So long story short here, as this is almost a year into a weekly campaign so there is a lot of detail to skim over...
One of my players is playing a warlock (Dion), whose current patron is a god of duality. The god is both one of good and evil, two sides of the same coin type deal. Now due to some trauma in Dion's past, he grew up mostly aware of the evil side, however after finding and travelling with his current party he has begun to feel more welcome and safe, and he is now hearing both sides more or less equally. They each try to influence Dion and tip the scales one way or the other, and above board are trying to use him as a tool to tip the divine balance in their favor. With all that being said, over the last couple sessions, the player has started to play Dion as leaning into the darker side more. Now normally I would be all for this as I am not one to shy away from an evil campaign, however, none of my other players are even remotely going this direction right now.
Talking with each of my 4 players, It seems like our paladin wants to continue on a good path, and wants to destroy the big bad. Our rogue wants to protect this found family, and destroy the big bad. Our monk wants to become strong and be able to look at himself with pride, he is the most neutral of the party. Now talking with Dion's player, he more or less wants to join/replace the big bad I set up.
I went into this campaign really wanting to let the players have control of the story as much as I could, more or less just reacting to what they decide to do, but I am really not sure how to handle this particular situation, as up until a couple sessions ago they were all in on the good path, and pretty unified in their plans. It is just a left turn I'm not really prepped for so any advice on how to proceed or ideas on how to make what the players want work would be super helpful.
Given you’re the DM and presumably playing the patron how were you intending to play this out? If both halves are part of the patron maybe tipping the balance results in the character losing certain traits/abilities so the player has to maintain balance to keep both halves of the patron happy and keep all the abilities?
how is the player? Can they pull off lawful evil? I’m happy with chaotic players as long as their characters have a reason to be there. If being evil means they will kill the party that’s bad, but if player characters are still safe and evil means clandestine making cults etc then they could still work with the party?
So far I've been writing that he will eventually choose the good side as that is how the party has been going till now. The road there hasn't been fully fleshed out, as I've been letting them have the lead over the main story for the most part, but I was planning for an eventual showdown where he will have to make a concrete choice and fight off the influence of the other half. Ultimately the plan was for him to be rid of the worst of the influence, but always have a little bit of the voice there, since it is just the other side of that coin. I think I could reverse this plan, but I want to keep my other players happy as well, so with them staying good, that's where I've hit the snag.
Powers wise, it has been mostly cosmetic/flavor as they still are kinda low level, but I was gonna start to give him some more healy buff type stuff to go with the good side of the balance, thinking about it, I could give him curse/debuff style stuff for the evil side maybe? Necrotic damage mod or actual necromancy stuff? I never really planned for him to walk the balance in the long run here, was more expecting a reconsideration that people aren't horrible and an ultimate flip to good, but balance could be interesting.
They are a fairly newer player, so I don't really know how he will handle that, and more so he is definitely going more nuetral evil or even chaotic evil from what I've been seeing. It is very emotionally charged and manic. So far he hasn't come to odds or disagreed a ton with the party, but his combat tactics are getting... more overkill? Not really cruel, but angry. I thinkk the paladin would be the thing here, if he continues like this and the paladin doesn't shift or vice versa it will prolly come down to a fight between them. At which point, the rogue and monk would most likely stick with the paladin and now I've got a three on one PVP in my party, and I don't think any of us want that.
That being said, The player has talked to me very briefly, and at the time mostly jokingly, about Dion becoming the big bad, and after talking after this last session he is more serious about it so I don't really want to flat out say no for the sake of the party, cause that is no fun for anybody involved, but if he does go full bore, Dion can not take on the rest of the party, even if I give him stuff to make it an even fight, either 1 or 3 toons are prolly dead, and that is even less fun I think.
If it were a more controlled evil, maybe the clandestine cult thing, but right now at least it is very manic and emotional and I am not sure how to write the next steps here to help guide him to a more... useful evil I guess? At the risk of repeating myself, I don't mind if he goes evil, I just don't want the party to implode because of it
Sounds like a great time to call a meeting, eat some pizza and real talk it out. Just put out there what you find fun (the party unites against evil) and listen as the players do the same. Maybe Dion's player is down for the idea of turning on the party and seeing how it plays out. Maybe they just haven't thought through what will happen after the heel turn and the shift of their character from player to NPC baddie.
And for me that's an important thing. I have YET to see a table stay a positive game space once one player is out to beat the rest of the table. Once Player A's goals is the defeat of Player B, then the real gaps in the DND armor shows. And you NEED all of the players to be in on that kind of PVP setting. It's way way way easier to turn a PC into an NPC and let Dion's player have a chance to join the team as a new hero to bring down his old character.
For some players that question of "but then what" is a good one to ask because many times people get caught in the "but it's what my character will do" and then a few sessions later say "this game isn't fun any more". For me, I'd much rather have light meta gaming (ie bending a character's goals) than having the game end (ie players have stopped having fun and leave).
If Dion decides to follow the path of evil and try to replace the big bad that the rest of the party is trying to destroy then the only result is typically PVP. You have two groups of characters/players whose objectives and interests in the game are diametrically opposed. That typically leads to conflict.
There are some groups that would be fine with this and can manage to role play characters in such a situation but there are a lot of groups where the players would not consider this fun even if the one character whose it turning evil finds it to be a hoot.
From a role play perspective, say Dion decides they want to replace the big bad guy, he knows that the rest of the party wants to destroy the BBEG and not replace them. So what does he do? The best plan is to use the party to eliminate the BBEG while trying to surreptitiously take over the BBEG's network of minions/allies. The latter is not simple since these minions/allies have no reason to trust or follow Dion. In addition, they have to do this without the rest of the party discovering what is going on. Dion is likely not as powerful as the current BBEG since if they were, they would be able to take out the BBEG on their own, which they can't. So, how is it even possible for Dion to take over?
It can be fun for the players to guide the development of the story but it is up to the DM to decide how their choices and actions interact with the game world. A character/player saying they want to take over from the BBEG isn't a license for that to actually happen. The DM could arrange for it but why would it make sense in the context of the game world for this transfer of power to actually occur? What actions did the player/character take in game to make this possible?
----
Anyway, you basically have a few choices ..
1) Talk to all the players about the direction of the campaign.There are two tacks you could take with this:
a) Specific. Discuss what each character wants to do and how they see their characters developing. Decide if the other players are ok with one of the character in the party taking an evil path. This way, the players know what is going on but the characters remain unaware. The challenge with this one is that I am guessing that the player who wants to become the BBEG wants to keep that information hidden from the other players so that just the DM and the player are in on the secret. That is another recipe for potential strife between players later when the rest of the players feel betrayed when they find out about the hidden sub-plot. Some players will think it was cool, others will feel like they have been left out.
b) General. Discuss in general whether the players want a generally good aligned party or not. Don't get into specifics but get everyone on board with the general direction of how they think the party should develop. Good, good/neutral, neutral, or a mix. Are the players playing heroes or can some of them be villains? Everyone in the party should respect whichever decision is made and role play the long term result though occasional dips to the dark side might happen, the long term would be generally neutral or good. So, no BBEG but maybe some smaller digression on a path to overall goodness?
2) Follow up with the warlock character and how they want to join/replace the BBEG. Replacing may not be possible in the current situation because the warlock likely just isn't powerful enough yet - but if they turn towards evil they could start creating their own network of criminals/minions/allies so that one day they could become a BBEG on their own. However, again, they will have to keep their activities hidden from the rest of the party and in the long run if the rest of them follow a path of "good" then this is also likely to lead to conflict.
3) Direct the player away from the evil path by having some more intervention from the good part of the diety (the DM). As mentioned, their plan to supplant the current BBEG who is powerful enough to challenge the whole party is likely a non-starter since the warlock is likely not powerful enough to take over. If they want to join the BBEG the first task is likely to be the betrayal and defeat of the party since they are likely the biggest threat to the BBEG. It would also be a sign of loyalty to the BBEG.
The BBEG organization may also have lieutenants who are weaker than the BBEG but at least twice as powerful as the warlock by themselves - these NPCs are far more likely to be accepted as replacements for the BBEG than this weaker stranger who just seems to think that its "cool to be evil". Basically, whether plot ideas suggested by players are successful are up to the DM to decide and it seems to me from the little information available that the warlock character doesn't have a realistic chance to take over from the current BBEG and if they decide to join the BBEG they may be a junior member and will likely be asked to betray the party as one of their first tasks just to prove their loyalty.
5) Decide up front. Just say no to this particular plot direction.Say it is ok to dip into evil actions but the character won't become the BBEG that the party needs to defeat.
Tell the player that trying to replace or join the current BBEG is likely to fail, that it will incur the enmity of the other characters, that this will lead to PVP and probably eventually the warlock leaving the party or the warlock succeeding in killing off the other characters so they can pursue their evil plans unencumbered by the morals of the party members - which is also likely to be the end of the campaign (unless everyone else decides to roll evil characters).
Personally, I don't think it should be the decision of one player/character to switch the track towards evil and effectively derail the character development of the other players. Maybe at that point, the warlock doesn't belong in the party and the player should just get a new character that will fit in better.
2) Follow up with the warlock character and how they want to join/replace the BBEG. Replacing may not be possible in the current situation because the warlock likely just isn't powerful enough yet - but if they turn towards evil they could start creating their own network of criminals/minions/allies so that one day they could become a BBEG on their own. However, again, they will have to keep their activities hidden from the rest of the party and in the long run if the rest of them follow a path of "good" then this is also likely to lead to conflict.
In my experience, limited as it is, having a player keeping secrets from the party long term only to have some sort of big reveal is a very high risk maneuver, especially if any of the party are hurt or harmed in the reveal itself. The nature of collaborative gaming tends towards a lot of group interconnection and some people might find that "you when when you said you were going to spare the miller you really turned him into a demonic soldier?!?" to be a deal breaker for fun.
My advice is always to get consent from your players up front if you can, especially if it involves potential secret making to run counter to the group
Contact Dion’s player and hash out your plans for the future. If there’s a chance the Dion will turn on the rest of the party, then you should both know what that means for the game and how to transition from that event (which will probably involve Dion’s player rolling up another character to go with the party, unless you’re feeling really confident about running the campaign at two different places at once).
I find that newer players often don't understand how collaborative games work. They might be too used to video games or get really into their character such that they don't really think about how their character needs to work with the group. A conversation is the best way forward, here. You need to level-set expectations.
I've been there. I had a campaign with players who didn't share the same goals and who didn't even like each other. The disharmony got real old, real fast. It's kinda fun in the short run to have some inter-party tension, but it just gets frustrating as time goes on - for the players, and most of all for the DM. Ultimately, D&D is a collaborative game, and the players and their characters need to be able to work together to make the game run smoothly. So if your player can't see Dion sticking with the party in the mid-term, let alone the long-term, it's probably best for everyone that he become an NPC and the player roll up a character that aligns with the rest.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So long story short here, as this is almost a year into a weekly campaign so there is a lot of detail to skim over...
One of my players is playing a warlock (Dion), whose current patron is a god of duality. The god is both one of good and evil, two sides of the same coin type deal. Now due to some trauma in Dion's past, he grew up mostly aware of the evil side, however after finding and travelling with his current party he has begun to feel more welcome and safe, and he is now hearing both sides more or less equally. They each try to influence Dion and tip the scales one way or the other, and above board are trying to use him as a tool to tip the divine balance in their favor. With all that being said, over the last couple sessions, the player has started to play Dion as leaning into the darker side more. Now normally I would be all for this as I am not one to shy away from an evil campaign, however, none of my other players are even remotely going this direction right now.
Talking with each of my 4 players, It seems like our paladin wants to continue on a good path, and wants to destroy the big bad. Our rogue wants to protect this found family, and destroy the big bad. Our monk wants to become strong and be able to look at himself with pride, he is the most neutral of the party. Now talking with Dion's player, he more or less wants to join/replace the big bad I set up.
I went into this campaign really wanting to let the players have control of the story as much as I could, more or less just reacting to what they decide to do, but I am really not sure how to handle this particular situation, as up until a couple sessions ago they were all in on the good path, and pretty unified in their plans. It is just a left turn I'm not really prepped for so any advice on how to proceed or ideas on how to make what the players want work would be super helpful.
Thanks a bunch!
Given you’re the DM and presumably playing the patron how were you intending to play this out? If both halves are part of the patron maybe tipping the balance results in the character losing certain traits/abilities so the player has to maintain balance to keep both halves of the patron happy and keep all the abilities?
how is the player? Can they pull off lawful evil? I’m happy with chaotic players as long as their characters have a reason to be there. If being evil means they will kill the party that’s bad, but if player characters are still safe and evil means clandestine making cults etc then they could still work with the party?
So far I've been writing that he will eventually choose the good side as that is how the party has been going till now. The road there hasn't been fully fleshed out, as I've been letting them have the lead over the main story for the most part, but I was planning for an eventual showdown where he will have to make a concrete choice and fight off the influence of the other half. Ultimately the plan was for him to be rid of the worst of the influence, but always have a little bit of the voice there, since it is just the other side of that coin. I think I could reverse this plan, but I want to keep my other players happy as well, so with them staying good, that's where I've hit the snag.
Powers wise, it has been mostly cosmetic/flavor as they still are kinda low level, but I was gonna start to give him some more healy buff type stuff to go with the good side of the balance, thinking about it, I could give him curse/debuff style stuff for the evil side maybe? Necrotic damage mod or actual necromancy stuff? I never really planned for him to walk the balance in the long run here, was more expecting a reconsideration that people aren't horrible and an ultimate flip to good, but balance could be interesting.
They are a fairly newer player, so I don't really know how he will handle that, and more so he is definitely going more nuetral evil or even chaotic evil from what I've been seeing. It is very emotionally charged and manic. So far he hasn't come to odds or disagreed a ton with the party, but his combat tactics are getting... more overkill? Not really cruel, but angry. I thinkk the paladin would be the thing here, if he continues like this and the paladin doesn't shift or vice versa it will prolly come down to a fight between them. At which point, the rogue and monk would most likely stick with the paladin and now I've got a three on one PVP in my party, and I don't think any of us want that.
That being said, The player has talked to me very briefly, and at the time mostly jokingly, about Dion becoming the big bad, and after talking after this last session he is more serious about it so I don't really want to flat out say no for the sake of the party, cause that is no fun for anybody involved, but if he does go full bore, Dion can not take on the rest of the party, even if I give him stuff to make it an even fight, either 1 or 3 toons are prolly dead, and that is even less fun I think.
If it were a more controlled evil, maybe the clandestine cult thing, but right now at least it is very manic and emotional and I am not sure how to write the next steps here to help guide him to a more... useful evil I guess? At the risk of repeating myself, I don't mind if he goes evil, I just don't want the party to implode because of it
Sounds like a great time to call a meeting, eat some pizza and real talk it out. Just put out there what you find fun (the party unites against evil) and listen as the players do the same. Maybe Dion's player is down for the idea of turning on the party and seeing how it plays out. Maybe they just haven't thought through what will happen after the heel turn and the shift of their character from player to NPC baddie.
And for me that's an important thing. I have YET to see a table stay a positive game space once one player is out to beat the rest of the table. Once Player A's goals is the defeat of Player B, then the real gaps in the DND armor shows. And you NEED all of the players to be in on that kind of PVP setting. It's way way way easier to turn a PC into an NPC and let Dion's player have a chance to join the team as a new hero to bring down his old character.
For some players that question of "but then what" is a good one to ask because many times people get caught in the "but it's what my character will do" and then a few sessions later say "this game isn't fun any more". For me, I'd much rather have light meta gaming (ie bending a character's goals) than having the game end (ie players have stopped having fun and leave).
"Teller of tales, dreamer of dreams"
Tips, Tricks, Maps: Lantern Noir Presents
**Streams hosted at at twitch.tv/LaternNoir
If Dion decides to follow the path of evil and try to replace the big bad that the rest of the party is trying to destroy then the only result is typically PVP. You have two groups of characters/players whose objectives and interests in the game are diametrically opposed. That typically leads to conflict.
There are some groups that would be fine with this and can manage to role play characters in such a situation but there are a lot of groups where the players would not consider this fun even if the one character whose it turning evil finds it to be a hoot.
From a role play perspective, say Dion decides they want to replace the big bad guy, he knows that the rest of the party wants to destroy the BBEG and not replace them. So what does he do? The best plan is to use the party to eliminate the BBEG while trying to surreptitiously take over the BBEG's network of minions/allies. The latter is not simple since these minions/allies have no reason to trust or follow Dion. In addition, they have to do this without the rest of the party discovering what is going on. Dion is likely not as powerful as the current BBEG since if they were, they would be able to take out the BBEG on their own, which they can't. So, how is it even possible for Dion to take over?
It can be fun for the players to guide the development of the story but it is up to the DM to decide how their choices and actions interact with the game world. A character/player saying they want to take over from the BBEG isn't a license for that to actually happen. The DM could arrange for it but why would it make sense in the context of the game world for this transfer of power to actually occur? What actions did the player/character take in game to make this possible?
----
Anyway, you basically have a few choices ..
1) Talk to all the players about the direction of the campaign.There are two tacks you could take with this:
a) Specific. Discuss what each character wants to do and how they see their characters developing. Decide if the other players are ok with one of the character in the party taking an evil path. This way, the players know what is going on but the characters remain unaware. The challenge with this one is that I am guessing that the player who wants to become the BBEG wants to keep that information hidden from the other players so that just the DM and the player are in on the secret. That is another recipe for potential strife between players later when the rest of the players feel betrayed when they find out about the hidden sub-plot. Some players will think it was cool, others will feel like they have been left out.
b) General. Discuss in general whether the players want a generally good aligned party or not. Don't get into specifics but get everyone on board with the general direction of how they think the party should develop. Good, good/neutral, neutral, or a mix. Are the players playing heroes or can some of them be villains? Everyone in the party should respect whichever decision is made and role play the long term result though occasional dips to the dark side might happen, the long term would be generally neutral or good. So, no BBEG but maybe some smaller digression on a path to overall goodness?
2) Follow up with the warlock character and how they want to join/replace the BBEG. Replacing may not be possible in the current situation because the warlock likely just isn't powerful enough yet - but if they turn towards evil they could start creating their own network of criminals/minions/allies so that one day they could become a BBEG on their own. However, again, they will have to keep their activities hidden from the rest of the party and in the long run if the rest of them follow a path of "good" then this is also likely to lead to conflict.
3) Direct the player away from the evil path by having some more intervention from the good part of the diety (the DM). As mentioned, their plan to supplant the current BBEG who is powerful enough to challenge the whole party is likely a non-starter since the warlock is likely not powerful enough to take over. If they want to join the BBEG the first task is likely to be the betrayal and defeat of the party since they are likely the biggest threat to the BBEG. It would also be a sign of loyalty to the BBEG.
The BBEG organization may also have lieutenants who are weaker than the BBEG but at least twice as powerful as the warlock by themselves - these NPCs are far more likely to be accepted as replacements for the BBEG than this weaker stranger who just seems to think that its "cool to be evil". Basically, whether plot ideas suggested by players are successful are up to the DM to decide and it seems to me from the little information available that the warlock character doesn't have a realistic chance to take over from the current BBEG and if they decide to join the BBEG they may be a junior member and will likely be asked to betray the party as one of their first tasks just to prove their loyalty.
5) Decide up front. Just say no to this particular plot direction.Say it is ok to dip into evil actions but the character won't become the BBEG that the party needs to defeat.
Tell the player that trying to replace or join the current BBEG is likely to fail, that it will incur the enmity of the other characters, that this will lead to PVP and probably eventually the warlock leaving the party or the warlock succeeding in killing off the other characters so they can pursue their evil plans unencumbered by the morals of the party members - which is also likely to be the end of the campaign (unless everyone else decides to roll evil characters).
Personally, I don't think it should be the decision of one player/character to switch the track towards evil and effectively derail the character development of the other players. Maybe at that point, the warlock doesn't belong in the party and the player should just get a new character that will fit in better.
In my experience, limited as it is, having a player keeping secrets from the party long term only to have some sort of big reveal is a very high risk maneuver, especially if any of the party are hurt or harmed in the reveal itself. The nature of collaborative gaming tends towards a lot of group interconnection and some people might find that "you when when you said you were going to spare the miller you really turned him into a demonic soldier?!?" to be a deal breaker for fun.
My advice is always to get consent from your players up front if you can, especially if it involves potential secret making to run counter to the group
"Teller of tales, dreamer of dreams"
Tips, Tricks, Maps: Lantern Noir Presents
**Streams hosted at at twitch.tv/LaternNoir
Contact Dion’s player and hash out your plans for the future. If there’s a chance the Dion will turn on the rest of the party, then you should both know what that means for the game and how to transition from that event (which will probably involve Dion’s player rolling up another character to go with the party, unless you’re feeling really confident about running the campaign at two different places at once).
I find that newer players often don't understand how collaborative games work. They might be too used to video games or get really into their character such that they don't really think about how their character needs to work with the group. A conversation is the best way forward, here. You need to level-set expectations.
I've been there. I had a campaign with players who didn't share the same goals and who didn't even like each other. The disharmony got real old, real fast. It's kinda fun in the short run to have some inter-party tension, but it just gets frustrating as time goes on - for the players, and most of all for the DM. Ultimately, D&D is a collaborative game, and the players and their characters need to be able to work together to make the game run smoothly. So if your player can't see Dion sticking with the party in the mid-term, let alone the long-term, it's probably best for everyone that he become an NPC and the player roll up a character that aligns with the rest.