A lot of campaigns focus on the PCs as being especially strong or important...

A lot of campaigns focus on the PCs as being especially strong or important. When was the last time your party met an adventurer who was a higher level than they were?

How'd that go?

They thought they were hot shit enough to beat someone far above their weight class. It worked out exactly like you think it would. They all took turns trying to best the level 15 adventurer as level 6s themselves. Instead of working together to possibly have a chance, they figured it was fine to do it one on one because they're the protagonists! "There's no way we can lose to someone else, guys!"

Why did they meet a character of that level at all? What matters of import were he or she taking care of that coincided with meeting the players?

Can't a lvl15 adventurer just be on the way of your PCs? Does he really need to be a special person?

I mean sometimes I feel like it's OK to do what books and movies can't do. Which is make it clear that there are things that are in the world that aren't necessary. Maybe TTRPG should be the type of media that could free from Chekhov's gun.

Last session. We are level 2-3 at most. We meet a group of lvl 20 adventurers. They taught us some tricks which were reflected in a buff of stats + new spells.

>When was the last time your party met an adventurer who was a higher level than they were?

that's called a dmpc and makes you a shit dm, user

My GM turned a recently made PC into a lvl 20 NPC that we meet in a town in the middle of nowhere just to tease the player for bringing him a character with a ridiculous backstory.

>Does he really need to be a special person?
A level 15 character is only a couple of levels shy of "masters of the world" tier., assuming DnD. I wouldn't figure that the kind of people throwing out Demiplane and bedazzling themselves in magic items are especially common.

Not OP, but strong NPC =/= DMPC. A DMPC is the the cjaracter the DM adds to the party who is above and beyond the party's level and exists soley to make them look bad by comparison to their feats of heroism.

I'm running Blades in the Dark for my crew in our homebrew settings that we normally use for D&D with the powerlevels more or less intact for the higher ups in the world. The PCs are constantly getting wrapped up with people and organizations way beyond their reach powerlevel wise and have been squeaking by due to a combo of luck, good planning, and bad decisions.

It's been pretty fun so far.

This was my biggest issue with Forgotten Realms. There was no reason for the players to do anything, since every kingdom had at least six DMPCs that were 30,000th level with a million contigencies, followers, and favor from the Gods and shit. There was no room for the players to become the most powerful characters in the setting.

It can be done, but only in limited circumstances, and never with the DMPC riding in to save the players' bacon. If anything, have the players sneak in under the radar to save a national hero and get a side-plot going from that.

One neat solution I've seen is to assume there is one 20th level character of each major class world-wide, then two 19th levels, four 18th levels, eight 17th levels, and so on. Naturally you don't have to include every splatbook class, and you can fudge the numbers somewhat, but it works out to a decent average.

I generally shy away from that type of thing. The PCs ARE the protagonists - even if the story they tell is a bitter tragedy of being killed by kobolds and left in a ditch. At least it was by virtue of their own poor decisions or incredible misfortune.

Introducing significantly superior characters just for wankery or "to teach them some humility" is some shit play, and also why I'm not a fan of some established settings like FR since the place is full of established characters most DMs seem to enjoy parading around.

A rival party that is a bit more veteran can be interesting, as potential allies or to give your players that feeling of eventually surpassing them.

>The PCs ARE the protagonists - even if the story they tell is a bitter tragedy of being killed by kobolds and left in a ditch.
Why does that necessitate them being the strongest people around? I literally do not see the connection between this statement and the idea that there can't be other, higher level characters running around.

I can't imagine how a party of level 20 adventurers would ever move in the same social circles, modes of transit, or even planes of existence as a group of level 2-3 adventurers.

Ever think that it could possibly be a way to give your players something to which they can aspire to become?

disregard this, i suck cocks
you already did answer that
>to give your players that feeling of eventually surpassing them

Protagonists of their own story, sure. They should always be the focus of play, but not of the world. Maybe they work towards it, but i disagree with defaulting to that mindset of 'best in the land'.

They don't have to be "the strongest" but it should generally be kept within "beatable with some pluck" range. Vastly superior characters running around will generally either suck all significance out of your players actions or lay waste to any feeling of consistency ("If these guards are so strong, why can't they go clear out the goblins?")

That's all assuming someone doesn't just get vaporized in an instant by some Warlock 14 levels higher because its That DM who took offence over some in-character flippancy. The kind you read in Veeky Forums threads.

Basically don't create the Jones next door and rub his new Ferrari in their faces unless there is some kind of impetus in mind. And especially don't do it if Mr. Jones can Finger of Death you at the dinner table for some slight.

>There was no room for the players to become the most powerful characters in the setting.
>I only want to play if I can be the most powerful ever

The setting I'm running right now has adventuring as a common job. So there are a boatload of higher level npc's running around the same area, most of them are too caught up in fucking with each other than to notice what are essentially bugs for my party. Should I hold off on introducing the players to them, or should I let them see the kind of mettle their up against?

>the gods in the setting are literally just 40th level pc's

The first time our party met a party of higher-level NPCs, they went out of their way to make sure we understood how much better than us they were.

DM was kind of a shit tho.

Problem is, games like Dnd literally require people higher level than you to be commonplace.

Who do you tjink made the magical gear you keep buying/trading up for as you find? Who do you think came up with the spells your party wizard is only just now learning to cast?

That would depend on the setting, wouldn't it?

Aaaaand that's the problem with D&D.

I mean, if the villain is much more powerful and the players needs to level up and gear up during 20+ sessions, how the fuck didn't the villain destroy/conquered/revived undead the world, in other way that "He is magically sealed and will only be unleashed when you will almost be of the same level as he is."

>the problem with DnD
This is why I can't take you niggers seriously. In every setting, in every campaign, if you're starting out at low-level there is going to be a shitload of people who are stronger than you, because only the shittiest of GMs creates a world in which the PCs exist in a vacuum. Unless your game starts at the fucking dawn of time, there is absolutely, positively, zero goddamn reason for your characters to be the dopest niggers on the block.

Faerun, Tamriel, Shadowrun, whatever the shit the world is called in Numenara, Earth. It's all the same, all the time. Shut your dumb, stupid, bitch-ass mouth and figure out how to tell a collaborative story instead of bitching that you ain't stronk enuff yet.

>anime
Ugh.

>They don't have to be "the strongest" but it should generally be kept within "beatable with some pluck" range. Vastly superior characters running around will generally either suck all significance out of your players actions or lay waste to any feeling of consistency ("If these guards are so strong, why can't they go clear out the goblins?")
That seems to be working with the implicit assumptions that the adventure is one of those Save the world from the Evil Menace, types, and that nobody else could rise to the occasion should it be necessary, and that said evil is defeated by kicking it's ass in a climactic fight.

Any of those 3 assumptions might not, and depending on your group's play style, often do not hold. Is it really so hard to think that the PCs are the heroes of the day because they know the right thing at the right time? Or that they're local heroes attending to local problems? Or that there isn't even a vast threat at all, and they're just off doing their thing?

Not commonplace, this is why the tiers exist and assume the world opens up or evolves as the characters do, preferably in ways influenced by the campaign.

Breaking those tiers leads to bullshittery, I.e the level 2 PCs running into level 15 NPC adventurers.

Not necessarily. You assume that PC's play by the same rules as the rest of the world, but you could very easily put together a premise in which the players are given some kind of inherent advantage right from the start. Take a few cues from animes or superhero comics. The PC might be PC's precisely because they have something unique about them: descendants of an ancient race, blessed by gods, subjects of experimentation, something.

I PERSONALLY don't really like that kind of a hook. But it's not difficult to pull off, and can be a lot of fun to play.

If its handled well, sure.

The problem is finding a reason for someone so out of their league to both be around lower level PCs AND have a reason to show off said power level that doesn't invalidate the PCs or feel contrived.

I like something like this
>PCs hear sounds of fighting
>rush over to see what the hell is up
>find corpse of [insert dangerous monster here] with [insert powerful NPC here] cleaning up or something else innocuous beside it

That would only really work once or twice at most without becoming annoying though. And it should be done for a reason. Like the powerful NPC gives them directions or tips or something like that.

I think a lot of the problem boils down to poor campaign and story design to begin with. And maybe a poor agreement that you might have with your players.
Why should players expect that everyone they come across is beatable, and why should they feel "cheated" if that is not the case?" It's probably because your campaign is based around scenarios that will extremely likely end in a fight, and features a simple, straight-forward story about "get power, acquire wealth and bitches" model, where other character being stronger does indeed rob the player of the thunder they desire.

But you don't fucking have to design your campaing around either of that. It's just pretty lazy storytelling to begin with.

I am using the base example of DnD as it was assumed from the rest of the thread. And that's really what DnD does well - Heroic Fantasy. It tends to struggle with most else.

This general rule applies in other cases anyway. A local problem solved by local heroes loses weight if you're aware something of much greater power with equal agency is around that could have done it in your place with much less effort. Or if they're off doing their own thing but a rival party is shown to be basically just them, but better - also off doing their own thing but somehow within the bounds of your story.

It's the same reason why DMPCs are considered awful. They just sap motivation. It doesn't matter the context it's in; most players are just going to be disgruntled or become apathetic if you make them live in the long shadow of someone else. If you're going something light like one of those SoL style games this probably isn't even likely to come up.

Just take a trip through any "That Guy" or "Terrible Game Experiences" threads and a PCs encounter with some much more powerful NPC comes up a lot.

>A local problem solved by local heroes loses weight if you're aware something of much greater power with equal agency is around that could have done it in your place with much less effort.
How the hell does that follow? Does the existence of local police solving crimes lose its weight in real life because there are things like the FBI and Interpol? Is the coffeeshop you patronize unimportant because there are bigger and more successful coffee chains?

It only "loses weight" if you, the GM, make local problems unimportant, because the crux of the game is about bigger and better and fightier. Which is a problem for DnD, but is more a problem with storytelling.

>Just take a trip through any "That Guy" or "Terrible Game Experiences" threads and a PCs encounter with some much more powerful NPC comes up a lot.
And the problem comes from them invalidating the game choices of the players, not their mere existence. I mean for fuck's sake, a logical outgrowth of your argument is that Only War, is, and cannot help but be, a terrible game. There are always tougher characters than the grunts that make up the party.

You can easily make a good game with very powerful NPC characters. You just have to not be an idiot about it. But the sticking point is the "not being an idiot" part, not the powerful NPC part.

This is one of the things I actually like about Pathfinder Society. For all the problems with the game, the scenario design is genuinely good and often very creative. It answers the question "where are all the other level 12 wizards?" by having the players get quests from adventurers higher on the totem pole than themselves, and occasionally throwing in NPCs who are further along in their progression.

You seem to misunderstand what the purpose of a story is. Or that an RPG is an exercise in, effectively, multiplayer story-telling. And then comparing this to...coffee shops.

Take your examples. Local police solve a crime. This is just an event.
Local police solve crime...and they NEED the help of your ragtag group of misfits! Presumably with a dog.

But now you introduce another ragtag group of misfits with their own mascot. Not a problem, bit of rivalry, some competition.
But if said rival group just swans in and demonstrates how amazingly good they are at solving crimes and the only reason they won't stoop down to the level of investigating the haunted bakery is because they're just too good for you, or worse yet, steal the group's thunder - why'd you even bother to waste everyone's time in the first place? They add virtually nothing to the story because the PCs have no recourse to surpass or at least compete with them - because in system terms you decided to throw something in that attempts to fulfill the same role as the players, but is statistically superior.

In the coffee shop example, big chains aren't competing for story space - they're the obstacles, assuming the goal of said coffee shop is to serve the best damn beans in the business or discover an ancient cake recipe or whatever it is. If the game is only focused on "Running a Coffee Shop Slice of Life" then, as mentioned before, none of this even becomes an issue. There is no space to compete for, unless you try to out-comfy your players in some bizarre, twisted campaign.

It's interesting you bring up Only War, since I just got done playing some of that. We even had a rival regiment.
But even in the Only War book it very specifically says that the PCs are special - even in terms of the average lifespan of a Guardsman. It's why they have fate points.

>Or that an RPG is an exercise in, effectively, multiplayer story-telling. And then comparing this to...coffee shops.
The comparison works: Something being smaller and more local does not follow that it is less important, especially if it's the highlight of the focus of your group.

>Local police solve crime...and they NEED the help of your ragtag group of misfits! Presumably with a dog.
The point is that I was comparing the PCs to the local police. Sure, solving the local murder might not be as important in the grand scheme of things as the ongoing insurgency in Afghanistan, but bet you anything that most papers, and most local people, are far more concerned with the former than the latter.

To continue this analogy, you don't include a rival group THAT DOES EVERYTHING BETTER FOREVER. You include a couple of vets from Afghanistan who are on leave,. Maybe they give you a bit of help, maybe they get in the way, maybe they just make a comment to remind you that a larger world exists out there. But the fact that a squad of army vets can beat up your police detective group doesn't and shouldn't really have an impact on what your guys are doing.

>But even in the Only War book it very specifically says that the PCs are special - even in terms of the average lifespan of a Guardsman. It's why they have fate points.
So you're at the middle of the totem pole instead of the bottom. So fucking what? Astartes exist in 40k. It's a reasonably common conceit that your group has to do X to hold the line until the Astartes can come along and save the day. Should they just not exist, or always be hidden so we can wank the players? Of course not.

Perhaps you need to take a trip back up to the top of the thread.

Rival adventuring parties.

And keep that in mind when developing your comparisons. Even though this does still work for stupid FR stuff like having big established factions getting in your face.
You also seem caught up on the combat aspect of things, even when trying to transpose those to other examples. You also seem to have the lost the nuance of "vastly" I introduced - after all you got to start from somewhere in an underdog story. But the point is they should be able to be overcome in the short-term. With some pluck. I feel like I'm repeating myself here.

Lets take the vets example. What do you add by introducing these people into the story of the missing baker? To begin with, this is not a "vast" power difference, especially if what is being compared here is sleuthing ability. Its nowhere near the same power comparison of First Tier and Third Tier DnD adventurers, or throwing Elminster at your level 5 party. It's actually conceivable that, if it came down to it, your bunch of delinquent detectives could still beat trained soldiers.

But even so, the better time to introduce said veterans, or something like Space Marines, is generally at the END of a story. The old hold out until the cavalry can arrive bit. The police only arrive after all the shit has gone down. Or if they do show up early, nothing is able to progress without the players.

>But now you introduce another ragtag group of misfits with their own mascot. Not a problem, bit of rivalry, some competition.
>But if said rival group just swans in and demonstrates how amazingly good they are at solving crimes and the only reason they won't stoop down to the level of investigating the haunted bakery is because they're just too good for you, or worse yet, steal the group's thunder - why'd you even bother to waste everyone's time in the first place? They add virtually nothing to the story because the PCs have no recourse to surpass or at least compete with them - because in system terms you decided to throw something in that attempts to fulfill the same role as the players, but is statistically superior.

Clearly you are going to stumble onto something going on at the haunted bakery shop that on the surface seems like a small problem but is in fact the first sign of a much bigger problem. Like finding out that the real estate scam the guy in the rubber mask was pulling off was state-wide in scope, and has the backing of powerful individuals who very much do not appreciate having their business exposed.

This forces you to team up with the other team to handle a problem that's bigger than anything in your weight class, and indeed its probably something they can't handle alone either. The first step, of course, is to get this rival team that was originally dismissive of your mission to take what you have found seriously...

Shit, this writes itself man.

We don't play D&D or any system with levels, but we run into nasty shit all the time. Normally we can just overpower them with numbers or out maneuver them if they're on their own. But last game this Socialist guerilla type just casually led us around, from one trap to another, with this big ass mastiff running interference. It's what we deserved really, for just wandering in without doing any research. After she had dropped three out of six of us, the two who stayed outside for support just leveled the building with CAS.

Bitch survives and saves us too. Turns out, the info we had that said she was a "Bruja" was right.

>The first step, of course, is to get this rival team that was originally dismissive of your mission to take what you have found seriously...

So you compete or surpass, clearly indicating the playing field was reasonably level to begin with. You are their peers here.

Compare that to, say, the first three replies to this thread.

>Perhaps you need to take a trip back up to the top of the thread.
Ok, let's do that.

> When was the last time your party met an adventurer who was a higher level than they were?
That says nothing about rivalry, which first comes into the thread here, and has nothing to do with the OP's question, nor is it an assumption I entertain in my posts. Higher level adventurers are not necessarily rivals to your group.

>More idiotic, asinine assumptions and barking up empty trees.
The point is that you can have a self contained, emotionally involved adventure on a local scope. I don't see why you have so much trouble with this concept. I don't see why you have trouble with other, related concepts, such as

>The PCs are the heroes because they're in the right place at the right time and time is of the essence, maybe someone could do a better job, but there's no chance to go get those people.
>The PCs are the heroes for something other than their ability to kill shit good, or throw around powers beyond the norm.
>The PCs are not in fact the heroes

Any or all of which should be possible, and which makes your "point"a la

> But the point is they should be able to be overcome in the short-term. With some pluck. I feel like I'm repeating myself here.
Completely fucking meaningless, UNLESS you assume the game is all about KILL DAT SHIT in an open fight. Which it often isn't.

The NPC who hired our party also hired a level 13 drow fighter (nope, not a ranger) to help us eradicate a drow raiding party. Our three characters were around level 8. He was super chill but didn't really want to interact with us much at first, he'd had bad experiences on the surface. We eventually got along quite well, but we still didn't know much about him. He played with my weasel familiar and he drank all of us under the table.