>BBEG was actually the good guy all along. How pissed would

>>51763843
As long as he made it believable and interesting, not very.

>>51763843
In my current campaign? Exceedingly pissed.
My character spent the first year of our campaign working for the lich who is now our main enemy. One player was kicked from the group, two others wanted to play new characters, and we got two new players so the party dynamic was completely changed. The everone is playing evil or neutral game suddenly gained a paladin, cleric, and ranger who were all different shades of good. So the DM gave me 1 on 1 session to play out why I switched sides and we ran with it from there. If I were to learn that the stupid lich were somehow the good guy after I was forced to switch sides I'd just quit right there.

Normally it wouldn't be so bad, but this scenario would be ridiculous.

>>51763852
Pretty much this

>>51763843
>bbeg

No thank you.

>>51764358
>I am incapable of using basic acronyms and am triggered by their use.

>>51764358
Again? Why?

>>51763843
>TFW I'm playing an Evil alignment

NO. REALLY.

File: 1485605326355.jpg (54KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 640x640px

>>51763843
Look, there are right and wrong ways of doing this, okay?

A stupid way is to have an Evil Fucktard Lich kill thirty defenseless villages and then have it where he's a 'good guy' because, oh, it's the way to seal some ancient evil the DM was too busy whacking off to rather than reading a basic analysis of morality.

Why is this stupid? Because it robs the players of actual agency because the morality of the world is backasswards; because the DM didn't even present the illusion of an 'Golden' outcome.

A 'Golden' outcome is the best case scenario, where the player's characters are actual Heroes rather than mere protagonists; it shouldn't happen all the time, but the allure of it will push players who want to have their characters be Heroes, forward.

When a DM says, fuck you, best case scenario is thirty dead villages, the DM has revealed that the players never had a choice in the matter, that any alternative was a pointless waste of time, and choo-choo, hope you like Novels, kiddos, because the pain train ain't stopping soon.

That's the worst case scenario, and also likely the most frequently experienced one, because doing shit stupidly is simple.

File: don't start it.jpg (47KB, 625x416px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 625x416px

>>51764358
Fuck off
>>51763843
I wouldn't be too upset if it was the result of the failings of the characters and it is possible to realize the main "antagonist's" true goal. But that also means you have to have something else to face if they figure it out or simply have the investigation and figuring out what's really going on the goal as long as investigation is what the players want.

>>51764384
>i need to sound like a toddler

Why stop there? Why not say "Bwig Bwad Ebil Gwuy" and then suck on your thumb loudly for a couple seconds?

>>51763843
A good vs good storyline? I'm not even mad.

>>51764505
People may have had the energy to argue with you the first dozen times or so, but now it's just turning stale. You need to come up with new bait

So BBEG is a Dindu.

>>51764561
Doing shady shit for a good goal isn't dindu you fucking faggot, if the DM's so unsubtle about this plot point that he has the villain directly consuming souls from a baby or some shit then he's made a poor story, a dude who's intrigued to ensure retard mcfucko doesn't take the throne and destablize the nation and murders him under the nose of the king is a justifiable narrative, if the DM's told the story poorly then it's his fucking fault, not all stories are crafted by shit storytellers you fucking faggot.

>>51764505
I prefer "Bwig Bwad Ebul Gwuy" thank you very much.

>>51764526
Are you still trying to pretend it's only one guy? I think that's half of what made me join in the fun to begin with.

>>51764505
>4 syllables
>over the perfect syllabic lulaby of BBEG
get the fuck off my board.

File: 1473289247485.jpg (22KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 400x300px

>>51764358
>>51764505

Stop taking the bait being provided by /tg/'s very own BBEG. They want to be reacted to. Every direct response only fuels them. It's getting boring already.

>>51763843
If I can figure it out before the big reveal or >>51763852, not at all.

I'd just like a chance to switch to the right side.

>>51763843
Honestly, it really depends on where this realization falls in the course of the campaign for me. If it's an "epic tweest!" During the climactic fight, I'd be fucking livid. If it's something that's revealed at the end of the second act after some intentional forshadowing (or better yet investigations on our part), then I'm on board 100%.

There's also what other anons have said in this thread already. If you're going to have the BBEG turn out to be Good, then you can't have them run around for the first 5 sessions murdering farmers for shits and giggles. It's insulting to the players.

>>51763843
>the BBEG is a bad guy
>the party is just worse guys

>>51763843
If it was done in a good, believable way I wouldn't be mad at all.

Because I generally ask the GM about certain things like
>Now that the BBEG is at this stage (he has taken over the throne from the previous king) what happened, exactly? Are there any changes in the life of the average person, anything that makes it worse than it was before?
>What happened that made the world a worse place?

What matters is only the result of the action of the villain: if things are exactly as they are before, what stake should I have in stopping the villain?
It all depends on the context of the situation and on all the details that make the picture.

>>51766949
There's an idea I could get behind.

>>51767082
It's certainly seeming that way in the game I'm running.

>>51763843

It's a pretty good idea, really. Watchmen worked well when it turned out the villain was actually doing everything for the greater good.

>>51763843
Who cares, I'd kill the fucker anyway.

>>51769912
No it wasn't. The whole "kill millions to save billions" is a classic BBEG motivation, but it's flawed from the start. It's fueled by narcissism and arrogance and at the end, Ozy really isn't any better than the rest of the cast. They're all shit people doing shit things for selfish reasons.

File: saddam3a-2-web.jpg (99KB, 750x991px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 750x991px

>>51763843
>BBEG was actually the good guy all along

happens all the time

>>51770084

What wasn't? It's clearly a villain doing bad things for the greater good.

I have actually planned something of the sort for my current campaign. The "big bad" is this rogue nation of demon worshipers that constatly tortures and do sacrifices for their master. The "twist" is that yes, they are doing it in order to keep their uberdemon constatly asleep so he doesn't wake up and wreck the world.

I plan to make it more interesting than the scenarios showed in this threads by adding the part that they are still unabashed assholes, and that that Uberdemon is not actually invincible, so the point is more continuing to create suffering constatly to keep him asleep for centuries piling up the evil acts and the deads instead of risking to have him wake up and have a war instantly that while risky and devastating will end his evils once and for all.

Also "keep him asleep to save the world" is what just the lower members believe. The higher ranks know that if he awake they lose their source of power, so they don't really care about the world.

>>51770273

So the plot to Cabin In The Woods, then?

>>51763843
commend gm for the effort

go back to murder hobboing BBEG

>>51763852
Could you please offer an example of believabe and interesting? And the opposite?

>>51770288
Fuck. I guess there is nothing new under the sun after all.

File: bbeg.jpg (148KB, 920x571px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 920x571px

>>51763843
>tfw

>>51770273
Hardly original, but acceptable. You will never manage to make this guys look good tho. The good path would be to fight the demon, even if he's invincible.

>>51770340

Unfortunately not. Every single book I've ever written has had some reviewer say "it's like this but with this" and they're always right. Even things I've never heard of. It's gotten to the point now where I just take dozens of different ideas and plots, mix them together, and hope it at least gives the illusion of originality.

>>51770391
Well, yeah, that's the idea. The point is that the demon is not invincible, so it's simply a matter of one hundred deaths a year forever or thousands of deaths right now to stop him. On the long term the good thing is to fight him right now, because the whole things has been going around for centuries and now the victims have been much more than those of having a war in the first place.

I don't count on these guys looking good (they are assholes) I count on actually forcing the party to debate the course of action, because on one side you are letting this obviously evil guys continuing to do their atrocities and sacrificing a lot more lives in the long term, on the other you are unleashing short term devastation while risking not only the lives of the party but those of a lot of people they care for (families, subjects).

My party is a lot more shades of grey than outright good/bad morality, so it should work.

>>51770273
Did you read the other stuff posted here? Cause that sounds like the stereotypical bad "BBEG turns out to be good" storyline.