Have you ever been in a campaign where the bbeg (ugh) was right?

Reminder that in the real world, we didn't need to sacrifice millions of people to get over the Cold War, which makes Ozymandias the greatest moron on Earth.
>B-b-but mister Manhattan
Wouldn't make a difference.

>millions of people
It was only New York.

So millions of people?

Millions of New York denizens. Maybe three actual people.

>People do things they actively believe to be wrong meme

Well, he did Marla. And that's unquestionably wrong.

Honestly he would have been right even if there hadn't been a war.

They do, there's just a level of double think and avoiding thinking about it.

>bbeg
hrug

Just to confirm, BBEG is pronounced bee-beg right?

It should never be pronounced in the first place.

Nah, it's pronounced "Bee Gee's".

I had a Lich overlord who planned on wiping out all life on Earth to use their lifeforce to raise his imperial host and a city inside a continent sized adamantine dragon and take a city to the sky. After this, he was totally willing, expecting, and excited to help them raise the world back from the dead. The plan was going to be less of a raise the dead as zombies, but more to use a dragon the size of Asia and a party of epic level characters to take heaven and hell hostage to annul their death. Alas, the campaign has been on a very long hiatus.

Sounds awesome.

It's just B.B.E.G.

this

> bbeg (ugh)
neck yourself faggot

Did Jeffrey Dahmer ever believe he was in the right?

kek, nice try Ozy

Everyone is unessisary pissy about the use of the term, so I might as well get it out of the way in the first post.

Or you could just say villain and spare yourself from looking like you're fresh off of tvtropes or straight out of kindergarten.

Nah.

>Ozymandias
>right

I thought that dude left Veeky Forums

I don't think you're allowed to >ugh your own bbeg. That's not how the meme works.

But also, right in what regard? Plenty of villains are right in the sense of, "the world is awful and no one is doing anything about it," but most of those type go for the "destroy and rebuild" solution.

The kind I'm thinking of is the Lord of the land who, while brutal, keeps the hundreds of bandit groups from robing every peasent, encourages trade by manipulating the market, stops prejudice of the races as its a deficit to the military, and sacrifices a loved one to prevent a horrendous evil unknown to the people from consuming the world.

I like antagonist better too. Good taste.
Anything is better than "big bad evil guy."

Large villanous spiteful man who ruins and shits on things people like for no reason.

oh wait that's you :)

People have been ughposting about BBEGs for YEARS

you mean months?

Just ignore the autists and use BBEG whenever you like.

>It should never be pronounced in the first place.
This is correct.
I wouldn't know how to properly respond to someone who pronounced it.
Like someone seriously speaking aloud "El-Oh-El", it's simply not done.

Like a Republic serial villain?

I played a WWII game once so, I guess so?

Yep.
Once it was over, I told the GM he was full of crap, and an overrated hack. He got a pouting, sulky look on his face, and blamed the system he was running the game under, for oppressing him or something I guess.
Everyone in the shop loves this guy, but honestly, he's nowhere near as smart as he thinks he is. (And I'm fucking sick of his constant bitching about the guy who runs the pretty cool Unknown Armies campaign supposedly stole his campaign notes.)

>pic related

>his plan is failing

Nah my man. The name implies that his efforts are futile Not that his plan is going to fail.

>People actively do shit they think is wrong.

Small scale villains might do wrong things but most people who actually hold power belief in their vision. Thats what makes them dangerous.

Sure you always have people that do it for the money but These people rarely have the drive to risk their comfy position to become the BBEG.

They are mostly mid level managment or high underlings.

Reminder that in the Watchmen verse A LOT of shit went wrong preventing a peaceful deescalation.

Ffs this is a universe where the USA sent a Demigod to atomize the Vietcong. Whole regiments worshipped Mr. Manhattan.

What kind of people would sit in the Kremlin in this world? Surely not Gorbachev.

>Fallout Campaign
>On the Candian border
>Amalgam of locals and US army discovered the secret behind Vault-Tec just before the bombs dropped
>Invaded the vault meant to house a cloning facility and memory implantation tech
>Every member is the clone of one of the original members, all with the memories of the previous clone downloaded into the minds of the new
>They're attempting to rebuild a small republic
>Discover they're using escaped synths as living computers, kept is a suspended artificial nightmare
>They lobotomise raiders to make them subservient
>It turns out they consider the local tribals to be raiders
>Enforce genetic purity standards on those who want to reproduce
>Anyone who reproduces unlawfully is thrown to the ghoul-infested swamps at the edge of the border
>Eventually discover they've rebuilt dozens of communities
>Built cities out of debris
>Universal healthcare
>Basic standard of living for everyone within the republic
>Donate food, clean water, medical supplies and housing to nearby, completely unaffiliated wasteland communities in exchange for blood samples every 6 months
>Achieved more in the last 10 years than the NCR, Legion, Brotherhood, Enclave and Followers have in their entire history
>Clearly the correct choice over the French-Canadian resistance movement that has been raging since before the bombs dropped
>Party still sides with the rebels because the hurt feelings of a few hundred ghouls and indoctrinated wastelanders are more important than the wellbeing of thousands and the very real chance of building a stable society for the entire region within the next 10 years

It's a meme, friend

People just hate Sues, that's all.

People do that all the time. You've done it. People on a diet go for the hamburger over the salad. People in a romantic relationship cheat on a significant other they care about. Human beings are creatures with desires and morality and the two are not always in sync.

There are plenty of people who try to convince themselves that the wrong thing is right, sure, but to imply that human beings are incapable of doing something without believing it's the "right" thing to do is ridiculous. You yourself probably disprove it in dozens of small ways every day.

His legacy lives on (ugh).

>>Discover they're using escaped synths as living computers, kept is a suspended artificial nightmare
>>It turns out they consider the local tribals to be raiders
>>Anyone who reproduces unlawfully is thrown to the ghoul-infested swamps at the edge of the border
They sound like cunts. The party did nothing wrong.

>y no one lik muh shitty enclave ripoff

Fear is freedom friend.

Those are some terrible examples, unhealthy food has nothing to do with morality and akrasia doesn't mean anyone sees themselves as the "villain" from a third person perspective, cf. Hitler and Stalin.

>akrasia

I learned a new word today. Neat.

Anyway, there's a difference between "seeing yourself as a villain" and "doing things you believe to be wrong." Are you really committed to the idea that people are incapable of acting against their morals in--for example--self interest? Do you believe that a human being literally cannot do something they think is morally wrong unless they rationalize it first?

Like, that probably was a bad example, but there's millions. Maybe digital piracy is a better one. Head over to /v/ some time (never thought I'd say that), there are plenty of people who rationalize it.

>"Piracy isn't stealing it's copying"
>"I wasn't going to buy it anyway"

That kind of thing. They behave exactly the way you're expecting them to behave. But there are also a healthy amount of people who say:

>"I know piracy is wrong and I do it anyway because it's easy and I can get away with it."

No attempt at rationalization, committing a morally wrong act. Hell, apply the same thing to shoplifting if you feel like it. Sidenote: we could get into a discussion about whether piracy is *actually* morally wrong or not but that's kind of irrelevant; the people making those comments believe it is and do not attempt to justify it.

Obviously pirating a video game isn't the same as assassinating a head of state or summoning the apocalypse demon or whatever. Are you more arguing about the scale it would take to do something so wrong as to classify yourself as someone's "BBEG" and that, while people might knowingly do morally wrong things on a small scale, people are incapable of committing the truly big-dick-evil acts worthy of a BBEG without rationalizing them first?

Reminder that the cold war never finished and still goes on today ...

Don't forget that some people just want to spit in the face of an ideal they can't live up to. I there was an obscure play about some guy named Richard that explores this concept.

Maybe it's a sense of scale yeah, chances are that someone who actually whole-heartedly thinks the meat industry is a moral abomination is a vegan and someone who believes killing innocents is always wrong+some braindead Catholic doctrines will not abort even if they were raped, piracy is kind of a who cares thing due to the distance between the alleged victim of the crime and the smallness of the supposed transgression. Of course my being an error theorist might muddle the discussion somewhat, morality in any absolute way never made a lick of sense to me.

Jeffery Dahmer is a very specific type of villain. Most antagonists are not neutral evil, mentally deranged, or serial killers.

So if you're playing a detective game where you're hunting down your own personal Moriarty then yeah your antagonist is probably an evil prick.

In most campaigns the overarching antagonist tends to lean more towards lawful evil though. And being lawful requires a code of law, which carries with it a concept of justice, right and wrong, and the idea of, in some way at least, staying on the higher path of the two.

Some people just want wealth, power, sex, or something else regardless of who they hurt. Do you think rapists think they are doing good things when they rape people?

>they arbitrarily choose who is and isn't a raider before labotomizing them
>but they're definitely the good guys, guys.

This sounds pretty retarded desu senpai

...

>hrug
yee

I once played a setting where it was 'The Evil Empire of (mostly) Humans vs. The Noble, Free Other Races'. Our party was a collection of off-kilter races trying to sabotage the human war of subjugation.

Now, we had been given first impressions that this was a Medieval Dark Ages kind of setting, by the state in which the elves/dwarves/goblins/beastmen/etc. lived, and how their governments were portrayed. Shoddy roads, people starving, no sewerage, public executions, etc. And for the first few months, the DM did the whole usual bit - telling us The Empire™ is full of sadistic tyrants and cutthroats who rob and starve their people, The Resistance™ are a poor, oppressed group of spunky go-getters, etc.

Long story short, as we cut deeper into The Empire™, we found that the people living there were FAR better off than the places we came from. It was practically Renaissance-era prosperity, with a more unified and stable government. Turns out we had just been duped into fighting a 'noble' cause, by leaders who didn't want to sacrifice their sovereignty.

We decided to just abandon The Resistance entirely, moved to some far-off corner of the map to dodge our main antagonist (some Captain of the Guard we kept foiling), to let ourselves get 'found' in the wilderness and integrate into The Empire™.

This list is shit though. The "elder god tier" always ends up opposing the protagonists through really contrived bullshit instead of just telling people how what they're doing is really for a good cause.

Switch the top and bottom m80 and you have a real list

We have a word for that. Its called a sociopath.

Of course, I AM the BBEG, therefore I'm right.

>Little finger
>Motives beyond wanting power
Little Finger is an obvious power monger hell he was the main force that caused the war of the five kings to start.

Cersei is just selfish.

Ramsay isn't insane and his motives aren't mysterious. He wants power but doesn't know many approaches to this besides violence.

Littlefinger wouldn't even be a troublemaker if Ned had taken up his advice. Or Renly's. And he actually cares about a few people (Catelyn and Sansa).

Yes, the GM was trying to make us stop playing evil characters by making the villain a legit good guy.
It did'nt work.