D&D General Who “owns” a PC after the player stops using them?

[jasper]

Holy archive, I still have some pc sheets from my 1E high school friends. And I know I turned some of them into NPCS in 2E and 3E campaigns. Some of these people are not alive today.
Just found someone's 3E pc from sunless and forge. Koln speak up.
I have played some people's pc within 3 minutes of them leaving see the Crazy Corporal story. I may have copies of Bola Bob's Richard Prince and his ranger. They became NPCs when I PCS to Berlin.
If you play in a living world, you have no say what happens to the pc when you leave the group. Especially if you left a pc sheet with the dm.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'd probably find someone that sensitive in that area would have other problems with our game culture, so it would be unlikely to come up.

I mean, we've taken it as a given that another player would usually run the character of someone (constrained by the GM) when they're missing from a session.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Maybe if you tell Bob that and ask nicely, he will agree to let you use his character.

Though it would behoove all participants (in this case, Bob especially, since you are granting him exclusive power here) to remember that courtesy is a two-way street.

 

[Ancalagon]

As a GM I have used old PCs as retired NPCs, or sometimes transplanted them in a completely different campain (From SKT to Drakkenheim). I do try to ask for permission though. If the NPC is merely inspired by a PC, but the name has been changed, the design personality tweaked... I probably won't ask for permission.

 

[tetrasodium]

Maybe if you tell Bob that and ask nicely, he will agree to let you use his character.

Bob is not playing the character, but Bob's GM is still running games in the gm's world that Bob was allowed to play that character in. Why do you feel it's justified to give Bob a pass for not bringing up his desire to carry unannounced baggage with his pc that would give him the option of surprise freezing ever growing parts of the world that his GM manages even after Bob stops playing a character?

 

[Lanefan]

No. I'm arguing, "In this specific case, the fact that they're no longer present means that what they're wishing for makes no sense."
If Bob is deathly allergic to peanuts, it makes sense if we agree we just don't eat them while he's around. If he leaves the group, and tells us to continue not eating nuts at the sessions, that is not reasonable.

If we always leave Bob the particular chair that he really likes, it is not reasonable for him to tell us to leave it vacant in his memory when he leaves the group.

Bob doesn't own the chair, nor the peanuts; but he does own his character. That's the difference.

Think of it more like Bob brought a chair of his over to use during the game, and has left it at your house. You haven't seen Bob in years and yet (assuming you're a reasonable person) you're still not likely to donate his chair to Goodwill before at least attempting to get it back to him and-or ask what he'd like done with it.

If Bob is playing his character, it makes sense for him not to want other people to play that character. If he leaves the group, it no longer affects Bob what we do in the session, and if the group really wants that character to continue, why wouldn't Bob respect the group's wishes?

That's up to Bob. If he knows the group wants to keep his character running yet refuses permission anyway, that's maybe not the nicest thing for him to do but IMO he's well within his rights to do it.

 

[Lanefan]

Why not just accept that if the group says it's important to them that the character continues, they mean it, even if it doesn't make sense to you?

People get emotional about the characters they've interacted with over years in a roleplaying campaign, in a way they don't about chairs or peanuts.

Note: In a situation where both sides hold strong emotional views, I fully support having a meaningful discussion about the situation and coming to a mutually agreeable understanding, which would be the reasonable thing to do. The only thing I object to in all this is Bob arguing his position as if he is the only person with the right to determine the outcome.

Except as it's Bob's character, Bob is the one with the final word regarding that character, in case of a dispute.

And it's not like Bob is trying to retroactively excise his character from the campaign. The history, memories, etc. of what that character did will still be there. All Bob is doing is saying that the character isn't to be played without his permission, which seems fair enough to me.

 

[Lanefan]

I'd probably find someone that sensitive in that area would have other problems with our game culture, so it would be unlikely to come up.

I mean, we've taken it as a given that another player would usually run the character of someone (constrained by the GM) when they're missing from a session.

We do this also, and everyone's made aware of it up front. Missing a session or two, however, is a different situation than a player leaving long-term e.g. for a year overseas, or jumping to a different game.

 

[tetrasodium]

Bob doesn't own the chair, nor the peanuts; but he does own his character. That's the difference.

Think of it more like Bob brought a chair of his over to use during the game, and has left it at your house. You haven't seen Bob in years and yet (assuming you're a reasonable person) you're still not likely to donate his chair to Goodwill before at least attempting to get it back to him and-or ask what he'd like done with it.

That's up to Bob. If he knows the group wants to keep his character running yet refuses permission anyway, that's maybe not the nicest thing for him to do but IMO he's well within his rights to do it.

That depends on how much Bob's chair is worth... lsince some folks asserting job owns the PC turned NPC living in the gm's world I'll go with legal too... Last I had a tenant leave property behind I believe thst the process is
*Attempt to notify tenant
if property is worth less than 500 (maybe 800?) landlord can dispose of sell or use it for personal use.
if I er 500$(800?) post in local classified ads or conspicuously around town for two weeks providing notice for the auction. Your state might vary somewhat

of course given that Bob's PC turned NPC living in his current or former GM's world is almost certainly worth less than 500(800?)$ iit falls to the GM running the world to make their own choices
..

 

[Irlo]

There are plenty of reasons to comply with a player's wishes regarding the disposition of their characters. This notion that there's a right of ownership that grants a final, indisputable say in the matter is not one of those reasons.