Hidden 11 yrs ago Post by Psyga315
Raw
OP
Avatar of Psyga315

Psyga315 From Shadows

Member Seen 2 yrs ago

So, we had a heated discussion over at an RPG over whether or not the NPCs in it can be controlled by players or not. It made for an interesting discussion, as different terms of NPCs were brought up. In one corner, we had the camp of "NPCs should be controlled by the GM only, and any NPCs the players create belong to them to control exclusively" and in another corner we had the camp of "Players and GMs alike control the NPCs."

Both have their pros and cons, and I have the faint nostalgia reach into the back of my skull as I try to remember the last time I played in an RPG where everyone can control NPCs.

So, that is my question(s) for this thread: How do you define NPCs? What NPCs are acceptable for players to control? Are RPGs more enjoyable when the GM controls NPCs or when the players control NPCs?
Hidden 11 yrs ago Post by Lillian Thorne
Raw
Avatar of Lillian Thorne

Lillian Thorne NO LONGER A MOD, PM the others if you need help

Member Seen 1 mo ago

In my very first RP here, and my first forum RP ever (I'd been a table top RPer only prior to that) I used another player's NPC brother in a post of mine without thought, it just fit so I went with it. My fellow players had fits, telling me (mostly nicely) in the OOC that what I'd done wasn't ok. I was mortified but the player whose NPC I used was very cool about it. He said I'd stayed within character of the NPC and he was fine with it but to ask in the future. As the game died shortly there after (vanishing GM) I never got to give it another try.

I think with NPC's there are lots of shades of gray to the matter. As a player I am (as demonstrated by my fumble above) willing to take on NPC's and work with them once I am comfortable with the setting and the NPC. This is easier done in a 1x1 when things are communal from the start. It gets a little trickier in a group.

I know when I GM there are NPC's who are plot critical and I don't want anyone moving them. However having to play every single NPC in the RP can be exhausting. I've had an RP turned into a series of 1x1's several times as players squared off with their own custom made NPC while that can be great fun, it can also be draining if they aren't also seeking each other out which is something I try to encourage. So I try to let it be known which NPC's are hands off and which are free to be used by any and all. Throughout the course of the RP such statuses can change which further muddies things. I have also had many players bring in NPC's that they either played or expected me to play as the GM. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't.

So I guess it really comes down to communication. As that kind player said to me so long ago, just ask.
Hidden 11 yrs ago Post by vancexentan
Raw
Avatar of vancexentan

vancexentan Hawk of Endymion

Member Seen 2 yrs ago

NPC's are characters who, while getting some characterization, are not the main priority in the story. For example Paul Lyons in Gundam Crossover - Those Who Correct finds a Lancer companion in Graham Aker whom is an NPC. He will be the main contrast to the more stone cold militaristic soldier that Paul is and help him develop out of it. However Graham himself could indeed die without Paul, a main character, being much affected by it in terms of being able to continue the roleplay. Unless the NPC is essential, like Captain Jason in the roleplay, then the case is that he is simply a figure head who is there to be the figure head and mentor without the need to make an entire character like I did Paul.

In other words NPC's are there to advance the roleplay while the main characters are there to be essential to the roleplay's continuation. They are the main focus and are the main reason for what is going to happen and will happen in the roleplay. An example of this is it Graham had a 'heel' turn and became Paul's enemy it would mean Paul would need to overcome a close friend in order to move on. If Jason died Paul would need to step up to lead the crew in his stead. It's all about advancing the player character.
Hidden 11 yrs ago Post by Kaga
Raw
Avatar of Kaga

Kaga just passing through

Member Seen 8 yrs ago

Since NPC stands for "non-player character" it doesn't make sense to me that an NPC can belong to one single player (other than the GM) and be controlled by that player only. At that point, isn't it just another character controlled by that player? What makes it an NPC at that point? Why is the label needed if they're still only going to be controlled by one person?
Hidden 11 yrs ago Post by Brovo
Raw

Brovo

Member Offline since relaunch

Psyga315 said So, that is my question(s) for this thread: How do you define NPCs? What NPCs are acceptable for players to control? Are RPGs more enjoyable when the GM controls NPCs or when the players control NPCs?


How do you define NPCs?
A: NPC's in role playing, though especially PbPRP (forum role playing) are a bit of a misnomer. It's a carryover term from tabletops to mean non-player characters, which are just that: Characters which are created and exist independent of player control. However, PbPRP's often skewer this line, because of the nature of PbPRP: That is, it's turn-based and not live play. The GM can't just answer your character's question in ten seconds, and sometimes a player just wants to buffer up their post with a conversation with an NPC. Depending on how authoritarian the GM is, this can be allowed, and it's perfectly acceptable.

Basically speaking, the term "NPC" in a PbPRP is typically used in place of what should be the proper term: Side character. Players control protagonists, GMs control everyone else, so if the NPC is being controlled by a player, but isn't going to "stay" as part of the player's repertoire, it's just a side character.

What NPCs are acceptable for players to control?
A: Ordinarily? Random pedestrians, no name characters, and so on. Like asking for directions is fine. Anything that doesn't derail the GM's plot is fine. Possessing important NPCs should only be done with permission, and you should make your intentions clear. Consider NPCs important to the plot to basically be the GM's characters. It would be impolite to simply take them over as it would be impolite for him to simply take your character over, right?

Are RPGs more enjoyable when the GM controls NPCs or when the players control NPCs?
A: Completely up to personal taste. I prefer a mix of both. Let players toy with lesser NPCs but keep more important NPCs in my own pockets. To each their own, though.
Hidden 11 yrs ago Post by Jorick
Raw
Avatar of Jorick

Jorick Magnificent Bastard

Member Seen 5 yrs ago

The short answer is that it depends on the GM's wishes.

The longer answer is that some GMs are fine with the players fiddling with their NPCs, but some will throw a fit if a player dares to control a character that is not their own. This can be for pure game reasons, because NPCs are the GM's main method of affecting the player characters and the story so a player controlling them really messes with that. It could also be because the GM views those NPCs as their own characters the same way the players view their own, so they see a player controlling an NPC as exactly the same thing as a player controlling another player's character; I've found this to be the most common in games where the GM doesn't have a designated character that they are playing just like the normal player characters, because they seem to see everyone else in the world as their character(s) instead, but I've also seen it happen in games where the GM does have a normal player character. There are plenty of valid reasons besides those two, but they represent what I feel are the two main schools of thought in GMs who don't like players messing with their NPCs.

I've found that the best way to handle the NPC thing is to allow players to do whatever they want (within bounds of reason) with NPCs of no consequence to the story, so long as those interactions are not used to cheat through plot barriers. For example, I saw one person in an RP use this sort of random NPC thing to metagame by asking them where a certain tavern (which was supposed to be sort of a hidden underground place, and our first challenge of the RP was to find it) was, then had the NPC tell them it was in the location that other players had already found out, and he went on his merry way there. That's obviously not okay due to the metagaming, but anything similar to that (mugging random passerby if you need money and just assuming you get enough after a while, for instance) is still a shady thing to do. As long as players aren't using the inconsequential NPCs to lazily get through barriers it ought to be fine to use them to fill out a post, maybe to show a bit of your character's personality by how they treat the person, so on and so forth.

Then, for the NPCs that actually matter, best way to handle that is for the GM to say that players absolutely 100% cannot control them without their approval. Depending on varying GM styles they might want to do a collaborative post for the interaction, or they might just want to tell you how that NPC would respond and let you write it all up yourself, but either way those important NPCs should never be beholden to the whims of the players. The players don't know what the characters know, they probably don't know their full history and personality, so on and so forth, so letting them control that character and probably botch it is just a bad idea. There's a term used in some tabletop game communities that I think fits here: GMPC, Game Master Player Character. Some people use the term to mean a normal player character controlled by the GM in the tabletop campaign, but it's also used to mean important NPCs controlled by the GM that tag along with the party. I figure just as NPC has been adapted to forum roleplaying, so too can GMPC. Basically they're more than the run of the mill NPC, they're a non-player character wholly the GM's to control, and they may or may not be key parts of the RP's plot. This could apply to kings and innkeepers alike, depending on the GM and the story at hand, any NPC that is important enough to not let players fiddle with them.

I doubt this terminology will actually become popularly used, but that's how I view the difference between normal and important NPCs. Normal ones can be messed with by the players, GMPCs can't. I think that makes for the healthiest mix of GM control and player freedom, which helps to maximize enjoyment for everyone involved, so that's what I like to see in an RP.
↑ Top
© 2007-2025
BBCode Cheatsheet