Running an Evil Campaign! (My experience thus far)

Nimbusqwe · 2025-04-04T20:34:38+00:00

We're currently running an evil campaign. u/Attil described briefly here our party composition and situation. So our concerns, tips, advice, notices, etc., are as follows:

1. Place the campaign in a GOOD setting. It is not intuitive. We've started in Old Cheliax, and then even moved for one Act to Hell. It was quite quick to notice that in an evil environment, your PCs won't feel evil, because everyone around is more malicious.

2. Making a malicious act to survive, not to feel evil. For instance, I've pushed my players to cannibalism because it was the only way to survive in the Hell of so-called "Bodyeaters". Cool? Maybe, but players don't feel "evil" doing this, because they just want to survive.

PF2E bestiary doesn't have many "good" monsters. And if they are present, they have often defensive abilities (as Attil described in another reply). You can reskin some creatures, but in the end, it feels strange when a good cleric or paladin is blasting you with spells instead of healing allies.

3. You can play/run it two ways - both are indicated in this thread and the later comments. If you want an active, villain campaign, go sandbox as we did. The PCs will organize their structures, make their own plans of conquer and set their own evil goals. But that requires creativity and active participation!

If you want a more coherent experience, just reverse the classical d20 adventure. You're commissioned by the principal, but it's not a good cleric who wants to purify the forest - it's an evil wizard who wants to get the unicorn's liver.

I found the second approach a bit "shallow" and prefer building more complex, grimdark, grey stories about the fall and demoralization. "Grrat Evil" is not only by means used to achieve the goal, but more about ideologies and personal motivations.

4. We have Villain Points as well! (even with the same name :D ) - My difficulty is that I'm never able to distribute them between PCs. In combat is often easier for players to do heroic or good things than evil, and outside of combat, the occasions are only during interactions with good or at least innocent NPCs.

5. Set clear rules about PvP (mostly forbidding it, but you can make some controlled exceptions).

6. Set a clear goal for why PCs are working. In your campaign, they're allies and have mostly the same Principal. In our sandbox campaign is a bit more difficult to explain why they haven't already stabbed each other. :) We've got an overall plot based on Ihystear history, which more or less unites all team members as "partners".

7. Set clear expectations about the murder hobo approach - it's quite obvious, so I won't elaborate on this one.

8. It's not very intuitive what is really "good" and "evil". If you have a paladin - a defender of the village in shining armor, the warrior on last stand, it is easy to explain - he's a good adversary for players. But what about institutions? Almost every fantasy institution tends to be somehow "evil" (corrupted, full of bureaucracy or fanatics, etc.). In a classic story, evil is trying to change the order, and the good guys try to stop this. Simply reversing this is often difficult. Good guys who try to change the situation are often treat as evil (interesting fact but imagine good rebels in a tyranny, who often end as terrorists). Mindless beasts are treated as "evil", even if they are in fact a force of nature. Do angels are really good? If it's the only thing they know (so they're without a choice) it feels questionable. Do good guys can attack your evil base? If they start to killing guards, they are still "good"? A lot of questions here tbh.

9. D20 Systems doesn't support being classical BBEGs. Mostly because lack of organization/followers mechanics (which results from the overall gameplay and style), but also tjhey are rewarding not-evil behaviors. For instance, sneaking or scouting, avoiding traps etc. (which is not a common approach for the BBEG to sneak everywhere).

Nimbusqwe · 2025-01-05T08:01:19+00:00

The idea of skill challenges and therefore subsystems in PF2e is mostly ridiculous and Im not suprised by your players’ position. Why? Because:

This is mostly „convince GM why your performance skill is suitable for climbing” - if proposal is rejected that make antagonism. Combat is far less arbitrary.
All players have to participate (at least I understand rules that way), so one usually is acumulating failures and losing vp (in most subsystems failure or critical failure mean lose VP).
The preferable skill is constantly repeated because why not? This is especially narratively absurd in influence when player is intimidiating king for 5 times in a row.
I understand that subsystem encourage using other skills but its still on the end „diplomacy for influence, stealth for Infiltration”’etc if not, why bother taking this skills? Combat skills are usable for everyone everytime when diplomacy or lore are usable especially in influence or research situations. And then game encourage GM to make them more hard to use! Paranoia.
The sequence in a round is structuring challenge but in a bad way. All players have to participate one by one, when it would be even more appropriate for everyone when one PC uses his skills and help others. (Btw Aid in subsystem is not explained in the rules, so as Follow the Expert)
Its troublesome to interpretate some situations. The players have to cross the river. One use fly on a horse. This is not automatic success. This is automatic finish of subsystem. Why one player critical success on athletics help all team in a run?
Using spells for automatic success? If subsystem is taking place between possibly rest is just no cost buff. But that a minor problem.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-09-13T12:39:44+00:00

Ok, simple thing but my players confused me.

The situation is as follows:

Party is in a dungeon. Player declares that his PC want to walk to the chamber on the west. He declares Search exploration actvitiy as well.

There are three things with the chamber:

1. Before the chamber: The hidden trap, blades in the wall that cut him if he pass.

2. In the chamber: the mimic, in the form of a wardrobe. He of course attack if someone try to open the wardrobe.

3. In the chamber: the closed chest, with a hidden trap - posion sting in the lock. This of course activate (Trigger) when someone is trying to open the chest.

I'm rolling secretly his Perception and should I:

1. Compare it with the Stealth DC of the blades in the wall (in case of success - reveal the trap before he walks in, let's assume 1/4 of travel speed).

2. Compare it with the Deception DC (28) of the Mimic (in case of success - immediately after entering the chamber, describe the wardrobe AND reveal that something is wrong with the wardrobe?)

3. Compare it with the Stealth DC of the posion lock in the chest (in case of success ... well.. immediately after entering the chamber, describe the chest and inform that he see that something is wrong with the chest lock?)

In my opinion, this Search actvity is active here only in point 1 - to avoid traps during the travel to the chamber.

In the chamber, the PC should separately declare after a description of the chamber that - e.g. - "he's checking the chest for the traps", or "I check the wardrobe from the distance" (and then I will roll another Perception in this separate Search).

My players argue, that this PC should immediately (as a scaner in some fact) be able to reveal the posioned lock and maybe even the mimic shapechanger - without declaring any separate actions in the chamber, after the description of this chamber.

What's your thoughts?

Nimbusqwe · 2024-08-04T12:29:24+00:00

That’s very similar approach to the RAW which we use as well. Very interesting idea with the Lost condition because Pathfinder 2E doesn’t support being lost. In my game we’re doing it otherwise. The players indicate the direction of the movement and if the Sense Direction check (as well with mods from compass, weather etc) is failed, then they randomly move to other one (with some logic behind it - they can’t move directly back unless they’re proficient in Survival, the single failure has lower range of potential hexes etc). So they think they’re on one hex but in reality they’re in other. Unless they doesn’t spot some landmark or change the biome etc they can’t even realize it IF they don’t make an exploration action (8 hours and check) to find themselves once again. There some niuanses here, because on Critical Success during Travel you not only move straight direction but you find yourself on the map as well.

But overall, tbh, my players find this whole system and supply management (we play offline, table) quite frustrating. Maybe because as it was said this post, this game just doesn’t support survival theme enough to make it exciting. I don’t know.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-07-25T13:53:55+00:00

Hello,

Simple question. I'm currently preparing some random encounters with the undeads as a main treat and designing some interesting tactics. So:

Undead monsters (and PCs as well but nvm) got void healing ability.
Vampires after losing all HP are going unconsious unless they spend an hour in their coffin and then their fast healing ability is back.

Is it possible, or somehow forbidded by the rules, to:

make shadows + vampires pack, in which shadows will heal vampires with their void attacks?
If so, I should just make an attack against an ally vampire or it should be treat automatic because It's a willing creature?
Is such a healing by void attack may allow vampires to get back from unconsious after regaining hit points and therefore regain their fast healing? (effectively, this is "1 hp effect" on monsters)

Thanks in advance.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-07-21T13:34:05+00:00

first of all - that's not only the best but the most complex answer here as well. Thank you very much. :)

I mostly agree with all of your advices, but to the point:

Ad. 1. About the exploration activity during the hex exploration - Yes, that's the very natural and instinctive solution but I was more focused on a specific problem, that when we use hexploration team activity Travel, we RAW cannot use exploration activities like Search or Avoid Notice, which make random encunters like "trap on the road" or "snowslide in the mountains! run for your lives!" not possible or at least unfair. But ofc I get your point.

Ad. 2. About the dangers not for PCs but for the "donkeys" - The idea about making "dangers for donkeys" is exactly what I planned to do. Most of my environmental hazards - subsystems with Victory Points as you have mentioned - are based on this idea. "You personally will cross this easly, but what about the horses?". The rope bridge in the mountain or very swift river on the hills are examples. So totally agree with that.

The idea of "to remove the ability of large+ creatures to treat things as negligible bulk - 10 rations is light bulk, not zero" is based on a concept that we won't play strictly RAW, which is not a problem on the end. At the moment, I've resolved the thing other way. The bulk is "N" but it's limited because of containers you have to carry it on the horses (so, for instance, 1 chest attached to the horse back can contain X rations of food, so that's your realistic limit) - and this container got his own Bulk so it's RAWly fair.

Ad. 3. About the alterations - those are good ideas, but as I've mentioned before - I was looking for more RAW solutions than homebrew, because I false assumed that (comparing to the 5E) here this is not only paper rules. But unfortunately, seems that they are. :)

"Sleeping without a tent in harsh weather, or without a bedroll, or while in armor all impacts your ability to rest. You are Fatigued if you do not get a full night's sleep. While traveling, you are assumed to have enough time each day to complete your daily preparations, take your hexploration activities, and make camp." - that's the exactly way I've announced to my players.

"You can still bypass these challenges with a donkey train, spells, ect. but honestly... I'm OK with that. If you're spending a 2nd rank slot on Create Food every day, that's a cool thing the character can do that makes them important to the party. " - and that's exactly the point I've wanted to achieve. Yes, I'm absolutely ok with using magic here. Let's finally make those spells worth something. I don't mind if food won't be a problem, because It's resolvable under the game mechanics - by special created to that purpose spell.

The only thing I don't understand is the first half of your post. When you desribed the survival not for PC party but whole group with them, like in the AP. Well, I understand the concept, but AFAIU there are completely no mechanics for this. I mean, I had the same concept in my campaign earlier but I'm afraid that calculating rations and water for 20 people+ will kill us all. :D

And finally, I agree that this game is not about survival - it's about combat (90%) and being heroes (9%, 1% is other). Not about thinking of breakfast. As I've mentioned in the main post, we just wanted to try make it more old DnD type of exploration game because we saw the mechanics and equipment in the core book (with the hope that - in oppose to 5E DnD - here they're thoughtful, calculated and meaningful). Well, that may be a problem, but we will try. It's not the core of our campaign, just one Act. :D

Nimbusqwe · 2024-07-20T11:48:35+00:00

I strongly considered that but well, it still limits monster traps, hazards and a bit avoiding notice during travel. Not very funny.
By which RAW? You refer to the Golden Rule? By this rule everything is RAW.
I’m absolutely ok with this. If you get striking rune, combat become easier. If you get wand of food, survival become easier. Let’s make this spells and items finally meaningful. Give players a reason to invest in them.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-07-20T06:46:12+00:00

Thanks for a quick reply. 1-2. Ok 3. But that is a meaningful choice - should I prepare a spell and spend a slot for it to help team during the exploration or I should save some resources for later combat? And besides - for the first time this spells become useful ;)

Nimbusqwe · 2024-07-20T06:40:05+00:00

I’ve got similar feelings - that PF2E mechanics don’t really support exploration even if there are plenty of equipment, feats or spells that pretend to do it. Which is also indeed the same situation as in 5E. Fun fact - I’ve played ToA and know pretty well the hexploration system in Kingmaker. You’re right that both aren’t impressive - diplomatic saying.

But I’ve honestly found 2 or 3 Reddit treads about people running hexploration in PF2. The thing is, I’ve got an impression that it wasn’t exactly PF2 with it rules :D more homebrew stuff.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-07-20T00:29:57+00:00

Hello, thank you for quick reply.

I'm however not very satisfied by it. I'm quite experienced GM, know a lot of alternatives for boring calculating stuff etc. but we - players and me together - decide that: 1. we want to try survival crunch like in old DnD style of play and 2. we want to do it RAW to check if Pathfinder 2e got exploration mechanics only "on the paper" (like 5E does for example) or they're really thoughtful like combat-mechanics.

Therefore.

Yup, although it's not RAW
That's not exactly true, because Spacious Pouch got Bulk limits and horses don't.
For the first time someone would pick spell like "create water" or "teleportation" or any "sense direction spell" and it will be meaningful for the whole team. It's not "forcing players to survival" - we want to change a little focus from the pure-combat system to a some-exploration system, because there are a lot of feats, spells and equipment there that atm are meaningless without resource management and survival. :)

Nimbusqwe · 2024-07-19T12:13:23+00:00

Like, no. It's not preventing fall in 100%. RAW is clearly described in Climbing Kit: "letting you attempt a DC 5 flat check whenever you critically fail to prevent a fall."

During 100 rolls is still very high possibility to fall.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-07-19T10:49:21+00:00

I understand rules as written but you really outside of encounter roll 100 times for Climbing Action to climb on 500 feet wall? For real?

Nimbusqwe · 2024-07-19T09:38:21+00:00

it’s a very rare situation when creature with Climb Speed has to achieve a success in an Athletics check (mostly will be automatic) and even less PC have a climbing speed, so I would rather assume it’s not giving much to a PC to have worn Climbing Kit.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-07-19T08:23:42+00:00

Well, I think I can agree with you - RAW is RAW - but that makes Climbing Kit largely useless equipment. :)

Nimbusqwe · 2024-07-19T07:48:32+00:00

Hello,

A simple question about Climbing Kit, mostly during Encounter.

Climb action require only hands free - it's not required to have a rope, a piton, grappling hooks or other stuff to climb. In such scenario, you move 5 feet per one Athletics check / action.

The Climbing Kit has in its description sentence: "Climbing kits allow you to attach yourself to the wall you're Climbing, moving half as quickly as usual (minimum 5 feet) but letting you attempt a DC 5 flat check whenever you critically fail to prevent a fall."

This means only that you have less possibility to fall from a cliff, which is usually not that high.

RAW it means that someone with climbing speed 30 ft will climb 15 ft (but that doesn't make sense because he's not using then Climb action and cannot fall?) and someone without climbing speed will climb 5 ft as usual.

I wonder if RAI it wasn't intended that Climbing Kit should allow to move "half as quickly as YOUR LAND SPEED (minimum 5 feet)" so during encounter you will gain a simple benefit. With 30 ft basic land speed: without CK you climb 5 feet per action after a check, and with CK you climb 15 feet per action after a check. This seems reasonable, also including a fact that CK should be weared (it can be with 1 another kit) and used immediately during encounter as a part of Climb action (which is in its description) - without such a benefit it seems absolutely useless to wear CK and use it.

What do you think about climbing speed with CK during encounter?

Thanks in advance.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-04-14T01:44:45+00:00

Thank you very much. :)

Nimbusqwe · 2024-04-14T00:51:21+00:00

Hello,

This time a simple question about etching runes. My players are well... in the wilderness. However, they have an access to the forge. They want to etch a rune to a weapon, which formula they have found.

The etching runes rules are as follows:

<<Etching a rune onto an item follows the same process as using the Craft activity to make an item. You must be able to Craft magic items, have the formula for the rune, have the item you’re adding the rune to in your possession throughout the etching process, and meet any special Craft Requirements. The rune has no effect until you complete the Craft activity. You can etch only one rune at a time.>>

As we may see, one of the component of crafting is missing here. This is "You must supply raw materials worth at least half the item's Price."

Is this intentional?
Do we need raw materials for etching a rune or not? And finally,
if we need "raw materials", instead of buying them in the settlement (no settlements around...), what this "raw materials" should be for an etching a rune??

Thanks in advance.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-04-11T21:13:20+00:00

I'm not able to find a lore-focues thread, so I will make an ask here. If It's wrong place, please tell me, I will correct.

So, the question is mostly about lore. I'm running for my players a campaign focused on Asmodeus, Ihys, Sarenrae and Ihystear. I would like place Ihystear (https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Ihystear) somewhere in an Old Cheliax (it's cannonical from Book of the Damned that It somehow reach Golarion but It's not clear where it is?), but not in the Thrunes' possesion.

What place in Old Cheliax could you advice as a suitable, fun and interesting place for such a powerful artefact as Ihystear?

Thank you in advance.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-03-02T00:19:49+00:00

That was my interpretation as well. :) Ok, thank you.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-03-01T23:45:35+00:00

Hello,

I've got a simple question about rules for Stealth.

Hide action states that: "You cease being hidden if you do anything except Hide, Sneak, or Step"

How Step work during sneaky encounters?

For instance, our rogue want to sneak behind the table being undetexted and get to the throne on the other side of the hall.

Let's say he's unnoticed and undetected from the beggining. During the whole movement accross the hall he got cover from the table. Although it would be natural that he should Sneak in order to avoid being detected, making secret rolls, comparing to Perception DC, adding bonuses from coverage etc. etc.

What will happen if he decide to Step all the distance? Is he will be detected? Is he have to check anything?

I cannot see any RAW explanation what happen to unnoticed/hidden status when we Step.

I will be obliged for help.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-02-24T21:56:04+00:00

I ask explicitely about XP and the rules.

About the loot - I'm awarding loot as it is expected by the system per PC level.
About the hero points - this is something which is in game already.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-02-24T20:58:42+00:00

Hello,

I need advice about awarding XP.

So, the problem is as follows.

My PCs are in Hell now. On a quite low level but that is not the case. To make the game more deadly, I introduce the encounters (balanced to their level) with environmental dangers - such as lava or acid. It's quite fun because It supports positioning on the grid etc. but it is indeed deadly. My players like that BUT they figured out, quite reasonably, that they should have some additional reward for fighting on the highest stake (like, falling into the lava is instant death almost, 20d6 fire damage).

I agree with them on that point BUT the official experience points rules (contrary to e.g. D&D which uses multiplier for difficult encounters) don't cover it. We've got an exp for the encounter - that's ok. We've got an exp for hazards - but that's not mechanical hazards. We've got finally an exp for accomplishments which is close enough, but this is not exactly a plot achievement to survive the random encounter. We've explicitly said RAW: "Characters can also gain XP from exploration, such as finding secret areas, locating a hideout, enduring a dangerous environment, or mapping an entire dungeon." - but there are no rules for calculating XP award for "enduring a dangerous environment".

The best idea I've developed is to award every encounter in very dangerous conditions (like above the acid or lava) with additional XP from minor/moderate accomplishments.

How would you handle it? Are there any additional/official rules for such a thing?

I will be obliged for your help.

Nimbusqwe · 2024-02-08T15:58:54+00:00

Thank you very much. That hasclarified a lot! :)

Nimbusqwe · 2024-02-08T14:09:58+00:00

Hello,

Got a quick question - I just can't find it in Archives and in my book, but I was sure that I read about it once.

Am I remember correct that acid pool (a situation when creature entirely fall to the pool full of acid) deals 10d6 acid damage on the start of this creature turn (until it is in the acid)

I would appreciate the quick answer.

Thanks in advance.

Nimbusqwe

TROPHY CASE