Does a single source of menace cheapen the game?

[Jacob Marley]

I set my games up with multiple entities that each have their own agendas. Depending on PC decisions and actions, some of these entities will become allies, others rivals, and some adversaries. I like this approach as it often results in complex interactions involving some very strange bedfellows.

I am not sure that I would say a singular source of menace cheapens the game, though, in my experience, it often leads to a game that is much more black & white than I generally prefer.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

Ptolus does a good job with this. There are a variety of villains, many of whom have goals that don't interact at all, but each also has rivals that occupy the same niche. I've been playing for years in a fantasy police campaign, and we're mostly focused on one of the mob families -- if we defeat them, others will fill the void instantly, but we have a good focus for what we're doing.

This is a great post by WD. Power vacuums happen all the time, when one BBEG or organization goes belly-up there are always other that are frothing at the mouth to take over and fill that spot. Even if you have a singular BBEG, you can still have that one get taken out by the PCs only to be confronted with this power vacuum and a bunch of upstarting trying to consolidate their power.

 

[prosfilaes]

Even if you have a singular BBEG, you can still have that one get taken out by the PCs only to be confronted with this power vacuum and a bunch of upstarting trying to consolidate their power.

I don't know. Personally, I think it would be wonderful to play in a game where we're fighting the Empire, and at the climatic moment we destroy the Death Star and Darth Vader dies while turning on the Emperor, and then we win.

Yes, I know, in real life, and in the Extended Universe, all sorts of bad things happen at that point. The consequences of a fallen empire, however Evil, can be pretty ugly. But I just want the pure Hollywood victory.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

I don't know. Personally, I think it would be wonderful to play in a game where we're fighting the Empire, and at the climatic moment we destroy the Death Star and Darth Vader dies while turning on the Emperor, and then we win.

Yes, I know, in real life, and in the Extended Universe, all sorts of bad things happen at that point. The consequences of a fallen empire, however Evil, can be pretty ugly. But I just want the pure Hollywood victory.

Don't get me wrong, a climatic scene like that is just as much fun for me and a lot of other people as is an extended universe that has multiple BBEGs or evil organizations that you are trying to thwart.

 

[SkredlitheOgre]

I've never found evil to be singular.

Personally, I tend to set up my 'evil' in a hierarchy. You have the BBEG at the top (in my Pathfinder campaign, this is going to be Orcus...I think) and numerous leveled lieutenants, each one can be used as a BEG on his own. You make HIM/HER the threat that the characters have to deal with currently, and with enough information that the PCs realize there's another level above that lieutenant. I currently have five lieutenants set up, easily scalable to counter party level, to make that individual a real threat.

Just because you have a BBEG in charge and lieutenants reading the same playbook doesn't mean everyone's on the same page.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

The term came from Buffy.

I never actually watched the show, but I believe the term referred to the Big Bad of a season (or adventure).

IMO, having a single big bad stops making sense once a few levels have passed. If the bad guy could crush the PCs at 3rd-level, why not do that, and wait until they're 8th level, one level below him, and act shocked when they kick his butt? (In other words, kill them fast.) Making matters worse, logical techniques (threatening their families) are forbidden in gaming circles (for good reason, IMO), which means using lethal force against the heroes and fast is pretty much required.

 

[howandwhy99]

Focused? Streamlined? Simplistic?

Let me tell you something...

I am The Man.

The one, the only. You've probably heard about me. I keep good men down and rule the world in my spare time. I do it because that's who I am, The Man. Big and bad? Check. End guy? Don't worry, you'll never reach me. And if I reach you, that's it for you. And you're right. It's all about me. Not you. All the focus is on me, even if you don't know it yet.

Okay, so yeah. A single source of menace doesn't necessarily cheapen the game. And it's clearly not unrealistic (rolls eyes), but worse than being simplistic or overly focused, it's just cliche. Our own world is too colorful and varied to be so black, white, and gray. I suggest having many things in your fantasy world and to keep making more for as long as the campaign continues.

 

[prosfilaes]

If the bad guy could crush the PCs at 3rd-level, why not do that, and wait until they're 8th level, one level below him, and act shocked when they kick his butt?

Is the bad guy really going to destroy every 3rd-level party out there, in fear that one of them might challenge him someday? If so, there are well-honed literary devices to let the party survive that.

 

[Waylander the Slayer]

Ptolus does a good job with this. There are a variety of villains, many of whom have goals that don't interact at all, but each also has rivals that occupy the same niche. I've been playing for years in a fantasy police campaign, and we're mostly focused on one of the mob families -- if we defeat them, others will fill the void instantly, but we have a good focus for what we're doing. Likewise, there are entire parallel campaigns available with other villains, including several potential world-conquerors. I plan on running a parallel campaign with other characters in Ptolus next year, dealing with a whole different slice of the pie, equally compelling, but very different.

Interestingly, i have recently been perusing Ptolus and have incorporated some of the overall themes and ideas into my campaign, especially some of the concepts around some of the power groups. Where in think the complexity comes in is in ensuring that the other parallell plots and events are evolving arounds the PCs, including the ones that the PCs have no interaction with. I'd argue that this added level of complexity might not work well for aa percentage of groups out there, and it does take a skilled GM to balance all the events going on simultaneously. The simpler approach, i think, has the advantage of the GM being able to focus on just those specific events and plot and thus making the main plot line engaging.

 

[S'mon]

I've used single-BBEG for more of a high fantasy, Tolkienesque feel, but normally I find that multiple evil power groups seems to work much better for my typical sandboxy play. It helps create the feel of a living world, and avoids the risk of anticlimax when the PCs bump off 'the' BBEG.