Shattered Kingdoms

Diabolical characters can be played many different ways. Some people seem to insist they be played one way, namely that they can't have long term aquaintances and that they MUST betray everyone they know at some point for no reason at all, except simply to do it. So, lets simply look at the description of a diabolic:

Diabolic characters are the cruel, heartless killers.
Yes, they kill people and are heartless.
They are the kind who plot and plan to harm others simply for their own entertainment.
They can make plans and kill people simply for their own entertainment and nothing more.
This does not imply that they do not have deeper goals, however.
But sometimes they are killing for something more than pure entertainment. They can have goals.
Their goals are USUALLY products of insanity and are too convoluted for the normal person to comprehend.
Their goals CAN be products of insanity and normal people won't understand them. They COULD also be products of other things.
Diabolic people need not follow normal rules of conduct, they CAN be the nicest, most generous person in the world one moment, and the next, stab you in the back and steal everything you own.
The rule for diabolics is that there are no rules, except that they enjoy killing. Thats about it. They can act kind, or they can act cruel, they can act in both manners to the same person. The diabolic character is the only one in the entire game that kills for the sake of killing. Others enjoy killing, but only in cases of revenge or honor. A diabolics only rule, as I see it, is that he likes to kill. There isn't a single line in this description that states, he MUST betray, he MUST be a loner, or that he must do anything except kill for the pure enjoyment of it.

Also, people claim a diabolic must continually be betraying people without any rational thought behind it, even if its bad for him. Thats the action of a stupid person and I hardly think a person who can conjure up undead creatures with arcane magic would be stupid.

Someone also said they shouldn't have ties with groups for a long period of time without betraying them, unless they run the group. Well genius, how is a person expected to gain leadership of a group without being in it for a long time? Perhaps that is their goal.

These characters are the bane of all that is good and organized. Diabolic characters are motivated by the desire for personal gain and pleasure. They see absolutley nothing wrong with taking whatever they want by whatever means possible. Laws and governments are the tools of weaklings unable to fend for themselves. The strong have the right to take what they want, and the weak are there to be exploited. When diabolic characters band together, they are not motivated by a desire to cooperate, but rather to oppose powerful enemies. Such a group can be held together only by a strong leader capable of bullying his underlings into obedience. Since leadership is based on raw power, a leader is likely to be replaced at the first sign of weakness by anyone who can take his position away from him by any method. Bloodthirsty buccaneers and monsters of low intelligence are fine examples of diabolic personalities.

Behavioral examples:
1. Rarely keeps his word. Has no honor.
2. Lies and cheats anyone.
3. Most certainly attacks and kills an unarmed foe (those are the best kind!).
4. Will hurt and/or kill an innocent without a second thought. (Or for pleasure).
5. Uses torture to extract information and pleasure.
6. Will kill for sheer pleasure.
7. Is likely to help someone only on a whim.
8. Despises honor and authority and self-discipline. Views them as weaknesses.
9. Does not work well in a group. Constantly vying for power and/or command.
10. Will always take dirty money, etc.
11. Will betray a friend. After all, you can always get another friend.
12. Associates mostly with other evil alignments.

I'm glad Erevan doesn't know what he's ever talking about.

I agree with Hoolio. My most enjoyable and most rewarded characters were the diabolic characters that acted in ways people just didn't expect. My favorite is the intense obsession with on thing. It doesn't have to be an evil thing, obsession can just make you act evil and crazy. For example: motherhood. Mommy dearest, anyone?

I believe Erevan's examples depend entirely on the character. In fact, my current diabolic character wouldn't fit into most of those, mainly because he is a forward thinker and isn't impulsive. Being diabolic doesn't mean the character lacks impulse control or the ability to think critically. Hannibal Lecter is a very good example. Obviously, he is warped but he is also highly intelligent and in control. Yes he lashes out and what not but it almost always (if not always) is calculated.

The diabolic alignment offers a great range for actions and motivations. The challenge is to have a consistent character. This is done by the player having a clear cut character concept defined for his character. When this is done, the alignment can offer the great range but the character concept defines what actions in what situations would be available. Unlike other alignments, the diabolic doesn't focus on actions, rather motivations and intentions....what makes a person truly vile.

I'm not saying other alignments don't address motivation/intention just they focus more on action or have more definition that ties in action. Diabolic challenges the player to develop a character concept that will then define the alignment for that character...so long as they are truly evil or their view of the world is such that others would see them as truly evil if they knew.

Lei Kung

I agree that diabolic characters need not be automatic betrayers BUT they need to fit that alignment better than miscreant or aberrant. That means something decidedly darker than killing for personal profit, or in honorable service to a dark god.

For a diabolic to have friends he'd never betray is dangerously close to aberrant at best. Such characters should have some vile compensating traits that drive their alignment lower. Of course, if it's just the matter of the right incentive not having shown up yet, that's another matter....

Yes, this character trait does put diabolics at a disadvantage in most groups, except the few corrupt enough to consider it positive. (Adepts, CoN) I have a problem with any other faction that knowingly elevates a diabolic to high office; someone is not taking alignment seriously.

Diabolical characters aren't required to betray people. It would be a sad day if they had to, that's not really the gist of the idea.

If a diabolic is going to stab you in the back, it's just a matter of timing, saying something that can be misconstrued by them or something else. I don't see it as a *necessity*.

QFT

I'm grieved to once again witness what a baby grakus is.

To the point, the last post I made on this thread was taken from ad&d's definition of Chaotic Evil characters. In the alternity system that SK seems to have based its alignments on, its pretty much the same.

Note that chaotic alignments can really be played in many different ways. Judging if this character is RP'ed correctly or not is up to the player himself, and someone who knows the player's intentions and all of the character's actions. In other words, its quite impossible for anyone else other than the character to say if a chaotic character is playing his alignment right or wrong, unless said character is doing extremes, such as a scrupulous character in a lightie killing spree etc.

Again, this is all based on RPG books.
This means that, grakus, if you find this nonesense, you can go ahead and contact monte cook and gary gygax. I'm sure they'd love to hear from you.

Erevan, Diabolic isn't Chaotic Evil, or even based on any D&D alignment. Our alignment system is based on the Palladium system, but somewhat less restrictive. In particular, there is no "chaotic", and even "evil" is pretty much just a name given to the lowest three alignments.

The idea is that you're supposed to read all the alignment help files, and pick the one that best suits your character. The ideal diabolic is someone who doesn't even recognize society's moral standards, save for the annoyance of getting caught. This should lead to truly depraved actions, such as torturing innocents for fun. It's a rare breed.

The original argument was that characters that live by "honor among thieves" aren't really diabolic, because they respect at least some morality. As has been pointed out, it depends entirely on whether they really respect that notion, or whether they just don't find the rewards of betrayal to be worth the risk - yet.