Magister <magister@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> Ben Finney wrote:
> > What types of situation would you like to see that you're not
> > getting now?
>
> The main example would be to bring a number of NPCs together with
> the PCs to play out some multiway negotiation. For example, the PCs
> have rescued an NPC who is the closest relative of the dying king
> and therefore the rightful heir, but other claimants (more
> respectable, or better connected) are also making their bids. The
> PCs might be caught up in an assembly of lords, with the objective
> of winning the most sup****t for their candidate for the throne.
Okay. That sounds like a situation that would be very difficult for
the *real people* to decide in, let alone you keeping them all
straight in your head as fictional characters.
My suggestion here would be to simplify it on your side, while
presenting as much roleplaying depth as you like to the players. In
the situation you set out above, set a single, simple, *secret* motive
and goal for each of the NPCs. Write it down in advance of the play
session, and make sure there's an interesting variety -- but keep each
individual simple.
Then, in the play session, you can refer to the sheet and roleplay and
ham it up for each character. The players will be quite confused as to
what's going on, so there will be no need for you to make the motive
complex -- take your cue from the players and reflect their complex
interpretations back to them. In other words, allow the players to
imagine subtle motivations for the NPCs so you don't have to :-)
> Even in this example, the interaction with NPCs may be relatively
> sequential, but all of the other NPCs are going to react rapidly
> when they find out about one interaction between an NPC and
> the PCs. And the PCs will probably want to find out about those
> reactions rapidly as well, so they can plan their future actions.
> One meeting with an NPC followed by downtime while I figure
> out what happens in response is probably too slow to make
> this playable.
If you have a single secret motive prepared in advance for each NPC,
you can use these during play to take what the players expect of that
NPC and twist it a little. They'll come up with all sorts of ideas
trying to figure out why the NPC didn't react as expected.
> It might be summarized; the point is that the NPC decisions are
> already made with a lot of thought in advance.
iIf you want things to be more responsive in play, I would suggest not
doing so much detailed planning in advance. Set the stage for NPC
motivations (exterior and ulterior) by preparing in advance, but do so
only in order to allow you to come up with NPC decisions on the fly,
to meet the actions and interpretations the players come up with.
> > [...] I always try to figure out what every NPC would rather be
> > doing right now. The interaction will then go on only as long as
> > the players are having fun, and the NPC would reasonably stick
> > around.
> >
> > When the players clearly have had enough of interacting with the
> > NPC, that's my cue for the NPC to make their excuses and get on
> > with their day.
>
> But what if there are two or more NPCs in the same place? Then they
> have to consider each other's actions as well as what the PCs are
> doing. That's I think the essence of what is troubling me.
Hopefully by keeping the motivations simple (so you have less to
consider) but secret (so the players don't have all the information),
you can use your players' ideas during play to improvise the
details. Ask them probing questions while they figure things out, so
you get them to articulate their interpretations -- then use them,
twisted slightly.
Done well, this can make you look far more prepared than you actually
are, and make the players feel much more involved in the story: some
of their ideas were right after all!
> > If the NPC doesn't have to respond immediately during the play
> > session, then one thing that can work is to enlist someone who
> > doesn't come to the session, and may not even be known to any of
> > the players, to play the part of an NPC by deciding their actions
> > as you describe above. [...]
>
> That might be feasible, and offers some significant advantages:
> appropriate decisions by definition, no disruption of the game
> sessions, less work for me.
Let us know how it works out; I've never used this "off-stage evil
overlord player" technique myself.
> Thanks for your comments and ideas.
You're welcome; please re****t back as to the efficacy of these
suggestions.
--
\ "If it ain't bust don't fix it is a very sound principle and |
`\ remains so despite the fact that I have slavishly ignored it |
_o__) all my life." -- Douglas Adams |
Ben Finney
|
