How often do you include NPCs primarily for roleplaying reasons?

[Kzach]

Why not?

He was into Palladium's Robotech and was interested in the mech designs. He used to draw them. He simply wasn't that into the game itself as we never actually played it. He simply one day said, "Hey, look at this. It's a game you sit down and play with dice'n'stuff. Look at the cool pictures!"

I latched onto the concept of the game though and read the books thoroughly and then pursued other avenues, eventually landing on AD&D. He never even read the rules to the game and was only really interested in the pictures which were, admittedly, very cool.

This is true, and yet I find no evidence in this that the definition of roleplaying has changed, particularly when it's flourishing in chat rooms and fanfiction threads and all kinds of places that have nothing to do with books and dice.

Do you play games like World of Warcraft or other MMOs or engage in discussions on forums for things like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Conan, etc.?

In numerous conversations I hear from the younger generation that they consider roleplaying to be anything they do with a character in a game. They could be playing Crysis and say they're roleplaying. The reason I call it the Diablo Effect is because I distinctly remember when Diablo came out, there was a massive split between people who called it an RPG and those who didn't. In almost every instance where I discussed this matter, the ones who called it an RPG were either young (90's born), or had never played PNP games like D&D.

Articles about the physics of falling damage, early explorations of two-weapon fighting, NPC classes, bestiaries for the purpose of making sure we had orange and purple and brown dragons. Stuff that was all mechanics, no characterization.

A very topical example is monster entries. What's one of the biggest complaints about 4e monster entries? No fluff.

 

[Barastrondo]

I latched onto the concept of the game though and read the books thoroughly and then pursued other avenues, eventually landing on AD&D. He never even read the rules to the game and was only really interested in the pictures which were, admittedly, very cool.

Gotcha. Then would it be fair to say that although the writing in the books inspired you to go after roleplaying as a valuable hobby, it didn't do the same for everyone?

Do you play games like World of Warcraft or other MMOs or engage in discussions on forums for things like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Conan, etc.?

Yep. And I've seen a tremendous difference on an RP server between the people who consider themselves to be roleplaying, and the people who are just there to play the game. One group has "characters," the other group has "toons." And the roleplayers are frequently held in contempt by the other folks. The definition I experience is pretty much how I was defining "roleplaying" back in the day. Some people are roleplaying -- others are just playing an RPG with no interest in roleplay. I saw that in tabletop 20 years ago, too, and it's still around today -- within a minute I could find a post where someone sneers at "amateur thespianism" in their D&D game.

In numerous conversations I hear from the younger generation that they consider roleplaying to be anything they do with a character in a game. They could be playing Crysis and say they're roleplaying. The reason I call it the Diablo Effect is because I distinctly remember when Diablo came out, there was a massive split between people who called it an RPG and those who didn't. In almost every instance where I discussed this matter, the ones who called it an RPG were either young (90's born), or had never played PNP games like D&D.

In video games, "RPG" terminology generally means mechanics derived from tabletop RPGs -- character advancement being the big one. Diablo counts as a video game RPG because what it takes from Bard's Tale and Wizardry is not the ability to make choices as your character would (which was kind of absent in those games as well), but the ability to level your characters up, select "classes" for them, itemize them, etc. Technically Diablo's an action-RPG, Final Fantasy Tactics is a strategy-RPG, and of course WoW is an MMORPG, whereas something like Mass Effect or Skyrim is generally a "pure" RPG.

I know a number of gamers who are irritated that the term's been coopted to mean "leveling up and itemizing," but it's a bit late to put that particular genie back in the lamp.

A very topical example is monster entries. What's one of the biggest complaints about 4e monster entries? No fluff.

Or not enough fluff, specifically. I can think of two high-water marks where fluff was concerned: the 2e Monstrous Manual, and the 4e Monster Vaults. But there were plenty of monsters written up that were reliant on the GM to deliver more than a couple lines of fluff. I mean, I have much respect for the froghemoth, but if you ran into it in the MM2 without having read/played Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, you had no sense of an ecology or what to do with it other than "It's a giant killer frog-thing and it seems likely you would fight it in a swamp."

And again, I'm not disagreeing that it would be nice to see more roleplaying in the hobby overall. In my experience, I just find that there are fewer differences between generations as far as whether it's more common, and why or why not.

 

[kitsune9]

Most NPCs I create for rp purposes won't be statted out. My players aren't the type to get boorish and attack someone if a negotiation goes south or they don't get the outcome they want.

I do have a lot of NPCs that I'll use for roleplaying and don't intend for any kind of combat.

 

[karlindel]

I agree with others that this is an odd question. Unless I'm running a delve type dungeon crawl (i.e. actively avoiding roleplaying), most NPCs are primarily for roleplaying reasons.

On the other hand, if you mean do I primarily stat NPCs for roleplaying reasons, the answer is no. I rarely stat an NPC unless I expect that NPC to end up in a battle with the PCs, because statting an NPC takes time, and I feel that my time will be better spent on something that is more likely to come up during a session and add to everyone's fun.

I have had many NPCs in my campaign who the party met and knew were too powerful for them to defeat (and often that they weren't sure they wanted to fight anyway), and I later statted them out at times when the party might end up in combat with them.

 

[Pentius]

Alright, friday's stats are in! EDIT: Note, this is a 4e game. First session.

Total Gaming Time: Approximately 4 hours.

Combats: 1

Combat Length: Approximately 1 hour.

NPCs who participated in combat:
Alicia, the ghost
5 wisps
2 severed hands
8 Total(1 named)

Pre-Planned NPCs who did not participate in combat:
Aliburn, the Unicorn
Bob, the town simpleton
Gregor Oren, Former Lord of Orenburg
Treona, Bob's mother/Gregor's Advisor
Tenor, Alicia's Father

Today's session took us through the homebrew traditional Addy, and segued into the intro for HS1(the slaying stone). Next week: HS1, Session 1.

Less Relevant Stats:

Number of Players New to 4e: 4/5

Number of Players New to TTRPGS: 2/5

Number of Funny Voices Used By DM: 2

Breaks for Food: 1

Movie references: many(mainly Neverending Story and 300)