Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Deadguy" data-source="post: 653261" data-attributes="member: 2480">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!</blockquote>

Verification