Who "Owns" Old PC's?

[Oaken25]

Yes, and this really is a bit different than the idea of the charatcer en toto as has been the primary focus of the thread, here. If all you have to do is change a name, then geez that's really nothing, because as the DM you did not put any time into identifying with that name enough to feel like you could ROLEPLAY under that name. I wouldn't want someone to go around making up and telling stories to strangers wherein the main character had my name, that's usually called "Rumors" after a few re-tellings.



If a former DM of mine wanted to post how a game session that I played a character in went, that's just dandy. That would be a re-telling of how I played my character (my character not because of that +4 ghost-touch battleaxe, but because I was the one who formed the personality that is the important part behind that piece of paper with numbers written on it). I think a good part of the reason that some people are uncomfortable with their characters being used as NPCs is because so very often the DM just simply cannot play the character the way the player who played him did. I've seen old players come into a game where some NPPs were their old characters, and invariably that player at multple points says something to the effect of "You know you're playing him all wrong, don't you?" And, knowing that someone's off somewhere mangling what is supposed to be your old character really does make me squirm just a little. If he'd just change the name, so it wasn't supposed to be the same character, then I'd be dis-associated from it, it'd just be a knock-off of my old character -- which are usually bad, and it's to be expected. [/B]

Aye, I checked and yes my 1st post said that was why the person was upset. But that part of my post got ignored halfway down page one as the thread got heated.

 

[jdavis]

*sigh*

You're so right, jdavis. I should just send my other players home if someone no-shows at my game. How positively foolish of me. That thoughtless player is obviously far more important than the rest of the group, and I should put my game on hold til that player generously graces us with his presence (and his character). /sarcasm

it's simple reality, if he's a part of my game, I'm not going to put it on hold just so he can feel comfy-cosy that his character has been preserved. You want keep your character the way you want it? Then show up and play the game.

Or if you want to have a real world anology, if I were putting on a Bill Shakespeare's Hamlet , and the actor who was playing his part didn't show, I'm not going to put the play on hold just to appease him. I'm going to get someone who's willing to do the job (that's what undestudies are for). In the case of a game, either I run it as an NPC, or another player gets control of it. Again, if they don't want that to happen, then they best show up for the game.

yes I agree with your point right up till you called them "inconsiderate slobs" your point was totally valid, but that doesn't neccesssarily make them the scum of the earth if they don't like their characters messed with. I agree totally 100% with the fact that no showing can mess up a adventure, particularly if you are in the middle of something and one of the players isn't there, I just didn't agree with the namecalling of people with different opinions.

You know there are two sides to every story, if somebody has had a bad DM before who played their characters while they were not there and say "killed them" (it happens) then they might be a little gun shy about having their character played by the DM, does that make them horrible people? Say they had a wreck and were late, well how dare they not make it on time, they should of left the scene and got to the very important game. You may not agree with people no showing and not wanting their characters messed with but that doesn't necessarily make them "inconsiderate slobs".

 

[Wolv0rine]

I never said he should be locked up.. And my use of the word nutcase was hyperbole. The guy however, does have some problems. If a person is emotionally involved enough that the mere thought of someone else pretending about something that he's pretended about is so distressing to him that he will tell another person that they cannot pretend in that manner, then i have to say the guy's got problems.

You're focusing on that piece of paper, on the numbers and the +2 longspears and whatnot. That's not the character, it's only the character's Arcane Focus P). The character is the way the Player acted and re-acted while playing that character. When a DM keeps that character and brings it back later as an NPC, what the DM is actually doing is attempting to do an impression of the old player. That in mind, how would yo feel if you asked someone not to do bad impressions of you while telling stories of things you were invloved with to other people? What if some guy you used to have out with went around telling stories of the times you guys used to hang out, and he always did this really dumb impression of you when he told it? This doesn't mean the guy's unstable, or even that he has issues. It just means he may have connected with that character.

 

[Wolv0rine]

Aye, I checked and yes my 1st post said that was why the person was upset. But that part of my post got ignored halfway down page one as the thread got heated.

*grins* Yeah, the thread took on a life and a point all it's own. I kind of figured after you'd said that you'd come to an agreement with your player, that the thread's branching off had become a goofy arguement for its own sake, and took part for the fun of it.

 

[Oaken25]

*grins* Yeah, the thread took on a life and a point all it's own. I kind of figured after you'd said that you'd come to an agreement with your player, that the thread's branching off had become a goofy arguement for its own sake, and took part for the fun of it.

Aye, so it did. But it's been a interesting discussion, and it's been mostly a civil discussion at least. Maybe it made a few people think about how they play in people's games, either as a PC or a DM. I know it made me think about some stuff, as I said in a post that is up a ways on this page.

 

[jdavis]

Aye, I checked and yes my 1st post said that was why the person was upset. But that part of my post got ignored halfway down page one as the thread got heated.

Yes I actually missed the details myself, but these things get going and have a life of their own, heck we got a half page on whether this was art or not thrown in in the middle of it.

My first wife didn't want to name our daughter Samantha because she had a cat named samantha that died of cancer when she was young. That didn't nessessarily make her crazy (she is but that is completly off topic). So we got another name. Names can be touchy for people sometimes because thay can have sentimental meaning.

I think setting up a definate policy before the game starts will solve these problems in the future. I also think that if you do it right that using old PC's can add a lot, you just have to remember that it gets abused sometimes and people get gun shy about having their characters misused and thrown back in their face. If you had a Lawful Good Paladin that you retired as a great hero and then he came back in a adventure as a Chaotic Evil baby eater, then you might get a little upset, and stuff like that does happen. Even if you just view it as a silly game that might just be too much. If the Paladin came back as the benevolent head of a church who gave the new PC's a mission and was only in the game a few minutes, well that's hard to get mad about. A good policy at the start of the game that you keep the characters as NPC's in the game world and you agree to keep them "in character" and to try to play them as the player would. If the player isn't going to be there any more you could take more liberties but if they are setting there staring at you and thinking "my character would of never done that" it could be a problem.

 

[jgbrowning]

So, basically, you're just an insensitive ass who (in this scenareo) took some degree of pleasure from betraying someone's faith in your word [/b]

well, that's not in my post. that interpretation.

[/b]
and then the sense of betrayal and loss of faith in someone they thought they could trust to basically just not lie to them and laugh behind their back. [/b]

could you show me the part where i laughed behind his back?

[/b]
I'm sorry but your script makes you nothing but a cheap bully, regardless of whether the request made any sense to you (or anyone else) or not, it was nothing short of malicious. [/b]

your one heck of a role-player because you can really make a character out of thin air.

[/b]
And so it's your job to treat him like crap until he does what you think, whether that request makes any sense to him (or anyone else) or not. [/b]

My request? My request that he "lets" me do what i want? My request that he stop trying to control my behavior, because the mere thought of me "roleplaying" his character causes him emotional distress?

Your right. I have to treat him like crap until he "allows" me to roleplay. I have to treat him like crap until he solves his personal issues. *beep beep beep-- im being sarcastic here --- beep beep beep*

[/b]
I'm sorry, but I know of too many gamers who got treated exactly like this in school by the "cool kids" for me to believe that this is how gamers treat each other. [/B]

Well your right there. If you make up all the things you said that i said or thought, and then you say you can't believe gamers treat each other this way, your right. Its because you role-played me as such a good jerk.

and to reference your second post....

[/b]When a DM keeps that character and brings it back later as an NPC, what the DM is actually doing is attempting to do an impression of the old player. That in mind, how would yo feel if you asked someone not to do bad impressions of you while telling stories of things you were invloved with to other people? [/B]

Um... I guess your just role-playing again. I don't seem to recall the OP saying he was planning to make fun of the guy when he played the old PC.

but, for future reference, i won't pretend to be you, if you stop pretending to be me. because you're really doing a poor job of it.

joe b.

 

[jdavis]

but, for future reference, i won't pretend to be you, if you stop pretending to be me. because you're really doing a poor job of it.

joe b.

I thought you were pretending to be hong?

Edit in

 

[Oaken25]

Yes I actually missed the details myself, but these things get going and have a life of their own, heck we got a half page on whether this was art or not thrown in in the middle of it.

My first wife didn't want to name our daughter Samantha because she had a cat named samantha that died of cancer when she was young. That didn't nessessarily make her crazy (she is but that is completly off topic). So we got another name. Names can be touchy for people sometimes because thay can have sentimental meaning.

I think setting up a definate policy before the game starts will solve these problems in the future. I also think that if you do it right that using old PC's can add a lot, you just have to remember that it gets abused sometimes and people get gun shy about having their characters misused and thrown back in their face. If you had a Lawful Good Paladin that you retired as a great hero and then he came back in a adventure as a Chaotic Evil baby eater, then you might get a little upset, and stuff like that does happen. Even if you just view it as a silly game that might just be too much. If the Paladin came back as the benevolent head of a church who gave the new PC's a mission and was only in the game a few minutes, well that's hard to get mad about. A good policy at the start of the game that you keep the characters as NPC's in the game world and you agree to keep them "in character" and to try to play them as the player would. If the player isn't going to be there any more you could take more liberties but if they are setting there staring at you and thinking "my character would of never done that" it could be a problem.

Aye, as I tried to explain up above in my many posts on this page. No I don't play PC's that have turned into NPC's in way that the player didn't expect. Most of the time when my games draw to a close or fall apart due to Real Life getting in the way, the PC's have places that they have either built or become part of. Since I have DM'd in the Realms for over 10 years now, many cities, temples, etc have been built by old PC's. These PC's now run those places and at times they make cameo appearances in my games for a reason. I don't pull them out willy nilly to mess with current PCs. If I use old PC's that are now NPC's there is a very good reason why I used them for that purpose.

If that makes sense? It's really late here and I really should get some sleep but this thread has been a very interesting discussion. And I feel like I keep repeating myself here.

 

[jgbrowning]

Wait that's almost like you are agreeing with what I said earlier............ and here I had given up.

Actually, im a sensitive guy. I do say what i think though, except when that doesn't help anyone involved. If i think it could possibly help i might speak but thats on a case by case basis.

I do however, defend what i do say.

I honestly think the guy has problems. That's just my opinion and its worth only that: my opinion. I think anyone who gets emotionally attached to ideas of any sort to such an extent that if someone says, effectively, "your wrong" that that person get emotionally upset, has problems. Ideas are ideas, pretend is pretend, and the self is the self. People really need to get that idea.

joe b.