How often do you include NPCs primarily for roleplaying reasons?

[Sammael]

Nope, not Cormyr.

Consider this - the sea, a submerged castle with a female ghost NPC, strong druid presence (king seeking counsel from the Grand Druid), a horrible monster that can only be slain with a special sword, firbolgs and verbeeg.

 

[Mallus]

I place NPC's in games because I think they're interesting fictional characters that the PC's could interact with, or because they belong there, or both, sometimes neither (maybe they're just characters *I* find amusing).

In my old 3e campaign, I only statted NPC's when I was absolutely convinced the PC's would/wanted to fight them. The majority of the named NPC's never got stats throughout the entire 3-4 year run of the game.

In my new AD&D campaign, I'm probably going to stat most NPC's -- because it's so quick and easy --plus, randomization is cool!

 

[howandwhy99]

I think the difficulty in answering for me is in part because of the semantics of role playing. When can an NPC be engaged with? Any time. When can they be engaged with in an attempt to communicate? Any time, but only those with Intelligence scores will answer (but those without them still do stuff too, so it's a bit of a toss up). When is this expression based on verbal communication? When the creatures have above animal Intelligence.

So in my games most creatures in the world are animal intelligence, but there are plenty of those within the human norm who can speak a language to some degree. There are even unintelligent undead, automatons, and others who can be engaged with and these things are acting/expressing something so... I don't know quite where to draw the line, but its the players choice on how they want to interact with any of multiverse.

 

[Pentius]

It might be interesting to see some percentages on

- NPCs who PCs only fight (low-level/mooks/minions included), not counting RPing like "I'm going to eat and/or fight you!" and such.

- NPCs who interact but do not fight, fairly extensive RPing, conversation, information exchange

- NPCs who are involved in both.

I could start keeping track. My group meets sort of infrequently, though, so it'd take awhile to get any real data.

I watched a recent one-shot game where afterwards the GM claimed it was a good session with more RPing than usual but it only actually amounted to a few tactical suggestion exchanges between the players at the table and the GM reading off a few pre-written speeches for the bad guys. Not really RPing, from my perspective, but perhaps some others believe this is how RPing actually happens? Maybe I am missing the obvious when I discuss RPing and people have very scaled back ideas of what RPing involves?

Not everyone is either good at or into RP. People on ENworld seem to be, from what I can see, probably because we're a self selected group who are enthusiastic enough about the hobby to come here and discuss it even when we aren't actually playing. Out in meatspace, though, I find things are often a lot less shiny and ideal than they seem online.

For example, I expect, when starting any new D&D game, that one or two of the players aren't going to make a meaningful RP contribution, ever. I don't push them, because they're just there to shoot the breeze, throw in $5 for a pizza, and maybe partake in a high five when someone rolls a crit.

Some people also either aren't comfortable with, or simply aren't into RP. They have a good time playing. They may or may not be into the mechanical aspects of the system. But they never really go beyond naming their character and maybe giving a sentence or two of background, which will without exception include all or more of the following:

A) Growing up in a small village.
B) Said village being attacked by Raiders or Bandits.
C) Their parents being killed by said raiders or bandits(loss of siblings optional)
Bonus!) Secret Ninja Training.


If you can get a whole group of these people together, you get the kind of one-shot you described. If you're into RP, and you can find an entire group like you, with none of the people I describe above, congratulations, you found the unicorn! Seriously, though, in my experience, that sort of group comes together either by rare chance, or by months or even years of getting to know all the gamers in your area, and carefully recruiting a group full of them. I've actually gotten used to scaling back my RP, because it's kind of embarrassing being the only guy at the table to show to a new campaign with a printed background and in-character questionnaire.

 

[Kzach]

I watched a recent one-shot game where afterwards the GM claimed it was a good session with more RPing than usual but it only actually amounted to a few tactical suggestion exchanges between the players at the table and the GM reading off a few pre-written speeches for the bad guys. Not really RPing, from my perspective, but perhaps some others believe this is how RPing actually happens? Maybe I am missing the obvious when I discuss RPing and people have very scaled back ideas of what RPing involves?

No, I think you're onto something that I feel is a recent trend rising from the term "RPG" being used to describe lots of things that aren't really RPG's. I call this the "Diablo Effect". In my mind, Diablo was not an RPG yet these days everyone calls it, and games like it, RPG's.

The definition of roleplaying has most definitely changed from what I understood it to be years ago. Now it seems to include just playing a character, whether you engage on anything more than a mechanical system level or not. To me, roleplaying is a step beyond the mechanical and into the theatrical, where you 'act' as your character by being 'in character'. Rolling dice has nothing to do with it.

 

[howandwhy99]

It might be interesting to see some percentages on

- NPCs who PCs only fight (low-level/mooks/minions included), not counting RPing like "I'm going to eat and/or fight you!" and such.

- NPCs who interact but do not fight, fairly extensive RPing, conversation, information exchange

- NPCs who are involved in both.

Mark, if this is what you're looking for, then it is completely up to each player and each particular group I run. They choose to fight or talk. It isn't about my intentions at all. My generation of material for NPCs to combat or conversing is as I mentioned in my post above. Most everything others typically call an NPC get both.

 

[Shemeska]

Given their play style, I'm doing my players a disservice if I don't create virtually every NPC with the option for meaningful RP and non-combat interaction (with the exception of things like dretches and lemures for whom interaction is limited to trying to eat your face).

Generally speaking, if the NPC is given a name, I plan on them having a history, personality, and goals. The PCs of course choose if they want to interact meaningfully with said NPC outside of rolling initiative.

 

[Mark CMG]

I could start keeping track. My group meets sort of infrequently, though, so it'd take awhile to get any real data.

Might be interesting.

Not everyone is either good at or into RP. People on ENworld seem to be, from what I can see, probably because we're a self selected group who are enthusiastic enough about the hobby to come here and discuss it even when we aren't actually playing. Out in meatspace, though, I find things are often a lot less shiny and ideal than they seem online.

For example, I expect, when starting any new D&D game, that one or two of the players aren't going to make a meaningful RP contribution, ever. I don't push them, because they're just there to shoot the breeze, throw in $5 for a pizza, and maybe partake in a high five when someone rolls a crit.

Some people also either aren't comfortable with, or simply aren't into RP. They have a good time playing. They may or may not be into the mechanical aspects of the system. But they never really go beyond naming their character and maybe giving a sentence or two of background, which will without exception include all or more of the following:

A) Growing up in a small village.
B) Said village being attacked by Raiders or Bandits.
C) Their parents being killed by said raiders or bandits(loss of siblings optional)
Bonus!) Secret Ninja Training.


If you can get a whole group of these people together, you get the kind of one-shot you described. If you're into RP, and you can find an entire group like you, with none of the people I describe above, congratulations, you found the unicorn! Seriously, though, in my experience, that sort of group comes together either by rare chance, or by months or even years of getting to know all the gamers in your area, and carefully recruiting a group full of them. I've actually gotten used to scaling back my RP, because it's kind of embarrassing being the only guy at the table to show to a new campaign with a printed background and in-character questionnaire.

I wonder how much of it is not being good at RP and how much is not being given the chance/tools/etc. I concur that most of the games I have played have included various levels of RPers, including some like you describe at times, but I have also found that after playing with those who RP more, those who RP less tend to RP more (and better), if that makes sense. So I do believe it is a learned skill that most if not everyone is capable of picking up. I also believe that if someone plays a roleplaying game, they are more than likely open to trying to RP.

Sure, there's the occasional hanger on that might never RP but also wouldn't cheer during a football game if over someone's house for the Super Bowl and wouldn't bother to pick a horse, even in fun, while watching the Kentucky Derby with friends. They are just there to hang out and that's all good but I think that's the exception rather than the norm. If a game says "Roleplaying Game" on the book or box cover, someone might not know exactly what they are getting into but they have some expectations including an expectation that roleplaying will be involved, which suggests an openness to participation.

I ran a brief Prince Valiant campaign over the summer with some young (20s) players who were mostly used to the more high profile RPGs and computer/console games. While I had played games with them previously where the levels of actual RPing were fairly low, I found that in a game where RPing was front and center, they all rose to the occasion and now RP much more in games where they used to do much less.

 

[Pentius]

Might be interesting.

I'll start keeping notes then.

I wonder how much of it is not being good at RP and how much is not being given the chance/tools/etc. I concur that most of the games I have played have included various levels of RPers, including some like you describe at times, but I have also found that after playing with those who RP more, those who RP less tend to RP more (and better), if that makes sense. So I do believe it is a learned skill that most if not everyone is capable of picking up. I also believe that if someone plays a roleplaying game, they are more than likely open to trying to RP.

Sure, there's the occasional hanger on that might never RP but also wouldn't cheer during a football game if over someone's house for the Super Bowl and wouldn't bother to pick a horse, even in fun, while watching the Kentucky Derby with friends. They are just there to hang out and that's all good but I think that's the exception rather than the norm. If a game says "Roleplaying Game" on the book or box cover, someone might not know exactly what they are getting into but they have some expectations including an expectation that roleplaying will be involved, which suggests an openness to participation.

I wonder, too, though I suspect it varies a lot by the individual. I try to give others chances to get involved when I play(which is so much easier as DM) but like I said, I don't push it. I've seen players blossom and really get into RP, but some really aren't there for much beyond the idea of not being left out on a friday night. People who buy a book that says "Roleplaying Game" on the cover generally are more open to trying it, but then again, I'm used to only 1-3 people in a group owning the books at all. In my group, I'm the only one that owns the books, the other players just use mine.

I ran a brief Prince Valiant campaign over the summer with some young (20s) players who were mostly used to the more high profile RPGs and computer/console games. While I had played games with them previously where the levels of actual RPing were fairly low, I found that in a game where RPing was front and center, they all rose to the occasion and now RP much more in games where they used to do much less.

Yeah, I've seen things like that happen, too. Sometimes it's interesting how much a person's perspective on gaming can change by trying a new game.

 

[Meatboy]

[MENTION=4475]Sammael[/MENTION]
Aglargond!

As for the OP. I tend to agree with the majority on this. I rarely stat npcs up unless I absolutely have to. I'd rather spend my tying thinking up whats going to happen next than number crunch... Though I do my fair share of that too.