Story vs. Game, or, "What would the BBEG do?"


Advice

1 to 50 of 57 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

In the most recent sessions of my homebrew game, the PCs learned of some clandestine meetings between the major campaign villain they had been searching for for some time and the servant of villainous noble. They set up an ambush and confronted the major villain and servant, eventually forcing her to retreat. Though they didn't kill or capture her they disrupted the exchange that was to take place and apprehended the servant, which led to the villainous noble being apprehended as well. Searching his estate they found more evidence of the noble's dealings with the major villain (who is a demon), further sealing his fate and effectively bringing a close to that chapter of the campaign. Their next moves are to continue searching for the demon and stop her for good.

Now, the demon is effectively the BBEG for the campaign and the interrupted meeting is at least the second time they've directly thwarted her schemes. Not to mention the other assassination attempts she's arranged against them they also stopped. Needless to say, she's very, very, displeased right now.

The framework I've laid out for the campaign is for the PCs to discover more of her scheming and and put a stop to those schemes in succession, dispatching a major minion/ally of hers while inching closer and closer to the center of her web. And in game terms, gain levels so by the time they get to her they're strong enough to confront her in a final battle. Typical stuff.

Here's where story and game considerations start to diverge. I use tropes but not cliches in designing my stories/campaigns, and verisimilitude is very important. The BBEG is not an idiot and not going to sit back anymore like some passive villain. She is officially done screwing around with the PCs; putting a stop to them will become her #1 priority. She's going to gather up her strongest allies as soon as possible and confront the PCs to kill them - because that's what an intelligent adversary would do. This is almost certain to result in a TPK.

Normally I wouldn't do that despite it being a completely logical course of action for the villain to take, because of the frank unfairness of it. However, the mitigating circumstances is that the PCs, through their many heroic actions and services over the course of the campaign, made powerful and influential allies. So even if they are TPK'd their allies will eventually figure it out and have the PCs resurrected. So that makes me more willing to go ahead with the BBEG's plan. It's what the villain would logically do, and the the resurrections afterward would show the PCs that the thanks they've received from the people they've helped wasn't just empty platitudes.

Of course, despite the logic of everything, it still may feel railroad-y and just make the players upset. Fun is still the #1 priority of the game, and my players have shown a lot of trust in me. But it would still be a major event that would very like be out of their control.


Take a step back and ask yourself, "Why has the BBEG acted the way she has in the past?"

-or-

"Why has she bothered with fish small enough for the PCs to fry?"

I can only assume that the answer is, "Because she had to."

Presumably, her powers/influence are limited enough that she isn't going to confront the PCs directly. Also, her powers are limited enough that her minion is more or less permanently incarcerated/neutralized. If this is the case, why is she risking further exposure (and therefore failure) by throwing out minions powerful enough to directly assault the PCs? Why wouldn't she try to distract them with some little nothings away from the action while she tries to accelerate her plans?

Alternately, why isn't she trying to discredit/implicate the PCs? Maybe that gets the PCs locked away in an oubliette and maybe that forces the PCs to decide between "surrender" and "turn against the authorities" as they try to clear their names. Just maybe (if she's lucky), it puts the PCs in a cell with an angry noble ex-minion so they tie up (ie kill) loose ends for her.

In short, a direct kill-kill confrontation doesn't always make sense, especially when you've got a lot riding on secrecy.

The Exchange

You're right to suspect that the 'most reasonable' course of action would cause a lot of friction with your players. Even if your players didn't rebel, a TPK (and the presumed addition of all the PCs' gear to the enemies' resources) is generally to be avoided when possible.

I think you're on the right track by using allies the PCs have made - just make them a little more proactive. A messenger might arrive warning them of evidence an ally has acquired (or discovered through divination) of their enemy massing an unbeatable force and planning a surprise attack.

Alternately, demons' "alliances" being what they are, the warning might come from one of the villain's allies. Obviously you'd have to figure out the reasons for this subtle betrayal (and whether it will remain undiscovered or lead to disruption within the enemies' ranks).

Whoever delivers the warning, you should have them advise lying low (depending on the game's power level and style, this could mean anything from 'a few weeks over the border in a neighboring kingdom' to 'a year on a plane demons cannot risk travelling to'.) If you've established any dungeons or regions where magical divination won't work, remind the PCs of their existence: if not, maybe an NPC can suggest either a warded location or a teleportation circle/planar portal that can give the PCs breathing room. If possible, give the PCs two options so they feel like they have some choice even when they're on the run.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I should point out that the logical course of action would be entirely appropriate, if she was a Devil. She is, however, a Demon. She does not want to quickly and efficiently deal with their threat. She wants to hurt them. She is a Demon, her revenges should be bizarre and unpredictable. Corrupting influences should be a part of it.


Are you asking for advice on why not to do this, how to handle it or ...?

Logic is in the eye of the beholder. As the story creator you have many options as to what is the most logical thing for your BBEG to do next. Direct confrontation is merely one option and not necessarily the only logical option. Direct confrontation carries risk, risk to the BBEG directly, risk she'll lose important allies or underlings. While it is a game mechanic, one blown save and she's toast. That mechanic exists because at it's heart that is the reality of direct confrontation, unpredictable bad stuff happens (any given Sunday and all that) and your BBEG is aware of that fact. There's the risk some other plan, previously a priority, will get derailed because her attention is on the PC's and piss her off just as badly if not worse. On the other hand part of the PC's risk is that they will draw too much attention to themselves too fast for their own health which is what you 'fear' is happening or going to happen. Your 'job' is to ensure the story walks the fine line between verisimilitude and timing (i.e. writing) things so the PC's aren't unfairly curbstomped (unless every one is looking for that in the campaign). You're the writer if it's too early yet create the reason for why it is too early. The PC's might even be expecting/fear the BBEG will show up to curbstomp them and not know why she doesn't. But as long as you know the why and what behind the scenes is going on the realism you want will be preserved. While the PCs are the focus of the story and campaign it does nothing but help the sensation of realism if they aren't the only movers and shakers around. The BBEG might pause on deciding to crush the PCs based on some 'off camera' thing one of those movers and shakers does even if the King's invitation to Mr Righteousness, the High Demonslayer to come visit has nothing to do with her. The real trick is to make the railroad ties as invisible as possible, not necessarily to eliminate them.


Kitty Catoblepas wrote:

Take a step back and ask yourself, "Why has the BBEG acted the way she has in the past?"

-or-

"Why has she bothered with fish small enough for the PCs to fry?"

I can only assume that the answer is, "Because she had to."

Presumably, her powers/influence are limited enough that she isn't going to confront the PCs directly. Also, her powers are limited enough that her minion is more or less permanently incarcerated/neutralized. If this is the case, why is she risking further exposure (and therefore failure) by throwing out minions powerful enough to directly assault the PCs? Why wouldn't she try to distract them with some little nothings away from the action while she tries to accelerate her plans?

Up until now that's what she has been doing, more or less. And it hasn't been working. It's become clear to her that sending assassins is pointless. She's already tried buying their allegiance and that failed too. The only solution left is to try to accelerate her plans - which jeopardizes their success - or make killing the PCs a priority.

Kitty Catoblepas wrote:
Alternately, why isn't she trying to discredit/implicate the PCs? Maybe that gets the PCs locked away in an oubliette and maybe that forces the PCs to decide between "surrender" and "turn against the authorities" as they try to clear their names. Just maybe (if she's lucky), it puts the PCs in a cell with an angry noble ex-minion so they tie up (ie kill) loose ends for her.

She's tried discrediting the PCs as well, but that's failed too. They've managed to overcome the suspicions against them and at this point they've built up too much good will with the leaders in the region they're in to try any more skulduggery.

"Kitty Catoblepas"In short, a direct kill-kill confrontation doesn't always make sense, especially when you've got a lot riding on secrecy. [/QUOTE wrote:

Secrecy has been her modus operandi from the start, which is why she hasn't directly confronted the PCs yet. Hasn't stopped the PCs from uncovering a lot of her schemes. Acting from secrecy is useless if it doesn't keep your schemes secret.


I agree with Lincoln Hills's suggestion of warning the PCs of the incoming hit squad, either through the PCs' allies, through betrayal among the villains, or perhaps through an interested third party.

Maybe a devil is upset at this demon bringing attention into its sphere of influence, and wants things to quiet down a bit. Maybe one of the demon's allies is less than enthusiastic about changes in the demon's plans, and needs to build up their own power before they can set up a more profitable venture by a future betrayal of the demon. Set up some evil vs. evil machinations, because they definitely don't play nice.

Then send the PCs to attack the demon's allies before they gather to make the demon's hit squad. Either directly, or through their power structure.


If you don't want the villain to be able to devote all their resources to killing the pc's give them a reason not to. Perhaps their ongoing scheme requires their personal attention, or another more dangerous opponent attacks them so they are too busy to sent themselves or their best minions after the pc's and the only minions they can spare are the level appropriate ones.

If you have written yourself into a corner then you either need to make up a new problem for the villain to deal with or have the villain kill the pc's


Xexyz --

Hard question, then:

If the PCs have so thoroughly defeated her, what does the story gain by keeping her as the BBEG instead of disposing of her in the final confrontation to make way for the new BBEG?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If the players are not a direct threat how are they the most important enemies? Seriously EVERYONE hates demons. Literally every single alignments greatest enemy is CE of which demons are the epitome. Its fairly easy to add in other enemies which the demon needs to focus on at the moment

There is always the fake death strategy. You could send a huntsman(sleeping beauty style) for the party. Preferably someone whom they already know. Perhaps someone who owes them a debt or has a particular code of honor. Alternatively have the demon fake her death then slowly build up into them discovering shes still out there. It is quite logical to cut your losses. She is immortal. Retaliation can wait centuries before striking at their descendants

Also there is the fact that demons simply aren't very logical. They are entities of chaos without morality and as such are utterly unpredictable. She could strike at their families, their church, the family cleric, an orphan they helped one time, their belief system. Really anything they hold dear, sacred, or believe in. Have succubi seduce their spouses, murder their parents, have their priest burned as a heretic, turn their followers against them, frame them for crimes, trick them into actually committing vile deeds. For an immortal revenge is endless until death would be welcome


Kitty Catoblepas wrote:

Xexyz --

Hard question, then:

If the PCs have so thoroughly defeated her, what does the story gain by keeping her as the BBEG instead of disposing of her in the final confrontation to make way for the new BBEG?

Because there is no new BBEG. And if I were to all of the sudden have one appear it would feel like a cheap ass pull, "So you think you've defeated the Big Boss? Mwahahahaha, you fools, little did you know she was merely a pawn in the service of Bigger Boss!"

I have been hinting at the existence of this villain since the PCs were 4th level; they just reached 14th level last night. If a BBEG is to have any impact on the players, it can't just be someone who shows up at the last moment, otherwise it may as well have just been another random wandering monster.

Also, they haven't defeated her; merely thwarted some of her plans. But they've thwarted them enough that she feels like a direct confrontation may be in order.


have a plot twist and have the demon actually be a servant(she would still be the BBEG of that story arc) to a pit lord/arch devil were when they confront the demon they stumble into the room while she is having a blood hologram conversation with her boss this will in turn give them a bigger goal to work towards for their lvl 15+ story arc also have it hinted at there's more than just her working towards the pit lord/arch devils goals


Dastis wrote:
If the players are not a direct threat how are they the most important enemies? Seriously EVERYONE hates demons. Literally every single alignments greatest enemy is CE of which demons are the epitome. Its fairly easy to add in other enemies which the demon needs to focus on at the moment

After the events of the latest sessions she now does feel that the PCs are a direct threat. Hence this post. I've always felt that for intelligent villains of this sort (puppet master manipulator types) there's a hierarchy for how the villain reacts to the heroes:

1. Ignore them; they're puny and don't pose any threat.
2. Hmm, maybe they're not so weak. See if they can be controlled/manipulated/bribed.
3. Can't be manipulated or purchased. Manipulate other pieces to move against them. Discredit them; frame them for crimes.
4. Social and mental methods have failed. Send agents to kill them.
5. Agents have failed. The heroes are still a threat. Time to take care of them myself.

After last session's events, I feel like the villain has arrived at stage 5.

Quote:
There is always the fake death strategy. You could send a huntsman(sleeping beauty style) for the party. Preferably someone whom they already know. Perhaps someone who owes them a debt or has a particular code of honor. Alternatively have the demon fake her death then slowly build up into them discovering shes still out there. It is quite logical to cut your losses. She is immortal. Retaliation can wait centuries before striking at their descendants

The faking death strategy is something to consider if I can figure out how to pull it off. The amount of evidence the PCs will require before they buy it would be extremely considerable, however.

Quote:
Also there is the fact that demons simply aren't very logical. They are entities of chaos without morality and as such are utterly unpredictable. She could strike at their families, their church, the family cleric, an orphan they helped one time, their belief system. Really anything they hold dear, sacred, or believe in.

Just because she's chaotic evil doesn't mean she's stupid. She has 18s in both intelligence and wisdom, so she knows when to be evil for evil's sake and when to act smartly. She's still a demon, so her temper does get the better of her occasionally and is in fact why her attempt buy the PCs failed.

Quote:
Have succubi seduce their spouses, murder their parents, have their priest burned as a heretic, turn their followers against them, frame them for crimes, trick them into actually committing vile deeds. For an immortal revenge is endless until death would be welcome

Absolutely. But this kind of torment is stuff you do after you've ensured the PCs are either dead or dealt with. Doing so before them only serves to up their determination to kill her that much more.


Lincoln Hills wrote:
You're right to suspect that the 'most reasonable' course of action would cause a lot of friction with your players. Even if your players didn't rebel, a TPK (and the presumed addition of all the PCs' gear to the enemies' resources) is generally to be avoided when possible.

It's not as bad as would be typical. Since I use ABP the players actually don't have a whole lot in the way of magical gear; at least nothing that wouldn't be pretty easily replaceable (with one huge exception). Since the beginning of the campaign I've informed them that they can make donations to their church as a way of buying credit toward spellcasting services. I'm also going to remind them that there are banks they can deposit their money in if they don't want to carry everything around with them.

Quote:
I think you're on the right track by using allies the PCs have made - just make them a little more proactive. A messenger might arrive warning them of evidence an ally has acquired (or discovered through divination) of their enemy massing an unbeatable force and planning a surprise attack.

Unfortunately the way the story has played out proactive action on the part of their allies would feel a bit too much like a deus ex machina. I've already gotten a few snide remarks from my players when I've skirted too close to that line.

Quote:
Alternately, demons' "alliances" being what they are, the warning might come from one of the villain's allies. Obviously you'd have to figure out the reasons for this subtle betrayal (and whether it will remain undiscovered or lead to disruption within the enemies' ranks).

This is an interesting possibility. I already know one of the demon's associates is less a minion than a partner with his own agenda.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Several people have pointed out "story" ideas you can use.
You shoot them down, because they are not tactically sound.
You cannot really use story ideas in what is, in fact, only a wargame scenario.

Smart people are not infallible, emotions can affect even the most intelligent.
People make foolish and sub-optimal choices all the time. You, as the GM are above all the chaos on the ground your game, your NPCs are not. Are all of your NPCs coolly dispassionate tacticians? Are you, as the GM, a general, coolly martialling your forces against your opposition?

Good luck with this.


Dastis wrote:


Also there is the fact that demons simply aren't very logical. They are entities of chaos without morality and as such are utterly unpredictable. She could strike at their families, their church, the family cleric, an orphan they helped one time, their belief system. Really anything they hold dear, sacred, or believe in. Have succubi seduce their spouses, murder their parents, have their priest burned as a heretic, turn their followers against them, frame them for crimes, trick them into actually committing vile deeds. For an immortal revenge is endless until death would be welcome

I agree with this. Instead of going after the PCs directly, go after everything important to them. Instead of killing them, break them. All those NPC allies they've made, start killing them off one by one. Incorporate PC backstory by killing off, torturing, desecrating all that the PCs are emotionally tied to. Set up red herring missions for the PCs to adventure, while off screen their home village is burnt to the ground. This way they can still level to the point that THEY're pissed enough to confront the big bad directly, ultimately forcing the showdown. Hopefully in a level or two it won't be such of a curbstomp?


It comes down to YOU are the storyteller, write the coming story to give the PCs time to gain more experience ... or not and slaughter them. Only you can answer which is a more satisfying answer to your dilemma.

PS: Then again PCs are utterly notorious for winning against long odds, it's what heroes do.


djdust wrote:
I agree with this. Instead of going after the PCs directly, go after everything important to them. Instead of killing them, break them. All those NPC allies they've made, start killing them off one by one. Incorporate PC backstory by killing off, torturing, desecrating all that the PCs are emotionally tied to. Set up red herring missions for the PCs to adventure, while off screen their home village is burnt to the ground. This way they can still level to the point that THEY're pissed enough to confront the big bad directly, ultimately forcing the showdown. Hopefully in a level or two it won't be such of a curbstomp?

Unfortunately I've already done this with the family of one of the PCs earlier in the campaign with some different villains. I doubt I'd be able to get away with it again without being called out by the players.


Xexyz wrote:
Kitty Catoblepas wrote:

Xexyz --

Hard question, then:

If the PCs have so thoroughly defeated her, what does the story gain by keeping her as the BBEG instead of disposing of her in the final confrontation to make way for the new BBEG?

Because there is no new BBEG. And if I were to all of the sudden have one appear it would feel like a cheap ass pull, "So you think you've defeated the Big Boss? Mwahahahaha, you fools, little did you know she was merely a pawn in the service of Bigger Boss!"

I have been hinting at the existence of this villain since the PCs were 4th level; they just reached 14th level last night. If a BBEG is to have any impact on the players, it can't just be someone who shows up at the last moment, otherwise it may as well have just been another random wandering monster.

Also, they haven't defeated her; merely thwarted some of her plans. But they've thwarted them enough that she feels like a direct confrontation may be in order.

Ah, I see. This is a much different issue at 14 than it is at 4; a different issue with a Type V Demon than a Succubus. I think we should have a clear grasp on your problem now -- the campaign is coming to an end (presumably in 2 levels or so if she's a standard Type V and she's not going to final fight alone) and it makes the most sense for the BBEG to end it now.

So...

1. She's going to start the end, killing/maiming/disabling/infecting the PCs and everyone they know. Presumably, a figurative bomb (teleport assassin, Lower Planar incubated creature bursting out of host, shock troop invasion, etc) will go off *just missing* the PCs due to some bad intel/lucky break. This alerts the PCs, gives them a sense of urgency, and starts attacking their resources while giving them hints that their enemy isn't omniscient.

2. For drama, the players need to be able to confront her, so there has to be a reason why she can't force the confrontation before they're ready. Presumably, she can't be summoned for 101 years due to backstory and the PCs will have to take initiative to gate her in or travel to her. It becomes a game of trying to survive long enough to gather enough resources to defeat her.

3. She is going to use her most powerful resources as soon as she can muster them to put an end to the PCs (presumably, her most potent threat at this point since this is their story, right?). A good way to stretch this out is to have her minions maneuver by getting the PCs to kill their rivals whom they should be helping. Play up the downfall of CE -- typically not working well together.

4. A power-hungry minion sees this as his ticket to the top and supports the PCs efforts to kill his boss (The Starscream hoping to become Dragon Ascendant since you hinted Troping). He keeps the PCs alive in the near and directs heat away from them in the "far" term (before he dies).

5. If she can kill the PCs, why can't she keep them from coming back? If someone's strong enough to prevent her, why aren't they strong enough to stop her? If you're going to break the gentlemen's agreement that is Pathfinder, why shouldn't your players?

Just some thoughts.


Assuming the party aren't utterly murderhoboes. How about if she attacks their reputations. Rumors, false witnesses, frame-ups and the like.

Liberty's Edge

You mentioned that the demon has already killed family members of the party. What if the demon arranged to have these family members come back vampires?Who would suspect a resurrected family member of vampirism?

Shadow Lodge

Quote:
...This is almost certain to result in a TPK.

Have the PCs done something out of the ordinary to merit this, or is this a Kobayashi Maru no-win scenario?

~ ~ ~

Methinks you're becoming a little too attached to your NPC boss villain while losing sight of everyone else in your game world who might notice if a demonic presence became apparent, or even just a pervading sense of unpleasantness rising to the level of we're-not-gonna-take-it-anymore.

For example, just as the villain is about to assassinate the PCs, she has other troubles in the form of a mass protest against her crooked pet politician jacking their taxes through the roof. Or the city's Captain of the Guard just so happens to be a Rutger Hauer werewolf paladin (who knew?). Or there's a wildly over-eager and enthusiastic new group of adventurers in town (all 4th level, reminding the PCs so very much of themselves not so long ago) also following the mystery.

Quote:
Quote:
If the PCs have so thoroughly defeated her, what does the story gain by keeping her as the BBEG instead of disposing of her in the final confrontation to make way for the new BBEG?
Because there is no new BBEG. And if I were to all of the sudden have one appear it would feel like a cheap ass pull

By the same token, from their perspective, they don't except to be fighting the same villain forever.

(And there's always another BBEG IRL, so why should it be any different in fantasy worlds? Take Game of Thrones: half the characters on the show are BBEGs, and there's not enough room in Westeros for all of them. Your demon boss' biggest opponents aren't PCs getting too big for their britches, but equivalent or even greater CR competitor BBEGs than might want to horn in on her sweet gig.)


@Kitty Catoblepas - What do you mean by Type V demon? FYI - the demon actually is a succubus with class levels (16th level oracle). As for your ideas:

1. This may be possible, but it has to be meaningful. It can't just be people to whom the PCs have an emotional attachment; it has to be allies who can/do provide meaningful aid to the PCs. So if I do this I'll have to be careful because some of those allies are very powerful and their deaths would trigger additional responses.

2. The summoning thing doesn't make sense for my campaign, but there's something else in that may work. Of the allies I alluded to in the first post, two are absolutely loyal to her, but the other two... maybe not so much. Might take some time and effort on her part to bring them around.

3. See #2.

4. I'll have to think if this is feasible. Since it's getting close to the end of the campaign, I mostly have all the remaining major players figured out. There may not be enough time left to have enough lead-up to a good betrayal.

5. It'll take too long for her to gather the necessary gems for six soul binds (there are six PCs) in addition to acquiring a way to cast the spell six times to begin with.

@Daw - Oh, she's already doing this. But at this point such tactics are just temporary hurdles the PCs have already overcome before.

@Martin Kaufman - Just to clarify, it was a different set of villains that killed the PC's family.


Sir Thugsalot wrote:
Have the PCs done something out of the ordinary to merit this, or is this a Kobayashi Maru no-win scenario?

From a story perspective it may.

Quote:
Methinks you're becoming a little too attached to your NPC boss villain while losing sight of everyone else in your game world who might notice if a demonic presence became apparent, or even just a pervading sense of unpleasantness rising to the level of we're-not-gonna-take-it-anymore.

Oh, they have, which is why even if the party gets TPK'd efforts will be made to have them raised/resurrected. Which is why a TPK is on the table from a game perspective to begin with. In my opinion that's a better option than having some NPCs show up to save the day and steal the players' glory. The players have made it pretty clear to me that while they like having the support of NPCs, they don't want NPCs fighting with them and stealing their glory.

Quote:
(And there's always another BBEG IRL, so why should it be any different in fantasy worlds? Take Game of Thrones: half the characters on the show are BBEGs, and there's not enough room in Westeros for all of them. Your demon boss' biggest opponents aren't PCs getting too big for their britches, but equivalent or even greater CR competitor BBEGs than might want to horn in on her sweet gig.)

Sure, in the game world there are bigger, more dangerous fish than the current BBEG, but the campaign doesn't go on forever. It just isn't satisfying to spend a near entire campaign against a particular BBEG, defeat her, but then learning all of the sudden that they weren't the end boss. Any man-behind-the-man who shows up afterward doesn't feel much more important or impactful than a random wandering monster. There's just not enough time left in the campaign to build one up.


Xexyz wrote:
Sir Thugsalot wrote:
Have the PCs done something out of the ordinary to merit this, or is this a Kobayashi Maru no-win scenario?

From a story perspective it may.

Quote:
Methinks you're becoming a little too attached to your NPC boss villain while losing sight of everyone else in your game world who might notice if a demonic presence became apparent, or even just a pervading sense of unpleasantness rising to the level of we're-not-gonna-take-it-anymore.

Oh, they have, which is why even if the party gets TPK'd efforts will be made to have them raised/resurrected. Which is why a TPK is on the table from a game perspective to begin with. In my opinion that's a better option than having some NPCs show up to save the day and steal the players' glory. The players have made it pretty clear to me that while they like having the support of NPCs, they don't want NPCs fighting with them and stealing their glory.

Quote:
(And there's always another BBEG IRL, so why should it be any different in fantasy worlds? Take Game of Thrones: half the characters on the show are BBEGs, and there's not enough room in Westeros for all of them. Your demon boss' biggest opponents aren't PCs getting too big for their britches, but equivalent or even greater CR competitor BBEGs than might want to horn in on her sweet gig.)
Sure, in the game world there are bigger, more dangerous fish than the current BBEG, but the campaign doesn't go on forever. It just isn't satisfying to spend a near entire campaign against a particular BBEG, defeat her, but then learning all of the sudden that they weren't the end boss. Any man-behind-the-man who shows up afterward doesn't feel much more important or impactful than a random wandering monster. There's just not enough time left in the campaign to build one up.

that's why you don't spring it right after the fight you hint at it all the way up until the fight and have it confirmed right as the fight begins


@Xexys

I was just guessing that she was a Marilith by gender and level (Called Type V Demon in previous editions with names listed: Aishapra, Kevokulli, Marilith and Rehnaremme). Succubus with class levels actually sounds more dangerous.


well you could have demon bbeg disapear and leave gift for them with a nice little note telling them.

you may have stopped me here, make no mistake you will hear from me again until then here are a few gifts for you , atleast I have things to learn for next time.

demon's gift can be anything you see fit. wouldnt leave cursed items though. few sacks of gold..

in hindsight this might make someone feel cheated unless next gm runs with it.


In almost every PF campaign logical action could have the PC's killed earlier on. Of you want to be logical, and still not have the BBEG make bad decisions then you can have an NPC give the PC's help, maybe in the form of a mindblank spell. If the PC's next action is obvious, and the BBEG will ambush them, then it makes sense to let the players know. The players are probably assuming the BBEG will sit back so they have become accustomed to that style of play. With them knowing you are not running a traditional PF/D&D game they can try to come up with other ways to get the job done without walking directly into a trap.


It sounds like you've built up a good story and followed along well with how things should progress (the BBEG moving along a reasonable checklist and not trying to smash the PCs straight out until they are at a level where they have a fighting chance.) What is it that you are asking for though? I am not quite clear.

Are you asking whether she would or should attack them? Because eventually she would unless she's already at the end of her plans and is about to [finish her doomsday device/complete a ritual/achieve victory], in which case it's up to the PCs to confront her.

Or are you asking how she should go about it? Whether to attack them head on, at their base, home, or stronghold? Or whether she should attack their allies (in such a way that the PCs can move to their aid, possibly failing or possibly saving their ally, which is the important part, not killing her)?


Pizza Lord wrote:

It sounds like you've built up a good story and followed along well with how things should progress (the BBEG moving along a reasonable checklist and not trying to smash the PCs straight out until they are at a level where they have a fighting chance.) What is it that you are asking for though? I am not quite clear.

Are you asking whether she would or should attack them? Because eventually she would unless she's already at the end of her plans and is about to [finish her doomsday device/complete a ritual/achieve victory], in which case it's up to the PCs to confront her.

Or are you asking how she should go about it? Whether to attack them head on, at their base, home, or stronghold? Or whether she should attack their allies (in such a way that the PCs can move to their aid, possibly failing or possibly saving their ally, which is the important part, not killing her)?

I think what I'd really want to know is this: Gathering her allies for an attack on the players is the most logical course of action for her.

If she gathers her allies now and confronts the PCs, the likely outcome is a TPK. Since it would be a TPK very much driven by an NPC's actions (As opposed to the PCs proactively biting off more than they can chew), how would you feel about it as a player if this happened to you? In normal games a TPK is a very significant event, but there a couple of factors in my game that would serve to lessen its impact:

1. Because of the many favors and heroic acts the PCs have performed, there are several powerful individuals who, upon learning the PCs have been killed, would gather their remains and have them resurrected.
2. Because I'm using the Automatic Bonus Progression system from Pathfinder Unchained, the PCs don't actually have a lot of hard-to-replace magic items (with one really big exception). Anything they lost wouldn't be difficult to replace.

It's these mitigating factors that are making me seriously consider a confrontation. But it's still a TPK, hence my concern.


Reading the other posters has brought something to mind.
First though, you need to accept that high intelligence does not presuppose a logical, methodical approach. Intelligence allows you to better handle complex situations but how you approach them is more personality than intellect. (BTW, the logical, methodical approach is more indicative of a Bright Normal than a Genius, and at Int:18 your Succubus is, at the very least, on the lower edge of genius, no matter how you define it.). Now, several of us have pointed out that a succubus, no matter how intelligent, is unlikely to be methodical, nor is she likely to be a cool thinker when things go wrong.

Now, by your descriptions, her strategies have been quite methodical, to the level of "check-the-box" methodology. Once a box has been checked she doesn't really go back to it. Her tactics are based on the past, not on the now. This is not really in character for a Spawn of the Abyss, a place where history is nearly irrelevant because continuity is mostly absent.

Her strategies as described are those of a Devil or a Khyton, edging towards Khyton as it doesn't show the typical arrogant signature of the Devil, who would almost be unable to resist showing he is in command of the (venom dripping disdain) Demon. A Khyton would have no problem letting the succubus believe she is in charge, but would still be a huge complication as the party closes in on her. It isn't that they have been after the wrong target, it is just they have missed an important one. You keep the plot, but add a twist.


Daw wrote:
Now, several of us have pointed out that a succubus, no matter how intelligent, is unlikely to be methodical, nor is she likely to be a cool thinker when things go wrong.

Right in the description of the succubus's beastiary entry is the following: Among the demon hordes, a succubus can often rise to incredible heights of power through her manipulations and sensual charms, and many a demonic war has raged due to the subtle machinations of such creatures.

That absolutely implies a creature capable of methodical, multidimensional scheming.

But more than that, she's my NPC and it's the way I've conceptualized, designed, and played her. I don't give a crap about devils, krytons, or whatever else there is or should be. It's my game and I'll create NPCs as I see fit.


Personally, I'm introducing a Succubus (alter self) as an almost-main-character who (given she's a demon) is perfectly willing to screw with the town and remain hidden-in-plain-sight while doing so. Without too much detail, I agree that they should be able to be devil-ish if their intention is to spread chaos.

I think I'd give the PC's some kind of warning that what is coming is too much for them, and they need to high-tail it. This is often how a video game deals with the boss character:
* Sends minions you beat them
* You run into him and he's 2OP4U
* He attempts to destroy you in some kind of ridiculous trap scenario
* More Minions
* Now you're strong enough for the boss

In that general arc, what you can do is say "She's comin' to get you" and possibly have an NPC(s) die in belligerent fashion in front of them if they decide to stick it out. They will be forced to suicide themselves OR run; with a caveat: They may also actually find a way to win; which would be quite spectacular.


This is a Demon that's plans have been smashed by the PC. Those plans have been years in the making.

A little rampage and destruction while blaming it all the PC would fit the story.

Does a couple of things -
People start blaming the PC for not stopping the Demon.

PC have to figure out and try to stop the rampage. Either by protecting potential targets or tracking down the Demons lair.

---------------

Another suggestion is trashing the PC reputation in another Kingdom or having the Demon try to start a war between 2 different kingdoms.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xexyz wrote:
5. It'll take too long for her to gather the necessary gems for six soul binds (there are six PCs) in addition to acquiring a way to cast the spell six times to begin with.

Well, this seems like a pretty good way to avoid a pointless unwinnable fight that the party can only survive by being rescued by your NPCs. (And make no mistake, whether the NPCs rescue them in the moment, or by later on springing for 150,000 gold worth of diamonds for six castings of True Resurrection, that is what you're doing here, either way: the players only being able to survive your villain thanks to the intervention of your NPCs.) Give her an opportunity for her to potentially get a line on six black sapphires that she does think might pan out in time for it to be worth it, and have it not work out quite in time for her after all, until after the PCs are ready for the real, do-or-die showdown.

After all, at this sort of level, if really is so crucial to her plans to stop the PCs that it'd be stupid for her not to do it, then it seems like it ought to be worth it to actually stop the PCs, as opposed to just temporarily inconvenience them.

Xexyz wrote:
If she gathers her allies now and confronts the PCs, the likely outcome is a TPK. Since it would be a TPK very much driven by an NPC's actions (As opposed to the PCs proactively biting off more than they can chew), how would you feel about it as a player if this happened to you?

Everything would depend on execution. But generally speaking, I think one big factor that comes to mind right off the bat would be that my annoyance would be largely proportional to the amount of time out of a session that the TPK took. If it's an early session in the campaign and the BBEG and her army teleports in and crushes us in a single round before we can even act, and its clearly part of the plot that we get resurrected, then eh, that's not inherently an awful thing. We die, get resurrected, and go on from there in pretty short order.

But if it's a sprawling combat that takes a whole session, and I realize at the end of it all that there was no practical way for us to win it, and it was basically that the GM wanted the campaign to have multi-hour cutscene where nothing we did was likely to have any practical effect on anything, then that would feel a whole lot more annoying, personally.

So I wouldn't say it would be impossible to do in a fun way, especially if you set up the fight in such a way that the party could still do meaningful actions in the context of it. ("Sure, maybe we got mulched, but at least we managed to damage the Lambent Foobar MacGuffin in the process, which means that fight still hurt her plans to some degree, and we're in a better position now even after getting resurrected than we would if we'd done worse in that fight and still needed to get resurrected.")

Still, even if it's not impossible to do in a fun way, it's definitely trickier territory than usual to get right. There's a lot of ways I can see it going quite un-fun as well. Just comes down to the execution, like I said.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
claymade wrote:


Everything would depend on execution. But generally speaking, I think one big factor that comes to mind right off the bat would be that my annoyance would be largely proportional to the amount of time out of a session that the TPK took. If it's an early session in the campaign and the BBEG and her army teleports in and crushes us in a single round before we can even act, and its clearly part of the plot that we get resurrected, then eh, that's not inherently an awful thing. We die, get resurrected, and go on from there in pretty short order.
But if it's a sprawling combat that takes a whole session, and I realize at the end of it all that there was no practical way for us to win it, and it was basically that the GM wanted the campaign to have multi-hour cutscene where nothing we did was likely to have any practical effect on anything, then that would feel a whole lot more annoying, personally.
So I wouldn't say it would be impossible to do in a fun way, especially if you set up the fight in such a way that the party could still do meaningful actions in the context of it. ("Sure, maybe we got mulched, but at least we managed to damage the Lambent Foobar MacGuffin in the process, which means that fight still hurt her plans to some degree, and we're in a better position now even after getting resurrected than we would if we'd done worse in that fight and still needed to get resurrected.")

Well said. If YOU have to do a TPK-resurrection scenario, keep it short and they must have the ability to do something worthwhile. Kill an important minion, break a Macguffin, Save an important ally, discover a vital secret...something. But if she is so smart, why won't she take steps to prevent the resurrections?

Question; have you made it clear to the players how methodical she is? Are your players long time players, or is this their 1st campaign with you?

I find it funny, this sounds like the DM equivalent of "But it's what my character would do."


@Claymade - Thanks for your perspective. If she does end up attacking it won't be an absolute no-win scenario; dice rolls are dice rolls and you never know what might happen. Also, The PCs can always try to run away. The intention is also to kill them quickly - if the fight drags on it means she's made a mistake because her whole goal would be to crush them swiftly and decisively.

@Valandil - She'll take steps to prevent probable resurrections - she'll disintegrate their bodies after she kills them and scatter the ashes - but preventing a true resurrection will require soul binds, and that currently isn't quickly feasible for her.

I've been gaming with this group for years. It's the first Pathfinder game I've run for them, but most of the group has played in other RPGs I've run.

About your observation "But it's what my character would do." That's somewhat accurate. If the roles were reversed most PCs would absolutely take steps to prevent the resurrection of a dangerous enemy if they suspected that enemy had people who could/would raise them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xexyz wrote:
Daw wrote:
Now, several of us have pointed out that a succubus, no matter how intelligent, is unlikely to be methodical, nor is she likely to be a cool thinker when things go wrong.

Right in the description of the succubus's beastiary entry is the following: Among the demon hordes, a succubus can often rise to incredible heights of power through her manipulations and sensual charms, and many a demonic war has raged due to the subtle machinations of such creatures.

That absolutely implies a creature capable of methodical, multidimensional scheming.

But more than that, she's my NPC and it's the way I've conceptualized, designed, and played her. I don't give a crap about devils, krytons, or whatever else there is or should be. It's my game and I'll create NPCs as I see fit.

Of course you it is your right. It does call into question your motives for creating this thread, and makes it appear less a request for advice than an attempt to justify a rather dickish excuse for a TPK.

Just Sayin


If she is consistently failing to mere mortals why isn't she in the midst of a power struggle?
Is the point of demons that they follow the strong? Not the consistently undermined.

Don't run it as a fight against a group of demons, run it as a fight against a group of fighting demons.


Daw wrote:

Of course you it is your right. It does call into question your motives for creating this thread, and makes it appear less a request for advice than an attempt to justify a rather dickish excuse for a TPK.

Just Sayin

I got cross because this stuff about how demons are supposed to act makes it sound like you're implying I made the NPC incorrectly based on some notion that demons, devils, and whatnot are all monolithic creatures who all are the same. I don't feel the need to chain myself to such stereotypes.


As a general rule, getting angry at people trying to help you in the advice section is rarely conducive to productive conversations, people in the advice section don't come here to give people a hard time.


Question to consider: would this demon BBEG actually want to call on all of her most powerful allies just to deal with a few puny mortals? Admitting to them that she needs them to deal with enemies that shouldn't even be able to threaten a dretch would be tantamount to admitting that she is too weak to deal with them herself. And when it comes to high-level evil players, admitting weakness is a recipe for getting stabbed in the back by your "allies."


Okay, just to review...

The BBEG's plans to defeat the PCs hinge on:

1. Knowing where the PCs are at any and every moment, either through scrying or telepathic contact with a spy.

1a. Actually having eyes on the surroundings. If they don't know the surroundings, they're taking a big risk that they could be entering an unwinnable fight.

2. Gathering a force powerful enough to squash the PCs without the PCs hearing about it and taking countermeasures against attack.

3. Having a minion powerful enough to teleport the force to the PCs (Wizard 9 for a suicide mission, bringing 3 allies; Wizard 12 to bring 4 others and stand a good chance of surviving the fight, Wizard 13 to not risk a teleport error).

4. Having a group of minions not only loyal enough to the BBEG to mount this attack, but loyal enough to each other to fight together and not get in each others' ways (or to take the opportunity to get the other killed).

5. Knowing enough about the PCs to not make a tactical blunder. For example, if a PC has permanent True Seeing and the BBEG doesn't know, then her minions could potentially rely on Invisibility to get the drop on the PCs from teleport.

6. Preventng the PCs from escaping. If the PCs escape round 1, the effort is for naught.

These are all opportunities to avoid TPK while still having your BBEG act how you believe she should. These are also things to review to make sure that your BBEG actually has the proper resources to launch the attack.


She's a smart succubus, not a melee brute, so I don't think she'd naturally want to go toe-to-toe with them anyway except perhaps one at a time. So I wouldn't expect her to try destroying them outright herself.

How about using them to attack one of her enemies? Drop hints that one of her allies, say an efreeti wizard (or demon, daemon, urgothoan cleric, whatever) is doing something vital to her plot and must be stopped; the PCs go off and waste time attacking said efreeti. The efreeti is of course one of her enemies for entirely unrelated and petty reasons, such as his mocking her beauty 600 years ago. If the PCs kill him, so much the better. If the efreeti kills the PCs, good. If they just waste time faffing around killing mook elementals and staying out of her hair, that's good too. Smart PCs might of course figure it out and ally with the efreet...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Valandil Ancalime wrote:
I find it funny, this sounds like the DM equivalent of "But it's what my character would do."

Ha! I actually laughed out loud after reading this, because it's so very spot on.

And yeah, I don't think that kind of shifting of the blame is any more valid coming from the GM's side of things than it is from the players' side. Less valid, arguably, since the GM has far, far more tools and levers to tweak the situation from all different directions than the player does, so their ability to find an alternate outcome has a scope as wide as the imagination. Not to mention that the scope for abuse is also greater with the GM's greater power as well.

When a player comes down with the dreaded "my guy" syndrome, the inherent boundaries to their in-system capabilities can at least limit the damage to a degree. When a GM comes down with "my guy" syndrome, though... ooooh boy.

(Of course, as I said in my previous post, that's not to say that it's absolutely impossible for a GM-initiated TPK-and-res style encounter to be an overall net positive experience for the campaign's enjoyment as a whole, depending on table preferences. So I'm not saying that any attempt ever to do so would fall under "my guy" syndrome automatically. Just that "that's what 'my guy' would do" is not enough, in and of itself, to justify something like that, IMHO.)


I actually got the impression that Xexyz started this thread because he wrote himself into the TPK corner and was asking for advice on how to get out of that corner without resorting to some contrived plot device.

I mean, why would you have a character that suddenly behaves differently when it is convenient? That damages your narrative.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

How about this - your PCs angered a powerful demon. Did they prepare for the wrath to come. They need some crazy NPC that wears a tinfoil hat tell them how to at least sleep somewhere secure if they poke at demon beehives with a stick. For example, rest in a monastery that is protected by a forbiddence spell or something. If the heroes have a well defended base, then it makes sense why the demon doesn't go for a TPK. If the players don't get the hint, then a TPK happens.


I'm now very curious what the bbeg's overall plan is.

Not all plot devices are contrived, and I think that some in this thread have argued that the game has imbedded plot devices in its setting. Demons have ways of defeating themselves sometimes, due to their very nature, and they also have ways of making enemies on all the various planes.

It may make sense for thus demon to take on the PCs full frontal at thus point, but it also may make sense for some celestial force to step in at this point.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I want to know if you commonly run your games like this.

If not then I wouldn't do it. It is the equivalent of going from having your NPC's use subpar tactics in battle to suddenly having them fight like they were trained by special forces. At the very least let the players know you are about to change how run the game.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Kitty Catoblepas wrote:
I mean, why would you have a character that suddenly behaves differently when it is convenient? That damages your narrative.

I'll try to answer in my own (poor) words, but one of the well-known articles that covers the subject, among other things, is this classic one written by Rich Burlew, and he says it probably way better than I could, so I would feel remiss in not also linking it as the superior resource. Also, this description of the issue linked here provides some valuable insight, particularly the story, as a concrete example of how people can get into that way of thinking, how damaging it can be, and why the person telling the story is so averse to it now.

Anyway, the short answer is that, even for mere players who have a vastly more limited scope of ways to adjust the situation, when the starting perspective is a fixed idea of what "my guy" would necessarily do, and compromising on that is thought of as poor roleplaying, that tends to result in less-fun table experiences than tables where the perspective is to ask the question of "how can I make my character work in a way that results in more fun for all of us at the table?"

Basically (to take a more extreme case) it's the difference between:

A) deciding "my character is lecherous and insensitive, therefore I will constantly hit on my party member, despite it making her player uncomfortable, because that's what 'my guy' would do!"

and

B) deciding "my constantly hitting on my party member is making her player uncomfortable, therefore I need to come up with some in-character reason for why my lecherous and insensitive character would nevertheless stop doing that, because it's hurting her enjoyment of the game."

Some might argue that A is better roleplaying. I don't agree, and I try to foster an attitude of B-style approach to looking at these kind of issues when they crop up at tables I'm involved in. IMHO, when the "starting point" of how you look at a situation is the starting point of the "my guy" approach of A, then that creates a table dynamic that has the potential to be far less enjoyable than when the "starting point" of how you look at it is more like approach B.

(Not to mention that, as Rich Burlew's article points out, even when you look at it from the B position, if you're willing to exert some thought and creativity, you can almost always find some way to either interpret or grow your character in a way that doesn't actually violate the core concept behind him. People are very complex, and approach B can actually turn into a way to give your character some interesting depth if you're willing to embrace flexibility.)

That's not to say that characters can't clash in terms of their values, of course. Far from it! If it was the other way around, if the character didn't like the other character's behavior while the player wasn't losing any enjoyment over it, then by all means, roleplay that value clash out! But again, that isn't being justified only just on "my guy" grounds alone, but rather on the more fundamental grounds that the roleplayed clash is actually enjoyable conflict for the table to work through, in that situation.

And again: that's just for players. If we're holding players to that standard, then the GM even more so. The GM has so many more levers available to them than the players do in order to introduce new justifications or impediments or reasons or new factors or altered situations or complications to explain why it might make more sense for their NPCs to take one course or another to route them in a way that maximizes table fun.

And just to make sure I'm clear, this also isn't me saying "don't ever let your NPCs use tactics that might cause TPKs". Sometimes, for many groups, the genuine possibility of TPKs is part of what makes it fun for them. I've certainly killed my share of PCs. And some of them did result in a better appreciation of how real the stakes were, and more fun in the table overall.

Others? Others had much more of a "my guy" component to them--on my part--that I regret now, looking back. I don't think I handled those PC deaths well. What I didn't fully appreciate (at the time) was how my players and I had different ideas about what kind of game we were looking for. And because of that, I had created my world with the sort of NPCs and structures in place that turned out to severely punish the kind of gung-ho, bold-and-audacious playstyle they were interested in. But rather than work with them to make adjustments to my original vision, I kept stubbornly on, just making the world react "logically" to their actions according to the plan I started with. I guess... I expected that they would "get the picture" and start playing the "right" way.

Instead, it just ended in a mess.

No amount of patting myself on the back for how unflinchingly I held to my true, "logical" vision of that world and its NPCs would actually make it worth how un-fun the campaign actually ended up being. No, in that case, I was completely wrong. My fundamental goal should have been for the table to have a fun time, not to hold religiously to any particular NPC concept or world concept or PC concept.

1 to 50 of 57 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Story vs. Game, or, "What would the BBEG do?" All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.