D&D General In D&D, the Big Bad is the Main Character

[Clint_L]

I completely agree with giving NPCs more depth and motivation!

I disagree, very strongly, with the statement that the Big Bad is the main character. The players are 100% the main characters in my campaign. Antagonists come and go, but the underlying narrative is driven by the player's goals for their characters. I run a very sandbox style of campaign, though, so there is no Big Bad driving the narrative, like in a Marvel movie.

I think this is maybe more of an issue if you run pre-packaged adventure style campaigns.

 

[Oofta]

Doesn't the DM need to be concentrating on what the PCs are doing, not playing a little game on their own?

And if they are not interacting with the players, how are they characters at all? How does it differ from "the DM decides some stuff happens"?

If it involves the DM playing D&D by themselves it is.

It doesn't take any game time, it's world event plotting that I'm doing between games. Just another aspect of prep.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

It doesn't take any game time, it's world event plotting that I'm doing between games. Just another aspect of prep.

Then you aren't really talking about a character. They are like Sauron, moving behind the scenes. Sauron doesn't have a personality, he doesn't even need a stat block!

 

[Oofta]

Then you aren't really talking about a character. They are like Sauron, moving behind the scenes. Sauron doesn't have a personality, he doesn't even need a stat block!

I usually think in terms of actors, which is even more generic. An actor can be an individual, group, movement. It's anything that can act on and impact the world.

In any case Sauron absolutely had a personality, motivations and goals. I don't know how you could have an actor or influential NPC without thinking about that kind of stuff. Just because those details were never revealed by Tolkien (or maybe they were, I'm not a Tolkien expert) does not mean they don't exist.

There are many, many times I don't bother determining stats for the BBEG until I actually need them. After all, I may set up Noruas as a potential BBEG but it's up to the players if they're going to do anything about them. Doesn't mean my absolutely not Sauron isn't a character. They may just be a character that fades away from direct interactions with the current group.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

As others have said, "main character" is about where the metaphorical "camera" is looking, not who is the most active or dynamic or impactful.

Most "main characters" in fiction are pretty reactive too! Villains are usually the ones who seize the initiative, cause the problems, inspire the search, etc.

 

[NotAYakk]

Doesn't the DM need to be concentrating on what the PCs are doing, not playing a little game on their own?

And if they are not interacting with the players, how are they characters at all? How does it differ from "the DM decides some stuff happens"?

If it involves the DM playing D&D by themselves it is.

I'm puzzled. What do you think a "character" is?

Maybe you are using some narrow definition I am not.

To be clear: from my perspective, a novel (not even an RPG novel) has characters. I am using "character" in the story-writing or story-understanding perspective.

A character can do things in a narrative that don't involve directly interacting with some specific other characters in the narrative. You seem to think that this isn't the case.

 

[niklinna]

Then you aren't really talking about a character. They are like Sauron, moving behind the scenes. Sauron doesn't have a personality, he doesn't even need a stat block!

It's D&D, one-time home of Deities & Demigods. Everything needs a stat block.

 

[overgeeked]

Not really, no. In action stories (like D&D almost always is), it’s true that the antagonist drives the plot, but they are not the main character. The protagonist is the main character. We spend the most time with the protagonist, we often see thing from their POV, we empathize with the protagonist, etc.

Look at any action story. In Die Hard, Hans drives the plot but McClane is the main character / protagonist. We spend most of the movie seeing things as he does, following along with him, etc. Same with superhero fiction. The supervillain has a plan to conquer the world and the superheroes have to stop them. Doesn’t mean the supervillain is the main character.

That’s what antagonists do in action stories, they drive the plot. If not for them, the protagonist would be home warm in bed. In no way does that make the antagonist the main character.

 

[Orius]

If the party's a bunch of murderhobos, that's for DAMN sure.

 

[Starfox]

In most D&D games, the big bad is the main character.

Just as in most action movies, the villain is the guy that actually wants to DO something, to change the world. The heroes are usually just kneejerk conservatives who try to preserve the status quo.

 

[payn]

Just as in most action movies, the villain is the guy that actually wants to DO something, to change the world. The heroes are usually just kneejerk conservatives who try to preserve the status quo.

I’ve been trying to flip the script and have the PCs be the ones to try and change the world and let the villains be the conservative ones.

 

[GMMichael]

George RR Martin reads original post: "wait, what?"

" I'd better get back to playing Elden Ring. "

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I’ve been trying to flip the script and have the PCs be the ones to try and change the world and let the villains be the conservative ones.

Isn't that the plot of Star Wars?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I'm puzzled. What do you think a "character" is?

A character has a distinct and recognisable personality.

To be clear: from my perspective, a novel (not even an RPG novel) has characters. I am using "character" in the story-writing or story-understanding perspective.

A novel does have characters, but the antagonist might not be one. There are a number of ways of writing a novel. You might use 3rd person omniscient narrator (especially common in TV and movies). In which case it's easy to establish the antagonist's personality, since you can include scenes in which they appear that the protagonist knows nothing about. But D&D is usually more akin to a 1st person narrative, everything is seen from the protagonists' point of view. So if the protagonist and antagonist do not have scenes together, there is little opportunity to establish the antagonist's personality. The author could give the antagonist a detailed personality, backstory and history, but it would be time wasted if the reader never got to experience it.


As an example, I ran an Eberron campaign which started with the PCs set up as patsies in a political assassination. I knew the villain's plot, and I knew their motive, but at that point I didn't know anything else about them. As the players (largely freeform) investigations brought them closer to the identity of their faceless enemy I filled out some details: their organisation, their rank, their name. Eventually, for the final confrontation I added a stat block. Since the PCs never got to speak to them, I never needed to give them a personality. If the PCs had managed a non-combat meeting I would have created a personality on the spot with improv acting.

 

[Starfox]

I’ve been trying to flip the script and have the PCs be the ones to try and change the world and let the villains be the conservative ones.

How did this work out? I've tried this too, but the players rarely bite or formulate a goal to acts towards. When they do, the golas are usually nebulous, such as "promote the arts" rather than "turn that mountain into a sculpture and animate it".

Isn't that the plot of Star Wars?

I'd say the heroes of Star Wars are reactionary rather than progressive, wanting to turn back time.

 

[payn]

How did this work out? I've tried this too, but the players rarely bite or formulate a goal to acts towards. When they do, the golas are usually nebulous, such as "promote the arts" rather than "turn that mountain into a sculpture and animate it".

It's a bit difficult you need the type that is proactive and willing to drive the game. Many gamers want to be reactive and taken for a ride instead.

 

[Oofta]

It's a bit difficult you need the type that is proactive and willing to drive the game. Many gamers want to be reactive and taken for a ride instead.

It also just depends on what you mean and perspective. I was in a campaign were we started a revolution against the BBEG that had taken over the territory (shades of Star Wars here). Were we just trying to return things back to "the old days" when the region wasn't under authoritarian control? Or were we being reactive?

 

[payn]

It also just depends on what you mean and perspective. I was in a campaign were we started a revolution against the BBEG that had taken over the territory (shades of Star Wars here). Were we just trying to return things back to "the old days" when the region wasn't under authoritarian control? Or were we being reactive?

The SW example muddies the water because we didn't have pre-empire content in New Hope; that came later. Though I would say the difference is if the opposing faction is maintaining a status quo that has been in place and was not ushered in by them. Then, its not being reactive or conservative. Though, I think we are taking the trees for the forest here. Id say the main point is the PCs creating a resistance and forming a way for revolution instead of joining one already in progress. There is no defined white hat and black hat, thats up for the PCs to decide.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The SW example muddies the water because we didn't have pre-empire content in New Hope; that came later. Though I would say the difference is if the opposing faction is maintaining a status quo that has been in place and was not ushered in by them. Then, its not being reactive or conservative. Though, I think we are taking the trees for the forest here. Id say the main point is the PCs creating a resistance and forming a way for revolution instead of joining one already in progress. There is no defined white hat and black hat, thats up for the PCs to decide.

There are actually a lot of "rebel" narratives, where the protagonist is working proactively against an evil tyrant who wants to maintain the status quo: William Tell, Robin Hood, Blake's 7 etc.

And you don't have to look that hard to find other examples with a proactive protagonist and a reactive antagonist. The Hobbit for example.

 

[payn]

There are actually a lot of "rebel" narratives, where the protagonist is working proactively against an evil tyrant who wants to maintain the status quo: William Tell, Robin Hood, Blake's 7 etc.

And you don't have to look that hard to find other examples with a proactive protagonist and a reactive antagonist. The Hobbit for example.

Ok, sure, now tell me about your RPG games where the PCs decided to become a Robin Hood like character on their own?