Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8146855" data-attributes="member: 82106">I don't accept this. If it was true, then you would be as equally likely to have the action focus on the NPCs, to have them leading parties, or being the 'main characters' in other contexts. Yet I am pretty darn sure you don't. Because there is a fundamental difference between a PC and an NPC. They are not alike at all! Neither in your game nor in mine...I think we agree that 'charm magic' can be used as an explanation and fictional circumstance WRT both PCs and NPCs. I doubt that they are employed in a really symmetric way in any of our campaigns though. I would bet money that there have been PC wizards in your game who used charm routinely, but that PCs have been subjected to it very rarely, most of them not at all. And that players would see routine symmetrical use as 'overuse' and 'trampling on their agency'.I think there is quite a bit of truth to the idea that you cannot easily delve into a PC and explore their character and conflicts without some well-drawn NPCs at times. I guess maybe the other PCs can serve the purpose, depending on the nature of the particular game. However, I expect that there are going to be times when a well-drawn NPC is useful. I don't see a reason not to produce some sketches of NPCs that might be useful. I would be wary of over-prep though, or that some imagined trait of an NPC would turn into an obstacle to some twist of plot. Luckily I think no sketch is going to be so ironclad it can't accommodate some bending.</blockquote>

Verification