The proper role of supporting NPCs?

[Barastrondo]

So as a DM, I try to keep all of the NPCs out of the limelight as much as possible. They might have a library they PCs can use, or can answer a discrete question the PCs have, but generally, I want the PCs to use their own skills discover the location of the McGuffin, solve the mystery etc.

To some extent, I'm the same way. In others, though, I have a fondness for NPCs who can provide information that kick-starts a game session. For example, the spymaster who can let you know where your next target is so that within fifteen minutes, you're scouting out the perimeter. The spymaster may not come with you, mind, but he might dispatch a guide or agent to show you to the next locale of importance.

I have no problem with NPCs being enablers that do things the PCs can't or won't. It just depends on what they're enabling. If I get together with one group only once a year or so, I'm happy to skip the "let the PCs do the investigation" phase and move right to the meat of the action. Similarly, if the PCs don't have anyone in the group who knows or cares about arcane knowledge, a sage is useful there. Essentially, I like them to provide the exposition and aid that the players ask for, rather than dumping on the stuff that the players were happy to handle themselves.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

For a couple hours a week *I* want to be the powerful person.

Then you need to do two things.

First, do not let your PC defer to the NPC's. It should not matter to your character that NPC X can handle a threat better. As far as your character is concerned that just isn't true - YOU can handle it better, or at least as capably as needed, and you don't have to go kowtowing to that so-called "superior" NPC to get his blessing or ORDERS to do what you should friggin' be doing without ASKING ANYONE in the first place.

Second, is when the DM puts NPC's in the position of hogging the spotlight from you and your fellow PC's then you have to get it away from them. If the NPC is going to handle the threat then refuse to go with him as HE DOESN'T NEED YOUR HELP. If you think the NPC is going to horn in on things then don't tell him. If he "magically" learns what's happening and shows up to insert himself into the situation then have your PC say to him, "Well we can see you've got things well in hand now. We'll leave you to it." AND THEN WALK AWAY.

Worst case scenario you need to beat your DM upside the head with the Clue Stick and TELL him to stop such nonsense and learn to keep his NPC's IN THEIR PLACE. Their place is NOT at the head of the PC party doing the things that THE PC'S are in the game to do.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

I've elaborated on my thoughts and posted lengthy blog entries here and here.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

...double...grumble...frig...post...dang...thing.

 

[Wyrmshadows]

<deleted>

 

[Wyrmshadows]

How one uses supporting NPCs is entirely context dependant.

A sidekick
A mentor
A love interest
A family member
A society the PCs belong to (the Harpers, church hierarchy)
etc.

They all provide plot hooks and the opportunity for interaction that supports the plot or adds versimilitude by making it seem that the PCs are the only 'real' people in the setting.

The heroes may be the center of any given story regarding their exploits ie. the current campaign but the setting should have heroes of lesser power than the heroes and those who are of greater power than the heroes.

IME greater heroes...those with recognized names in the setting...are, if used well and sparingly, sources of help, inspiration and potentially powerful allies/friends. Heroes of greater and lesser strength than the heroes make it seem as though the PCs are part of a dynamic setting....one that isn't in stasis until the PCs get there. The DMs job is to make sure that even if the heroes aren't the greatest heroes evah just yet, that they are the greatest heroes in any given campaign.

However, just because the campaign spotlights the heroes this doesn't mean that there aren't many, many threats that the PCs aren't yet powerful enough to combat. In a developed setting of any kind there are many regions, nations, peoples, threats, heroes and villians, some of whom the PCs may never meet.

The DM can feel free to set off a war in a kingdom next to where the PCs are currently adventuring so as to set up a potential campaign arc for five levels from now. Great warriors, priests and mages of the kingdom who are currently much more poweful than the PCs are battling the threat but when the PCs arrive they may coincidently find themselves being overwhelmed and needing the assistance of the PCs.

There are plenty of ways to have a believable setting with powerful NPCs and to not have them upstage the PCs in a given campaign. I think a lot of anti-NPC hostility (such as what I have seen in regards to FR) comes from those who read setting-based novels. Back when I DMed an FR campaign I was lucky because my players loathed FR novels so had no resentment of the all-powerful, always cool, always winning NPCs of note. IMC the PC have encountered NPCs such as Alustrial, Elminster, Storm Silverhand, the Simbul, Azoun, etc. and liked working bot for them (at lower levels), with them (at higher levels) and even even saving their lives on occasion.

Well developed NPCs can and do add a great deal fo richness to a setting.



Wyrmshadows

 

[S'mon]

I think Tolkien has a lot to answer for - too many GMs model their NPCs on Gandalf, Elrond and Galadriel: immortal, super-powerful masters of magic. Gandalf especially can result in GMPCs like Ed Greenwood's Elminster. I think you need to be very careful including such characters; and they are usually best kept in the background, eg Midnight's Witch Queen (a Galadriel analogue). Also note that Gandalf's magic was fairly limited compared to what even a 6th level D&D Wizard or Sorcerer can accomplish - no teleport, no buff/scry/teleport, no fly over army fireballing them. If you do include powerful friendly NPCs in your game, they need similar limitations.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

EDIT: Double post.

 

[Wyrmshadows]

Some of the thinking on this subject would actually make a setting full of weak doddering old wizards, weak doddering old kings, weak doddering old high priests, etc. that populate a world that:

1. Quails endlessly in fear while hopelessly waiting for the PCs to arrive on the scene.

2. Has villians of absolute incompetance who can't muster credible threats anywhere in the world until just as the PCs get there.

3. Is like Elder Scrolls: Oblivion that scales everyone and everything to the PC's current level of ability. Weak, weak, weak. There must be pre-existant people and places in a setting both beyond and beneath the PCs current level or power.

Being the hero in the current campaign so long as it doesn't involve the entire world being subject to a invasion from the far realms means that the PCs may be the best heroes locally, or the best heroes available at the time, the best heroes not currently slaughtered by the villains, the least best hope, etc.

Being a great hero isn't usually about being the best in regards to objective power from the outset, it is developing into a great hero via heroic actions. Every hero has to start somewhere.



Wyrmshadows

 

[Fenes]

Some of the thinking on this subject would actually make a setting full of weak doddering old wizards, weak doddering old kings, weak doddering old high priests, etc. that populate a world that:

1. Quails endlessly in fear while hopelessly waiting for the PCs to arrive on the scene.

2. Has villians of absolute incompetance who can't muster credible threats anywhere in the world until just as the PCs get there.

3. Is like Elder Scrolls: Oblivion that scales everyone and everything to the PC's current level of ability. Weak, weak, weak. There must be pre-existant people and places in a setting both beyond and beneath the PCs current level or power.

Being the hero in the current campaign so long as it doesn't involve the entire world being subject to a invasion from the far realms means that the PCs may be the best heroes locally, or the best heroes available at the time, the best heroes not currently slaughtered by the villains, the least best hope, etc.

Being a great hero isn't usually about being the best in regards to objective power from the outset, it is developing into a great hero via heroic actions. Every hero has to start somewhere.



Wyrmshadows

You can have your powerful NPCs, but is there a need to rub the players' noses into the latest deed the NPCs did? That's my point: One doesn't have to define and make the NPCs known as X level, or "able to cast 9th level spells", or to spotlight the NPCs' deeds.