One-Liner NPCs

GMMichael · Dec 1, 2017

They had it right back in 1987 (note the innkeeper):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8PHmi2L7FY

While realizing what a tangled web we weave the other day, it occurred to me that most NPCs shouldn't need more than one line of dialogue, like in some of the earliest Nintendo RPGs.

Doesn't that sound boring? Less-than-one-dimensional NPCs?

It's actually really practical. Hear me out. Any given book - those that contain the stories we know and love - contains a handful or three of characters who provide the majority of dialogue in the book. This is the "cast," if you'll permit some TV/movie terminology. The rest of the NPCs are the extras - all the other people in the world who get only one line of dialogue to use for their entire lives (though "extras" don't usually get dialogue).

Game masters have a significant burden: the duty to turn a pile of rules into an exciting game. This is almost impossible to do if every NPC is supposed to have a unique name, voice, backstory, family tree, place in the world, and equipment list. It's just too much information, and honestly, a waste of the GM's creative energy when it must be spent on one-liner NPCs. The story needs to be told, and too many characters will actually get in the way of it.

You can convey this to players with the named/unnamed convention. The "innkeeper" gets one line, while players can expect more dialogue from "innkeeper Carl."

Should players expect fleshed-out NPCs to be everywhere? Can GMs provide a single line of dialogue (or less) for an NPC and not ruin immersion for the players?

innerdude · Dec 1, 2017

One of the main GM tenets of Dungeon World is that "Everyone has a name."

Anyone to whom the PCs actually speak a line of dialogue should have a name, and at the very least a basic motivation for their "scene" with the PCs. Something like this:

Barkeep
Name: Griswold
Motivation: Just wants to be done for the night and go home

And you may not even need to write down anything other than the name. The motivation can just be kept in your head, but for me it's always a great starting point to at least have some frame of reference.

Now --- in some cases, the PCs may not actually TRY to speak to an NPC. "We find an inn and get rooms and food." In this case, you don't need to give the innkeeper a name, because the innkeeper isn't even part of the scene.

The second one of the PCs says, "I'm going to ask the innkeeper a question," then the NPC needs a name and a basic scene motivation.

Phion · Dec 1, 2017

An NPC should be as interesting as the situation requires. If a player takes an interest in one expand on the NPC as required; it would be unreasonable to expect the DM to plan every NPC but becomes artificial if the world just turns into a video game.

Sunseeker · Dec 1, 2017

I have played with people who like to get "chatty" with random NPCs. I hate having my time wasted. I hate having the rest of the players time wasted while Bobby wants to shoot the breeze with some rando on the street. So yeah, I'm fine with NPCs having few lines, I mean realistically most IRL people probably have nothing interesting or relevant to say.

Hand of Evil · Dec 1, 2017

NPC have personalities and will answer questions put to them, those answers should be in that personality. Also, NPC should reappear in campaigns and be developed as sources for the players to use.

MarkB · Dec 2, 2017

I don't even get the concept, really. Some NPCs will have specific information they may wish to convey. Some won't. But I won't be writing out "lines of dialogue" for them in advance. If the players have their character talk to someone, a conversation will happen - but it'll happen naturally, not as a series of dialogue trees.

Yaztromo · Dec 2, 2017

The truth is that I get carried on when running NPCs (typically with information) and I tend to make them negotiate / roleplay too much before passing on the information and... regularly players get bored.
I have to improve under this point of view and manage these issues in a more snappy fashion. In case, better having an early roll to decide if the NPC will talk or not, rather than argue too much or wait for the playing characters to say "the world".
A bit of balance never hurts....

redrick · Dec 2, 2017

Whether or not I name or assign motivation to an NPC in my notes has nothing to do with how much chatter time that NPC takes up at the table.

My last adventure had detailed (2 sentence) notes for 3 NPCs, and then a list of names for a family. Most of the interaction between NPCs and player characters ended up being with NPCs only implied on the adventure notes — the Inn had an innkeeper. Questions were put to him. He got a name. Then he got his teeth knocked out, and then it turned out he had a wife living in the Inn with him, etc, etc.

So is the suggestion that NPCs be deliberately terse, so as to keep the session on track and avoid extended social interactions? Or is it that the DM shouldn't spend too much time coming up with NPC names, backgrounds and motivations during while planning an adventure?

GMMichael · Dec 3, 2017

MarkB said:
I don't even get the concept, really. Some NPCs will have specific information they may wish to convey. Some won't. But I won't be writing out "lines of dialogue" for them in advance. If the players have their character talk to someone, a conversation will happen - but it'll happen naturally, not as a series of dialogue trees.

What if I put it like this: realistically, a dozen people have knowledge about one clue that's necessary for the detective to put together two clues that will eventually lead him to the killer.

GMs don't have time for that. One NPC is going to reveal one clue, another will reveal the other clue, and a third NPC will help the PCs put the two clues together (because you know they're going to need it). Then the chase scene ensues.

If you don't write out lines of dialogue, then your primary NPCs have significant notes that reveal what they know, with whom they interact, and what their routines and inventory look like.

If you don't have lines of dialogue written out, or significant notes on what the NPC knows, then you're just winging it - which can lead to serious inconsistencies, player confusion, and - get ready for it - non-immersive play.

The concept is that there are NPCs who require detail, but most really don't, and shouldn't be expected to.

Jhaelen · Dec 4, 2017

If my players develop an interest in npcs that I didn't have more plans than a 'one-liner' for, they get 'promoted' to 'real' npcs. For that purpose I always have a list of names ready. We're playing an RPG here, not a video game.