I'm sick of saving the world. Let's conquer it.
- Thread starter Tyler Do'Urden
- Start date
jmucchiello
Hero
I've been toying with a topple the king campaign. Basically, the kingdom is rather LE and has been for the last 150 -200 years when the prior line of kings was overthrown by the current line. The king dies at the start of the campaign. The dead king was not overly tyrannic but still not very good. He was respected since he did do well by the kingdom if not to individuals in the kingdom. Problem is his heir, the new king, a complete wastrel. Debouchery is his legacy but there is little dissent because he quells it harshly (as the party will witness first hand).
The party works for one of the older earls or dukes at court. An honest man in a difficult situation. At around 5th level, they discover the heir of previous line of kings is someone they've known for a while. He is not aware of his lineage but the party discovers it through some lost records in an adventure.
At this point, they could leave him be and destroy (or hide) the evidence. Tell him and let him do as he pleases. Or perhaps it gets in their heads to restore the prior lineage. Their patron would love that since he is unhappy with the current situation. There are a few waning organizations of holy warriors who, if they find out, will make it their duty to restore the old line whether he wants to do so or not.
I just have this overriding fear that it get to the point of revealing the lost heir and they won't be interested in setting things right.
The party works for one of the older earls or dukes at court. An honest man in a difficult situation. At around 5th level, they discover the heir of previous line of kings is someone they've known for a while. He is not aware of his lineage but the party discovers it through some lost records in an adventure.
At this point, they could leave him be and destroy (or hide) the evidence. Tell him and let him do as he pleases. Or perhaps it gets in their heads to restore the prior lineage. Their patron would love that since he is unhappy with the current situation. There are a few waning organizations of holy warriors who, if they find out, will make it their duty to restore the old line whether he wants to do so or not.
I just have this overriding fear that it get to the point of revealing the lost heir and they won't be interested in setting things right.
The true difference between a hero and a villain is not in what they intend to do, the difference is in how they intend to do it.
Darklone
Registered User
Agreeing with mythusmage and somehow crothian too. I always had one specific player in my group who opted to conquer the world. Sometimes with good means, sometimes with bad means... the aim stayed the same.
Being Darth Vader or Batman...
That's easy. Simply be cool and dark. You'll find it's not about being evil whether you're cool or not.
And as the comic above shows: The most cruel dude who starts an empire will most likely be reverred as a hero later.
Being Darth Vader or Batman...
That's easy. Simply be cool and dark. You'll find it's not about being evil whether you're cool or not.
And as the comic above shows: The most cruel dude who starts an empire will most likely be reverred as a hero later.
Here is an adventure I've always wanted to do:
A tongue in cheek spoofing of the whole underground dungeon with a diabolical mastermind being invaded by the good guys and you're the mastermind's workers rigging the place with booby traps, employing mercenaries, feeding the monsters, etc.
It seems like a good idea for a reverse dungeon dive competition or if you have a big group 4 people can be the goodie goodies and the others can be plotting with the DM to thwart the goodies. Of course, only the DM would have access to the nitty gritty of both side's character sheets so it stays fresh for both opposing sides.
A tongue in cheek spoofing of the whole underground dungeon with a diabolical mastermind being invaded by the good guys and you're the mastermind's workers rigging the place with booby traps, employing mercenaries, feeding the monsters, etc.
It seems like a good idea for a reverse dungeon dive competition or if you have a big group 4 people can be the goodie goodies and the others can be plotting with the DM to thwart the goodies. Of course, only the DM would have access to the nitty gritty of both side's character sheets so it stays fresh for both opposing sides.
painandgreed
First Post
I started a Thay campaign that was similar. The "adventure path" was set up so that the PCs would be working for the Red Wizards and through reputation via getting jobs done and a wizard PC with family connections would be able to enter into the existing power structure and do all the things that red wizards and their peers do. The true trick, I think, is getting players who can think like achievers rather than lackeys. Most PCs will sit around until some NPC gives them something to do, and getting PCs into the habit of working for themselves is the hard bit.
It also takes a different type of game. Saving the world is easy, you just kill the guy trying to take it over. Taking it over becomes much more of a game of resource managment and becoming the targets. Even if moving up in the ranks of an existing power structure without opposition by say being the heirs in a LE (or LN or LG) kingdom, as the PCs gain power, they're going to want to use that power. Quickly, the game will be more than just the PC party because they can start calling up 50 men units to do their dirty work for them in some cases. Why go into a dungeon by themselves when they can easily order 1000 men to march with them, set up camp, and dig the entire dungeon out of the ground. Needless to say, it will probably take war and large scale troop movements to conquor the world anyway. As they gain contorl over the resources of the land the take over, they're going to want to spend it on magic items. Money guildlines will go right out the window and I don't think they apply to heads of state who can afford whatever they want.
I think they typical DM (or at least many of the ones I've had) will balk at giving such power to the PCs. They'll find themselves taking over the country, yet not having any more money or power than they would normally. To properly run such a game where the PCs are taking over the world, I think the DM will have to get used to the idea that the PCs are character of privledge and will have money, servants, and political power well beyond the typical adventuring group. Of course, the party is now also a target and will have to face troubles they normally wouldn't. Other kings will send adventuring groups to stop them. Politics and relations with organizations such as the churches, nobles, or societies (secret or otherwise) will have to be dealt with because they'll need their support.
To the point of having evil parties, that pretty much fits about 80% of the campaigns I've ever been in (and the others were only 'good only' due to DM fiat). No big deal. Same moduels usually work. Instead of doing it for alturistic reasons, the PCs are doing it to kill things and take their stuff. Even the adventures that expect PCs to do things because they're good, still provide an opportunity for the PCs to be come rich enough to sate neutral or evil PCs.
It also takes a different type of game. Saving the world is easy, you just kill the guy trying to take it over. Taking it over becomes much more of a game of resource managment and becoming the targets. Even if moving up in the ranks of an existing power structure without opposition by say being the heirs in a LE (or LN or LG) kingdom, as the PCs gain power, they're going to want to use that power. Quickly, the game will be more than just the PC party because they can start calling up 50 men units to do their dirty work for them in some cases. Why go into a dungeon by themselves when they can easily order 1000 men to march with them, set up camp, and dig the entire dungeon out of the ground. Needless to say, it will probably take war and large scale troop movements to conquor the world anyway. As they gain contorl over the resources of the land the take over, they're going to want to spend it on magic items. Money guildlines will go right out the window and I don't think they apply to heads of state who can afford whatever they want.
I think they typical DM (or at least many of the ones I've had) will balk at giving such power to the PCs. They'll find themselves taking over the country, yet not having any more money or power than they would normally. To properly run such a game where the PCs are taking over the world, I think the DM will have to get used to the idea that the PCs are character of privledge and will have money, servants, and political power well beyond the typical adventuring group. Of course, the party is now also a target and will have to face troubles they normally wouldn't. Other kings will send adventuring groups to stop them. Politics and relations with organizations such as the churches, nobles, or societies (secret or otherwise) will have to be dealt with because they'll need their support.
To the point of having evil parties, that pretty much fits about 80% of the campaigns I've ever been in (and the others were only 'good only' due to DM fiat). No big deal. Same moduels usually work. Instead of doing it for alturistic reasons, the PCs are doing it to kill things and take their stuff. Even the adventures that expect PCs to do things because they're good, still provide an opportunity for the PCs to be come rich enough to sate neutral or evil PCs.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
