>>47113697
Let her try, let her roll, see where it goes from there.

>>47113697
When your players want to try something unique and different with how they solve problems, let them do it and be excited about it. It's why they are playing an ttrpg and not a video game. Let the try, but don't force it. Play out the game, and let them have their moment to talk.

>>47114049
Seconding this

Priority #1: Preventing an Anti-Climax.

Let's assume she talks the Alchemist out of his plans, what then? You have to end with something other than "Crisis averted, everybody go home." If the BBEG is just an alchemist it doesn't sound like he'd be much of a fight in the first place. The first thing you need to do is size up the Alchemist's plans in the first place and how he would carry them out. You could pull an Ozymandias Maneuver.

Maybe he wants to sow discord throughout the world. Maybe he executes a plan to send a familiar to taint the wine at a royal feast with a potion that drives those who drink it berserk and there is nothing he can do to stop it even if you talk him down. This would force the party into a position where they could either try to prevent the wine from being consumed or allow you to introduce a secondary antagonist, like a crazed and vengeful family member of an individual slain during the feast-gone-awry.

Then there's the issue of whether the party wants to punish the Alchemist for his sins or give him a chance to redeem himself.

As a player who prefers diplomacy, I can already tell she's going to wind up disappointed if everyone else wants to just fight. I'd recommend having at least a lieutenant or assistant that her notes show can be turned. I'd probably lay it out like so:

>assistant can be reasoned with or bargained with, has much of the knowledge and can provide critical help for the party when things go down. Party likes the aid, diplomat likes turning the knowledge to good.
>Actual alchemist is irredeemable, too far gone into his plan. Rest of party gets their big fight, diplomat helped by convincing assistant to distract the reinforcements or letting the party in so the fight begins on favorable terms.

>>47114125
>Ozymandias Maneuver
Wuzzat?

>>47114177
Say the player was actually able to turn the mad alchemist good, yeah? Turns out his evil plan had already been enacted and he was just waiting for the timer on the bomb to go off. Then the players would be in a moral conundrum as to what to do with the alchemist, and potentially try to stop the awful events(bomb, poison, etc) from occuring. Like a race against time, and time has a head-start.

File: ozymandias.jpg (75 KB, 600x354) Image search: [Google]

75 KB, 600x354

>>47114177

>>47113697
Thirding >>47114049 , but adding the somewhat obvious statement that talking to the BBEG will only work if he's both willing to negotiate and he wants something the party can reasonably give him. One campaign I was in ended with the part giving the BBEG (a master-class thief and assassin) what she wanted, because it turned out she was just stealing components of a magic item that would bring her dead boyfriend back to life. Sure, she killed people and stole priceless heirlooms from noble families, but by the time the campaign was wrapping up we has all of the pieces between us and her, and we decided that she was just doing the wrong thing for the right reasons. It was actually a very satisfying ending to the campaign.

>>47114214
Thank you

>>47114146
Or go the other way, the alchemist can be talked down, but the assistant is like "Fuck you guys I put my life in this" and stages a coup/finishes the plan. The party now has the alchemist help for the final battle but have to fight all the inions at once and they get a buff from being devoted to the plan and angry at the bosses betrayal.

>>47113697
You should always reward players who employ any sort of 'out of the box' thinking (though diplomacy barely counts unless it's really a hack and slash campaign) for two reasons;

You're creating incentives for your players to think about your campaign and it's challenges even when they're not sitting and playing with you, and because you're creating an opportunity for yourself to be surprised with where a situation may lead to.

As for whether the BBEG should ever be talked out of being a BBEG it depends. The BBEG motivations almost as a matter of definition naturally involve changing the world in some way or another (that the heroes and others frown upon). Those motivations shouldn't be up for discussion or a change of heart. However, the methods that the BBEG employs are probably not set in stone and perhaps some alternative solution could present itself.

>>47114393
I would add even what I find the best most natural response for one of your players trying to talk the BBEG out of doing their plan is for the BBEG to respond exactly in kind. To convince the party to join him in his 'evil plan' and to reward them well for helping to carry it out. Perhaps he has a tragic backstory that can tug at heart strings. Perhaps he's helping to prevent some even greater calamity from happening. Perhaps he's just lying to them.

No, but BBEG talked my PCs into being his servants. PCs helped the lich to take over the land and aided him in suppressing revolts against his terrifyingly effective tyranny.

Yeah we've had it happen a few times. Talked a dragon out of her plans once. Another time one of the PCs became penpals with the BBEG.

Usually though the best we've been able to accomplish is to get them to be more civil or figure out what they want, rather than just getting them to stop.

Happened once on my memory. However, we've been talking the dragon out of his plans *while* fighting him, so it wasn't a complete anticlimax.

>>47114940
>BBEG talked my PCs into being his servants

Tell me more?