Ilsabet Obour and Ivana Boritsi: What's the Difference?

[Mistmaster]

True enought. Still, I like to avert the bad seed trope.

Some of the Darklords are the bad seed trope by canon, however. I'm not sold that it applies to Ivana. Dominic d'Honaire is definitely a bad seed. Dr. Frantisek Markov tortured animals as a child, which is a huge red flag that he is a bad seed. Adam is a supernaturally bad seed, on account of the evil spirit that animates his body. Inza Magdova Kulchevich was born evil for some reason, so another bad seed. Malocchio Aderre is a literal demon.

Yes, but if you check my rewritings I have changed Dominic, Adam and Malocchio backstories. Adam and Malocchio are both chaotic neutral, Dominic was an ambitious but decent person until he started to manipulate people to their ruin for his own interests earning darklordship only as an adult.
Ivana is actually good in the Mistworld. So canon does use the trope, I prefer to avert it.

[The Lesser Evil]

True enought. Still, I like to avert the bad seed trope.

Some of the Darklords are the bad seed trope by canon, however. I'm not sold that it applies to Ivana. Dominic d'Honaire is definitely a bad seed. Dr. Frantisek Markov tortured animals as a child, which is a huge red flag that he is a bad seed. Adam is a supernaturally bad seed, on account of the evil spirit that animates his body. Inza Magdova Kulchevich was born evil for some reason, so another bad seed. Malocchio Aderre is a literal demon.

I'm with you on Ivana, Camille seemed to have actively instructed her on spitefulness with her biggest shift to darkness coming from the events with Pieter. Although I suppose one could argue Ivana would have had evil inherently born into her already with the whole born under a dark moon thing with her "spiritual twin" Ivan, whom seems to have been performing pretty evil acts as young by 5 years of age. The Dilisnyas seem to have an inborn predisposition toward darkness.

Inza has some explanation for her dark nature in that there's some weird implications that she might have some sort of weird connection to Gundar, as her birth was on the same day as Gundar's death. For d'Honaire, Gaz III threw in some reinterpretation factoring in environment in that as his mother died giving birth to him, he never had a proper mother figure to discipline him as everybody else spoiled him (save for the nanny he gaslit).

[Speedwagon]

Yeah I myself don't typically use the 'bad seed/enfant terrible/fetus terrible' trope, even for the inhuman Darklords like King Crocodile in my "3 AM Thoughts on ..." series. Feels like the Dark Powers are looking for the exceptional, and while the 'bad seed' trope is exceptional, it feels like a cop-out or a cheat from the Dark Powers and what they're looking for. If they wanted something innately evil, they've got an infinite amount of Fiends to pull from in the D&D multiverse. Even with the Outsiders in the Demiplane, the likes of Gwydion, Ebonbane, and Vecna (and even Arijani) are/should be unique enough to draw the Dark Powers' notice. I'd posit the same for Malocchio, which is why I like the Mistmaster and VRGTR versions where Malocchio didn't immediately grow up into a discriminatory despot. Even though I love the Evil Eye, I want for my players to be able to nudge Malocchio's fate in a certain direction. Whether that's towards his canon unrepentant evil or towards being an ally, idk. I've also used elements of the Mistmaster interpretation of Dominic D'Honaire for that same reason, and the 'prophetess' version of Inza (because I disliked basic canon Inza).

[Garudos Celestar]

I will point out that Malocchio Aderre is not a darklord (he's only bound to Invidia because of the Vistani's actions during The Evil Eye), so claiming that he's in Ravenloft because the Dark Powers are interested in him is somewhat misleading (not to say that they aren't interested in him, but they didn't pluck him out of the multiverse for their collection).

I'll also throw my support in for tomokaicho's point that Malocchio is a literal demon. Perhaps in Planescape that might not be enough to make him born evil (and even in that setting, risen fiends like Fall-from-Grace were born evil but learned other alignments over the centuries), but it's completely appropriate for a demon to be inherently evil in Ravenloft's Gothic milieu.

[Mistmaster]

I'll also throw my support in for tomokaicho's point that Malocchio is a literal demon. Perhaps in Planescape that might not be enough to make him born evil (and even in that setting, risen fiends like Fall-from-Grace were born evil but learned other alignments over the centuries), but it's completely appropriate for a demon to be inherently evil in Ravenloft's Gothic milieu.

Cambions are half-demon thoughts; yes they have doubtlessly a more developed darkside, but they have a non-demonic part which can influence them. I am, as you surly by now realized,an heavy proponent of free will and nurture over nature.

[alhoon]

Cambions are half-demon thoughts; yes they have doubtlessly a more developed darkside, but they have a non-demonic part which can influence them. I am, as you surly by now realized,an heavy proponent of free will and nurture over nature.

Well, that's not according to gothic horror though. Sins of the father and all. When I have asked in the past, in Secrets of the Kargatane, I was told by the official channels (Azalin) that in gothic horror a githyanki, a demon, an imp... they are all incarnations of evil beyond mortal understanding even if not powerful, not baddies in edgy costumes. Anything that is "outsider [evil]" in 3e is assumed to be inherently evil beyond salvation a creation of pure evil.

[tomokaicho]

Well, that's not according to gothic horror though. Sins of the father and all. When I have asked in the past, in Secrets of the Kargatane, I was told by the official channels (Azalin) that in gothic horror a githyanki, a demon, an imp... they are all incarnations of evil beyond mortal understanding even if not powerful, not baddies in edgy costumes. Anything that is "outsider [evil]" in 3e is assumed to be inherently evil beyond salvation a creation of pure evil.

I could even see an evil outsider using Mistmaster's line of "logic" on a human victim while leading the mark towards damnation.

[Mistmaster]

You are mixing up two different things. Outsiders with the Evil subtype are Evil personified, it is part of their nature, of course. Cambions thought are half- humanoids. They have not the evil subtypes and they are not inherently evil at birth only with an highter hen average pull towards evil. And I have successfully raised my half-succubus daughter in my last campaign as a lawfull/good Paladin. Actually I see a fiend using your line of logic to corrupt someone turning them in a child-murderer.

[alhoon]

And in previous discussions about this issue, we have been told that from a Gothic horror perceptive, that cambion would be evil from birth, similar to how children of the drow kill each other in the womb or if placed in the same crib, strange each other. More or less Malocchio seems to be the "default" Cambion: early conscience, a monster in a child's form that has much more advanced understanding than his age, and is clearly evil.
Furthermore, I think in these forums, in discussions with other members, the consensus was that as far as gothic horror goes, a celestial would kill such a demon-spawn because it is an inherently evil creature, a blight on the world etc etc. I.e. the 3-days-old infant has conscience already and is evil to the core.

Now, how you choose to play your game, is of course up to you and nobody has any reason to say that your way is wrong and his way is right. I am just pointing out that setting-wise, we go towards pre-destination and sins of the father. If you prefer nurture-vs-nature so be it.

[Mistmaster]

And in previous discussions about this issue, we have been told that from a Gothic horror perceptive, that cambion would be evil from birth, similar to how children of the drow kill each other in the womb or if placed in the same crib, strange each other. More or less Malocchio seems to be the "default" Cambion: early conscience, a monster in a child's form that has much more advanced understanding than his age, and is clearly evil.
Furthermore, I think in these forums, in discussions with other members, the consensus was that as far as gothic horror goes, a celestial would kill such a demon-spawn because it is an inherently evil creature, a blight on the world etc etc. I.e. the 3-days-old infant has conscience already and is evil to the core.

Now, how you choose to play your game, is of course up to you and nobody has any reason to say that your way is wrong and his way is right. I am just pointing out that setting-wise, we go towards pre-destination and sins of the father. If you prefer nurture-vs-nature so be it.

Of course. I simply find the idea of born evil disgusting on a personal level and too simplicistic on a narrative one. Born evil characters are just machines programmed to do evil; no depth, no evolution, no interesting backstory no flavours at all. Think about Frankestein by Mary Shelley; the Creature is not born evil. What the creatures does later is evil, in a sense. But there is a reason he became that way. That is my gothic model: choises matter, evil is not born .

[Five]

Of course. I simply find the idea of born evil disgusting on a personal level and too simplicistic on a narrative one. Born evil characters are just machines programmed to do evil; no depth, no evolution, no interesting backstory no flavours at all. Think about Frankestein by Mary Shelley; the Creature is not born evil. What the creatures does later is evil, in a sense. But there is a reason he became that way. That is my gothic model: choises matter, evil is not born .

Yet it can be, somewhere, sometimes...

Think Michael Myers, or any other pseudo boogeyman. Pure, unrelenting, forward-thinking (doing) evil, existing on, in, or just outside the fringes of scientific, philosophical, and psychological boundaries of (tidy; easily-labelled/understood) mortal comprehension.

You cannot reason with it because it is, in part, illogical (to those sitting inside the fence of accepted understanding). You cannot put motive to it because you cannot empathise with the purity of singular emotion given physical form.

Etc, etc.

Of course, the superstition, or, in-universe acceptance of born evil can be a good bit of fun at the table if used even a bit more often as an actual born evil creature. Birth defects, ill omened births, and other such "rural" ignorance that oftentimes leads to brutal persecution; that's just good world-building. Here the PCs get the chance to isolate/ostracise themselves from the good intentioned but still miserable bastard masses (be heroes in Ravenloft) by being in a unique position of seeing past such limited mindsets...by having much more modern or "frontier" way of thinking. That certain point of view that differs from the "norm" (ie outsiders). Etc.

Nobody ever said good and decent was an easy road to walk...

[Mistmaster]

Yet it can be, somewhere, sometimes...

Think Michael Myers, or any other pseudo boogeyman. Pure, unrelenting, forward-thinking (doing) evil, existing on, in, or just outside the fringes of scientific, philosophical, and psychological boundaries of (tidy; easily-labelled/understood) mortal comprehension.

You cannot reason with it because it is, in part, illogical (to those sitting inside the fence of accepted understanding). You cannot put motive to it because you cannot empathise with the purity of singular emotion given physical form.

Etc, etc.

Of course, the superstition, or, in-universe acceptance of born evil can be a good bit of fun at the table if used even a bit more often as an actual born evil creature. Birth defects, ill omened births, and other such "rural" ignorance that oftentimes leads to brutal persecution; that's just good world-building. Here the PCs get the chance to isolate/ostracise themselves from the good intentioned but still miserable bastard masses (be heroes in Ravenloft) by being in a unique position of seeing past such limited mindsets...by having much more modern or "frontier" way of thinking. That certain point of view that differs from the "norm" (ie outsiders). Etc.

Nobody ever said good and decent was an easy road to walk...

Micheal Myers is indeed a character I do not like, even if the first movie is great. However, I'm not saying it can't be used, I say I do not use it.

[Five]

Micheal Myers is indeed a character I do not like, even if the first movie is great. However, I'm not saying it can't be used, I say I do not use it.

And all I'm really saying is that sometimes a "simple, born evil" monster can be the vehicle for a rather complicated and far-reaching narrative. The back story and flavours are or can be in the wake of its destruction, for example, as opposed to nothing of either; a pro to your con.

Of course, to each their own.