Need Ideas: Disney-Themed NPCs/PCs for DnD 5e

[DiceDiceBaby]

Hello, all!

I've been toying around by creating hypothetical characters using the PHB (a dangerously addictive habit, I know), and recently became facinated with translating some Disney characters/archetypes/villains into D&D characters.

For example, these PCs (based on their Disney counterparts) look fun to play, if we apply their flaws, bonds and ideals in rather broad strokes:

Heroes
Hercules - Barbarian, Lawful Good, Folk Hero
Aladdin - Rogue, Chaotic Good, Urchin
Mulan - Fighter, Chaotic Good, Noble

Villains
Dr. Facilier - Warlock, Lawful Evil, Charlatan
Maleficent - Sorcerer (Dragonborn), Chaotic Evil, Hermit

I'm wondering if anyone out there has any more ideas for a Disney-inspired set of PCs, NPCs or even a Campaign (someone out there must have been part of one).

I'm open to clichés, and that's kind of the point. Any thoughts? They don't have to be perfect, 1-for-1 versions of the original characters.

How would your favorite Disney characters look like in DnD 5e?

Thanks in advance!

[RickAllison]

Elsa: Wild Magic Sorcerer (naturally :smalltongue:), TN or NG, Noble
Riley: Commoner, NG, Scholar?
Cinderella: Life Cleric, NG or CG, Urchin or Noble
Tarzan: Monk/Barbarian, CG, Outlander

[FlourescentKing]

Gaston - Vengeance Paladin?
Lumiere, Cogswoth, Mrs. Potts, etc - Animated Objects

[DiceDiceBaby]

Elsa: Wild Magic Sorcerer (naturally :smalltongue:), TN or NG, Noble
Riley: Commoner, NG, Scholar?
Cinderella: Life Cleric, NG or CG, Urchin or Noble
Tarzan: Monk/Barbarian, CG, Outlander

Wow, I can't believe Elsa slipped my mind! Thanks for that.

Tarzan is a great idea, too, but maybe he'd multiclass though (he has this whole connection with nature that seems Ranger or Druid-ish)?

I chuckled at Cinderella. I suppose Animal Handling and Speak with Animals are all mandatory skills and spells for her (and every other Disney Princess). :smallbiggrin:


Gaston - Vengeance Paladin?
Lumiere, Cogswoth, Mrs. Potts, etc - Animated Objects

Gaston strikes me as a Ranger with... wait for it... "Beasts" as his "favored enemy". :smallbiggrin:

Similarly, the Carpet from Aladdin could also be an animated object along with the members of Beast's castle, so thanks for pointing that out!

Great stuff so far! Looking forward to other ideas. :smallcool:

To add:

Jafar: Wizard, Lawful Evil, Charlatan (used Wish to multiclass into Sorcerer)
Judge Claude Frollo: Paladin (Vengeance), Lawful Evil, Acolyte
Shan Yu: Monk (Way of the Shadow), Chaotic Evil, Outlander

[RickAllison]

Wow, I can't believe Elsa slipped my mind! Thanks for that.

Tarzan is a great idea, too, but maybe he'd multiclass though (he has this whole connection with nature that seems Ranger or Druid-ish)?

I chuckled at Cinderella. I suppose Animal Handling and Speak with Animals are all mandatory skills and spells for her (and every other Disney Princess). :smallbiggrin:

Well that was a Monk/Barbarian MC, but I see what you mean! I suppose what I see in Tarzan is someone who isn't mystical at all, he has just made himself the peak of human athletics. Agreed that Speak with Animals is pretty much a uniting factor for so many Disney PCs.

Chernabog: Wizard who chain True Polymorphed to increase his CR past 30, Chaotic Evil, Hermit?
Genie: Sorcerer who decided to Wish to be able to grant wishes to others without losing the power, Chaotic Good, Entertainer.
Buzz Lightyear: Ranger, Lawful Good, Hermit (Discovery of a future that warped his mind!)
Alice: Rogue (Thief), Chaotic Good, Acolyte.

Alice's is a favorite of mine that just seemed to click. She broke into the White Hare's house to take his stuff, she uses magic items to reach desired effects (mushroom, Drink Me, Eat Me, etc.), she has Expertise (Persuasion), and solves her problems through quick thinking and being a Rules Lawyer. Honestly, I kind of want to make her as a PC now :smallbiggrin:

[Nicodiemus]

Don't forget Merida from Brave:

Spell-less ranger with archery FS, CG, noble

[Joe the Rat]

Disney specifically? I've got a recurring villain behind the curtain that is using story-themed minions.

What's on tap:

Raven Hair and the Brotherhood of Seven
Raven Hair: Feypact Warlock, though you'd probably want to use Bard (singy) to keep truer to material.
Nosepick, Knockout, Shyguy, Slasher Smile, Foolkiller: Dwarf Thugs with variant weapons (Nosepick uses warpicks, Knockout has a maul, Slash fights with an off-hand meat cleaver, etc.). As PCs, a mix of Fighters and Rogues would be my pick. Dopey (Foolkiller) would make a good battlerager (SCAG - Dwarven name for the class is "Axe Idiot")
Surly: Dwarf Berserker / Barbarian (Berserker). Alternatively, a Vengeance Paladin. (Don' like 'em, don' trust 'em, but he'll be the one leading the charge to fight for or avenge 'em).
Maester: Dwarf Acolyte / Cleric of Knowledge.

The Lost Girl in the Mirror
Ms. Liddel: Fey Warlock or Wild Magic Sorcerer, unless you want to convert The Alice. Whatever you pick, she's really not a very good Rogue.
Cheshire the Displacer Beast (replace with Sphinx as a noncombatant). This would be a good Arcane Trickster.
Tweedle the Ettin
Card Soldiers: I used animated armor with the carpet's smother ability added, but if you want something more biological, use Hobgoblins, with the Aces being Captains. (Martial Advantage means they do better as a deck). Change out weapons to reflect suits. If you want something squishier, Kobolds.
The Caterpillar was the tricky one. I was going to use a sentient Carrion Crawler, or take the Rhemoraz and change it's heat effects to poison. Or make him a Copper Wyrmling. Or a Spirit Naga. His giant mushroom is clearly a pygmy cap / bigwig hybrid. As a PC, it would be an interesting take on a Wizard, with his word games and stuffiness and the ability to turn into a giant butterfly at high levels.

If Ms. Liddel is a Sorcerer, the Hatter makes for an interesting Warlock (Guild Artisan - Haberdasher).

I also have one for the Wizard of Oz, but that's outside your sphere of interest.

[SharkForce]

just a quick note: vengeance paladins are not evil. they believe in helping others, and defeating evil (all evil, not just their hated enemy)... they simply place the main priority on defeating one specific evil above all else. their goals are largely in direct conflict with a full-blown evil alignment; an evil person can certainly hate an enemy above all else, but they aren't likely to care about helping the victims of that enemy, or defeating evil other than that enemy.

a vengeance paladin that hates illithidae will overthrow an evil ruler or protect a town from a horde of goblins just like a devotion or ancients paladin... the difference is that if the vengeance paladin becomes aware of a group of illithid somewhere, he'll leave off defending the town (if possible) to go deal with the illithid threat first, and then come back to help deal with the goblin threat (if that's still a problem). if you're lucky, the goblins may be in between the vengeance paladin and his chosen enemy, in which case i would expect the paladin to kill the goblins along the way so long as they don't delay the paladin from their true goal.

so, quite frankly, most disney villains simply do not fit as vengeance paladins. they might have a hated foe above all others, but they almost never care about the victims of that foe and they certainly don't have a general attitude that all evil needs to be defeated (eventually, as in, after their main foe has been killed, go do the next best thing and hunt down something else that is evil).

[tieren]

Make Lilo a chain lock and stitch the familiar (Quasit?).

[RickAllison]

just a quick note: vengeance paladins are not evil. they believe in helping others, and defeating evil (all evil, not just their hated enemy)... they simply place the main priority on defeating one specific evil above all else. their goals are largely in direct conflict with a full-blown evil alignment; an evil person can certainly hate an enemy above all else, but they aren't likely to care about helping the victims of that enemy, or defeating evil other than that enemy.

a vengeance paladin that hates illithidae will overthrow an evil ruler or protect a town from a horde of goblins just like a devotion or ancients paladin... the difference is that if the vengeance paladin becomes aware of a group of illithid somewhere, he'll leave off defending the town (if possible) to go deal with the illithid threat first, and then come back to help deal with the goblin threat (if that's still a problem). if you're lucky, the goblins may be in between the vengeance paladin and his chosen enemy, in which case i would expect the paladin to kill the goblins along the way so long as they don't delay the paladin from their true goal.

so, quite frankly, most disney villains simply do not fit as vengeance paladins. they might have a hated foe above all others, but they almost never care about the victims of that foe and they certainly don't have a general attitude that all evil needs to be defeated (eventually, as in, after their main foe has been killed, go do the next best thing and hunt down something else that is evil).

I don't know if anyone mentioned others with that class, but Judge Claude Frollo fits VP to a T. The dude is literally obsessed with eradicating the gypsies to the exclusion of all else. Although he never succeeds at taking down the Romana, it is entirely possible that if he had succeeded he would find another group to eradicate.

[SharkForce]

I don't know if anyone mentioned others with that class, but Judge Claude Frollo fits VP to a T. The dude is literally obsessed with eradicating the gypsies to the exclusion of all else. Although he never succeeds at taking down the Romana, it is entirely possible that if he had succeeded he would find another group to eradicate.

you mean the guy who is totally okay with murdering innocents and spends exactly no time at all trying to help any "victims"? who promises to spare esmeralda if she'll become his mistress instead of slaying her without mercy? the one who is prepared to murder innocents on a vague theory that maybe they might be helping esmeralda?

that frollo?

yeah, if he was *ever* a vengeance paladin, he stopped being one long ago. assuming we even accept the notion that "gypsies" are an evil that you could swear an oath of vengeance on, as they are no more inherently evil (or good) than anyone else.

[RickAllison]

you mean the guy who is totally okay with murdering innocents and spends exactly no time at all trying to help any "victims"? who promises to spare esmeralda if she'll become his mistress instead of slaying her without mercy? the one who is prepared to murder innocents on a vague theory that maybe they might be helping esmeralda?

that frollo?

yeah, if he was *ever* a vengeance paladin, he stopped being one long ago. assuming we even accept the notion that "gypsies" are an evil that you could swear an oath of vengeance on, as they are no more inherently evil (or good) than anyone else.

Let's pull up the VP's Tenets of Vengeance:


Fight the Greater Evil. Faced with a choice of fighting
my sworn foes or combating a lesser evil. I choose the
greater evil.

As far as Frollo was concerned, he was combating the greater evil by removing his perceived gypsy menace from Paris.


No Mercy for the Wicked. Ordinary foes might win
my mercy, but my sworn enemies do not.

This is the guy who ordered the burning of a windmill around the family who owned because they harbored gypsies. I think he definitely qualifies here. Note that he was willing to (with some persuasion by the archdeacon) show mercy to Quasimodo despite considering him an evil creature.


By Any Means Necessary. My qualms can’t get in the
way of exterminating my foes.

Drove the gypsies underground, punished any who aided them, was allowing Paris to burn to fulfill his vendetta. So much VP here.


Restitution. If my foes w reak ruin on the world, it is
because I failed to stop them. I must help those harmed
by their misdeeds.

This is the only tenet he is unclear on. Though we don't see him helping anyone, we also don't see the vast majority of his work.

Part of the issue I think you have is the idea that paladins still have to be Lawful Good. In fact, the PHB even gives us this gem:


are willing to sacrifice even their own righteousness to
mete out justice upon those who do evil, so the paladins
are often neutral or lawful neutral in alignment.

Frollo is probably getting more towards Lawful Evil, but he legitimately believes that eradicating the gypsies will create a better world. This is not card-carrying villainy, this is real-life, self-justified villainy. Welcome to the delightful world of Gray and Gray Morality.

[AriLance]

Ariel: Sea Elf Bard, CN/CG, Noble
Captain Hook: Swashbuckler Rogue, LE, Sailor/Criminal
Hades: Tiefling Sorceror, LE, Acolyte

I'm a little new to 5e so these might not fit into the exact rules, but they're ideas :smalltongue:

[SharkForce]

"I think they might be harboring someone I don't like" does not justify committing murder of random people, even for a vengeance paladin. vengeance paladins don't have to be lawful good, but they also are not evil. they can do horrible things to further their goal, but they don't *want* to do horrible things, and it should bother them, and they should try to avoid it when unnecessary (for example, when you have no actual evidence and can readily search the windmill to find the actual targets of your wrath, not just "hey, there might be some of my enemies in there, better murder a family and cause serious harm to the entire community by destroying an important resource rather than take the time to be certain"

and taking Quasimodo in is a direct violation of the oath of vengeance, particularly when you only do it because you're threatened with punishment in the afterlife (vengeance paladins are explicitly willing to sacrifice their righteousness if it means killing their foe... though again, that doesn't mean they're *eager* to give up their righteousness).

paladins don't get to pick and choose which parts of their oath they're going to fulfill. they either fulfill the *whole* oath (to the best of their abilities) or they are not a paladin (or become an oathbreaker).

and no, "we haven't seen what he does 100% of the time, maybe he's only 99% evil" is not a reasonable argument. if all we ever see of him is that he is a hate-filled murderer and tyrant that everyone in the town is glad to be rid of, then it is not reasonable to speculate that he probably does all kinds of nice things when he isn't busy murdering people on the off chance that they might be doing something that only he considers to be wrong without bothering to actually check if they have.

if this was real life (or heck, if we were talking about the actual book, where the character is from what I've heard much more developed), there is gray morality. but we're not. this is a Disney movie. in his spare time, he probably accuses random adorable helpless animals of being gypsies (or helping gypsies, or of possibly having helped a gypsy at some point in their existence, or having known someone who did so and not turning them in for it) and burns them alive too.

though again, this supposes that "gypsies" are a valid target for an oath of vengeance in the first place. which they probably aren't, considering the only possible "victims" don't even want the gypsies dead. if "I really hate those people and am happy killing others along the way to killing them" was enough to make you a vengeance paladin, they'd be extremely common amongst the evil races in D&D. in fact, there'd probably be more drow paladins than there are elven paladins, considering hatred and contempt for life is practically a defining characteristic for drow. heck, there'd be tons of undead paladins too, crusading to rid the world of the living.

[RickAllison]

"I think they might be harboring someone I don't like" does not justify committing murder of random people, even for a vengeance paladin. vengeance paladins don't have to be lawful good, but they also are not evil. they can do horrible things to further their goal, but they don't *want* to do horrible things, and it should bother them, and they should try to avoid it when unnecessary (for example, when you have no actual evidence and can readily search the windmill to find the actual targets of your wrath, not just "hey, there might be some of my enemies in there, better murder a family and cause serious harm to the entire community by destroying an important resource rather than take the time to be certain"

Valid concern. This is a Vengeance Paladin who has gone off the deep end. Remember that he obtains his power through his devotion to his vengeance, so doing awful things in the course of his revenge doesn't remove his powers.


and taking Quasimodo in is a direct violation of the oath of vengeance, particularly when you only do it because you're threatened with punishment in the afterlife (vengeance paladins are explicitly willing to sacrifice their righteousness if it means killing their foe... though again, that doesn't mean they're *eager* to give up their righteousness).

paladins don't get to pick and choose which parts of their oath they're going to fulfill. they either fulfill the *whole* oath (to the best of their abilities) or they are not a paladin (or become an oathbreaker).

And what parts has he broken? We never see how he deals with people who have been affected by the gypsies, so the final tenet cannot be judged either way, and I've already shown that he fulfills the rest. Quasimodo could be considered someone (and Judge Frollo almost certainly does consider it as such) who was negatively affected by the gypsies, being cursed because of his association with them (at least from Frollo's point of view). Showing mercy to him by that criterion would place him as fulfilling his fourth tenet rather than breaking his second.


and no, "we haven't seen what he does 100% of the time, maybe he's only 99% evil" is not a reasonable argument. if all we ever see of him is that he is a hate-filled murderer and tyrant that everyone in the town is glad to be rid of, then it is not reasonable to speculate that he probably does all kinds of nice things when he isn't busy murdering people on the off chance that they might be doing something that only he considers to be wrong without bothering to actually check if they have.

You are making assumptions that are contradicted by less-prominent events in the movie. Remember that the gypsies were considered a deleterious presence throughout much of Europe during the epoch of the movie. Based on the fact that he wasn't deposed and that he actually had fantastic loyalty from his troops (aside from Phoebus, who had been away at war for much of Frollo's tenure), there is a very reasonable argument that he was trusted as a vicious, but effective judge and protector of the city. Remember that the movie takes place from the perspective of a gypsy, a deformed friend of a gypsy, the love interest of the gypsy, and the oppressor of the gypsies. We never see how he deals with anyone but those directly aiding the gypsies, who he is specifically seeking vengeance against. As for the family, I specifically re-watched that scene to remind myself of the situation.
1) He did have evidence. They found a gypsy talisman on the property. This was not enough to convict, but it reinforced his suspicions.
2) The miller confessed that he had harbored gypsies. By the tenets of the vengeance paladin, it would make sense for him to kill them.
3) One of the onlookers specifically mentions that "He's gone mad!" This seems to indicate that persecution of those who simply harbored the gypsies was a new step in his campaign, not that he was a "hate-filled murderer and tyrant that everyone in the town is glad to be rid of." Rather, he was likely a reasonable legal official who the general populace considered to be solving a problem they wished to be rid of.


if this was real life (or heck, if we were talking about the actual book, where the character is from what I've heard much more developed), there is gray morality. but we're not. this is a Disney movie. in his spare time, he probably accuses random adorable helpless animals of being gypsies (or helping gypsies, or of possibly having helped a gypsy at some point in their existence, or having known someone who did so and not turning them in for it) and burns them alive too.

See above. He was persecuting a people that were considered by him and society at-large to be criminals and scum of the Earth. In fact, evidence suggests that he never acted in a way contrary to the wishes of the people until the very end. Remember that the gypsies and their allies were a minority, not the general population.


though again, this supposes that "gypsies" are a valid target for an oath of vengeance in the first place. which they probably aren't, considering the only possible "victims" don't even want the gypsies dead. if "I really hate those people and am happy killing others along the way to killing them" was enough to make you a vengeance paladin, they'd be extremely common amongst the evil races in D&D. in fact, there'd probably be more drow paladins than there are elven paladins, considering hatred and contempt for life is practically a defining characteristic for drow. heck, there'd be tons of undead paladins too, crusading to rid the world of the living.

Why aren't they? To him, it would be like making an oath against a guild of thieves, liars, and murderers. Which, based on both the book and the song "Court of Miracles", a significant portion of them actually were. There is no evidence until the scene with the miller that anyone of the general population actually were opposed to what he was doing. Also, until the end, he was only seen killing one person, who he was arresting and then fled. Until the executions at the end, he isn't seen to take killing even the gypsies lightly. As for the drow and undead, all they actually have to fulfill is the fourth tenet. If they do, why wouldn't they start to have paladins? But that requires unselfish drow and undead who seek to better other undead or another group rather than just seeking to kill.

EDIT: Also, I would like to quote the "Court of Miracles" song, just so you get a ready reminder of why he has justification in the terms of the movie:


Clopin:
We find you totally innocent
Which is the worst crime of all

All:
So you're going to hang!

A large portion of the gypsies are completely fine with murdering two people for no reason other than that they aren't gypsies. You can justify that they did this as a defense mechanism, but think about it in modern terms. You have an oppressed people who, humanely, we want to root for. Unfortunately, this group attempts to murder every person who tries to help them.

Also, keep in mind that this is based on societal views of the gypsies at the time and the portrayal in the movie and source book. These are not my personal opinions, but you can't evaluate the motivations of someone if you refuse to look at the issue in terms of the person. A marooned sailor who killed a giant tortoise could be simply surviving without knowing their impact on the species, but we would consider it awful for dooming a species.

[Slipperychicken]

Gaston strikes me as a Ranger with... wait for it... "Beasts" as his "favored enemy". :smallbiggrin:

I could also see the argument for Gaston being either a valor bard, or else a fighter or ranger with high charisma. He was quite popular (despite being rather unpleasant as a person) and got things done through persuasion, song, argument, and connections. Most of of his efforts relied heavily on his social skills and reputation, like his attempts to woo Belle (seduction, blackmail), publicly discrediting Maurice and Belle, bribing the asylum-warden to take Belle's father, and persuading villagers to siege the Beast's castle.

I don't think paladin would be appropriate. Gaston was not concerned with oaths, moral principle, or religion, and he didn't have any supernatural powers to speak of. He also didn't wear armor, nor did he ever use a shield or holy symbol, even when confronting the Beast. Unless there's a paladin oath about being a womanizer or eating 60 eggs for breakfast, I think we can safely count him out of the class.

His background is most likely Folk Hero. He wasn't such a great guy, but the people of his village held him in high regard and would certainly have supported him in a time of need.

[Arkhios]

Simba as (obviously an NPC) awakened Lion Paladin. Oath maybe ancients or devotion. Or even Crown. (though a certain Narnian lion would qualify for that even better)

[MrStabby]

Luke skywalker as a pact of the blade warlock? :smallyuk:

[AriLance]

Mulan - Fighter, Chaotic Good, Noble


I'd think Mulan would fit into the soldier background instead of Noble!

[RickAllison]

I'd think Mulan would fit into the soldier background instead of Noble!

Remember that while she might not necessarily be noble, she comes from a respected and well-off family. Soldier didn't come into play until well into her adventuring career!

[CantigThimble]

Remember that while she might not necessarily be noble, she comes from a respected and well-off family. Soldier didn't come into play until well into her adventuring career!

We even see her getting lessons in persuasion and history before she takes off.

[RickAllison]

We even see her getting lessons in persuasion and history before she takes off.

So all of this is making me want to watch Mulan tonight...

[Spiritchaser]

Luke skywalker as a pact of the blade warlock? :smallyuk:

Vader as Lawful evil lock/oathbreaker

[RickAllison]

So after re-watching Mulan, I'm finding Mulan really is a D&D PC, but I think she might be a Rogue/Fighter MC. Her entire style is based around agility and cunning and she has far too many skills that she is an expert with to be a Fighter alone :smallwink:

And honestly, her rocket at the pass? Tell me that isn't something a PC would do.

[Arkhios]

Minor nitpick: Star Wars characters pre-episode 7 aren't "Disney" :P

[RickAllison]

Minor nitpick: Star Wars characters pre-episode 7 aren't "Disney" :P

Actually, they are now :smallwink: They might not have made them, but they own them!

[DiceDiceBaby]

Well that was a Monk/Barbarian MC, but I see what you mean! I suppose what I see in Tarzan is someone who isn't mystical at all, he has just made himself the peak of human athletics. Agreed that Speak with Animals is pretty much a uniting factor for so many Disney PCs.

Alice's is a favorite of mine that just seemed to click. She broke into the White Hare's house to take his stuff, she uses magic items to reach desired effects (mushroom, Drink Me, Eat Me, etc.), she has Expertise (Persuasion), and solves her problems through quick thinking and being a Rules Lawyer. Honestly, I kind of want to make her as a PC now :smallbiggrin:

These ideas are great! Well, if we expand into Kingdom Hearts and Once Upon a Time in Wonderland territory, Tarzan can cast spells like every other NPC on Sora's team, and Alice is definitely a Thief Rogue who is in love with an Arcane Trickster Rogue Genasi, and on the run from an amped up Sorcerer Jafar. :smallsmile:


Disney specifically? I've got a recurring villain behind the curtain that is using story-themed minions.

I also have one for the Wizard of Oz, but that's outside your sphere of interest.

Actually, I find your ideas as intriguing fantasy NPCs in general that can crossover into a Disney campaign, so I really appreciate that you listed them in detail. Thanks for that! :smallsmile:

Incidentally, doesn't Disney own a lot of Wizard of Oz stuff now, too? I think at least two movies, and Oz is featured in Once Upon A Time.


Don't forget Merida from Brave:

Spell-less ranger with archery FS, CG, noble

Could also be a Fighter or a Rogue with Archery FS, but the magic is justifiable. Her quest involves saving her mother from the effects of Polymorph. :smallwink:


Make Lilo a chain lock and stitch the familiar (Quasit?).

Could work, but then who would her Patron be? :smallbiggrin:


Ariel: Sea Elf Bard, CN/CG, Noble
Captain Hook: Swashbuckler Rogue, LE, Sailor/Criminal
Hades: Tiefling Sorceror, LE, Acolyte

I'm a little new to 5e so these might not fit into the exact rules, but they're ideas :smalltongue:

I like the idea of Captain Hook, but I think the variant Pirate may be a better fit. :smallsmile:

For Hades (and the entire crew of Aladdin and Hercules deities) perhaps we can modify the fantasy pantheons in the PHB? Though LE fits his alignment quite well.


I could also see the argument for Gaston being either a valor bard, or else a fighter or ranger with high charisma. He was quite popular (despite being rather unpleasant as a person) and got things done through persuasion, song, argument, and connections. Most of of his efforts relied heavily on his social skills and reputation, like his attempts to woo Belle (seduction, blackmail), publicly discrediting Maurice and Belle, bribing the asylum-warden to take Belle's father, and persuading villagers to siege the Beast's castle.

I don't think paladin would be appropriate. Gaston was not concerned with oaths, moral principle, or religion, and he didn't have any supernatural powers to speak of. He also didn't wear armor, nor did he ever use a shield or holy symbol, even when confronting the Beast. Unless there's a paladin oath about being a womanizer or eating 60 eggs for breakfast, I think we can safely count him out of the class.

His background is most likely Folk Hero. He wasn't such a great guy, but the people of his village held him in high regard and would certainly have supported him in a time of need.

I, for one, totally love this justification for Gaston being a Valor Bard (EDIT - better: a Fighter, if we go with the "no magic" route) with the Folk Hero background and social skills maxed out. Thanks for this! :smallbiggrin:


Simba as (obviously an NPC) awakened Lion Paladin. Oath maybe ancients or devotion. Or even Crown. (though a certain Narnian lion would qualify for that even better)

Oh, right! Chronicles of Narnia is totally Disney now.

Is there any children's book that isn't owned by Disney yet? :smalltongue:

On Mulan - Soldier would have fit her well... after her military days, but for reasons already stated, she'd a fit for Noble Background, though I do admit that she has enough Rogue in her to justify a multiclass. The point with the rocket to Shan Yu's face being a DnD PC's insane idea is delicious; she's worth building a character around just because. :smallcool:

On Frollo - I suppose it ultimately depends on your DM on whether or not you can believe there can be an "Evil" Paladin or not. I enjoy a good debate on the objectivity of good and evil though. If evil paladins who believe themselves to be good is a thing, sure. If not, in which class would I put him? Seems to be too rich of a character to pass up as a potential BBEG.

On Star Wars - Oh gosh. So between Marvel Comics, The Chronicles of Narnia, The Wizard of Oz, some Square Enix characters, some Pixar Characters, and Once Upon A Time, all currently owned by Disney, basically make a whole range of characters "fair game". Hmmmm....

That said, it's time to open the nominations for the potential BBEG for this campaign. Any takers?

[RickAllison]

One good alternative option for Frollo is actually a Rogue. Rather than just using brute force, he plans and adapts; to catch a thief, he tries to think like a thief; he surrounds himself with mooks who do his bidding for him (barring chasing Quasi's mother and trying to kill Quasi at the end). The Mastermind mook-master archetype for rogues just fits him so well!

Clopin: Bard (Satire), Urchin, CN

[Shining Wrath]

Ratatouille - awakened rat.
Peter Pan - Sprite with class levels in Rogue.

[Draken]

Luke skywalker as a pact of the blade warlock? :smallyuk:

Bladesingers or Favored Souls, the lot of them.

[Joe the Rat]

Actually, I find your ideas as intriguing fantasy NPCs in general that can crossover into a Disney campaign, so I really appreciate that you listed them in detail. Thanks for that! :smallsmile:

Incidentally, doesn't Disney own a lot of Wizard of Oz stuff now, too? I think at least two movies, and Oz is featured in Once Upon A Time.
Thank you. please mine it in good health.

I did a quick poke - Oz (the books by Baum) is in public domain, specific adaptations (such as the '39 movie) are not. Technically most of what Disney has is public domain... (and here I will not derail into the OUAT / Fables discussion)

The original combo for Wonderful Wizard, and partial CR upgrades (party leveled before I could put them in play):
Ms. Gale (Fey Chain Warlock... notice a theme?) added levels. She wears a pair of silver slippers that let her Dimension Door away if things go badly
Tew, the Little Dog (minor fey spirit, stats as Quasit with a Scottie Dog form)
Rags (Scarecrow - incresed hp, power DC, upgraded attack to a scythe (1d10))
Dexter and Sinister - the Scarecrow's Brain (twig blights with a team grapple ability, they erupt from his head when he falls)
Rusty (Animated Armor with a greataxe, upgraded to Helmed Horror)
Ka Werd (Flind (adapted from gnolls - lionine appearance, flindbar) - bumped to Manticore)

From a distance, they'd look like a farm girl (with dog) traveling with a beggar, a knight, and a hunched form under a cloak. The Lion's upgrade means he comes crashing in after round 1.

The relative power levels vary a lot, so you may need to tweak for better balance.
One of the themes I was working on is that each team is led by a "lost girl" - lost family, trying to find a way home, etc. The Patroness is trying to kill the party's Warlock, using the Power of Plot to defeat the enemy. She is specifically invoking groups that fought or defeated the "Evil witch/stepmother/fairy mistress of evil/red queen." The intention was to have the Warlock escape each time (Raven Hair had a teleporting apple, Gale has her shoes, Alice was going to shrink and duck through a Rabbit Hole/Fairy Gate). Later, she would return with a new team by her Patroness, and ...modified to fit the new role (taller/shorter/bleached skin/fresh scalp of blond hair). I'm aiming for Callous Horror and Adult Fear on this one.

The irony of this plot is that the Patroness, trying to be a Fairy Godmother, is in fact a Wicked Witch. Her own ploy will end up causing her downfall.


That said, it's time to open the nominations for the potential BBEG for this campaign. Any takers?You can either twist the roles, or play it straight. Peter Pan as an arch-villain is a clever idea... but the Fables Substitution was a clever replacement.

Playing it straight, You've got plenty of evil fairy step witches to work with (Maleficent is far enough up the chain to be a good endgame villain; Ursula has a lovely Humanoid Aboleth or Mad Marid vibe. You could always dig deep, and go for the Horned King.

Me, I'd go with Yen Sid (http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Yen_Sid).

[DiceDiceBaby]

Thank you. please mine it in good health.

I did a quick poke - Oz (the books by Baum) is in public domain, specific adaptations (such as the '39 movie) are not. Technically most of what Disney has is public domain... (and here I will not derail into the OUAT / Fables discussion)

The original combo for Wonderful Wizard, and partial CR upgrades (party leveled before I could put them in play):
Ms. Gale (Fey Chain Warlock... notice a theme?) added levels. She wears a pair of silver slippers that let her Dimension Door away if things go badly
Tew, the Little Dog (minor fey spirit, stats as Quasit with a Scottie Dog form)
Rags (Scarecrow - incresed hp, power DC, upgraded attack to a scythe (1d10))
Dexter and Sinister - the Scarecrow's Brain (twig blights with a team grapple ability, they erupt from his head when he falls)
Rusty (Animated Armor with a greataxe, upgraded to Helmed Horror)
Ka Werd (Flind (adapted from gnolls - lionine appearance, flindbar) - bumped to Manticore)

From a distance, they'd look like a farm girl (with dog) traveling with a beggar, a knight, and a hunched form under a cloak. The Lion's upgrade means he comes crashing in after round 1.

The relative power levels vary a lot, so you may need to tweak for better balance.
One of the themes I was working on is that each team is led by a "lost girl" - lost family, trying to find a way home, etc. The Patroness is trying to kill the party's Warlock, using the Power of Plot to defeat the enemy. She is specifically invoking groups that fought or defeated the "Evil witch/stepmother/fairy mistress of evil/red queen." The intention was to have the Warlock escape each time (Raven Hair had a teleporting apple, Gale has her shoes, Alice was going to shrink and duck through a Rabbit Hole/Fairy Gate). Later, she would return with a new team by her Patroness, and ...modified to fit the new role (taller/shorter/bleached skin/fresh scalp of blond hair). I'm aiming for Callous Horror and Adult Fear on this one.

The irony of this plot is that the Patroness, trying to be a Fairy Godmother, is in fact a Wicked Witch. Her own ploy will end up causing her downfall.

You can either twist the roles, or play it straight. Peter Pan as an arch-villain is a clever idea... but the Fables Substitution was a clever replacement.

Playing it straight, You've got plenty of evil fairy step witches to work with (Maleficent is far enough up the chain to be a good endgame villain; Ursula has a lovely Humanoid Aboleth or Mad Marid vibe. You could always dig deep, and go for the Horned King.

Me, I'd go with Yen Sid (http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Yen_Sid).

Thanks for letting me use the ideas Joe the Rat! The concepts you came up with are great. Totally see them coming to life on the table (and very accurately following the plot and characters of the original, given a few liberties). :smallsmile:

For the most part, I think I will play the majority of the fairytale tropes straight (clear good and evil, maybe one or two twists) to keep the traditional Disney feel... though I do agree that having the Big Good turn out to secretly be the Big Bad is a really nice twist for a future campaign.


One good alternative option for Frollo is actually a Rogue. Rather than just using brute force, he plans and adapts; to catch a thief, he tries to think like a thief; he surrounds himself with mooks who do his bidding for him (barring chasing Quasi's mother and trying to kill Quasi at the end). The Mastermind mook-master archetype for rogues just fits him so well!

Clopin: Bard (Satire), Urchin, CN

It's a good concept, but thinking about it, I totally agree with you that Frollo should be a Vengeance Paladin to really feel the flavor of his villany; he's unique among Disney villains in that he's convinced himself that he's doing the right thing. At any cost. I think that there's really only one class to shoe him in, then, but I appreciate your input, as a whole, RickAllison. I think you get the spirit of the Disney characters quite well when you translate them into DnD. :smallsmile:

I'm still open to suggestions regarding villains and worldbuilding. Not sure if I want to take the Kingdom Hearts/Once Upon A Time approach and have many different "worlds" or "realms" and then make the heroes travel them through whatever magical means necessary to get there and solve an inter-world-realm plot, or if I can just have them set in one world from different "kingdoms" (i.e. Greece for Hercules, Arabia for Aladdin, China for Mulan, etc.) undergoing globalization, similar to earth during the pre-medieval times, but with access to magic and better means of travel, where all of them exist as contemporaries (though anachronological).

Any thoughts? :smallsmile:

[RickAllison]

snip


I'm still open to suggestions regarding villains and worldbuilding. Not sure if I want to take the Kingdom Hearts/Once Upon A Time approach and have many different "worlds" or "realms" and then make the heroes travel them through whatever magical means necessary to get there and solve an inter-world-realm plot, or if I can just have them set in one world from different "kingdoms" (i.e. Greece for Hercules, Arabia for Aladdin, China for Mulan, etc.) undergoing globalization, similar to earth during the pre-medieval times, but with access to magic and better means of travel, where all of them exist as contemporaries (though anachronological).

Any thoughts? :smallsmile:

While I prefer the idea of having them all in one world, I feel like power levels are drastically different between them. The villain of one world is capable of utterly annihilating another. For instance, Jafar is a powerful sorcerer (probably a gestalt with Warlock, based on his interaction with his staff; maybe see about giving him Shapechange in his spell-list, so he can go Snake-form, perhaps with a modified Purple Worm?), but he is opposed by a party of NPCs that are of a comparable level in addition to the PCs. In contrast, we have the Pride Lands that would only be a challenge for a low-leveled party. Separating the worlds gives you more flexibility with the magic of the system (PCs are turned into animals for Pride Lands, etc.) and more clearly delineates why Jafar can't just zip on over to another part of the world and take it over completely.

EDIT: It might help my input that I grew up going to Disney World, want to be an Imagineer, am obsessed with the Kingdom Hearts series, and have been toying with creating a dark Disney world for a campaign.

[DiceDiceBaby]

While I prefer the idea of having them all in one world, I feel like power levels are drastically different between them. The villain of one world is capable of utterly annihilating another. For instance, Jafar is a powerful sorcerer (probably a gestalt with Warlock, based on his interaction with his staff; maybe see about giving him Shapechange in his spell-list, so he can go Snake-form, perhaps with a modified Purple Worm?), but he is opposed by a party of NPCs that are of a comparable level in addition to the PCs. In contrast, we have the Pride Lands that would only be a challenge for a low-leveled party. Separating the worlds gives you more flexibility with the magic of the system (PCs are turned into animals for Pride Lands, etc.) and more clearly delineates why Jafar can't just zip on over to another part of the world and take it over completely.

EDIT: It might help my input that I grew up going to Disney World, want to be an Imagineer, am obsessed with the Kingdom Hearts series, and have been toying with creating a dark Disney world for a campaign.

Great input! Well, that does explain a lot. :smallwink:

Not sure about how to do inter-world travel yet, but I suppose that is the most elegant solution.

Though if we go with the "one big world" idea, maybe the party could start out with facing minor villains at first, and the other minor villains eventually rise to power (much like the PCs). Ergo, Jafar starts out as a plain Wizard at first, but at some point in the campaign, acquires a Wish that allows him to become a Sorcerer and menace the party once they get to higher levels.

For a starting party of heroes (level 1), I'd pick/allow:

Rogue - Aladdin or Mulan
Fighter - Captain Shang, Phoebus or Prince Philipp
Barbarian - Quasimodo (Acolyte background!) or Tarzan (Outlander)
Cleric - Rapunzel (I looted that one off another Disney thread on the forum)

Higher level Hero PCs (starting at higher levels for more experience players):

Barbarian - Hercules
Wizard - Merlin
Sorcerer - Elsa

Lower level villains:

Warlock - Dr. Facilier
Fighter - Gaston
Wizard - Jafar (pre-Wish)
Paladin - Frollo

Higher level villains:

Ursula - Wizard (for a sea-themed part of the campaign)
Maleficent - Sorcerer

Maybe Ursula and Maleficent are just biding their time in their solitude until such time to strike, I don't know. :smalltongue:

Else, maybe for the sake of balance, I'll go for inter-world travel through magic or water.

Thanks for all the help guys! I'm still open to ideas, as this is a work in progress. Really inspired by all your ideas though. :smallbiggrin:

[RickAllison]

Great input! Well, that does explain a lot. :smallwink:

Not sure about how to do inter-world travel yet, but I suppose that is the most elegant solution.

Though if we go with the "one big world" idea, maybe the party could start out with facing minor villains at first, and the other minor villains eventually rise to power (much like the PCs). Ergo, Jafar starts out as a plain Wizard at first, but at some point in the campaign, acquires a Wish that allows him to become a Sorcerer and menace the party once they get to higher levels.

For a starting party of heroes (level 1), I'd pick/allow:

Rogue - Aladdin or Mulan
Fighter - Captain Shang, Phoebus or Prince Philipp
Barbarian - Quasimodo (Acolyte background!) or Tarzan (Outlander)
Cleric - Rapunzel (I looted that one off another Disney thread on the forum)

Higher level Hero PCs (starting at higher levels for more experience players):

Barbarian - Hercules
Wizard - Merlin
Sorcerer - Elsa

Lower level villains:

Warlock - Dr. Facilier
Fighter - Gaston
Wizard - Jafar (pre-Wish)
Paladin - Frollo

Higher level villains:

Ursula - Wizard (for a sea-themed part of the campaign)
Maleficent - Sorcerer

Maybe Ursula and Maleficent are just biding their time in their solitude until such time to strike, I don't know. :smalltongue:

Else, maybe for the sake of balance, I'll go for inter-world travel through magic or water.

Thanks for all the help guys! I'm still open to ideas, as this is a work in progress. Really inspired by all your ideas though. :smallbiggrin:

I trust you've probably played the KH games, as you've mentioned them before. If not, they are a great resource for pillaging ideas from. Two methods of travel I can think of:
1) The Star Shard. A neat little MacGuffin from KH that, when invoked, transports the user to another world at the speed of plot! Literally, the stone is designed so only the most experienced (read: Yen Sid) are capable of directing. For everyone else, it takes them where the stone wishes them to go. That could be where they want to be, or it could be because the stone wants to be there, or it could be because it wants to be taken from its owner by someone at the location. It can feel railroad-y, but it's effective and has to be invoked by the players.
2) Planeswalkers. Different people have covered this far better than I could, but ripping off the mechanic from Magic: the Gathering is a great way to give the players freedom to travel as they like, but it can prove unreliable :smallwink:

Also, remember that the most powerful of the villains tend to scheme and plan. References, away!
Movie-wise, we see Ursula who manipulates Ariel (the PCs) long before becoming her BBEG. Scar used Simba as a pawn to clear his way to the crown, and also conspired to get Simba killed beforehand. Frollo's trap for the gypsies was an elaborate game of Speed Chess with him always on the attack. Hades set his plans to take over Olympus two decades before the actual event would hit. In Kingdom Hearts, Maleficent forced Terra to capture a heart for her in Birth by Sleep, used both Sora and Riku as pawns in her initial attempt at total domination (that only failed because of an even longer-term plan by Xehanort), kept Pete as a reserve general in case she failed for ten years, and spent the two years after trying to hijack the good guys' plans for her own benefit. Hades's gambits included manipulating Cloud in the first game, but really came into his own in the second; he wore down Hercules for a long time (like Bane to Batman), then used Sora to both unlock his special arena as well as forcing Hercules to go to his aid, which then allowed numerous spectators of the coliseum to be killed and thus breaking Hercules's spirit. Heck, even Clayton uses the heroes and Tarzan in his movie to further his own goals, and he is stupid compared to other Disney villains!
Basically, if you play the villains true to form, halfway through the PCs won't be able to figure out whether the person they are helping is going to help them defeat the BBEG or be the BBEG, and it works! Detect Good and Evil doesn't work like it used to, so feel free to litter the party's endeavors with secret BBs hatching their own plans >:)

[Joe the Rat]

On Pridelands and Prejudice:

You can get a lot of flexibility if you expand your interpretations. Using Lion King as talking animals (and that damn monk-druid monkey) makes for limited power. If you move from film to theater (or theatre), you can blur the line between man and beast. You now have clans of nobles with their beast-symbols - either purely symbolic, or in the vein of the Totem path, or some weird animist aura thingy, or just go full on shapeshifters.

This opens up your build space significantly.