A DM's best friend - a Guiding NPC

[Hussar]

IME, in many campaigns, there is a bottleneck. On one side, you have the campaign, all the backgrounds, the notes, and whatnot and on the other, you have the players. In the middle of that, creating this nice, neat little choke point is the DM. It falls to the DM to somehow disperse the information from the campaign to the players without overloading the players by infodumping and without being so stingy with information that the players don't know what's going on.

And it's a very delicate balancing act. As a DM, you don't want to give away too much information, because, well, that takes away all the surprise and suspense. OTOH, you don't want your players getting frustrated and bored because they just can't figure out what's going on. Getting that balance can be very, very tricky.

Enter the Guide. The Guide is an NPC who knows some of the plot of the campaign, knows some of the setting details and is willing to pass that on to the players. Now, how much he or she knows is entirely up to the DM and may actually change from time to time. But, the Guide is an ally of the party, and while may be occasionally mistaken, is usually trying to help.

So, how do we introduce this Guide. What sort of NPC makes a good guide and what makes a bad one? Well, (and take this with a grain of salt, cos this is just my opinion) here is a list of things to keep in mind when making your guide:

• The guide should be less competent than the PC's. If the guide is more competent, he stops being a guide and starts being a leader and that sucks when the NPC is the leader. Choo choo! Everyone on the Plot Train. A guide who is weaker, less powerful, and possibly subservient in some way to the PC's makes a much better guide. He can offer ideas, he can offer guidance, which is what you want, but, he can't actually really affect any outcome.
  
• The guide should be reliable most of the time. While it's fine to use the guide to chuck in the occasional red herring, if the guide is too unreliable, the players will just ditch him and rightfully so.
  
• The guide needs some sort of hook. If the guide is just a fount of knowledge, he'll quickly become very boring. He needs something other than his knowledge to make him interesting. Maybe he's like a Watcher from Buffy, or, in my case, a senile intelligent dagger forged by celestials and forgotten for millennia. Something that you can use as the DM to give this guy a very specific "voice".
  

That's what I can think up for now. What do you do with your guide type NPC's? Do you use them? What shouldn't a DM do with them?

 

[Grymar]

Totally agree with your post, but it can be difficult to have a campaign long guide in the party. I tend to like to put the burden on the party to develop their own contacts and have them reach out to the contacts in times of need. Same result, but by making the PCs work to get the information they tend to remember it more and the campaign feels a bit more organic.

For instance, rather than the party asking the dagger (great concept, by the way), they would say "Hmm...we need to figure out this big Arcane McGuffin. What was the name of that arcane professor we dealt with two months ago? Maybe he knows something?"

Now we've spun off a mini adventure, tied them more closely into the world, and allowed the PCs to be the driving force.

 

[wedgeski]

I'm with you entirely, a DM mouth-piece is a very useful NPC indeed. In my current 4E campaign, he *is* enigmatic and powerful, but is off-stage most of the time (not to mention that he will soon be off-stage semi-permanently... for about 20 levels, at which point he will return as something altogether different), and just really acts as an agitator.

He has pointed the players in the direction of one plot hook, and escorted them to a town where a bunch of other plot hooks lurked in wait for them. Along the way, he answered questions about the region, and about his organisation and others he knew of... in short, he did exactly what I put him there to do. Once they arrived, he exited stage-left, and has since only been heard of in passing (he left town in a hurry but asked the PC's to wait for his return).

I debated for a long time whether or not he should be a mentor-type character, for obvious reasons. It's dangerous having a high-level NPC mixing it up with the party, we all know that. I think I've walked the line reasonably well, though, and hope that he has enough texture so that when he does return much later in the campaign as... well, something else, it will have meaningful resonance with the PC's.

So I guess I broke most of your rules Hussar, but I had my reasons.

 

[Oryan77]

• The guide should be less competent than the PC's.
  
• The guide should be reliable most of the time.
  
• The guide needs some sort of hook.
  

Man, I follow all of these suggestions myself, and I seem to have the same general opinion. But what the heck do you do when your players make no effort at all to gain information from NPCs on their own in order to move forward in the adventure?

Earlier on in our campaign, we began joking about how the parties tactics seem to always be, "kill first & cast Speak with Dead second".

It was funny to me at first (but still frustrating as the DM). But now I'm at my wits end. People always complain about DMs railroading players, but I'm not kidding when I say this....my players make me railroad them, literally. If I don't hold their hand and bluntly railroad them into what to do next, they will either spend several hours discussing what to do (again, not an exaggeration), or they sit there and wait for me to make things happen.

For example, several sessions ago they figured out that they needed a guide to help them get to the Vault of the Drow. So they are hanging out in a tavern; not really telling me what they are doing in the tavern. They sit at the gaming table doing 'whatever' until I'm yet again forced to say, "what are you guys doing". They tell me they are just hanging out in the tavern and then one of them says, "So do we find a guide?" They all laugh and then one of them says, "So anyway, who's our guide?" They were not joking, they were simply being lazy. Keep in mind, we're playing a Planescape game and they are in Sigil trying to go to the Vault of the Drow...they had absolutely no idea how to get there and they made zero effort to figure it out.

This is also not supposed to be a hack-n-slash game and they all claim to be roleplayers. But I really do not see much roleplaying & the only time the game is moving is when a combat happens. So I've unintentionally turned it into a hack-n-slash game.

I'm trying to run the Dead Gods adventure and so far it's been a real let-down. We just got to a point where they had the chance to have the entire plot revealed to them, and once again, they talked more about killing the only NPCs that knew anything, rather than roleplaying to find out what the NPCs know. But all they've talked about for several sessions is how they don't know what the hell is going on (which is how the adventure is written).

I mean, last session one player playing a wizard was captured and then rescued, but is now without his gear (and spellbook). They are in the middle of a drow war camp that consists of hundreds of tents, and the first thing they do is tell me they look in the first random tent to see if his equipment is there (expecting me to just have it appear so he can effortlessly get his stuff back). They even know the gear could be at a 2nd drow war camp half a mile away that is almost just as big. The wizard even had the chance to negotiate his release & if he attempted to roleplay, could have negotiated to get his stuff back. But all he gave for roleplaying were 3 word responses (like all of his characters do). They could even try to roleplay and talk to various drow NPCs to try and find out where the stuff is. But the players first thought was that he was just going to make a new PC if he doesn't find his spellbook, "cause he'll be gimped". I didn't plan for the capture to happen, but geez, part of playing D&D is to overcome challenges...and this became his challenge. He'd rather scrap the character than try to overcome the challenge.

They don't even try, they just expect me to throw in that NPC (guide) to do all the leg work for them and then if they aren't being railroaded, they seem bored. I don't get it. They literally do look to their NPC guides as the one that will fill them in on all the information they need to know. I could just DM & play by myself if I wanted to make everything happen

The crazy thing is, if I turned it into nothing but a hack-n-slash game with random encounters & a BBEG to fight, they would be bored of the game cause it has no substance.

 

[timbannock]

I think you have two options:

1. Concentrate on something other than investigation that requires talking to NPCs. I.e., make all the clues show up in ancient tomes, odd puzzles, Magic Mouth spells, and the like. Use skill challenges to get that info (if you're playing 4e), or play survival horror-type games where the badguys are mindless or unable to be communicated with, and it's more about resource managment, staying alive, and fleeing or fighting. Create a zombie apocalypse in the world, and just see what the Players come up with in order to get themselves out of the hordes of undead.

2. Give clearer and bigger rewards for the stuff you feel they SHOULD be doing more of. If you play 4e, give them Quests that clearly state who they need to keep alive and talk to, or where the info they seek might be...but not how to get to that person or that info. If you don't play 4e, just start (preferably subtly and without the Players ever really knowing) undercut the rewards for hack-and-slash and pile on the ad-hoc rewards for the actions you'd rather they take. Want them to use diplomacy and roleplaying more? Stop the whole session the second they do so and say "Good job!! You get a +1,000 XP kicker for diplomacy use! What a great idea you had!" Make it sound like it was their idea, and that they totally wow'd you by doing that.

In addition, read the PARANOIA XP rulebook. Talks all about how you can train your players to do what you want, while making them believe they're doing what they want.

If you have some more specific situations, I'd be happy to comment on them.

 

[Starbuck_II]

I mean, last session one player playing a wizard was captured and then rescued, but is now without his gear (and spellbook). They are in the middle of a drow war camp that consists of hundreds of tents, and the first thing they do is tell me they look in the first random tent to see if his equipment is there (expecting me to just have it appear so he can effortlessly get his stuff back). They even know the gear could be at a 2nd drow war camp half a mile away that is almost just as big. The wizard even had the chance to negotiate his release & if he attempted to roleplay, could have negotiated to get his stuff back. But all he gave for roleplaying were 3 word responses (like all of his characters do). They could even try to roleplay and talk to various drow NPCs to try and find out where the stuff is. But the players first thought was that he was just going to make a new PC if he doesn't find his spellbook, "cause he'll be gimped". I didn't plan for the capture to happen, but geez, part of playing D&D is to overcome challenges...and this became his challenge. He'd rather scrap the character than try to overcome the challenge.

To be fair, Wizards without their spellbook have no new spells prepared. That means he has spells per life instead of spells/day.
Meaning he is worse than commoner (they have better skill selection).

A Challenge would be cursed with Bestow curse or Quest/Geas. Must find a way to remove it.
Unless you are giving maybe bonus XP to the wizard: why would he want that challenge.
Heck, he isn't even able to act like a wizard anymore.

He probably made a Wizard to be a Wizard. He is likely unable to have fun as a commoner.

I agree he needs to attempt better his negociation, but maybe he dumped Charisma.
Dumping Charisma makes you bad at that stuff. After all, besides Charm/Planar Binding, what Wizard ability requires Charisma.

What are the parties Cha scores?
Maybe they are roleplayin' their abyssal Cha scores.

 

[Windjammer]

The guide should be less competent than the PC's. If the guide is more competent, he stops being a guide and starts being a leader and that sucks when the NPC is the leader. Choo choo! Everyone on the Plot Train. A guide who is weaker, less powerful, and possibly subservient in some way to the PC's makes a much better guide. He can offer ideas, he can offer guidance, which is what you want, but, he can't actually really affect any outcome.

This. Tenser in Age of Worms was really well worked into the Adventure Path despite his capacities. Somehow, in Second Darkness Paizo went the opposite way and provided NPCs throughout how, despite them being inferior to PCs, kept ordering them around to do this and that in a way that wasn't remotely subtile. Who knows, maybe that's a tribute to Night Below which (in Booklet 1) did exactly that?

Sorry, couldn't help bringing up the Adventure Paths when I saw you're currently playing one of them right now!

 

[FriarRosing]

I have a problem where any guide type NPC I introduce feels too artificial. Or, he feels artificial to me, at least. I have another problem with it where the guide NPC is the only one the players ever want to talk to. Why talk to anyone else when you have the guide to give you good advice?

I'm thinking that for my current solution I may have the guide be a bit of a butt, or he'll somehow want to limit what the party does out of concern or some other motivation.

 

[Oryan77]

I think you have two options:

1. Concentrate on something other than investigation that requires talking to NPCs.

I run a lot of published adventures and tweak them or add my own stuff in them due to lack of time. Plus I think professional adventure writers are better at making up adventures than I am

But I do like to use a little of everything in a campaign. So we've had a lot of adventures that were similar to what you suggest. I just don't think I could run the same basic thing over & over and keep their attention.

2. Give clearer and bigger rewards for the stuff you feel they SHOULD be doing more of. Stop the whole session the second they do so and say "Good job!! You get a +1,000 XP kicker for diplomacy use! What a great idea you had!"

This is something I really should do more of. I do give them bonus xp for things, but I realize now that I never point it out to them. I just give them their xp at the beginning of the next session but I don't explain what it was all for. I think I'll try to remember doing what you're suggesting here. Thanks

To be fair, Wizards without their spellbook have no new spells prepared. why would he want that challenge.
Heck, he isn't even able to act like a wizard anymore.

Maybe this has been lost since the release of 3e & 4e, but I grew up playing D&D with the mindset that I'm playing out a persons life, not a peg from the game of life boardgame

I can't count the amount of times I've had my own PCs lose his entire gear (multiple times with the same PC in fact) and had to come up with ways to rebuild him back to normal. To tell you the truth, those moments were always the most exciting to me because it was a struggle. And when I began to see progress, it made it even cooler and I thought my PC was that much more of an interesting character.

My fondest memories include the times I escaped danger with only my dagger in hand, or when I hoarded whatever loot I got my hands on so I could sell it or trade it and get some money to buy some new gear. Party members don't want the nonmagical weapons? Cool, I'll throw them on my pack mule & sell them later. I've fought hundreds of encounters & killed many NPCs, and none of those stories would be in my top 5 tales to tell my friends when we reminisce about our D&D characters.

To simply 'give up' because your gear is gone is such a waste to me. Even if it is a spellbook. So what, saving up for a blank spellbook isn't that hard. Finding and buying new scrolls isn't that hard. Sure, you'll be gimped for a bit, but if the only way you have fun is by outshining everyone else in the group during battle by doing the most damage, then you're missing out on so much that makes D&D such an awesome game. I bet the other players would remember the time your wizard did something super creative during a battle when everyone thought he'd be useless more then they would if he had cast Fireball for the umpteenth time. And you'd have a great story to tell Enworlders.

I agree he needs to attempt better his negociation, but maybe he dumped Charisma.
Dumping Charisma makes you bad at that stuff.

I don't remember off hand what his Cha score is, but roleplaying isn't limited to your stats. At least not in my games or with my PCs. My Diplomacy skill is a tool for when I need help roleplaying...it does not dictate how my character interacts with another person.

The only time I have ever seen any of the players use their low scores as a reason for why they aren't roleplaying much with an NPC (or roleplaying poorly) is when they don't know what to say or they just don't care to interact with the NPC. If they actually feel like roleplaying with an NPC, their PCs will have a silver tongue.

I have another problem with it where the guide NPC is the only one the players ever want to talk to. Why talk to anyone else when you have the guide to give you good advice?

That is exactly why I mentioned my situation. The same thing happens in our game. Even to the point where the players will ask the guide, "What should we do next?"

 

[Starbuck_II]

Maybe this has been lost since the release of 3e & 4e, but I grew up playing D&D with the mindset that I'm playing out a persons life, not a peg from the game of life boardgame

I can't count the amount of times I've had my own PCs lose his entire gear (multiple times with the same PC in fact) and had to come up with ways to rebuild him back to normal. To tell you the truth, those moments were always the most exciting to me because it was a struggle. And when I began to see progress, it made it even cooler and I thought my PC was that much more of an interesting character.

My fondest memories include the times I escaped danger with only my dagger in hand, or when I hoarded whatever loot I got my hands on so I could sell it or trade it and get some money to buy some new gear. Party members don't want the nonmagical weapons? Cool, I'll throw them on my pack mule & sell them later. I've fought hundreds of encounters & killed many NPCs, and none of those stories would be in my top 5 tales to tell my friends when we reminisce about our D&D characters.

To simply 'give up' because your gear is gone is such a waste to me. Even if it is a spellbook. So what, saving up for a blank spellbook isn't that hard. Finding and buying new scrolls isn't that hard. Sure, you'll be gimped for a bit, but if the only way you have fun is by outshining everyone else in the group during battle by doing the most damage, then you're missing out on so much that makes D&D such an awesome game. I bet the other players would remember the time your wizard did something super creative during a battle when everyone thought he'd be useless more then they would if he had cast Fireball for the umpteenth time. And you'd have a great story to tell Enworlders.

See, what you find fun and others are not the same.
I grew up on 2nd, but I can't understand this belief that losing something and regaining it is always fun.

No. Losing a weapon or armor can be fine...if a little troublesome. Losing all my class features is not.

A blank Spellbook is 100 gp. Then to add spells is 100/spell lv. To even add spells requires you have them prepared (hope he doesn't cast them before he can scribe it).

So he can't even add spells unless he prepared them behand. Which means if he accidently cast a spell before getting spellbook back: he has lost the spell forever.
He can't add it to a new book until he gets old back.

Unless you include some Drow Wizards with spellbooks.

I don't remember off hand what his Cha score is, but roleplaying isn't limited to your stats. At least not in my games or with my PCs. My Diplomacy skill is a tool for when I need help roleplaying...it does not dictate how my character interacts with another person.

Sounds like cheating to me even if it isn't exactly.
Charisma should be a key to how you act. Guys with no Charisma shouldn't be Don Juan.