Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 7187723" data-attributes="member: 6778044">And Dracula died relatively quickly, only killing Quincy with a knife if I recall. It was the death of Quincy that takes center stage, not Dracula. They attack him when he's being taken off a ship in his coffin.I also don't recall Cthulhu being considered a joke, and the mythos has only increased in popularity and acclaim over time. The Telegraph picked him as the 26th best villain of all time. It's a pretty common trope I think in literature, that what we fear is often greater than the reality.I don't disagree that something like a vampire should be terrifying. In my campaigns, energy drain is a terrifying ability, you permanently gain a level of exhaustion, and that's enough to do it. I mix in a bit of the movie variety of the Vampire Lestat in terms of abilities (primarily the speed - they can use their reaction to avoid an attack it can see and dash without provoking opportunity attacks). The real fear, I think, in something like a vampire, though, is not knowing how to kill it. The horror is what the vampire is. The fear is that you don't know how to stop it or kill it (and originally sunlight didn't kill Dracula). Since there are more ways to kill a vampire in D&D, it isn't as fearful. Since everybody knows what those ways are, it's not as much of a challenge. One way to alter that challenge is to make them stronger. I'd prefer to change their weaknesses and/or make them smart(er). That's kind of the same concept behind the Tarrasque (Godzilla) or King Kong. The creature is too impervious to destruction by normal means, so a weakness must be discovered and exploited. But that's against the D&D design mantra now. Not to mention, the weaknesses are already known, so the story doesn't exist unless the DM changes the weakness.The majority of the Bond villains can't do anything special once they are cornered. Of course, they are just people, not monsters. Exceptions? I can't think of any offhand. We know Vader and Palpatine could eventually be killed, there are only two Sith, and so many have died before. The end of Star Wars is a great example, actually, of a climactic battle without a BBEG. Empire Strikes Back obviously has the fight with Vader, but Luke was barely trained at that point and didn't stand a chance. Return of the Jedi sort of did, but it was Vader that ended it, I don't think Luke was powerful enough yet. And ultimately, it wasn't about destroying Palpatine, since that would have been accomplished anyway when the Star Destroyer was destroyed - it was about saving Vader. Luke would have been satisfied at that point just to take Vader with him and come to get Palpatine later. Ultimately I think the problem with the BBEG design (outside of a video game) is that D&D has too many variables. The CR system (or anything similar) can only give a rough estimate of how difficult a given creature will be against a party of a given level. As others have pointed out, when you add optional rules like feats into the mix, the balance is thrown off with the original calculations, and even the state of the party - do they meet it just after a long rest, or at the end of a day?That doesn't mean it can't be done, although the designers probably have a different opinion of the tools and guidance they've provided compared to many here. I certainly don't mind an occasional BBEG that is a difficult fight in one on many combat, but to make that the defining feature of a "good" villain seems a bit restrictive, no?</blockquote>

Verification