# Forum > Gaming > Roleplaying Games > D&D 5e/Next >  Edgelords

## J-H

I need some stereotypically over the top Edgelords for NPCs, based on PC classes.  What are the most edgy options?
So far I've come up with Hexblade and Necromancer.

----------


## JackPhoenix

Warlocks and rogues in general, but conquest/oathbreaker paladins, death or maybe grave cleric, shadow monk (for the "teleports behind you" schtick) fits too. Really, though, an edgelord is a personality, not a class, even if some options lend themselves for to that more.

----------


## Dualight

For other options that are easily made edgy: Spores druids, Gloomstalker rangers, any artificer that adds spikes to all their designs, Phantom rogues specifically, Way of the Long Death monks, Ancestral Guardian barbarians, Spirits bards, Echo Knight fighter, Shadow Magic sorcerer, warlocks (except maybe Celestial).

Any Underdark-dwelling creature 
 (am I using blue text right?)

----------


## RogueJK

Shadar-Kai Undead Warlock 1/Conquest Paladin X. Anti-Paladin bringing all the fear, all the time. With the default edgelord race.

Changeling Whispers Bard 5/Assassin Rogue X or Assassin Rogue 3/Whispers Bard X, with the Actor feat. A master assassin and worshipper of the God of Murder who impersonates whoever necessary to get close to his target, and then hits like a truck (Sneak Attack + Psychic Blades + Critical) with a backstab when the target lets their guard down, before reverting back to their dark and edgy real appearance and monologuing about the inevitability of death as the target bleeds out.

Dhampir Ancestral Guardians Barbarian 3 or 6/Echo Knight X. A bloodthirsty raging monster haunted by a swarm of flitting ghosts, their Echo and Ancestral Protectors are spirits of those he's slain/eaten.

----------


## NecessaryWeevil

An Aberrant Mind Sorceror could certainly be this. Just rant about "alien geometries" all the time, play up the ickiness of your transformations, and mutter "Cthulhu fhtagn" at random intervals.

----------


## Mastikator

Gloomstalker has that edgy darkness vibe.

----------


## Cygnia

> Gloomstalker has that edgy darkness vibe.


Our party had a Gloomstalker-Assassin.  We joked that she was just the secretary to our party's necromancer.

----------


## Segev

A Light Domain cleric who worships "the Green Sun" and plays up radiant damage as radiation poisoning/burns, and talks of scouring the land of all life in cleansing light. If you're familiar with Exalted's Infernals, take inspiration from the Malfean Charms that deal with Green Sun radiance and the like for how to flavor things and how he talks  enthusiastically  about them.

----------


## Joe the Rat

Alchemist Artificers, because poison is edgy.

Beast Barbarian, for Lycanthrope-lite.  I'm so dangerous, I am a living weapon, I am rejected by my (insert appropriate social group based on background) for my inhuman(or elven, or halfling) nature.
Frenzy barbs can fit in the "I killed my village" theme.

Twilight and Grave Clerics, in the overly poetic teen angst flavor.

Underdark Land Druid, doubly so if you are Drow (but the only good one blah blah Drizzt blah).

Death Monks. Because they scary.

As much as it can be intereseting, an Edgelord Divination Wizard has potential.  You've seen the future, you know everything will die, all you have is your power and knowledge, Raistlin the crap out of the personality.


Just make sure they're all orphans or estranged nobles or orphaned nobles or Dark Fate Folk Heroes (who have been orphaned) and the like.

----------


## Segev

> Underdark Land Druid, doubly so if you are Drow (but the only good one blah blah Drizzt blah).


I'm actually playing a Circle of the Land (Underdark) Druid who is a drow orphan. He's fascinated with the underdark and his drow heritage, and has a romanticized idea of its "dark" and "wicked" nature. He fancies himself tough and scary (because his Charisma is pathetic for a drow, and people just assume he's untrustworthy, etc., so he's decided it's cool to be sneaky and distrusted and somewhat feared), and if you asked him, he'd claim to be Chaotic Evil. He's actually somewhere in the upper right corner, wavering between Chaotic Neutral and NEutral Good (I'd call him 'chaotic good' if I had to pin a particular alignment, but he's determined to prove he's wicked enough that he'll do some less-than-good things, while not having the heart to actually be evil, and he also believes in keeping his word and the like, which sometimes makes him less than chaotic.)

He thinks spiders and poison are super awesome, and rides a giant wolf spider named "Silinrul." It's drow for "Hunter."

----------


## Slipjig

Or play totally against type and go with a race/class combo that people expect to be the comedy relief.  Like, a Gloomy Kobold Celestial Warlock or a Nihilist Kender Life Cleric would be hysterical.

----------


## Mastikator

> Or play totally against type and go with a race/class combo that people expect to be the comedy relief.  Like, a Gloomy Kobold Celestial Warlock or a Nihilist Kender Life Cleric would be hysterical.


Dhampir life cleric, seeker of the blood of vol. He drinks peoples blood and then heals them. Fully consensual, of course. And by consensual I mean "converts them to his religion with promises of inner divinity, only to have access to walking renewable bloodbags"

----------


## Slipjig

On the flipside, a character you EXPECT to be angsty or Edgelord-y (Conquest Paladin, Gloomstalker, Grave Cleric, Assassin) who is instead just a ball of cheerful, helpful sunshine could also be pretty entertaining.

----------


## Rynjin

Basically any character can be classified as such, it's a state of mind. An (awful) story I read once had a "paladin" with sunlight powers as the resident edgelord. His preferred way of apprehending suspected criminals was to laser beam off their arms and legs so they were no longer a threat.

This was not a setting where such damage was reversible, and note that I said SUSPECTED criminals. This was not something the character did in self-defense or as a last resort. It was the first option jumped to when he wanted to question someone.

----------


## Slipjig

> Basically any character can be classified as such, it's a state of mind. An (awful) story I read once had a "paladin" with sunlight powers as the resident edgelord. His preferred way of apprehending suspected criminals was to laser beam off their arms and legs so they were no longer a threat.
> 
> This was not a setting where such damage was reversible, and note that I said SUSPECTED criminals. This was not something the character did in self-defense or as a last resort. It was the first option jumped to when he wanted to question someone.


Yikes.  When you read about disturbing stuff like this you can (almost, sort-of) understand where the Satanic Panic came from.

I always thought safety tools were a little silly until I started encountering horror stories like this one.

----------


## Rynjin

Safety tools?

----------


## Luccan

Swarmkeeper Ranger seems like a good option. You could flavor it as ghosts or whatever, but I think sticking to bugs would work just fine

----------


## KorvinStarmast

> Safety tools?


 You might want to look up "the X card" and other small group dynamics aids that are intended to get a group on the same page in terms of "cool with this" and "not cool with that" before session play begins.  But the X card kind of safety tool is reactive. Something comes up in play that triggers a visceral and negative reaction; X card displayed to alert other players that someone's good time just got thwacked .... roughly.

----------


## Rynjin

> You might want to look up "the X card" and other small group dynamics aids that are intended to get a group on the same page in terms of "cool with this" and "not cool with that" before session play begins.  But the X card kind of safety tool is reactive. Something comes up in play that triggers a visceral and negative reaction; X card displayed to alert other players that someone's good time just got thwacked .... roughly.


That sounds pretty useful for the mute players at the table for sure.

----------


## Ionathus

> That sounds pretty useful for the mute players at the table for sure.


I see your point, but I'll always err on the side of making the roleplaying brakes too responsive, rather than not responsive enough. Not everybody is comfortable voicing their discomfort in a TTRPG: I can see the value of having a "button" you can just "push" when the topic has gotten too real, rather than already being distressed about the experience and then having to form a coherent statement. Especially if you worry that you're "wrecking other people's fun" by being the only one who doesn't want to do a visceral torture scene or something.

----------


## Segev

> I see your point, but I'll always err on the side of making the roleplaying brakes too responsive, rather than not responsive enough. Not everybody is comfortable voicing their discomfort in a TTRPG: I can see the value of having a "button" you can just "push" when the topic has gotten too real, rather than already being distressed about the experience and then having to form a coherent statement. Especially if you worry that you're "wrecking other people's fun" by being the only one who doesn't want to do a visceral torture scene or something.


I've never understood how "the X card" is better than just saying, "Hey, guys, this is making me uncomfortable." If you're worried about 'wrecking other people's fun' or the like, you're going to be just as worried about doing it with "the X card" as you are with...you know...specifically saying what is making you uncomfortable. And you're going to have to say it anyway.

I have been in games where the GM makes a big deal about using it, and have generally ignored its existence because it has never come up, and if I were the one who was uncomfortable, I would just say something. Certainly, I wouldn't be more comfortable dramatically playing "the X card" like it was the fifth piece of Exodia if I wasn't already comfortable voicing that I have qualms about whatever is happening.

----------


## Sception

Obviously edgelordiness is more about attitude and aesthetic than specific abilities and so can be any race or subclass, but there are naturally better fits.

For races: drow, shadar-kai, winter eladrin, half elf (where the elf half is one of the aforementioned), fallen aasimar, tiefling, dhampir, hexblood, reborn, non-metallic dragonborn, duergar, deep gnome, ghostwise halfling, gith, yuan-ti.

for subclasses: zealot barbarian; whispers or sword bard; death, war, trickster, or twilight cleric; spore druid; echo knight, eldritch knight, or psionic warrior fighter; shadow, death, kensei, or mercy monk; swarm or gloomstalker ranger; assassin, phantom, or soul knife rogue; vengeance, conquest, or oathbreaker paladin; shadow or aberrant sorcerer; any warlock but especially hexblade; necromancer, enchanter, illusionist, or blade singer wizard.  For non-core classes there's not really an obvious edge lord artificer (though again it's more about attitude than mechanics so you absolutely could if you wanted to), while the entire blood hunter class screams edge lord almost as loudly as the hexblade warlock does.


If you're looking to put together an 'anti-party' type build, then an oath-breaker paladin and necromancer wizard have a lot of synergy working together.  A death cleric and phantom rogue would round out a classic 4 man group with on theme (though less mechanically synergistic) subclasses, while an undead patron warlock or spores druid would provide an on-brand 5th or 6th member.

----------


## Segev

I feel like I tend to make "anti-edgelords" an awful lot, when I go for the "edgelord" vibe. I dive into the aesthetics and then wind up playing this nice person who, if anything, is too innocent to realize that he's creepy, spooky, mysterious, and ooky.

----------


## RogueJK

> I feel like I tend to make "anti-edgelords" an awful lot, when I go for the "edgelord" vibe. I dive into the aesthetics and then wind up playing this nice person who, if anything, is too innocent to realize that he's creepy, spooky, mysterious, and ooky.


Like the Munsters.  :Small Big Grin:

----------


## Joe the Rat

> I feel like I tend to make "anti-edgelords" an awful lot, when I go for the "edgelord" vibe. I dive into the aesthetics and then wind up playing this nice person who, if anything, is too innocent to realize that he's creepy, spooky, mysterious, and ooky.





> Like the Munsters.


Or The Addams Family. 

Or the Perky Goth Archetrope.

----------


## JackPhoenix

> I feel like I tend to make "anti-edgelords" an awful lot, when I go for the "edgelord" vibe. I dive into the aesthetics and then wind up playing this nice person who, if anything, is too innocent to realize that he's creepy, spooky, mysterious, and ooky.


I guess my current characters sort of falls into this category: Dhampir divine soul sorcerer, fluffed as Blood of Vol blood mage. Stabbing and cutting himself with a dagger focus to cast spells, dabbles in necromancy, wearing dark longcoat (because Karrnath)... ironically, while he's not the most social (but when he does decide to speak, people listen, courtesy of high Cha) person, he's the least mercenary and most moral member of the party, the necromancy being secondary to his main focus on healing and support, and while he's not a pacifist, he prefers to avoid combat or killing if possible, spent most of one battle saving the lives of (not outright hostile, but unfriendly towards us) non-combatants hit by friendly fire from their own side, and tries to keep the rest of the party from getting in trouble.

----------


## Dr.Samurai

I feel like there's not enough shadar-kai in this thread  :Small Confused:

----------


## Gryndle

> I see your point, but I'll always err on the side of making the roleplaying brakes too responsive, rather than not responsive enough. Not everybody is comfortable voicing their discomfort in a TTRPG: I can see the value of having a "button" you can just "push" when the topic has gotten too real, rather than already being distressed about the experience and then having to form a coherent statement. Especially if you worry that you're "wrecking other people's fun" by being the only one who doesn't want to do a visceral torture scene or something.


Safe tools are especially helpful in that not everyone's limits are the same, even among folks with the same background. 

For example; I grew up in an environment of extreme violence that would make most edgelords curl up and cry. So if you want graphic violence in game then I am willing to discuss the real difference in the sounds it makes when you break someone else's elbow vs what it sounds like when someone breaks your neck. I am cool with all that in game. But throw in cruelty to animals or kids or any kind of sexual assault and I'm all John Wick about it.

Conversely, one of our players has wartime combat experience and getting too real or too graphic with the violence is a no-go with him. But he can brush off the other things I mentioned as long as they aren't narrated in gory detail. 

Both of us are animal lovers with real world violent experiences, but the lines of what we find acceptable in game are pretty different. 

For us, session 0 has been sufficient to draw those lines. But we are an older group that knows each other very well outside of game. For groups that don't have that friendship and understanding as a baseline, the black cards can be the difference between saving a campaign or losing a player and possibly a friendship.

----------


## Segev

Why is a card better than just  saying something?

----------


## Cygnia

Because sometimes people don't feel comfortable talking out loud about what is bothering to them.

----------


## Unoriginal

> Why is a card better than just  saying something?


It's not better in an objective, it-will-always-work-for-everyone way, but some people find it easier to have a "alright, we're stopping" button. 

And sometime it's just the fact of having everyone at the table agree to one before anything arise that makes the person prefer it.

There's all kind of folks out there, different things fit different people.

----------


## Segev

> Because sometimes people don't feel comfortable talking out loud about what is bothering to them.


How does it being a card help, then?

The card is no different than, "Hey, guys, I'd like to stop this right now; it is making me uncomfortable in the extreme."

In both cases, a natural and necessary follow up is: "What do we need to stop, so we can avoid it in the future?" which brings us back to needing to talk about what bothers them. 

Or is the "X Card" supposed to stop the entire session, and end the game permanently, so that nothing that might have been involved in it which might be the unspecified thing that's bothering the player who submits it can come up in that game again, because it's over? I doubt that, but I'm not sure how else you "play the X card" without having to talk about why you played it, at least to the point of saying, "I am playing it on [topic]; we should avoid [topic] at all costs in the future."

----------


## Anymage

I have a feeling that "the X card" is being referred to metaphorically more often than literally.  An explicit rule telling people that they can and should speak up if they're being made uncomfortable (and conversely, keep an eye our for other players showing signs or discomfort so they can back off) is a good thing, because I've heard horror stories where new and/or shy players weren't aware that was an option.

A literal, physical card could make sense for times when it's hard for a player to get a word in edgewise due to other players being bulldozers.  That sounds more like a table specific concession to me, though.

----------


## Dr.Samurai

> How does it being a card help, then?


More and more we live in a society that would rather enable someone to remain as they are than overcome the things that they are struggling with.

So instead of working through why it's difficult to verbalize their thoughts or feelings with a group of friends, they're given a workaround that keeps them being apart and different from everyone else.

I'm sure I'll catch flak for saying as much but it's not really helpful to enable someone that feels uncomfortable speaking to... not have to speak. Throwing up a card to stop the flow of the game without talking about it can breed resentment, since it's a power move (ironically). But, anyways, my two cents.

----------


## Segev

> A literal, physical card could make sense for times when it's hard for a player to get a word in edgewise due to other players being bulldozers.  That sounds more like a table specific concession to me, though.


Okay, yes, I could see the value, there.

----------


## Mastikator

> More and more we live in a society that would rather enable someone to remain as they are than overcome the things that they are struggling with.
> 
> So instead of working through why it's difficult to verbalize their thoughts or feelings with a group of friends, they're given a workaround that keeps them being apart and different from everyone else.
> 
> I'm sure I'll catch flak for saying as much but it's not really helpful to enable someone that feels uncomfortable speaking to... not have to speak. Throwing up a card to stop the flow of the game without talking about it can breed resentment, since it's a power move (ironically). But, anyways, my two cents.


On the flip side, I'm a DM, not a therapist, my D&D game is not your therapy session and I have no obligation to work through a damn thing. Just tell me what your no-no's are and I can steer clear of that. And if your no-no's prevent me from DMing the kind of game I want to DM I'd rather find a new player than fix their brain. (also goes for playstyles like if players that only want to be murderhobos and I want to do cloak and dagger game, as a DM I can dictate what kind of game it is, and who gets to play)

----------


## Gryndle

> Why is a card better than just  saying something?


because if simple communication was consistently effective in emotionally charged situations, there would never be conflict.

People often respond to symbolism better in emotionally charged situations than they do to calmly spoken words.

I would much rather someone throw a card on the table in a game instead of throwing a tantrum

----------


## Unoriginal

> The card is no different than, "Hey, guys, I'd like to stop this right now; it is making me uncomfortable in the extreme."


It's not different for you, Segev. It is different for other people.



Having a "we stop now" button can help people when the other persons are too deep into the scene and aren't realizing how they're hurting said people, and  it can help people when *they* themselves are too deep into the scene and need a clean break.

----------


## J-H

My thread for adventurer concepts sure wandered afield!

I think if you have emotionally mature adults at the table, it's not a problem to say "Hey, can we not?"  It may be different with teenagers who haven't learned to handle emotions or talking yet, _but_ it would also be irresponsible to take a game past a PG-13 direction with that age group anyway.  

Most of the horror stories out there ("DM had my character violated in a cutscene," etc.) seem to involve playing with total strangers.  In those cases, a card or whatever isn't going to help because a group of randos is probably not going to follow the same process that the person with the card wants to bring to the table.  A blunt "Dude, can we not?" is more likely to be effective _because_ it promotes a discussion instead of shutting things down.

The people who lack that sense of appropriateness/etiquette/responsibility/taste enough to bring up what we could probably call R-rated topics at the table are probably the same ones who need things explained to them, with words, in a direct and clear fashion for them to understand it.

The whole discussion is a bit foreign to me, as I run my games generally PG, including a "please don't use foul language at my table" rule.  I'm not likely to ever run anything with content that anyone would object to or whatever.

----------

