What do your PCs talk about during down time?

[Prestidigitalis]

Picture the following situation:

The party sets off on a two week trek across a mountain range and a barren waste to raid the lair of an evil creature that has been wreaking havoc in the region. Before they set off, they made sure to stock up on rations, climbing gear, sunrods, etc. -- all the stuff you need when you won't see civilization for a while. While on the trip they take great pains to travel with stealth, avoid ambushes, and secure their camp each night. Finally they arrive, find the creature, and the combat encounter begins.

Wait. What did the PCs talk about during those two weeks? Two weeks is actually a long, long time for just about any kind of discussion that the PCs are willing to have. Unless the characters hate each other or have taken vows of silence, there is no particular reason to think that they won't be talking quite a bit. Possible topics might include:

- Stories about previous travels and adventures, shared or separate
- Shop talk about weapons, spells, etc. -- pros and cons, techniques, prices
- Religious or philosophical arguments
- Strategic planning -- the ultimate goals of the party and the individual PCs
- Operational planning -- how to achieve the current goal
- Tactical planning -- how to fight the creature when they find it at the end of the trek
- Story-telling -- myths, legends, fables, morality tales, tall tales, lying contests
- Cultural sharing -- teaching or simply enjoying song, dance, crafts, recipes
- Complaining -- Mommy, tell him to stop!

But how do you incorporate the conversation into a role-playing game? Here are some options:

- Actively role-play any and all such conversations. Assume that no conversation of any consequence has happened unless it is role-played.

PC: "Well of course I mentioned that I have two hearts at some point during the past three years of travel!"
DM: "Nope. You really didn't."

- Declare the topics discussed and hand wave the details.

DM: "During the long nights, your characters share stories of their childhood days, bonding more tightly than ever."
PC#1: "I especially stress the close ties with my extended family."
PC#2: "I tell them about the tribal initiation I experienced, but obviously not The Secret That Must Not Be Shared With Outsiders."
PC#3: "I wind them up with a bunch of lies. You know, the kind of stuff they want to hear about dedicating myself to a life of service."
PC#4: "I smile enigmatically and go back to sharpening my blade."

- Role-play "flashback conversations" as needed.

DM: "You ride through the giant gates of the city and find yourselves awed by the grandeur and beauty of the buildings."
PC#1: "I spent six months here before I joined the party. I think I would have told them everything I knew about it."
DM: "Sure, we can do that now. Assume the conversation took place the night when you decided to visit the city."
PC#1 and DM jointly tell about the city's history, geography, culture, government, thieves guild and beer.


So how do you do it in your campaign? How well does it work? What are the pros and cons of that approach? And why does that PC have two hearts, anyway?

 

[Desdichado]

Is it wrong that the PCs in my game, if we ever stop and just chat in character, only talk about sex and booze?

 

[Crothian]

My players seem to focus on "We're doomed" and that the world as they know it is ending. It's not but they have choosen to interpret the worse out come from the set of facts they've so far uncovered.

 

[WHW4]

We are a little of both. In any town where we have some downtime we kick up the roleplay/discussion up a notch. Almost always over an ale in the tavern listening to the local gossip; on the road however we don't narrate or otherwise hold conversations of any meaning. Maybe a quick in character Survival check or something if we're lost, but nothing like sharing of backstory or anything.

I'm a big Operational planner. I always want a group of soldiers or thieves or something to order around and manage. I do alot of that on the side as the other guys do upkeep, and we even sometimes RP that type of stuff if an NPC catches our eyes or the DM describes something in an off way. I do like to RP with any lieutenants or officers or high ranking lackeys though. They gets names and get promoted above redshirt status.

Major character ideals and goals we all just agree are going to be general knowledge in a group that travels this much together and this closely, often depending on each other for their very lives. If it's a secret type thing (I'm a werewolf!), we tell each other out of character (cause we're nerds and we like other nerds to to say 'cool') and then don't metagame it and everyone loves it.

Alot of times though we do it quick and dirty:

DM: Ok you guys approach the town of Ishcal and can see it off ahead in the distance.
Player: Hey I'm from this area have I ever been here?
DM: Well... it's a big city but you're a farmer's kid. I'm going to say... 15% chance.
Player: ::Rolls:: 13, got it. Hey guys I've been here a few times I know where to get a good drink or two. (13 of 15 representing alot of visits, maybe even lived here for a bit)

Pretty fast and loose.

I like how we do things. We expand the interesting bits and contract the stuff we don't want to spend time on: roadtrips. Blech.

 

[Cor_Malek]

Is it wrong that the PCs in my game, if we ever stop and just chat in character, only talk about sex and booze?

Not if they're women.

It all depends on pacing of the campaign, but I can recall several sessions spent entirely on screwing around and talking. It was always assumed that it was said if it was said, and any different approach never really came up. I like the flashback idea though, as it leaves a window of opportunity for misunderstanding (similarly - instead of going "yeah, I tell them what I've been told" ask your player to actually relay the conversation, and see how well that'll go ;-) ).

 

[fba827]

- Actively role-play any and all such conversations. Assume that no conversation of any consequence has happened unless it is role-played.

That wouldn't fit my personal style/taste as it seems too draconian.

The only caveat being 'guarded information' (information that the PC would not necessarily freely share; aka "my dark past") and 'completely irrelevant information' (some topic that would be hard to say comes up in the course of casual conversations and not related to the task/scenario at hand) -- that type of stuff i tend to assume if it's not stated by the player as being shared then i assume it's not.

- Declare the topics discussed and hand wave the details.

Done a couple times, this would be my preferred style.

But if extended downtime happens frequently, then this might get old fast -- from a RP perspective it's great.. gives you more fodder to say "and if Bloth drones on anymore about Wren and the 13 Treasures or Rule he sought when he was younger, I will scream and not take part of any conversation with him for the journey" -- but from a player perspective, it would depend on my mood that day.

- Role-play "flashback conversations" as needed.

Once or twice for very crucial or 'big' things, I'd be game for this. But it runs the risk of droning on. When one player or the DM has to talk for a while to explain things, people sometimes lose focus. And a flashback conversation about lore/details that one player knows more than the others will turn more into an 'information dump' rather than participative conversation since one character clearly knows more and the others would just be saying "yes, interesting, and then?"

So how do you do it in your campaign? How well does it work? What are the pros and cons of that approach? And why does that PC have two hearts, anyway?

Just as it varies between groups, I'd imagine it also varies in the individual player minds within the same group.

I tend to assume that it's a) idle chat and stories b) conversations on directly related information that isn't 'secret' c) practice/meditation/etc d) administration of supplies e) npcs with them are furthering their own love/hate of the PCs and of other NPCs f) topics of interest (such as a religious type may discuss theology with anyone willing to listen, etc)

Though everything on this list is clouded by the types of PCs involved. For instance, bardic-types might focus more on stories, while topics of interest may include tactical discussions for the tactically-minded PCs.

But my general observation has been (not just talking about my most recent group, but from any group I've been with) is that if you stop and clarify what is being discussed, it aggravates some players. Not so much from impatience, but just from the idea that if the DM is going to hand-wave via narrative, then the act of going in to specifics on what was discussed during that downtime is too much detail. Of course, individuals vary, i am only speaking from experience.

When I DM, and later situations come up where one PC might know something and another doesn't (and it's not 'guarded information') I've generally been liberal in pointing out "you realize this might be related to X that was probably mentioned during the travel time"). All kind of depends on the circumstance and a momentary judgment call as to what is "idle enough" and what isn't.

 

[Abraxas]

As DM I handwave it all - anything about the PCs that is not supposed to be secret I assume is known by the other PCs.

As a player, having my imaginary character talk about an imaginary background to the other player's imaginary characters just isn't my kind of gaming. Being in character and discussing something that is an active scene of the game is fine, but all off camera conversations are just assumed to happen, much like it's assumed that the PCs go to the bathroom.

Of course, if the PC's off camera activities are going to impact the game, then they switch to an active scene and are played out. So if the player says his fighting man gets drunk and starts picking bar fights - that gets active attention, or if a player has her bard begin performing to get in good with the local duke, or if a player has his rogue start robbing house, etc, etc...

 

[Mallus]

But how do you incorporate the conversation into a role-playing game? Here are some options: -snip

Why would the DM want to do anything at all to encourage intra-party downtime communication? If the players want to talk (in-character or out) they will. All the DM should do is butt out when they are talking up a storm, and skip ahead to the action/interesting bits when they're not.

And to answer the question: usually our characters talk about how to make money off of the false religion they created, when they're not talking about how much they despise and/or are repulsed by one another.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

Why would the DM want to do anything at all to encourage intra-party downtime communication? If the players want to talk (in-character or out) they will. All the DM should do is butt out when they are talking up a storm, and skip ahead to the action/interesting bits when they're not.

Some downtime communication is not just fluff and roleplay -- there could be bits of information that play directly into the events of the game.

Your character lived in the city for years and established numerous valuable connections among the craftsmen and merchants. The rest of the party is new to the city. Some time after entering the city, the party is split. So -- do the members who are not with your character have any of that information, or not?

It's easy to use a heavy hand and say, nope, your character never mentioned that stuff because you, the player, did not make it happen. But if your character trusts the others and is known for planning ahead, it would be perfectly in character for him to make sure the others are up to speed on who's who, where to go for information, sanctuary or whatever.

Really, it comes down to a an issue of time management and boredom. If you are going to hand wave a two week trek, with maybe a couple of rolls for Endurance checks and random monsters, effectively you are also hand waving every social interaction that could possibly occur during that period.

That's why I suggested the idea of flashback conversations -- once it's become clear that the exchange of that particular information or viewpoint has become important to the game, you go ahead and roleplay the conversation the the characters agree would have happened. Clearly there are limits to this approach. You have to trust your players to be honest about what they would or would not have revealed. Big important secrets like "I'm really a KGB agent" or "I'm not really left handed" should probably be off limits. But the things that it makes sense for the party to share because they are in fact a team, working together toward a common purpose and generally looking out for each other's welfare -- I think a DM should give the players a lot more freedom.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

As DM I handwave it all - anything about the PCs that is not supposed to be secret I assume is known by the other PCs.

As a player, having my imaginary character talk about an imaginary background to the other player's imaginary characters just isn't my kind of gaming. Being in character and discussing something that is an active scene of the game is fine, but all off camera conversations are just assumed to happen, much like it's assumed that the PCs go to the bathroom.

Of course, if the PC's off camera activities are going to impact the game, then they switch to an active scene and are played out. So if the player says his fighting man gets drunk and starts picking bar fights - that gets active attention, or if a player has her bard begin performing to get in good with the local duke, or if a player has his rogue start robbing house, etc, etc...

Pretty much this, although if the players want to talk about their character's background in character - more power to them!

With regards to my character's coming from a city the party's never been to, chances are that I don't know any more about it then they do!

As for why that character has two hearts? The GM obviously let someone play a Time Lord!!!