Kinda painted myself into a corner

[Chiaramonte]

So, I'm running a campaign where the party traveled to a foreign country that turned out to be ruled by a heavy-handed lich. They took it upon themselves to destroy the ruler via a bargain with his advisor, an opportunistic vampire who seemed to be the lesser of the two evils. Players come and players go. Now the party has a couple natives who find even the present situation untenable and want to find a better ruler. Fine, I have an idea for that, but what I want to figure out is how to let that happen without A) making the "lost heir" so heroic in their qualifications that the players feel useless or B) making the party so heroic that the heir's suitability is questionable? Thanks for any advice.

[Rafaelfras]

A child heir is a good option, is a king in the
making so the party itself could help mold the future ruler
Or
The heir is a member of the party, it will became personal at the risk of putting one player in the spotlight for too long but as an adventure everyone will be participating equally. I would suggest after this adventure is over that you shift the focus on other players backgrounds before going to a more general, less personal, adventure

[Greywander]

If there's a resistance movement, then you could have them assist with overthrowing both the lich and the vampire, but treat them as somewhat disposable. If the dice rolls are with your players, or they happen to come up with an exceptionally clever plan, they might all survive, but otherwise it's likely that a few of them will die during the revolution. Just have the most senior (or most suitable) surviving rebel become the new king.

You could even make the rebel leader someone who is physically handicapped (e.g. missing a limb, suffering from permanent injuries that weaken them, etc.), but is an excellent leader. The obvious person to become king should they succeed, but also not very likely to actually survive, should they need to get into the action. See if the players rally around him and protect him at all costs. Otherwise, when things are at their worst, you can have him sacrifice himself to give the players another chance at succeeding. Winning the war is more important than surviving, and no matter who the next king is, it will still be better than what they had.

[Chiaramonte]

No, not a party member. In fact, there are 3 possible heirs, and they have to figure out the true one.

[Seclora]

So, I'm running a campaign where the party traveled to a foreign country that turned out to be ruled by a heavy-handed lich. They took it upon themselves to destroy the ruler via a bargain with his advisor, an opportunistic vampire who seemed to be the lesser of the two evils. Players come and players go. Now the party has a couple natives who find even the present situation untenable and want to find a better ruler. Fine, I have an idea for that, but what I want to figure out is how to let that happen without A) making the "lost heir" so heroic in their qualifications that the players feel useless or B) making the party so heroic that the heir's suitability is questionable? Thanks for any advice.

Why does Merlin, the Wisest, most powerful member of Arthur's Court not simply rule himself?

Present the heir as being morally diligent, industrious in his work, and inspiringly humble. They should be someone who is not -yet- a hero, but who has a clear future and is full of potential, but has not yet come into their own. Someone with good stats, high health, but few proficiencies. Someone who can learn the best of what the party brings to the table, perhaps even showing them something about themselves in the process. Don't make them a heroic knight, powerful wizard, or master thief, make them the loyal squire, the bright young apprentice, or quick-witted ragamuffin. Their claim to the throne is distant, perhaps even a subject of THE P R O P H E C Y, but their character should be such that the party wants to see them fulfill their destiny. Have him fix small problems while the party is away, find the answer to a question that they were going to cast a spell over, come up with the funds to help them buy that extra potion, and other small things. When they're doing something dangerous and leave him behind, have him tackle that one bandit they missed on the way in, or impress another NPC with their poetry, illusions, or knowledge, maybe they're just a really good notetaker!

My point is, don't make them the hero, make them the person who will answer the call when the party asks, "Someone is going to have to clean up this mess the last guy left behind."

[Sigreid]

Funnily enough this whole situation reminds me of the movie The Sword and the Sorcerer. I'd suggest checking that out for ideas. But here's a short list...

1. Descendant of the lich from before he became a lich who has no idea of his birth right and is a wise and good leader of a remote village. Give him a birthmark or the lich an item that can only be used by his family to prove his claim.

2. Conspire with an underground church to anoint a leader.

3. Support an existing rebel leader that has proven himself not to be a psychopath.

4. My personal favorite and the hardest to do....True resurrect the lich, bind and gag his mortal form and drag him to that place in the celestial realms that forces an alignment shift and hold him there until you're certain you're returning a powerful lawful good and benevolent ruler.

Edit to respond to the post above. Merlin can't rule for 2 reasons. 1. He's an outsider and will never be fully trusted as anything other than a King's advisor. 2. Arthur gives the people something Merlin, as a supernatural creature; never can. An attainable ideal they can strive for wrapped in a man with strengths and weaknesses that they can understand.

[Lunali]

So, I'm running a campaign where the party traveled to a foreign country that turned out to be ruled by a heavy-handed lich. They took it upon themselves to destroy the ruler via a bargain with his advisor, an opportunistic vampire who seemed to be the lesser of the two evils. Players come and players go. Now the party has a couple natives who find even the present situation untenable and want to find a better ruler. Fine, I have an idea for that, but what I want to figure out is how to let that happen without A) making the "lost heir" so heroic in their qualifications that the players feel useless or B) making the party so heroic that the heir's suitability is questionable? Thanks for any advice.

Why is a ruler who lacks combat ability unsuitable?

[kingcheesepants]

So I'm not really clear on why the heir needs to be heroic, the king's duty is to establish just laws and taxes fighting monsters doesn't really factor into it. Moreover why should the party care about his legitimacy, they've already gotten rid of the "legitimate" ruler in favor of someone else why not just install whoever they liked best? Also the situation you set up seems ripe for a democratic revolution. Having all the power in the hands of one all powerful potentially crazy/evil ruler has clearly not worked out for this country, a more representative and distributed form of leadership seems like a better way overall.

Therefore you could make an interesting game wherein the "legitimate" ruler is just more of the same, a despotic crazy person drunk on their own power. Then there could be another person who seems like they'd be a good ruler but they would have to lie to the people and establish fake credentials in order to be accepted. Or the party could try to convince the people to give up the monarchy altogether.

[Kane0]

So, I'm running a campaign where the party traveled to a foreign country that turned out to be ruled by a heavy-handed lich. They took it upon themselves to destroy the ruler via a bargain with his advisor, an opportunistic vampire who seemed to be the lesser of the two evils. Players come and players go. Now the party has a couple natives who find even the present situation untenable and want to find a better ruler. Fine, I have an idea for that, but what I want to figure out is how to let that happen without A) making the "lost heir" so heroic in their qualifications that the players feel useless or B) making the party so heroic that the heir's suitability is questionable? Thanks for any advice.

Heir has sidekick levels, so theyre competent but not quite the same as the PCs. Heir might even tag along with the PCs for a bit or lead their own forces to demonstrate the proper leadership qualities. Heir has all the stats and a few magic items they might need, which may or may not translate as good stats and items for an adventurer.

[Unoriginal]

Why is a ruler who lacks combat ability unsuitable?


True. Even if the heir does have combat abilities, what makes a good ruler and what makes a good adventurer are very different traits. Some people have both, true, but that's far from a given.

The heir could b handling the "convince the people to support them" part of taking over while the PCs do the adventuring job of killing liches and vampires.

[Chiaramonte]

All very good things to consider. Thanks for all your input. I will probably go with a combination of these ideas. The country is still too steeped in tradition for them to consider democracy at present, but the right leaders could begin to introduce the concepts.

[Sparky McDibben]

The country is still too steeped in tradition for them to consider democracy at present, but the right leaders could begin to introduce the concepts.

Hell, if they don't want to get rid of the lich, what about a Magna Carta-type moment?

[Segev]

It's been brought up, but I want to highlight it by asking:

What does the party being "so heroic that the heir's suitability is questionable" look like, to you? What are the consequences, if that's so?



How I would personally advise moving forward with solving the problem hinges on knowing what it is you view the problem to be, and I hope this question highlights where I am unclear what, precisely, the problem is.

[KorvinStarmast]

4. My personal favorite and the hardest to do....True resurrect the lich, bind and gag his mortal form and drag him to that place in the celestial realms that forces an alignment shift and hold him there until you're certain you're returning a powerful lawful good and benevolent ruler. Bytopia?


2. Arthur gives the people something Merlin, as a supernatural creature; never can. An attainable ideal they can strive for wrapped in a man with strengths and weaknesses that they can understand. Yep. :smallsmile:

[Sigreid]

Bytopia?



Probably. Too lazy to look it up. hehe

[Seclora]

Merlin can't rule for 2 reasons. 1. He's an outsider and will never be fully trusted as anything other than a King's advisor. 2. Arthur gives the people something Merlin, as a supernatural creature; never can. An attainable ideal they can strive for wrapped in a man with strengths and weaknesses that they can understand.
Exactly!

Both are valid reasons why The Party also cannot be the ruler. They're outsiders. Furthermore, their abilities and goals are beyond the reach of the average citizen, often with flaws and backgrounds that render them unrelatable to the average citizen. Merlin, the half-(sources vary between fey or fiend) who ages backward and can wield incredible magical power is more like the average adventurer than Arthur, who grew up in the equivalent of foster care, happened into a prophecy while doing his job, and is routinely cuckolded by a Frenchman.

[Chiaramonte]

It's been brought up, but I want to highlight it by asking:

What does the party being "so heroic that the heir's suitability is questionable" look like, to you? What are the consequences, if that's so?



How I would personally advise moving forward with solving the problem hinges on knowing what it is you view the problem to be, and I hope this question highlights where I am unclear what, precisely, the problem is.

My original thinking was that the people might think; "if the heroes were so capable of getting rid of the big bad, what is this unknown person going to do for us? Are they just a puppet ruler?" but I see a lot of ways to push the heir forward. Thanks to everyone for the input.

[Asmotherion]

A good Ruler is not necessarily a good Fighter.

Have him help the party by providing Safe Camps, supplies and that sort of stuff, without having him be in the frontlines. Have him send out troups to win strategic victories against the enemy that will help solidify his conquering of the land. You can make a great Ruler out of a LV 1 commoner with high mental stats.