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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tav_Behemoth" data-source="post: 5088370" data-attributes="member: 18017">I think it's a good point that having a dynamic NPC can let you put pressure on the players even if you're a sit-back DM in scenes where there aren't NPCs pushing their own agenda.However, in practice I find that drawing the line between me and the NPCs I roleplay is difficult. (e.g. the horror of the Mary Sue GM PC).If every NPC that the players ever meet is saying "please save us from the spelljammers" or "I am an advance scout from the spelljammer fleet here to kill anyone who could resist our invasion," then the players are probably justified in thinking that fighting the spelljammers is part of the DM's agenda, and not just that of the NPCs being portrayed.So having a variety of NPCs with a variety of motives is important. For me it was a big revelation to read through the Moldvay Red Box a year or two ago and see that making a random reaction roll was part of the standard procedure for any encounter. (I grew up with the Blue Box and AD&D, where this isn't as clear.) I think it leads to richer dungeon design if I have to prepare ahead of time for the possibility that the dice will say the unicorn attacks on sight and the goblins welcome the party with open arms. The advantage here is that, by being open to dice-based random results, I'm also open to whatever the players come up with. If they want to make friends with the goblins, awesome: I've already thought of a rationale for why they might work together, in the course of prepping for a favorable reaction roll. (Note that the reaction roll sets only the initial attitude; the players get the invigorating surprise of hostile "good" monsters and friendly "evil" ones without losing the chance to change their attitude through negotiation.)I also find that the more vigorously I play an NPC, the harder it is for me to stay impersonal about their agenda and its fate. (And as a player there have been times where I felt like the DM was out to punish  me & my character for the way the party had treated a NPC that was a favorite of his). I find that random rolls are a useful disconnect mechanism here for me too: when the players had stolen something from a powerful cleric and I was thinking about "how will he revenge himself on the party," I found it slipping uncomfortably into "how will I get back at them?" Making a quick d6 table of possible reactions helped me remember that, like the dice, this NPC was something outside myself; and prepping the table led me to think about alternate directions, like what allies the NPC could call on to assist in his revenge, that proved to be useful even when that wasn't the option the dice chose.How do other GMs deal with these issues of making sure that NPCs don't all reflect their own outlook and agenda, and of separating their NPCs from themselves?</blockquote>

Verification