Who "Owns" Old PC's?

[jgbrowning]

The thing is this isn't a question about a character, it's about respect for the wiashes of another person, if he has feelings about it then they should be respected, it doesn't matter what the reasons are, it doesn't matter what anybody here thinks, if he said no then you should respect that he said no and find another way. Can I use your fork? no. Can I use your car? no, can I sleep with your wife? no. Can I use your character as a NPC after he retires? no. It has nothing to do with ownership or if it is a silly question or not, it has to do with respect for the wishes of the other person, it is his right to feel however he wants to on this subject. Seek other options rather than you turning his character into your character. Find a middle ground that doesn't hurt your game world and doesn't hurt his feelings on the matter. That is the end of it.

I disagree. The DM feels like he wants to use it because much of what the character is represents the world/challanges the DM put the character through, and according to you, his opinion is just as valid as the guy's who created it. I can easily say that the player is not respecting the DMs feelings in this instance as well. See it is about ownership.

How about this example..... I make a drawing of a square, you like my square and say "can i use your square in my game after you quit?" and i say, "no, its my square." Well then you go "Ok," and then you draw your own square and its exactly like mine in all ways, shapes and forms. I then get upset and say "You can't run that square in your game because that square is mine," and you go "Bug off you freak! Its a friggen game where we all play pretend! And now I'm pretend killing you! Die! Die! Die! And I hope you eventually grow up a bit and stop putting so much of your sense of identity in bits and pieces of numbers and words on a piece of paper!!!!!!"


*whew* i've been reading tomany of Hong's posts. hope he dont find out because he may freak on me and say his post's style are his and i can't use them.


joe b.

 

[Quinn]

I never said i'd use some one elses PC, as a PC of my own. I said id use it as a NPC, cause it's part of my game world, the character was made for MY game world, and after the game is over that character is now mine. It was made for my world, it adventured in my world, it is now a NPC in my world. But this does not stop you from using it in some one elses game world, but a copy of it, if you will, will exist in my campaign world.

So......why are you asking us then whether you can or not?

It's a simple matter. The guy asked you not to. It's your choice whether you're going to do it or not.

 

[Oaken25]

So......why are you asking us then whether you can or not?

It's a simple matter. The guy asked you not to. It's your choice whether you're going to do it or not.

I wasn't really asking if I can or not, I can make up my own mind if I can or can't use it as a NPC. What I was asking is opinions on the topic in general. And as I said in page 1 of this topic me and the PC got it straigtened out but I kept the topic open cause I wanted to hear what other's had to say on the subject.

 

[Deadguy]

I can't help but think that two separate issues have become muddled in this matter.

As jdavis says the question of whether to use a PC after the players leaves the campaign is really one of courtesy. If the player really does not want that character included then it's simply a friendly gesture to concede the point. Of course, should the PC be relevant to ongoing storylines or world histories said player shouldn't be surprised if retrospectively an NPC appears that fits many of the same characteristics of the original PC. The departure of a single player shouldn't be allowed to mess up the campaign for the remaining players more than it may already do.

The question of ownership is really independent of this courtesy. I tend to fall into the camp that says that all ownership of PCs is mutual, between player and DM. Indeed it's also between players too, since the existence, nature and activities of your fellow PCs cannot help but affect the direction your character takes. Unless money is going to come into this (by publishing) it's not really a legal point, and folds back in to courtesy. It's also worth adding that like all intellectual properties the ability of the player to use the character is in no way diminished by the DM using a 'copy' of the PC in the original campaign.

I must say that whilst identifying with your character is essential for good PC development, it can be taken too far. I have the impression that Oaken25's player is under the impression that the way 'his' character is going to be played after his departure is somehow going to reflect on him. This is really highly mistaken reasoning. Whilst former players might still refer to the original player, the DM should make clear that all the actions henceforth are those of his own design. Nothing thereafter is in any way the 'fault' of the original player!

 

[jgbrowning]

I can't help but think that two separate issues have become muddled in this matter.

As jdavis says the question of whether to use a PC after the players leaves the campaign is really one of courtesy. If the player really does not want that character included then it's simply a friendly gesture to concede the point. Of course, should the PC be relevant to ongoing storylines or world histories said player shouldn't be surprised if retrospectively an NPC appears that fits many of the same characteristics of the original PC. The departure of a single player shouldn't be allowed to mess up the campaign for the remaining players more than it may already do.

The question of ownership is really independent of this courtesy. I tend to fall into the camp that says that all ownership of PCs is mutual, between player and DM. Indeed it's also between players too, since the existence, nature and activities of your fellow PCs cannot help but affect the direction your character takes. Unless money is going to come into this (by publishing) it's not really a legal point, and folds back in to courtesy. It's also worth adding that like all intellectual properties the ability of the player to use the character is in no way diminished by the DM using a 'copy' of the PC in the original campaign.

I must say that whilst identifying with your character is essential for good PC development, it can be taken too far. I have the impression that Oaken25's player is under the impression that the way 'his' character is going to be played after his departure is somehow going to reflect on him. This is really highly mistaken reasoning. Whilst former players might still refer to the original player, the DM should make clear that all the actions henceforth are those of his own design. Nothing thereafter is in any way the 'fault' of the original player!

Whats up with you brits!?!?! All you guys ever seem to do since WWII is talk calmly, rationally, and logically. What ever happened to that reckless sense of fun you guys used to have? Remember the Black Prince, Crazy George III? What you guys need is another good war with Scotland to get the blood pumping!

joe b. *still practicing Hongesque posts*

 

[jdavis]

I never said i'd use some one elses PC, as a PC of my own. I said id use it as a NPC, cause it's part of my game world, the character was made for MY game world, and after the game is over that character is now mine. It was made for my world, it adventured in my world, it is now a NPC in my world. But this does not stop you from using it in some one elses game world, but a copy of it, if you will, will exist in my campaign world.

And as I said on the WOTC boards, the game is made between the PC and the DM, it is a joint venture, as some one said earlier, as soon as the PC enters the game it no longer is the same PC, the DM changes it as the game progresses. The DM gives out magic items, gives out spells, gives out plot hooks, etc. It can't be considered just the PC's character any more, cause it is a joint venture between the DM and the PC.

Driving your car, is a lot different then having a character that a DM reuses. And if any thing WOTC is the only one who can claim "ownership" on a character cause we all use THIER books to make characters.

so if it's a joint venture in creating the character then why isn't it a joint venture in the characters future? What a lot of people are overlooking here (to some extent me included in past post) is that the issue is that the guy said NO, that he had feelings on the matter, well kill the character off, let the character go live as a hermit, let the character slide into obscurity, how is any of this ruining the game. And to some people playing a character as a NPC or a PC is the same exact thing, you are making decisions for that character. I am not actually one of those people, heck 99% of the time I don't care if my characters come back as crazy ax murderers later, but if I said "you know I would like this character to retire into obscurity", then why should that be a problem, the character wonders off into the sunset, his memory lives on but he stops interacting with the game world. I in no way think that it is wrong to reuse old characters but it is wrong to go against somebodies express wishes, regardless of what the reason they had was. It is just rude, it doesn't matter whether the guy was a nutcase or not, it's his right to be a nutcase, it doesn't matter if he should be honored by this or not. Just let the character not appear anymore, he can be talked about and be part of the history but he doesn't have to appear in a active role, it is in no way neccessary. I don't give a rats ass who owns the character, this could be worked out so much easier without a fight, a little respect is more important than whoever's right it is to own the character. This should never be a fight or a arguement, this should never even be a issue. Here is a little script to help you out in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DM: So I want to use your player as a NPC after you leave the group.

Player: No, I don't think I would like that.

DM: OK, so lets figure out how get them out of the story without it causing problems with my story line.

Player: Sure maybe the character just wants to be a hermit, or maybe he goes to __________, or etc................................

DM: Great, so he will___________________ then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is that so hard, why is that a problem at all? Why is that a issue? Why make somebody unhappy when it isn't neccessarry, it doesn't matter if the guy is crazy why make him crazy and upset too.

Oh and on the other thing isn't calling somebody pretentious sort of pretentious too. The whole "anybody that doesn't agree with me is stupid" arguement is a little juvenile. Or how about:

All the people who won't let the GM do so are inconsiderate slobs, end of story

Yea how dare they have a different opinion than you. Only you can be right. Geesh I should of just avoided this whole thread, art is about perception, and people are allowed to have opposing opinions and not be considered idiots. Why turn a fun thread on a non-important issue into a insult throwing contest?

 

[Deadguy]

Whats up with you brits!?!?! All you guys ever seem to do since WWII is talk calmly, rationally, and logically. What ever happened to that reckless sense of fun you guys used to have? Remember the Black Prince, Crazy George III? What you guys need is another good war with Scotland to get the blood pumping!

joe b. *still practicing Hongesque posts*

Haven't you seen A Fish Called Wanda, Joe? John Cleese captures what it is to be English perfectly!

Archie Leech
Wanda, do you have any idea what it's like being English? Being so correct all the time, being so stifled by this dread of, of doing the wrong thing, of saying to someone "Are you married?" and hearing "My wife left me this morning," or saying, uh, "Do you have children?" and being told they all burned to death on Wednesday. You see, Wanda, we'll all terrified of embarrassment. That's why we're so... dead.

So you see, we can't help put be carefully reasonable in case we offend someone and are therefore embarrassed, which, as we all know, is worse than dying!

edited to make it read in English rather than tired

 

[jdavis]

Whats up with you brits!?!?! All you guys ever seem to do since WWII is talk calmly, rationally, and logically. What ever happened to that reckless sense of fun you guys used to have? Remember the Black Prince, Crazy George III? What you guys need is another good war with Scotland to get the blood pumping!

joe b. *still practicing Hongesque posts*

you should repalce every mention of courtesy with wanger in the quote.

And what's wrong with not fighting a war over a character sheet?

 

[jgbrowning]

Originally posted by jdavis
so if it's a joint venture in creating the character then why isn't it a joint venture in the characters future?

'cause to be quite blunt. there isn't a character. There are only players who pretend. more than one player can pretend at the same time. more than one player can pretend at different times.

Here is a little script to help you out in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DM: So I want to use your player as a NPC after you leave the group.

Player: No, I don't think I would like that.

DM: OK, so lets figure out how get them out of the story without it causing problems with my story line.

Player: Sure maybe the character just wants to be a hermit, or maybe he goes to __________, or etc................................

DM: Great, so he will___________________ then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is that so hard, why is that a problem at all? Why is that a issue? Why make somebody unhappy when it isn't neccessarry, it doesn't matter if the guy is crazy why make him crazy and upset too.

Here's my scenerio.
----------------
player: i don't want you to.
Dm: ok. (Dm then procedes to do so anyway and hopes he doesn't find another nutcase in the new player.)

(after player finds out DM did it anyway)
player: you lied to me!
Dm: yep. And all the time i was playing the PC you didn't feel bad, did you? I guess your feeling bad now about me playing the PC is something personal you need to work on. If my playing a pretend game with a pretend character that you pretended about for a while gives you real emotional distress you have personal issues.
----------------

And im not pretending here. There is some things that need to be addresed in this guy's life if he gives a rat's butt about a pretend character, in a pretend world, that he pretends to have ownership over, in a pretending game.


joe b

 

[Oaken25]

The other thing people seem to be missing and maybe I didn't add it in the orignal post on this board was that the person didnt care about the character, it was that they didn't want the characters NAME to be reused cause the NAME was special to them. Other wise they didn't give a monkeys bum about the character itself, just it's name. But as I said a few times me and the PC straightened it out yesterday, but I kept this thread open cause it was a interesting discussion about how PC's and DM's feel about the reuse of old PC's in campaigns.

Any how I still feel it is really odd that a lot of PC's are so anal about thier characters in general (and yes I also play in some peoples games and I would love that the DM includes a copy of one of my characters in thier games), that they don't allow DM's to include a copy of thier characters in the history of the game world. Its not like its stopping you for ever playing that character again, but, as a example, if the character was used in my campaign then that character would exist in my world, but it might also exist some where else if another DM allows you to use that character in his or her game. Now if the PC's were to be published then I could see why people would have a problem with that but for a normal game it just really boggles my mind.

Also as some on posted earlier, what if the DM wrote a story for the Story Hour board about the PC's. Is that allowed by PC's who don't allow DM's copies of thier PC's? This topic has a lot of ramifications then most people think.