Theory of Games
Disaffected Game Warrior
But as experienced GMs, maybe it's time to let this cliché go?
Why does the BBEG always delegate?
- Thread starter cranberry
- Start date
I don't think it's a cliché. I think the cliché that we always see is for the BBEG is, well, I did post the Evil Overlord list.
A real BBEG shouldn't be defeated. At best, they can be stopped for a while. I think the problem is that people want this heroic image of defeating the Big Bad.
If the Big Bad is really that Big, and that Bad, you're not going to "win." You're going to stop some things, hopefully. But a real Big Bad is one that keeps on keepin' on.
I would argue that the real problem is that DMs don't really have Big Bads. They have ... Final Bosses. To defeat. And there's a difference. Heck, the "Big Bad" might not be a single person or monster- it might be a group, or ... heck, it might be the fantasy private equity, funding evil. Whatever floats your boat.
It's whatever works for you and your table.
MGibster
Legend
There was an article in Dragon (I think) asking why heroes like Elminster delegated tasks to adventurers instead of doing everything themselves. Not only does Elminster have a limited amount of time, but just showing up to take care of the problem might attract his enemies making the situation even more perilous than it was before he got directly involved.
My BBEG is building a tower to destroy the gods of the realm and is having his underlings perform rituals to summon Genies to grant him more power. The BBEG doesn’t do it himself since he isn’t a direct combatant and instead uses money and influence as a political figure to get others to do his bidding.
HaroldTheHobbit
Adventurer
If one want to run a connected campaign, not just a series of unrelated adventurous evens and locations, there will always be some kind bad guy hierarchy. It may be overt and basic, or covert, conspiratorial, multi branched, organizations within organizations etc etc. But bad guys delegating stuff to folks lower in the food chains is a given.
Now, me and my group enjoy intrigue and conspiratory webs within webs of secrets, so I embrace this. As I wrote, I have a hard time visualizing a connected campaign without some kind of bad guy delegating. But maybe I'm just a narrow sighted GM
Meech17
WotC President Runner-Up.
When it comes to business, even though it usually starts out this way... Owner's typically don't want to be the ones running the day-to-day operations forever. The goal is to build something that is relatively self sufficient so that you are able to sit back, and enjoy the fruits of your labor, while occasionally lending a guiding hand.
I'd imagine world domination is a similar situation. What's the point of ruling the world if you can't sleep in a few days a week? You need to have managers under you to do the hard work, and peons under them to do the harder work while you get to cash the checks while you sit back and sip mojitos.
As to your OP.. I think this one is easily excusable. The BBEG was imprisoned for however long.. They may not be at full power once released. Fighting anyone in that state would be foolish endeavor. Retreat and reassess from a safe distance.
I'd imagine world domination is a similar situation. What's the point of ruling the world if you can't sleep in a few days a week? You need to have managers under you to do the hard work, and peons under them to do the harder work while you get to cash the checks while you sit back and sip mojitos.
As to your OP.. I think this one is easily excusable. The BBEG was imprisoned for however long.. They may not be at full power once released. Fighting anyone in that state would be foolish endeavor. Retreat and reassess from a safe distance.
Theory of Games
Disaffected Game Warrior
A given at your table, but not allIf one want to run a connected campaign, not just a series of unrelated adventurous evens and locations, there will always be some kind bad guy hierarchy. It may be overt and basic, or covert, conspiratorial, multi branched, organizations within organizations etc etc. But bad guys delegating stuff to folks lower in the food chains is a given.
Now, me and my group enjoy intrigue and conspiratory webs within webs of secrets, so I embrace this. As I wrote, I have a hard time visualizing a connected campaign without some kind of bad guy delegating. But maybe I'm just a narrow sighted GM
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
They all have management degrees.
The real question is why the heroes don't find big caches of business advice books in the lairs they leave behind.
Similar Threads
