaping spells, you get the idea...thing is, he was Neutral Good. GM argued with me constantly about it, but fact of the matter was, if he said he was going to do something, by goodness he was going to do it, and he'd presume others would follow their words as well despite any prior knowledge, amusingly enough. What this rambling is getting at is, just because a character acts like a good individual, or a morally ambiguous individual, does not necessarily imply how they will act when push comes to shove. If she and Lucas gets attacked, and she's chaotic evil, she could easily run and hide, or try and trick Lucas into negotiating ("They might KILL us if we don't fight") etc. As I recall, Paladins had a penalty for even DEALING with non-lawful good individuals as part of their vows.

...I steadily get less lucid the further in I go, apologies everybody who attempts to draw some degree of sanity from this pallete.

[asdflove]

Hello. Fan of the story. Seeing lots of discussion and notes that people don't think the main character is evil....yeah, I could see why you'd argue she's true neutral, but, at the same time, chaotic evil isn't (or at least to my mind isn't) about randomly wandering and bringing about damage through murdering every person you possibly can. Plus, as the comic goes out of its' way to say, she's not...well she's not good at violence. It'd be like trying to have a fighter play Chopin's Raindrops. Yeah, he could do it, with enough practice, and taking a twenty, but fact is, he wouldn't be good at it. Now, the ways this can be applied...well, chaotic evil charismatic tends to like having more of a portfolio, minions, etc etc to my knowledge, but hey, author-person mentioned they like ideas on ways to show chaotic evil, so, ways will be shown!

You just had to bring this back up didn't you.

1: Butterfly Effect: Yes, yes, I know, people are going to tell me that setting down tendrils and prepping routes is a lawful thing...with charisma, it doesn't have to be. Hold up, before I get burned to cinders! If she doesn't obsess on her target TOO much, and instead tries to slowly make the baseline average for 'good' a little bit lower, encourages people to be a little bit greedier (and if it happens to hit her target and make his day a little bit less pleasant, so be it) then she adds a few more seconds of damnation to everyone, as everyone shows a little more fury. Convince somebody that somebody else is less then useful, or that taking that bribe won't hurt that many people (likewise, that taking that bribe doesn't NECESSARILY mean they have to actually follow through with their end of the deal).

I don't actually think I know what you're trying to say here...

2: Bad Instruments: She's a bard, there's plenty of enchanted instruments she could 'accidentally' get a hold of. In Pathfinder (yes, yes, I know, it's probably not in 3.5) there's this lovely little cursed item called the "Riot Pipes" she could pretend to be enchanted by and start causing some lovely little accidental riots, play it off as being the victim and needing Lucas that LITTLE bit more, and, if nobody catches on it's her doing it, even convince Lucas that humans / sapients / whatever you want to call the all-varied species are that little bit less kind/good.

She sings, acts, and sleeps with people. A bard she may be, but she doesn't play instruments.

3: Dark Pacts/Devils Deals: Yes, yes, I know, Demon, not devil....or was it the other way around? Regardless, she can't obsessively follow her target, being the devil on Lucas' shoulder works, yes, but you follow somebody 24/7, you're just going to freak them out or enrage them eventually, an example of something she could do to demonstrate her evilness is to start offering out dark pacts to some 'innocents'. Get a bit of extra oomph from free-soul gathering, badda bing badda boom, money get, evil get, possible awkward explanation that goes completely against her mission, get. Bonus points if she manages to twist it into a faustian pact that gets her a new contact for equipment. Although, in all honesty, this one probably requires the most intelligence not to make some over the top nonsense.

Succubi are demons. She doesn't have the authority to make pacts like that, unfortunately. She will be the 'demon on his shoulder' though.

4: General light mayhem and chaos: She's a bard. Bards are known for their music/speeches/dances/whatever their spec is inspiring emotions, sanity, insanity, whatever is appropriate to the given bard. Alignment supposedly influences what music is available (from what I have heard and what little I have seen in NWN2), so, one simple thing she COULD do to prove she's evil? Play a few songs that simply inspire self-loathing, inspire an intense hatred in a race, or whatever, and let the results fall where they will. I'd suggest a different disguise if she's going to do THAT though. She also should have a few spells she can mess around with to appropriately influence the environment.

Alignment influences bardic music, how?

5: Revelation as to why she's from one of the circles of bad place: Well...yeah. Easiest solution would be a flashback as to what precisely she did/has done to earn a chaotic evil alignment, if anything at all. That said, as I recall, planar beings are actually a species unto themselves, and not spirits, so that doesn't work so well.

Sure, some flashbacks will happen... Far later when this won't even matter anymore...

That said, all that advise given, I actually DO like her seeming ambiguous at the start, her alignment looking/appearing TN / etc, because the alignment wheel is NOT a perfect description of how the characters act all the time. For example, I had a cleric, touched by the gods, could hear them talking all the time, and as such was more then the slightest amount insane (on more then one occasion he jumped of a building for funsies), liked to play god with earthshaping spells, you get the idea...thing is, he was Neutral Good. GM argued with me constantly about it, but fact of the matter was, if he said he was going to do something, by goodness he was going to do it, and he'd presume others would follow their words as well despite any prior knowledge, amusingly enough. What this rambling is getting at is, just because a character acts like a good individual, or a morally ambiguous individual, does not necessarily imply how they will act when push comes to shove. If she and Lucas gets attacked, and she's chaotic evil, she could easily run and hide, or try and trick Lucas into negotiating ("They might KILL us if we don't fight") etc. As I recall, Paladins had a penalty for even DEALING with non-lawful good individuals as part of their vows.

...I steadily get less lucid the further in I go, apologies everybody who attempts to draw some degree of sanity from this pallete.

You like her being ambiguous? The fact that people think she could be TN is driving me nuts. It completely lessens the impact of later stuff...

[Chameon]

You just had to bring this back up didn't you.



I don't actually think I know what you're trying to say here...



She sings, acts, and sleeps with people. A bard she may be, but she doesn't play instruments.


Succubi are demons. She doesn't have the authority to make pacts like that, unfortunately. She will be the 'demon on his shoulder' though.


Alignment influences bardic music, how?

Sure, some flashbacks will happen... Far later when this won't even matter anymore...



You like her being ambiguous? The fact that people think she could be TN is driving me nuts. It completely lessens the impact of later stuff...

I apologize, I didn't know I was bringing this back up. I thought it was still going on, and you asked for advise.

You asked for advise on how she could identify herself as chaotic evil. The first, and simplest aspect of doing such would be to cause minor incidents, convince people that hey, maybe stealing that wallet would be a good idea, etc etc.

Yeah, sorry. Just going with what I know. I didn't know if she could use instruments or not. I just follow what paths I see available, one of the simplest is to simply come across 'conveniently' cursed items, so I brought up the riot pipes.

The pacts bit is unfortunate, you're right. I was pretty sure she couldn't anyway.

Alignment influences bardic music because it influences where inspiration comes from. In NWN2, there's a couple of feats that allow you to show this off (Cursed song and blessed song, as I recall) that each have individual influences such as debuffs for enemies or buffs for allies based on alignment on the good-evil scale. I do not know if this is the case in 3.5 or PF, just what I know from NWN2, I never actually got to play 3.5

Yes, flashbacks will happen, later. I'm just trying to use what resources are available and give what advise is available.

Yes, I like her being ambiguous at the start, especially given that the statements you make hint that she's going to go good, not that he's going to necessarily go evil. It gives growing room, prior to the end-game, for the character to 'incidentally' branch out into giving minor demonstrations, like any of those five examples I provided. Three of them have been rebuffed, one of them was not understood, and one of them is not likely until far later. Still, I felt I would provide advise, since one of your MAIN complaints was that nobody was providing suggestions on how the character could show herself as evil. I apologize, as I thought the discussion was still -on-, and I was trying to be helpful. As I have done nothing but stress the author of this piece, clearly I have failed at being helpful, so I'll get out of your hair.

[asdflove]

I apologize, I didn't know I was bringing this back up. I thought it was still going on, and you asked for advise.

You asked for advise on how she could identify herself as chaotic evil. The first, and simplest aspect of doing such would be to cause minor incidents, convince people that hey, maybe stealing that wallet would be a good idea, etc etc.

It had been like week or more since it had been discussed...
I appreciate that you're trying to help. I really do.

Yeah, sorry. Just going with what I know. I didn't know if she could use instruments or not. I just follow what paths I see available, one of the simplest is to simply come across 'conveniently' cursed items, so I brought up the riot pipes.

I had a character sheet made for her and up here for a while, but I took it down 'cause I messed up on it... I'm remaking it now. It wasn't a bad idea, it just doesn't work here.

Alignment influences bardic music because it influences where inspiration comes from. In NWN2, there's a couple of feats that allow you to show this off (Cursed song and blessed song, as I recall) that each have individual influences such as debuffs for enemies or buffs for allies based on alignment on the good-evil scale. I do not know if this is the case in 3.5 or PF, just what I know from NWN2, I never actually got to play 3.5

No such thing in 3.5.

Yes, flashbacks will happen, later. I'm just trying to use what resources are available and give what advise is available.

That was just me noting why that wouldn't work. By the time I will be able to logically do flashbacks, it won't matter anymore.

Yes, I like her being ambiguous at the start, especially given that the statements you make hint that she's going to go good, not that he's going to necessarily go evil. It gives growing room, prior to the end-game, for the character to 'incidentally' branch out into giving minor demonstrations, like any of those five examples I provided. Three of them have been rebuffed, one of them was not understood, and one of them is not likely until far later. Still, I felt I would provide advise, since one of your MAIN complaints was that nobody was providing suggestions on how the character could show herself as evil. I apologize, as I thought the discussion was still -on-, and I was trying to be helpful. As I have done nothing but stress the author of this piece, clearly I have failed at being helpful, so I'll get out of your hair.

Now, don't assume anything. You can't be sure Lucas won't turn evil. For all you know I already have the fall scene drawn already...
You already were more helpful, because you tried. My main issue was that they were complaining while offering no advice on how to fix it. You didn't stress me at all. The people before, who were offering no advice annoyed me, but not you. I really was just hoping the conversation would drop, because I was just frustrated with the previous people.