CruelSummerLord
First Post
I recall reading Skip Williams' DM's Option: High Level Campaigns book many moons ago, and I recall my irritation with Williams' apparent assumption that while PCs can be expected to fly off the handle and act rashly or foolishly if the villain goes after their allies or loved ones, villains are always able to keep a cool head, remain perfectly rational at all times, and have unlimited resources both in contacts/spies and in magical items to know about all the backgrounds of the PCs and strike appropriately.
Without going into too much detail, I personally prefer low magic item counts. That applies just as much to villains and NPCs as it does to the players themselves-if 12th-level fighters have to make do wearing ordinary chain mail and wielding non-magical swords, then even the most powerful villains won't have as many magical resources or contacts as they might like, either. Sure, the evil wizard might love to have +10 bracers of armor, but he can't manufacture them (IMO, you have to be at 18th level to create any sort of permanent magic item, to maintain a proper 1E feel with 3E rules), so he'll have to make do with shield and wizard armor spells.
Anyway, I'm just wondering: How often have you as DM done things that might not have been the most tactically sound options, but that still appealed to the PCs' foes anyway for reasons ranging from ego to a warped sense of honor to thinking emotionally instead of rationally?
Sure, it might be smarter for that red dragon to wear down the humans with its breath weapon and spells, but where's the fun in that? Most red dragons, I would think, simply view humans and other races as ants, and should be treated appropriately. They view humans as simply not being powerful enough to stand against them. And in any case, why risk destroying their magic and treasure with the breath weapon?
Yes, that vampire might be steamed at being defeated by the human adventurers, and he might be able to destroy the humans by waiting thirty years until they're too old to fight back, but he's livid. He wants revenge, and he's not going to sit around for three decades and run the risk of the heroes dying from something else. He's waited thirty years for his vengeance...only to find that heart disease has cheated him out of it. Blah.
Maybe if he were thinking clearly, the evil general might realize that the heroes are baiting him with their challenges and accusations of cowardice, slandering his family name. But he's not thinking clearly. They've slandered his name, insulted his heritage. No one, but NO ONE, gets away with doing that!!!
The evil wizard could, if he had the patience, spend time building up a network of spies and corrupt the governments, gradually convincing everyone to obey him, building up a cult of personality. But that's not the way he works-he wants people to fear him, and he disdains the idea of working behind the scenes-as if he were too scared of the potential consequences, to say nothing of appearing weak in front of his minions. They obey him because they fear him, and tiptoeing around behind the scenes makes him look timid and weak. If he fears the reaction from court bureaucrats, how will he react in dealing with adventurers?
Other snags might also come up. Sure, that bandit chief would love to kidnap and make slaves of the hero's sister...only she lives about 300 kilometers away, and he has absolutely no idea how to find her. Too much lost in time and resources to make going after her worth the trouble.
The evil wizard might have heard of some of those heroes, but he has to base his reactions off hearsay and what's generally known, some of which could be false. After all, his grand plans are in motion-how can he possibly have the resources to track down every single potential threat, learn every single detail about them, and anticipate their every move? His spies are busy enough as it is setting up his plans and reporting on the actions of different groups he knows are already a danger-they can't probe too far without running the risk of blowing their cover, and he doesn't have enough spies to furnish him with as much intelligence as he might like. His magical resources are currently tied up in necromancy or mind control, not divination, so the magical route isn't as much of a help either.
With all this in mind, what are your thoughts? My own are that villains are just like anyone else-they don't have the resources or the capacity to do everything they'd like; they have the ability to fly off the handle and do things without thinking; they might make tactically risky decisions for any number of reasons from ego to the idea that the action is simply more satisfying that way. Of course there are villains who remain cool and objective, but even the most powerful ones can make mistakes and do things in a riskier way for any of the reasons cited above.
There have been times when players have deliberately done things they know are stupid, because that is how their character would act in role-playing. But, by the same token, aren't there occasions when DMs deliberately have their villains do something that isn't necessarily the soundest course of action, because that is what the villain would do according to his, her or its personality?
Without going into too much detail, I personally prefer low magic item counts. That applies just as much to villains and NPCs as it does to the players themselves-if 12th-level fighters have to make do wearing ordinary chain mail and wielding non-magical swords, then even the most powerful villains won't have as many magical resources or contacts as they might like, either. Sure, the evil wizard might love to have +10 bracers of armor, but he can't manufacture them (IMO, you have to be at 18th level to create any sort of permanent magic item, to maintain a proper 1E feel with 3E rules), so he'll have to make do with shield and wizard armor spells.
Anyway, I'm just wondering: How often have you as DM done things that might not have been the most tactically sound options, but that still appealed to the PCs' foes anyway for reasons ranging from ego to a warped sense of honor to thinking emotionally instead of rationally?
Sure, it might be smarter for that red dragon to wear down the humans with its breath weapon and spells, but where's the fun in that? Most red dragons, I would think, simply view humans and other races as ants, and should be treated appropriately. They view humans as simply not being powerful enough to stand against them. And in any case, why risk destroying their magic and treasure with the breath weapon?
Yes, that vampire might be steamed at being defeated by the human adventurers, and he might be able to destroy the humans by waiting thirty years until they're too old to fight back, but he's livid. He wants revenge, and he's not going to sit around for three decades and run the risk of the heroes dying from something else. He's waited thirty years for his vengeance...only to find that heart disease has cheated him out of it. Blah.
Maybe if he were thinking clearly, the evil general might realize that the heroes are baiting him with their challenges and accusations of cowardice, slandering his family name. But he's not thinking clearly. They've slandered his name, insulted his heritage. No one, but NO ONE, gets away with doing that!!!
The evil wizard could, if he had the patience, spend time building up a network of spies and corrupt the governments, gradually convincing everyone to obey him, building up a cult of personality. But that's not the way he works-he wants people to fear him, and he disdains the idea of working behind the scenes-as if he were too scared of the potential consequences, to say nothing of appearing weak in front of his minions. They obey him because they fear him, and tiptoeing around behind the scenes makes him look timid and weak. If he fears the reaction from court bureaucrats, how will he react in dealing with adventurers?
Other snags might also come up. Sure, that bandit chief would love to kidnap and make slaves of the hero's sister...only she lives about 300 kilometers away, and he has absolutely no idea how to find her. Too much lost in time and resources to make going after her worth the trouble.
The evil wizard might have heard of some of those heroes, but he has to base his reactions off hearsay and what's generally known, some of which could be false. After all, his grand plans are in motion-how can he possibly have the resources to track down every single potential threat, learn every single detail about them, and anticipate their every move? His spies are busy enough as it is setting up his plans and reporting on the actions of different groups he knows are already a danger-they can't probe too far without running the risk of blowing their cover, and he doesn't have enough spies to furnish him with as much intelligence as he might like. His magical resources are currently tied up in necromancy or mind control, not divination, so the magical route isn't as much of a help either.
With all this in mind, what are your thoughts? My own are that villains are just like anyone else-they don't have the resources or the capacity to do everything they'd like; they have the ability to fly off the handle and do things without thinking; they might make tactically risky decisions for any number of reasons from ego to the idea that the action is simply more satisfying that way. Of course there are villains who remain cool and objective, but even the most powerful ones can make mistakes and do things in a riskier way for any of the reasons cited above.
There have been times when players have deliberately done things they know are stupid, because that is how their character would act in role-playing. But, by the same token, aren't there occasions when DMs deliberately have their villains do something that isn't necessarily the soundest course of action, because that is what the villain would do according to his, her or its personality?
That's real nice for real life but heroes sort of require a queue of megalomaniacs all plotting to take over the world with the scheme of the week - bwahaha!
