D&D General Who “owns” a PC after the player stops using them?

[doctorbadwolf]

I completely understand a player wanting to maintain control of their character while they remain participants in the game. Having no control over decisions the PC makes is going to seriously damage the experience for some freewéwpeople. Completely understandable.

Where I'm left utterly befuddled is the notion that, if someone leaves the game permanently, that their vision of how the game should proceed and the characters behave is somehow more important than the players who are still involved. Where does someone get the idea that they have the right to dictate to others what they are allowed to imagine, in the privacy of their own homes?

If the group decides to continue using the character of a player who has left, that causes that former player zero harm (they don't even need to know it's happening). On the other hand, if the group is invested in the character enough that they wish to continue using that character, their experience is lessened if they are unable to use the character. Suggesting that the party with nothing to lose or suffer and, I note again, who is no longer a participant in any way, is the one with the right to determine what happens, is ludicrous.


(Emphasis mine.)

Yes, they do. They get to imagine anything they want when they show up to game, and if you're not a participant you don't have any right to say otherwise.

Why should your wishes be honoured, if you are no longer participating in the game?

I’d honestly be uncomfortable playing with someone who espoused this mindset when another player left the game, and had reasonable direction for what their PC did down the road. “We should ignore all that and keep them around as a companion NPC instead.”

Ugh no. As a fellow player at the same table, I would tell them that I hope they’re joking, and if they didn’t drop it, it would be a problem.

Their wishes will be honored because we are either friends or something like it, and it would be very strange and awkward to use the character of someone who has left the game as an NPC any more than is necessary to keep the game moving long enough for them to leave.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

The campaign story is a shared creative work, and the player character is each player's main tool for input into the story.

So even a player has left the campaign, the polite thing to do to if you want to respect their participation is to

• Honor their wishes for their character, and how they played it
• If a player doesn't want you to run their character, have it fade into the background and never show up again

Of course, respect should be mutual. If a player whose character is central to the plot just drops out of the game, I wouldn't feel bad about making anything happen to the character if it's necessary to get the story back on track.

 

[Remathilis]

Oh this is a very delicate subject for me. It's gone bad both ways I've seen it done.

In general, I have opted that players have full control of their PCs, up to the "take your PC somewhere else" if they want. That said, if your PC ends up in a position that is important to the game world, you become a semi-retired joint venture. For example, the cleric who became the head priest of his faith might get used as an NPC if the game requires other PCs to meet the head priest. I try to keep such interactions brief and if the player is still playing, I include them in the topic but remind them I will override anything that harms the overall game. If the player no longer plays, he's a full NPC. In general though, I try to keep the former players wishes in mind.

I do this because over the years, I've had PCs ripped out of my hands, and even a player try to restart a whole campaign with himself as the DM after the game ended. I've also moved my own PCs from other campaigns to become NPCs in my game. I'm very controlling about my characters due to how things have been played out but I recognize that sometimes it's inevitable. Which is why I try to minimize such DM overtaking and respect the players wishes.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Intellectual property law does not work like that.

Did I miss a bill that says stealing's okay if you're the DM?

 

[cranberry]

If a player stops using a PC, then without knowing the details, it's not unreasonable to assume they are no longer interest in that PC, and also has left the game.

In that case, what other people do with it likely doesn't matter to the player.

It always best to simply ask the player if they are OK with the PC being used, and then honor that request.

And ownership is not really a thing in this case because the player can simply take their character to a new table, and the player can't prevent his old group from doing anything with the PC. (Obviously, I'm assuming this is just casual play, and copywrite law doesn't enter into the equation...)

 

[MGibster]

You ever read through a thread and wonder to yourself, "Just how is this even an issue?" It's just utterly bizarre to me that someone would be offended by a GM continuing to use their character once they left a campaign. That said, I'm hard pressed to think of any example where I've done such a thing. As a GM, I wouldn't hesitate to do it if having the PC leave abruptly would disrupt the campaign. i.e. Let's say one PC was the wealthy benefactor whose patronage allowed the PCs to investigate supernatural cases in 1930s London? If the player left I'd continue using the former PC though he wouldn't participate directly in investigations anymore. I'm not sure how I'd react if the former player was upset. Probably just shrug my shoulders.

By the way, if you ever play in one of my homebrew campaigns I'm not going to be upset if you borrow elements for your own game. Why not? For my all dwarf campaign I stole borrowed from D&D, World of Warcraft, Aristophanes, 19th century U.S. women's history, and even Time Bandits. Go nuts, people!

 

[MGibster]

Did I miss a bill that says stealing's okay if you're the DM?

It's not stealing in any meaningful sense legally or morally. Right now I could design and run an adventure for my group where the PCs take on the roles of Doctor Doom, Doc Savage, Doctor Jones, Doctor McCoy, and Doctor Steel fighting against the World Crime League after they've kidnapped Buckaroo Bonzai and that's perfectly fine.

 

[Morrus]

Hmm. That's interesting. It's an IP issue, I guess. I think we could all agree it's reasonable you can't publish somebody else's creation. Can you use it in your home game?

I guess the answer lies in other similar questions--can you use Batman in your own game? We all certainly agree that DC owns the character. We agree you can't publish your own Batman game or movie. But can you--non-commercially, at home, in private--pretend to be Batman? Can you put him in your home game?

I think the question is more one about courtesy and social expectations than 'rights', and that's going to change from person to person and group to group.

 

[Arilyn]

Honestly, it has never occurred to me to use a player's non-active or retired PC as a NPC. Their past heroic (or infamous) deeds might be talked about by NPCs but I'd never use them. It would feel weird.

 

[Rystefn]

Obviously, there's often a difference between what you can do and what you should do. You can do all kinds of things that no one could stop you from doing. Lots of them are still dick moves. For example, if you ever find yourself saying "Why should your wishes be honored..." it might be worth it to step back, take a moment, and ask yourself why honoring the wishes of a creator regarding their own creation isn't your default position.