Beowulf fought Grendel, who was semi-human ("warped in the shape of a man... bigger than any man"), and Grendel's mother, then a dragon. Odysseus defeated a Cyclops and escaped other monsters, but most of his fighting was against other human warriors. King Arthur fought human warriors, though he crossed paths with hostile magic. Robin Hood had 100% mundane human opposition, so far as I know. Miyamoto Musashi and Connor McCloud (of Highlander) and Jaime Lannister (of Westeros) fought humans, mainly humans with swords. How often do you run stories in which your protagonists fight human (or demi-human, that is, the species which can become PC) with class levels, and how often do they fight "monsters" in the sense of beasts, monstrosities, aberrations and so forth? Are their enemies greedy, ambitious, cruel people, whose goals are unjust... or are their opponents a variety of hungry carnivores?
D&D 5E Opposition
- Thread starter Riley37
- Start date
My villains are almost exclusively humanoid sentients. Sometimes they will be orcs or vampires, but they are always relatable to normal personal emotions and reasons. I just prefer it that way, players don't really hate dragons and beholders, but they will sure as hell hate the mayor that sells his town out to one. They will hate the cult leader who deceived them into bringing back the artifact he needs. They will hate the local lord who annexes their ancestral lands.
I like to not hang a lantern on the fact that somebody is a villain. I like the PCs to decide for themselves that the guy needs to be dealt with and is too much trouble to let run free. I also rather like Lawful Evil villains, particularly when it puts the PCs on the wrong side of the law to just up and destroy them.
Monsters fall into two catagories for me, abominations that have been (unwittingly?) summoned or disturbed by the villain or, a horror beyond the current level of the PCs that is pulling the villains strings. I don't generally throw monsters around without good reason, I have a very human-centric low monster campaign. I also use monsters to show that the area the PCs are in out truly wild and untamed, monsters don't exist in even semi-civilized lands.
I like to not hang a lantern on the fact that somebody is a villain. I like the PCs to decide for themselves that the guy needs to be dealt with and is too much trouble to let run free. I also rather like Lawful Evil villains, particularly when it puts the PCs on the wrong side of the law to just up and destroy them.
Monsters fall into two catagories for me, abominations that have been (unwittingly?) summoned or disturbed by the villain or, a horror beyond the current level of the PCs that is pulling the villains strings. I don't generally throw monsters around without good reason, I have a very human-centric low monster campaign. I also use monsters to show that the area the PCs are in out truly wild and untamed, monsters don't exist in even semi-civilized lands.
Ravenheart87
Explorer
Even if my campaign is in DCC RPG, I will leave this here: the party is soon going to face a floating swarm of planet devouring machines with hive mind in space. But the real boss of the campaign is going to be humanoid.
My villains are almost invariably intelligent creatures (humanoid or otherwise), or at least very charismatic creatures who like think of themselves as intelligent.
The most nuanced villain I've ran so far was a refluffed Simbul for a FR 3.5 campaign, in which she was a somewhat despotic sorcerer-queen who "just wanted to keep her people safe" at the expense of many freedoms (including freedom of thought). PCs were a bunch of elven and half-elven supremacists who wanted to drive out the humans from Aglarond, so they weren't really all that better.
The most nuanced villain I've ran so far was a refluffed Simbul for a FR 3.5 campaign, in which she was a somewhat despotic sorcerer-queen who "just wanted to keep her people safe" at the expense of many freedoms (including freedom of thought). PCs were a bunch of elven and half-elven supremacists who wanted to drive out the humans from Aglarond, so they weren't really all that better.
ExploderWizard
Hero
There is a difference between opposition and an actual villain.
Opposition can be ANYTHING that is "opposed" to the operations of the PCs. For example, there is a small tribe of orcs that live in the entry caves of a large cavern dungeon. They go about their daily lives doing orcish things and so forth. Until contact is made with the PCs the orcs are neither opposition nor ally.
The PCs arrive and desire to explore deeply into the cavern complex to search for lost treasure. The orcs don't want the stinkin' humans traipsing through their home so they are now in opposition to the PCs.
The PCs need to get past the opposition so they can use force, guile, or negotiation to do so. The orcs are simply a source of conflict that needs to be resolved in some manner if the PCs wish to proceed with their original plan.
A villain represents more than just opposition. A villain has an agenda and wants to accomplish things and quite often the PCs don't even figure in to any plans until they stick their noses in and start mucking things up.
Whether humanoid or not, a villain must intelligent enough to form goals, strong enough to accumulate resources used in achieving those goals, and ruthless enough to carry out those plans.
Opposition can be ANYTHING that is "opposed" to the operations of the PCs. For example, there is a small tribe of orcs that live in the entry caves of a large cavern dungeon. They go about their daily lives doing orcish things and so forth. Until contact is made with the PCs the orcs are neither opposition nor ally.
The PCs arrive and desire to explore deeply into the cavern complex to search for lost treasure. The orcs don't want the stinkin' humans traipsing through their home so they are now in opposition to the PCs.
The PCs need to get past the opposition so they can use force, guile, or negotiation to do so. The orcs are simply a source of conflict that needs to be resolved in some manner if the PCs wish to proceed with their original plan.
A villain represents more than just opposition. A villain has an agenda and wants to accomplish things and quite often the PCs don't even figure in to any plans until they stick their noses in and start mucking things up.
Whether humanoid or not, a villain must intelligent enough to form goals, strong enough to accumulate resources used in achieving those goals, and ruthless enough to carry out those plans.
Astrosicebear
First Post
These heroes were not forged because of who they fought, but rather by how they fought... how they won.
Anyone can be written to kill a dragon, or slice their nemesis' throat. But true heroes arise because they outthink their enemies, outsmart the villain, or outmanuever the evil. Always against all odds, and always the underdog.
Kid Charlemagne
I am the Very Model of a Modern Moderator
The enemies in my campaigns are most frequently human (or near to it). I like my monsters to be on the rare side, and apart from some major groups (typically more social monsters) I tend not to re-use iconic monsters over the course of a campaign - the PC's might see groups of Yuan-ti, or minotaurs, or giants, but Dragons are very rare, and they might see one beholder or one medusa per campaign.
In a campaign I ran and recently finished, the PCs fought two definitely non-human creatures, one undead human and two people with magical powers. The rest of opponents were normal (though in most cases not "mundane") humans.
But that was a setting with humans as the only intelligent species and with a specific theme with its monsters. Quite different from the kitchen-sink D&D worlds.
But that was a setting with humans as the only intelligent species and with a specific theme with its monsters. Quite different from the kitchen-sink D&D worlds.
Rod Staffwand
aka Ermlaspur Flormbator
I always use a mix of 'men' and 'monsters'. I'll typically create an evil organization of humanoids (be it a horde, kingdom, wizard order, etc.) that actively sends out parties (of skilled NPCs) and forces (larger military groups) that vie against the PCs to complete goals. An example would be the PCs and an evil party racing to see who can claim the powerful Dragon Staff first.
To mix things up, the villains will usually have monsters under their control and their will undoubtedly be native monsters and humanoids serving as obstacles to quest progression for both sides.
I like humanoids since they're easier to give personalities to, they work well in groups, and they can have tricksy skills (such as powerful magic) that can really challenge the PCs.
I like monsters since they can be big, exotic, and really fun to wreck house with. I have a particular fondness for manticores and hydras, as well as things burrowing and worm-like.
To mix things up, the villains will usually have monsters under their control and their will undoubtedly be native monsters and humanoids serving as obstacles to quest progression for both sides.
I like humanoids since they're easier to give personalities to, they work well in groups, and they can have tricksy skills (such as powerful magic) that can really challenge the PCs.
I like monsters since they can be big, exotic, and really fun to wreck house with. I have a particular fondness for manticores and hydras, as well as things burrowing and worm-like.
It doesn't matter who the villain is, be they a dragon or a greedy human. The point is to humanize them. Give them personality, give them flavor, give them motives and urges beyond "my alignment is evil, so therefore I must try to take over / destroy / corrupt the world." Depth. Make them relate to the characters. One thing I enjoy is making them believe what they are doing is the right thing.
Or, in the case of the Oathbreaker paladin and the Death cleric, make them actually sympathetic characters. One example from my game is a noble-born paladin who's had their family killed through the result of political movement, but justice thwarted because of money, politics, or the like - so, they fell, burdened by rage and hate. In the same kingdom, death clerics and infernal warlocks serve as royal spies and assassins, right along the shadow monks and rogues of the same name.
I prefer to have no such thing as pure evil or pure good races. Even with celestials and fiends and undead.
Or, in the case of the Oathbreaker paladin and the Death cleric, make them actually sympathetic characters. One example from my game is a noble-born paladin who's had their family killed through the result of political movement, but justice thwarted because of money, politics, or the like - so, they fell, burdened by rage and hate. In the same kingdom, death clerics and infernal warlocks serve as royal spies and assassins, right along the shadow monks and rogues of the same name.
I prefer to have no such thing as pure evil or pure good races. Even with celestials and fiends and undead.
