PDA

View Full Version : Villain Advice...



Project_Cobalt
2010-03-24, 05:51 PM
I've just recently begun DMing a campaign, and I've stumbled upon an interesting opportunity. At the end of the first encounter, a player had to leave suddenly, and we packed up until next session. This left us talking about what we should have done differently in the encounter, and what the party needed to make itself work more smoothly.

This in turn got us thinking that we could add in a character or two to balance the party and say they were still at camp while the others, who were scouting ahead, fought the monsters. Now, what does this all have to do with my villain?

The answer is that, for the purposes of the plot, I am interested in having the villain grow in power alongside the PCs, rather than starting as an omnipotent dark lord, and the idea struck me to have them join the party when the other characters who were at the camp are introduced.

Now, here is the crux of the issue - I don't know if I want to add in what will essentially be a DMPC for a length of the campaign. I love the idea of a trusted friend betraying the party and becoming the ultimate evil (the details of the story are too lengthy to go into here), but I don't know if adding that character in as party-member, and then having them turn evil would come off as a sort of Gary-Stuism, rather than legitimate storytelling.

So, does anyone have any advice on how to make this sort of thing work? I already plan on having him be an incredibly durable person, who doesn't lead or act unless others need him to do so, so he certainly won't be solving the problems or doing the talking, but I just don't want him to end up stealing the show or exhibiting favoritism towards him or any of the other traps a DMPC might fall into.

Any ideas, anyone?

jiriku
2010-03-24, 06:12 PM
PC, I'm sorry to say it, but your idea, while new and shiny to you, is a seriously overplayed trope in D&D. Really, the DMPC who betrays the party was around before sliced bread was invented.

If you must use this tired old chestnut, take your best roleplayer aside and pitch the idea to him: he'll play the turncoat character as a straight and loyal party member, and then one day, when you give the sign, his character will betray the party and become an NPC.

Project_Cobalt
2010-03-24, 06:16 PM
While a tired trope in regards to D&D as a whole, it's something my group A: has yet to experience, and B: Will expect, but have great fun with when it comes down to the idea of someone whom you -know- is going to be evil, but whom your player trusts.

I didn't claim to be reinventing the wheel, but I would like to know how to finagle the idea and make it work, as it has time and time again, and avoid the disaster which has likely claimed it time and time again as well.

Math_Mage
2010-03-24, 07:03 PM
PC, I'm sorry to say it, but your idea, while new and shiny to you, is a seriously overplayed trope in D&D. Really, the DMPC who betrays the party was around before sliced bread was invented.

If you must use this tired old chestnut, take your best roleplayer aside and pitch the idea to him: he'll play the turncoat character as a straight and loyal party member, and then one day, when you give the sign, his character will betray the party and become an NPC.

Seconded. For an absolutely amazing example of this, see Saph's Red Hand of Doom campaign journal (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94243) (the betrayal happens on page 15 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94243&page=10)).

It is infinitely better when a player pulls the betrayal than when a DMPC does it. Of course, it is also infinitely better when such a thing happens spontaneously (as in Saph's campaign) than when it's a DM pre-planned scheme.

EDIT: Of course, Saph and his group are veterans. For a group getting started, a little DM guidance might be appreciated. But a little nudge to a player building an evil character--"hey, what would happen if your character wasn't much for party loyalty?"--should be enough to get the ball rolling.

Swordgleam
2010-03-24, 07:11 PM
If you have the right kind of mischievious group, I'd let them know exactly what is going on. Out of character, of course. Then watch as they try to steer that guy to evil, give him high-damage magic items, and make oblique comments about relative morality. (If you can't envision your players responding this way, don't follow this advice.)

magic9mushroom
2010-03-24, 09:58 PM
A better idea is to have the villain show up only occasionally, and be already eccentric. Like, say, one of their contacts in a city might occasionally help them out (but is a little weird/has an unhealthy interest in [insert Evil topic here]/whatever), and in-between a couple of adventures goes completely Evil and starts being a stereotypical Villain. That way, the players get to know the character before they go evil, and get to see them grow in power. Just DON'T make it obvious that they're going to go evil. Keep it subtle, and stay mum on the matter OOC. Also don't derail the character when they go evil. It should grow out of eccentricities they already have.

You could also have the villain be a rival of the PCs, or of one PC in particular. If it's of one PC, make it clear to the players that you're not playing favourites. Making them less powerful until they go evil might be an idea (as they feel overshadowed and turn to evil to get power).

Swordgleam
2010-03-24, 10:12 PM
A better idea is to have the villain show up only occasionally, and be already eccentric. Like, say, one of their contacts in a city might occasionally help them out (but is a little weird/has an unhealthy interest in [insert Evil topic here]/whatever), and in-between a couple of adventures goes completely Evil and starts being a stereotypical Villain. That way, the players get to know the character before they go evil, and get to see them grow in power. Just DON'T make it obvious that they're going to go evil. Keep it subtle, and stay mum on the matter OOC. Also don't derail the character when they go evil. It should grow out of eccentricities they already have.


I like this idea. Or, a twist - have the PCs know one of their allies is going to turn evil, and have several NPCs who it could be (including one who's so good, he's suspicious because of it). End up having at least one of the non-evil NPCs be a champion of good, so the players can either go, "Phew, glad we didn't kill that guy preemptively," or, "Oh shoot, maybe we shouldn't have preemptively killed that guy's friend."

Zanatos777
2010-03-24, 10:20 PM
Seconded. For an absolutely amazing example of this, see Saph's Red Hand of Doom campaign journal (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94243) (the betrayal happens on page 15 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94243&page=10)).

It is infinitely better when a player pulls the betrayal than when a DMPC does it. Of course, it is also infinitely better when such a thing happens spontaneously (as in Saph's campaign) than when it's a DM pre-planned scheme.

EDIT: Of course, Saph and his group are veterans. For a group getting started, a little DM guidance might be appreciated. But a little nudge to a player building an evil character--"hey, what would happen if your character wasn't much for party loyalty?"--should be enough to get the ball rolling.

I actually had this for two of my players. They both betrayed the party (not together but in the same session and one helped corrupt the other), it was foreshadowed and the party had the chance to stop one of them from walking the path of darkness. I am now looking forward to seeing how they react to meeting these characters again.

Edit: I suppose I should note how the players took the betrayal as that is the most important thing in a PC betrayal. They initially were angry since everything they worked for was obliterated or made irrelevant by the betrayal but they bounced back quickly since they avoided the nastier parts of the Eclipse style betrayal by one character (Berserk for the uninformed). The other one they were rescued from quickly by new characters from the same players. They now feel it was a truly awesome session so I am happy with it. I think the secret was not keeping them enslaved (the point of the second betrayal) for long at all.

Project_Cobalt
2010-03-24, 10:45 PM
I'm not looking for a better idea! I'm looking for help making this one work. It's not that I think it's original, it's that I enjoy it, and want to see what I can do with it.

I don't want to make it a contact, or a number of people, or even a mystery. As I said, I assume my players are smart enough to figure out that the DMPC will probably be evil later. The difference is that they won't care that they've figured it out, and will have fun playing the storyline despite knowing one of the plot points later.

If it's been done thousands of times before, why is there no examples of it being done well? No advice to make it work? And besides that, what difference does it make if it's been done before? It's not like I'm writing a novel, and my group doesn't play with anyone else, so it's not as if I need to worry about them having played through a similar structure before. If I had come in asking about help making a "Dragon kidnapped the Princess" story, would you tell me to just not do it rather than offer tips on how to make the idea different or more interesting without changing it completely?

And in regards to the "player turned betrayer" concept, my players each already has a character they wish to play, and whose interaction with the villain would be intriguing, so I can't just up and haul the rug out from under one of them just to avoid using a cliche.

magic9mushroom
2010-03-24, 10:48 PM
Them figuring it out is a) going to deflate all the intrigue and b) result in metagaming. That's the problem. It's something which relies on not being figured out which will be figured out, which consigns it to the "bad" pile.

Project_Cobalt
2010-03-24, 10:52 PM
Them figuring it out is a) going to deflate all the intrigue and b) result in metagaming. That's the problem. It's something which relies on not being figured out which will be figured out, which consigns it to the "bad" pile.

That's the thing, though. I didn't say that I wanted it to be a mystery, or that it needs to be shocking, or even needs to be figured out. It's not that they don't see it coming, it's that they enjoy the ride. There doesn't need to be intrigue in regards to the plot. He's not a spy, he's a character who would fall from grace.

And as for the meta-gaming, it could result in meta-gaming, and I actually know my group well enough to know that they will not do that.

Human Paragon 3
2010-03-24, 10:53 PM
I once double crossed my party. It was epicly and deliciously evil.

A PC cleric was holed up in his temple, surrounded by enemy soldiers who had declared him a herretic. I was a PC warrior in the army, but lower rank. I had worked out a deal with the cleric where we would trick my commanding officer into going into the temple, at which point we would kill him, I would take command of the army, and then order a retreat, "awed by the mighty power of the true god."

The plan worked perfectly. With the help of the cleric, I killed my commanding officer in an unfair fight. Then I exited the temple and took control of the unit.

Me: Men! Form up.
DM/Soldier: Uh... what formation, sir?
Me:... (Evil grin) Attack formation.
Cleric: You son of a *****!

Yeah, that's how I became the general of my own army. Lawful Evil at its best.

deuxhero
2010-03-24, 10:59 PM
You could have a recurring boss instead, but that posses the risk of him actually getting killed.

You could also have him portrayed as a rival who just happens to (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BlatantLies) get involved in the same quests as the players every now and then. Beyond killing a few random monsters to show of his power, he will mostly stay away from the PCs (but be implied to for contrived reasons (There is a fork, I'll take this side).

Totally Guy
2010-03-25, 04:32 AM
That's the thing, though. I didn't say that I wanted it to be a mystery, or that it needs to be shocking, or even needs to be figured out. It's not that they don't see it coming, it's that they enjoy the ride. There doesn't need to be intrigue in regards to the plot. He's not a spy, he's a character who would fall from grace.

That's the way I would play it. In fiction the audience often knows who the betrayer is when the characters are in the dark. It doesn't make the reveal into a lesser moment.

You write out 3 beliefs that the character has and share this with your players when he joins the party.

You've given your players the power to control the narrative, you need to respect that they can choose what to to with that power. One player might want to alter the story to be one of redemption, one player might want to be the guy that knows too much but is blackmailed by the character. another player might think it's trite and plan to be one step ahead of him. But as long as you all know where everyone wants the story to go it's all cool.

After this, return to play (come up with another situation/scenario independent of your villain gambit) and see how it all plays out.

I'm playing a small independent system where there are mechanics to this sort of situation which you won't have the benefits (and drawbacks) of. I don't like secrets. I find them an unnecessary obstacle.