Whose "property" are the PCs?

[SG1Laura]

If the campaign is finished, then the DM decides the fate of the characters. Unless those same players intend to play those characters in a sequal campaign under you, then they really cannot complain about what happens to them after the fact.

Personally, when I GM and a campaign ends, I usually ask the players to write a finale for their characters, then I write up a final finale for the campaign based on their responses.

How can the DM decide AND the players get to decide (via their written finales)?

 

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

No matter what the player should be informed, yes?

It might be fun for the old player to be informed, but certainly not necessary on the DMs behalf.

 

[was]

I frequently use old pc's as NPC's. Even though they were created by the players, they're
part of the campaign world and I think it provides a sense of continuity. However, I never make them evil or look foolish. I usually seek input from the players on how their characters would have turned out if they had stopped adventuring. They usually end up as business owners, minor nobles, local priests...etc...

 

[Quickleaf]

Only when the player is actually playing it. Then it is called a non player character.

Let me rephrase, it totally depends on the circumstances.
If the GM talks to the player and says "what do you think about the character who you played turning to evil?"
And the player says, "no way! his highest ideal was sacrificing himself for others and protecting the innocent. it would be out of character."
Then the GM should say "you know what, you played this character for X months/years, you're the authority on them, OK. "
If, however the player says "you know what, I never thought of it before, but yeah that sounds neat, go for it, and have a great campaign".
Then the GM should villify the once-good character to their heart's content.

If the GM is running a new group of players and wants to use elements from their old campaign, then there's no reason why they can't decide all the PCs turned into rabbits. They're designing the world after all. Any inspiration the GM wants to use is legitimate.

However, if the GM is running a game which includes the player of the character in question (or possibly could include the player during some...say she returns from a summer vacation), then the GM shouldn't make any drastic changes to the character unless the player has expressed agreement.

I guess I assumed the worst case scenario: Player returns to a long campaign after several months away, and GM says, "Oh, you can't play your old PC because she has turned to the dark side and is the new nemesis of the party. Why don't you roll up a new one?"

 

[S'mon]

As far as I, as a GM & a copyright specialist, am concerned:

Player of PC X is entitled to write & publish stories about PC X. If they want to set those stories in my gameworld, they need my permission. Which is to say, I could stop them doing it if I wished.

I as GM am entitled to write and publish stories set in my world that refer to PC X and their existence whether the player agrees or not. However if I want to make PC X the protagonist of my story, I would ask the player their permission & not do it if they declined.

 

[SG1Laura]

I assume players are aware of (1). It goes without saying. I don't expect to control what happens to my PC after I quit a game. Obviously I can still do stuff with that PC myself.

But we're not talking about quitting a game- I'm asking about after a conclusion has been reached, PCs are level 20 and there is nothing more for them to play. The next "ingame" time is way after said PCs are dead. So, the issue becomes, does the DM "decide" what happened to the characters or does the Player retain the right to decide if their PC settled in teh country, got married, etc.

 

[S'mon]

But we're not talking about quitting a game- I'm asking about after a conclusion has been reached, PCs are level 20 and there is nothing more for them to play. The next "ingame" time is way after said PCs are dead. So, the issue becomes, does the DM "decide" what happened to the characters or does the Player retain the right to decide if their PC settled in teh country, got married, etc.

Either way is good. The GM can declare it if they wish, but as GM I would certainly accept reasonable suggestions from the player, eg I probably wouldn't accept "I became Overking, then ascended to godhood, and now I'm the chief god of the pantheon".

 

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

But we're not talking about quitting a game- I'm asking about after a conclusion has been reached, PCs are level 20 and there is nothing more for them to play. The next "ingame" time is way after said PCs are dead. So, the issue becomes, does the DM "decide" what happened to the characters or does the Player retain the right to decide if their PC settled in teh country, got married, etc.

Even if the DM said, "Your character turns evil and does all of this stuff you don't think they ever would," what's the difference?

It's a game.

And - if it really bothers you - You can always shrug and say, "Well - that's their version of the story."

 

[Mercule]

How I handle it: The players can either agree that the PC stays in my campaign or not. If they don't, then the PC is forgettable and their name will never appear in the histories. Some of their deeds may even get ascribed to other PCs/NPCs.

If they agree, they have control over the character for as long as the character is alive -- it is their character. I will only use the character in vague, off-camera ways, and only as necessary to show the passage of time. Once time IMC has move to a certain point, the PC dies of old age and is entered into the histories.

It boils down to this: If a PC is part of my campaign, they stay there and there is a shared ownership. If the PC is played in another setting, they are erased from my world. It's the GM's version of the player saying "Don't play my PC as an NPC after I leave." It's a respect thing, both ways.

 

[The_Universe]

It's all the property of a collective of imaginations, no more and no less. So, the DM can do whatever he wants with an entirely fictional character. If he wants to say that, after the campaign ended, your noble paladin was willingly polymorphed into a fairy princess, he can do that. That's his take on the *thing that never really existed* and there's really not a whole lot you can do about it as a player.

At the same time, if you prefer to imagine the exploits of that character in an entirely different way - you can. Maybe he conquered the world after creating a benevolent theocracy of the True Faith. You can run a game in *that* world, if you want, too.

The idea here, people, is that you can't dictate how someone prefers to imagine something. You can gripe all you want (in either case above), but it's not going to make a difference. Imagined deeds and tales are no ones property.

Sheesh!