I've got a problem in a campaign I'm about to start running. I was working with the players to create their backstories and one player wanted a villain to be connected to theirs. I really liked the idea, so I agreed and gave them a bit of info about the villain. The short-short version is that the PC is an elf that was attacked as a child and now they are hunting for the leader of their attackers. The villain is meant to be a mastermind type, that they slowly uncover the plot of. However, the player really wanted to know more about the villain, explaining that since he's an elf and he's been hunting this guy for hundreds of years he should have more info. I gave him a bit, but he wanted to know way more, like the villains name, his powers, his goals, he even suggested that his character should have fought the villain a few times. I tried to explain that knowing more beforehand makes the villain much more boring and excludes the rest of the party from the game. Nothing that happens in a backstory is ever as impactful as something that happens at the table. He didn't really get what I was trying to say.
Recently, through no fault of his, he accentually read my notes about the villain and it spoils almost everything. All the twists, his secret powers, his goals. Everything. So I tell this player that since he read everything about this villain I have to scrap the villain and come up with a new one. He is adamant however that its fine, again because his character has been hunting the villain for so long. I explained that this doesn't leave any room for me as DM to craft an interesting narrative around this villain. He is disappointed and doesn't want me to replace the villain, but honestly, I just wouldn't even what to do with a character like that. The plot for that villain revolves around figuring out why he captures certain people, what powers allow him to go unnoticed, and he does to those he captures. But this player already knows all of those things. But this player insists that it would still be a good story.
Am I missing something or do I just need to tell this player that he's wrong and move on? I'm open to any suggestions.
The villain is obviously a powerful one who has lived for hundreds of years. He would also be extremely smart as well. He would know the PC is chasing him. Therefore, the villain has probably left clues to find. The clues are not 100% accurate, they are in short false. The villain is doing a disinformation campaign.
Basically, the villain has "purposely" gave the PC all the information/clues the PC read/found/knows.
Now instead of redoing the villain, tweak him. if your PC thinks he has lasers coming out of his eyes, instead it is lightning out of the villains toes. The PC will prep for lasers but "shock" it is not lasers it is something else.
The plot for that villain revolves around figuring out why he captures certain people, what powers allow him to go unnoticed, and he does to those he captures. But this player already knows all of those things.
Tweak these powers and reasonings.
Two things will probably result form this, the PC will see changes and therefore doubt everything he read because it is not lining up, or he will keep believing those things he read are still verbatim, and will actually weaken the party as they Buff for the wrong power.
The above poster has a really good idea. Another option could be that the villian the PC is hunting isn’t actually the villain. Let the player think it is. After a few levels, let him have his confrontation and win. Then he finds some notes or letters that reveal the villian he’s been hunting is really just a flunky. There’s a bigger bad guy pulling the strings. That’s the one who ordered the attack on the PC’s village. But why? Bonus points if you can tie the why to another character’s back story, or the main plot or both, and weave the campaign a little tighter.
And to the issue of the player not getting that he wouldn’t know much about the villian. No matter how old the PC is, he’s still 1st level. How could he have fought this villian, and survived, and still only be level 1? It sounds similar to when some new players want their backstory to be they were the pirate king, or the head of the knightly order. You have to remind them that at 1st level they aren’t the head of anything. That’s a goal their character can work towards, but that’s not where they start. It sounds like you’re trying to explain that, which is good. Just try to stay on top of it, or it might become a problem in future campaigns, as well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I've got a problem in a campaign I'm about to start running. I was working with the players to create their backstories and one player wanted a villain to be connected to theirs. I really liked the idea, so I agreed and gave them a bit of info about the villain. The short-short version is that the PC is an elf that was attacked as a child and now they are hunting for the leader of their attackers. The villain is meant to be a mastermind type, that they slowly uncover the plot of. However, the player really wanted to know more about the villain, explaining that since he's an elf and he's been hunting this guy for hundreds of years he should have more info. I gave him a bit, but he wanted to know way more, like the villains name, his powers, his goals, he even suggested that his character should have fought the villain a few times. I tried to explain that knowing more beforehand makes the villain much more boring and excludes the rest of the party from the game. Nothing that happens in a backstory is ever as impactful as something that happens at the table. He didn't really get what I was trying to say.
Recently, through no fault of his, he accentually read my notes about the villain and it spoils almost everything. All the twists, his secret powers, his goals. Everything. So I tell this player that since he read everything about this villain I have to scrap the villain and come up with a new one. He is adamant however that its fine, again because his character has been hunting the villain for so long. I explained that this doesn't leave any room for me as DM to craft an interesting narrative around this villain. He is disappointed and doesn't want me to replace the villain, but honestly, I just wouldn't even what to do with a character like that. The plot for that villain revolves around figuring out why he captures certain people, what powers allow him to go unnoticed, and he does to those he captures. But this player already knows all of those things. But this player insists that it would still be a good story.
Am I missing something or do I just need to tell this player that he's wrong and move on? I'm open to any suggestions.
The answer is both and/or neither.
The villain is obviously a powerful one who has lived for hundreds of years. He would also be extremely smart as well. He would know the PC is chasing him. Therefore, the villain has probably left clues to find. The clues are not 100% accurate, they are in short false. The villain is doing a disinformation campaign.
Basically, the villain has "purposely" gave the PC all the information/clues the PC read/found/knows.
Now instead of redoing the villain, tweak him. if your PC thinks he has lasers coming out of his eyes, instead it is lightning out of the villains toes. The PC will prep for lasers but "shock" it is not lasers it is something else.
The plot for that villain revolves around figuring out why he captures certain people, what powers allow him to go unnoticed, and he does to those he captures. But this player already knows all of those things.
Two things will probably result form this, the PC will see changes and therefore doubt everything he read because it is not lining up, or he will keep believing those things he read are still verbatim, and will actually weaken the party as they Buff for the wrong power.
The above poster has a really good idea. Another option could be that the villian the PC is hunting isn’t actually the villain. Let the player think it is. After a few levels, let him have his confrontation and win. Then he finds some notes or letters that reveal the villian he’s been hunting is really just a flunky. There’s a bigger bad guy pulling the strings. That’s the one who ordered the attack on the PC’s village. But why? Bonus points if you can tie the why to another character’s back story, or the main plot or both, and weave the campaign a little tighter.
And to the issue of the player not getting that he wouldn’t know much about the villian. No matter how old the PC is, he’s still 1st level. How could he have fought this villian, and survived, and still only be level 1? It sounds similar to when some new players want their backstory to be they were the pirate king, or the head of the knightly order. You have to remind them that at 1st level they aren’t the head of anything. That’s a goal their character can work towards, but that’s not where they start. It sounds like you’re trying to explain that, which is good. Just try to stay on top of it, or it might become a problem in future campaigns, as well.