What I do with my group is keep track of what the bbeg is doing while the party does their own thing.
For example, my original intention for my current campaign was for them to realize the king is corrupt after being banished, return and fight him only to realize he's been possessed by a god of pestilence and has made a bunch of plague zombie things (For plot reasons).
They chose NOT to go back to that country AT ALL.
So what I'm doing is escalating the bbeg's plan. Since no one was there to stop him, he's done a lot of conquering and other bad stuff and the party is hearing about it via town criers, diplomats, and other sources.
So rather than leading them to king, OR changing my plot, I'm just gonna have the bbeg WIN and continue WINNING until they either stop him, or this becomes a survival campaign.
What I do with my group is keep track of what the bbeg is doing while the party does their own thing.
I really like that approach. It's what I do with the NPCs and factions in the immediate adventure narrative.
If we had infinite time to plan and update our worlds, we could do this for all factions and countries in the world.
I believe that Adam Koebel ( of Court of Sword stream ) attempted an experiment where he crowd-sourced this; various groups in the community would role-play the actions of various power groups in the world, and resolve conflict. It sort of became a game in-and-of itself, where the larger geo-political game being played by the community at large became the backdrop events for the Campaign.
Not a bad approach at all - I just don't have a community of a few thousand volunteers to update my world :)
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
And another thought, at the end of the day, unless you explicitly tell them, players have NO way of knowing what you have or haven't planned for. If you're good enough at improvising with a straight face, you can convince them that everything you do is part of some huge plan and that you've accounted for all their choices.
Other than keeping track of a few running events in my head, I've decided to stop planning ENTIRELY for DnD and instead make the plot completely reactionary. Basing the development off of their choices. YES i have a bbeg, YES there are "chapter milestones" I have thought of, but if they wanna spend their time playing drinking games in the local tavern, or screwing with shop owners and NPC's alike, I say let 'em. Those sessions are where some of the most memorable moments happen.
I used to like making a deep story that was carefully planned out, but when my players started derailing it, it was frustrating since I had worked so hard. But now, I run everything straight out my ass and it's honestly been the most fun I've ever had DMing!
My points (Purely opinion):
1. If the players need a dragon heart to beat the bbeg because its the ONLY way to beat it, and they don't go get the dragon heart, then maybe the bbeg wins?
2. Its more fun to react to their dumbass decisions than it is to fret about them lol
3. If you have a plot, its gonna unfold whether or not they participate. Have your planned events shape the world they're screwing around in lol
And another thought, at the end of the day, unless you explicitly tell them, players have NO way of knowing what you have or haven't planned for. If you're good enough at improvising with a straight face, you can convince them that everything you do is part of some huge plan and that you've accounted for all their choices.
Also, you can totally plagiarize your own Players, when they come up with better ideas than you had, so long as they don't contradict what you've already presented to them.
This happened to me, when one of the Players made a comment about one of the BBEGs ( it was a multi-factional struggle ), musing aloud "I wonder if he is a dragon". As the DM, I knew he was associated with a cult which worshiped a particular sect of ancient dragons, but when I heard that, I thought to myself " ... well ... he is now .... " ;)
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
As Akacen says, sure, they can roll persuasion, but all a high roll means is that the dragon will hear them out and not instantly try to roast them. Nat 20 is not a "I get to do whatever I want" with a persuasion check, and its a homebrew rule for it to apply to skill checks anyway.
I dont think it's so out of the realm of possibility that an evil chromatic dragon is just so irredeemable viscous that it scorns any attempt at diplomacy and just attacks. Oh, you rolled a nat 20 for persuasion? Sorry, DC is 50. Some people (or dragons) simply cannot be persuaded of something that goes against who they are as a person (or dragon).
Even with a reasonable, non evil, non dragon, I'd like to see the PC who is so persuasive that "hey, give us your heart" works on people. You cannot convince any reasonable person to part with a vital organ unless they're REALLY nice and it's like an organ donation scenario.
It doesn't sound like you HAVE to railroad this into a fight, logically it sounds like it'll end up in a fight anyways.
Maybe make the dragon be controlled by some magical means to where it cannot be reasoned with. Or have it do the breath weapon in the air and kill that player and never deal with it again lol.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-Sol
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What I do with my group is keep track of what the bbeg is doing while the party does their own thing.
For example, my original intention for my current campaign was for them to realize the king is corrupt after being banished, return and fight him only to realize he's been possessed by a god of pestilence and has made a bunch of plague zombie things (For plot reasons).
They chose NOT to go back to that country AT ALL.
So what I'm doing is escalating the bbeg's plan. Since no one was there to stop him, he's done a lot of conquering and other bad stuff and the party is hearing about it via town criers, diplomats, and other sources.
So rather than leading them to king, OR changing my plot, I'm just gonna have the bbeg WIN and continue WINNING until they either stop him, or this becomes a survival campaign.
I really like that approach. It's what I do with the NPCs and factions in the immediate adventure narrative.
If we had infinite time to plan and update our worlds, we could do this for all factions and countries in the world.
I believe that Adam Koebel ( of Court of Sword stream ) attempted an experiment where he crowd-sourced this; various groups in the community would role-play the actions of various power groups in the world, and resolve conflict. It sort of became a game in-and-of itself, where the larger geo-political game being played by the community at large became the backdrop events for the Campaign.
Not a bad approach at all - I just don't have a community of a few thousand volunteers to update my world :)
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
And another thought, at the end of the day, unless you explicitly tell them, players have NO way of knowing what you have or haven't planned for. If you're good enough at improvising with a straight face, you can convince them that everything you do is part of some huge plan and that you've accounted for all their choices.
Other than keeping track of a few running events in my head, I've decided to stop planning ENTIRELY for DnD and instead make the plot completely reactionary. Basing the development off of their choices. YES i have a bbeg, YES there are "chapter milestones" I have thought of, but if they wanna spend their time playing drinking games in the local tavern, or screwing with shop owners and NPC's alike, I say let 'em. Those sessions are where some of the most memorable moments happen.
I used to like making a deep story that was carefully planned out, but when my players started derailing it, it was frustrating since I had worked so hard. But now, I run everything straight out my ass and it's honestly been the most fun I've ever had DMing!
My points (Purely opinion):
1. If the players need a dragon heart to beat the bbeg because its the ONLY way to beat it, and they don't go get the dragon heart, then maybe the bbeg wins?
2. Its more fun to react to their dumbass decisions than it is to fret about them lol
3. If you have a plot, its gonna unfold whether or not they participate. Have your planned events shape the world they're screwing around in lol
Also, you can totally plagiarize your own Players, when they come up with better ideas than you had, so long as they don't contradict what you've already presented to them.
This happened to me, when one of the Players made a comment about one of the BBEGs ( it was a multi-factional struggle ), musing aloud "I wonder if he is a dragon". As the DM, I knew he was associated with a cult which worshiped a particular sect of ancient dragons, but when I heard that, I thought to myself " ... well ... he is now .... " ;)
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
As Akacen says, sure, they can roll persuasion, but all a high roll means is that the dragon will hear them out and not instantly try to roast them. Nat 20 is not a "I get to do whatever I want" with a persuasion check, and its a homebrew rule for it to apply to skill checks anyway.
Site Info: Wizard's ToS | Fan Content Policy | Forum Rules | Physical Books | Content Not Working | Contact Support
How To: Homebrew Rules | Create Homebrew | Snippet Codes | Tool Tips (Custom) | Rollables (Generator)
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Feats | Spells | Magic Items
Other: Beyond20 | Page References | Other Guides | Entitlements | Dice Randomization | Images Fix | FAQ
I dont think it's so out of the realm of possibility that an evil chromatic dragon is just so irredeemable viscous that it scorns any attempt at diplomacy and just attacks. Oh, you rolled a nat 20 for persuasion? Sorry, DC is 50. Some people (or dragons) simply cannot be persuaded of something that goes against who they are as a person (or dragon).
Even with a reasonable, non evil, non dragon, I'd like to see the PC who is so persuasive that "hey, give us your heart" works on people. You cannot convince any reasonable person to part with a vital organ unless they're REALLY nice and it's like an organ donation scenario.
It doesn't sound like you HAVE to railroad this into a fight, logically it sounds like it'll end up in a fight anyways.
Maybe make the dragon be controlled by some magical means to where it cannot be reasoned with. Or have it do the breath weapon in the air and kill that player and never deal with it again lol.
-Sol