well then, that settles it. psion speaks: no book of common npc's.
At least not for me. Sheesh, people. I know a lot of people respect my judgement, but I do occasionally speak for myself.
i'd argue that with programs like master tools, it's not THAT hard to come up with stats for npc's, though. and seriously, how often do you NEED full stats for common NPC's? unless your players are enlisting every bartender and dog-catcher they meet, you shouldn't need stats for folks like that. remember, we're not talking about mercenaries for hire or thieves from the guild here.
I agree that certain software tools are helpful. And I also agree that NPC stats are pretty trivial. But I said that, didn't I?
i also think you miss the concept. it's not a book of "NPC's with quirks", it's a book of 3-D NPC's. yes they might have quirks, but they might also like gardening and are willing to talk at length about a certain purple wildflower that only blooms 2 weeks out of the year. that's flavor that players will appreciate.
That doesn't sound too bad. But sersiously, I still think it has limited appeal for me personally. My reasons for not liking this approach too much are twofold. One, as I said before, even in a fairly big resource of this sort, I often find that nothing fits just right and I end up severely tweaking it and making a lot of it up myself. Two, I am of the campaign style that I prefer to skip over "inconsequential shopkeep yammering" and there are few enough NPCs that I feel are important enough to give this much detail to that it is not too much of a task.
now, i know you might say "well, just make that up when they talk to that person", which is a bit naive. you don't think there's beginning DM's who couldn't find a use for such a book?
Sure. But I imagine that many GMs will find as I did that learning the skills for yourself might be a better investment in the long run, as you can better adapt it to your game's needs.
hell, i've been a DM for 20+ years and i'd find great use for such a book.
(...)
i think alot of others would, too.
Quite possibly. I'm just speaking for myself (and perhaps some others out there who might feel as I do.)
i don't understand the "random table" comment. i can only assume you may be misunderstanding what we want. it's a book of npc's with a backstory, not a one word descriptive like "surly" or "gregarious".
I've been frequently told -- and agree -- that one memorable quirk is all you really need to make NPCs stand out. Trying to give players the life stories of minor NPCs is often lost on them/goes over their head/under their radar screens OR serves as a distraction from the real stories. NPC details are garnish, IMO. You don't need to heap it on. Often a table of quirks, mannerisms, motives, and whatnot, can give you much more mileage that fully fleshed out NPCs that don't fit and have more detail than will ever be pertinent or exposed in the game.
you think most people would not use 90% of such a book?
Yes, I do think that. I find that a great many of these location and NPC books only has a handful of items that a particular GM would like. Heck, I think that about
Enemies & Allies and
Urban Blight, so don't feel alone there. The difference for me is that when I do need those details, it's more of a service to me when you need exacting game mechanics on the fly. Making up NPC personalities is a bit easier to wing... and I consider myself no master of NPCs.
fully fleshed out npc's are the life-blood of a good campaign.
1) The more fully fleshed out they are, the harder they are to work into a campaign, as more details have a chance at being at odds with the campaign assumptions.
2) Trying to squeeze detail into inconsequential encounters (which is really the only way I can see using a large portion of the contents of such a book) can really make a campaign drag, IMO.