When modern ethics collide with medieval ethics

[GSHamster]

Another interesting historical character, especially regarding gender roles, is the Chevalier d'Eon.

Truth is stranger than fiction.

 

[prosfilaes]

Likewise if the 4th level PCs mouth off to the 20th level king, he'll kill them and take their stuff. Maybe the next adventurer group will be more respectful.

I will note that mouthing off to the king is different from not bowing.

It just doesn't seem necessary, especially for not bowing. There are so many other ways of taking it, and a 20th level king certainly doesn't need to kill them and take their stuff.

 

[Janx]

What we have is a Reality is Unrealistic problem. The DM is trying to create a world that makes sense using rules that, IRL, weren't always followed. I once asked Jef Lobe at World Con (the only time I was at World Con) when he was on a panel why people always complained about so-and-so acting out of character when people IRL acted out of character all that time and no one calls it that. He response? Real life doesn't have to make sense.

plenty of good points made.

I do think the difference in real people who act out of character, is that when you have all the facts, a psychologist can trace a path of how the person came to the point of their new behavior as a logical conclusion.

Whereas, a PC just starts acting goofy because the player isn't deciding things from the context of the character's point of view. Thius, a psychologist analizing a PC woule find their behavior inexplicable.

Contrast this with common DM advice that they decide the actions of the NPC from the NPC's perspective and NOT from the GM's perspective of a good story.

Why should the GM be expected to "act in character" for his NPC, when the PC doesn't have to?

 

[malcolypse]

[MENTION=21169]Doug McCrae[/MENTION]: Everything about her piqued my interest. Her advocacy of free love will no doubt confuse and horrify the characters, and maybe the players, since I intend to tell them ahead of their meeting with her that she was a real person during the time period.

 

[pemerton]

Contrast this with common DM advice that they decide the actions of the NPC from the NPC's perspective and NOT from the GM's perspective of a good story.

Why should the GM be expected to "act in character" for his NPC, when the PC doesn't have to?

I can't speak for fanboy2000, but I don't think that common advice is particularly good advice. When it comes to playing NPCs, I tend to follow this advice instead:

I frame the [player] character into the middle of conflicts I think will push and pull in ways that are interesting to me and to the player. I keep NPC personalities somewhat unfixed in my mind, allowing me to retroactively justify their behaviors in support of this.​

 

[Elf Witch]

I can't speak for fanboy2000, but I don't think that common advice is particularly good advice. When it comes to playing NPCs, I tend to follow this advice instead:

I frame the [player] character into the middle of conflicts I think will push and pull in ways that are interesting to me and to the player. I keep NPC personalities somewhat unfixed in my mind, allowing me to retroactively justify their behaviors in support of this.​

I have played with a couple of DM who have done this and I really disliked it. It felt as if they were just plot devices being used to move us one way or another.

I like the game world to feel real and the NPCs to feel like real people my PC interacts with. I have found that it works best of the DM has some grasp on the NPCs personality and views. This is especially important with recurring NPCs.

 

[pemerton]

just plot devices being used to move us one way or another.

That's not what Paul Czege is talking about, though. He's not talking about using the NPC as a plot device to railroad the player. He's talking about using the NPC as a conflict-facilitating device to emotionally/thematically push/pull the player.

It's not about getting the player to do any particular thing. It's about getting the player more heavily invested in the stakes of doing whatever they choose to do.

Simple example: if the PC is a paladin of the Raven Queen whose father was a city constable, then the NPC cultist of Orcus turns out also to be a long-serving member of the city constabulary. This doesn't force the player to choose one way or another what his/her PC does with the captured cultist. But it raises the stakes of whatever choice is made.