Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?

[Snackness]

I’ll allow that romance/relationship drama can be plot but I have a hard time seeing it as effective ‘game-wide’ plot. TS all you want on your PC.

ETA: Same goes for mini golf!

[surreality]

Bluntly: the primary reason I am against staff-NPCs engaging in TS is not because I think sex and romance can't be important elements of a story.

It's because players should have equal access to the NPC (per whatever generic guidelines are in place, for instance, if it's a faction NPC, anyone in the faction can request a scene with them, etc.) re: whatever services/offers that NPC makes to players of their rank/status/affiliation/whatever.

Not real keen on the notion of people grousing that Joe got laid, so he shouldn't be denied some hawt staff-NPC TS, as Joe's equal whatever. That's a whole world of nope.

[scar]

@krmbm said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

So let's divorce the issue from sex, so we don't have to worry about pearl-clutching.

Should staff NPCs be wandering around, roleplaying random mini-golf games that don't do anything for the story? Setting? Pretty much anything but their own desire to have a mini-golf scene?

IMO, no. If you want to RP mini-golf on a game that's not about mini-golf, do it with a PC, not a staff-run NPC. Otherwise, you're implying that mini-golf is important on some level that it's really not.

Does the mini-golf scene help set up a foundation of security and friendship for PCs where the NPC is concerned, from which to jump off of? This seems like it's just a matter of taste. Sure, NPCs can be very rewarding while still lacking in those dimensions. It depends on the story you're telling.

[krmbm]

@scar said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

Does the mini-golf scene help set up a foundation of security and friendship for PCs where the NPC is concerned, from which to jump off of? This seems like it's just a matter of taste. Sure, NPCs can be very rewarding while still lacking in those dimensions. It depends on the story you're telling.

Yes, but so does a scene that's actually about the story I'm telling.

By using a staff-run NPC to play mini-golf, this staffer is suggesting that mini-golf is important. As a player, I'm left thinking, "Oh, I better make sure my PC gets a mini-golf game in with StaffNPC, since apparently that's the 'in' for plot right now!"

See why the optics are important? Why - if mini-golf is your bag and you're not on Mini-Golf By Night - you might be better served playing a regular old PC than trotting out your staff NPC in this instance?

[bear_necessities]

@krmbm I think you hit the nail on the head. It is about the optics. It is important for the health of your game to use your NPCs responsibly, ensure they have access to the PCs they need access to, and are giving plot equally regardless of relationship to specific PCs.

The best way to do that is to use NPCs sparingly, ensure they are used to progress the plot, and use your PCs to play all the mini golf you want

[scar]

@krmbm Optics. And communication, clearly. Admittedly, I'm finding the mini-golf hypothetical just as distracting as TS for some reason. Maybe I need to get a game in, soon.

[Auspice]

@surreality said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

Bluntly: the primary reason I am against staff-NPCs engaging in TS is not because I think sex and romance can't be important elements of a story.

It's because players should have equal access to the NPC (per whatever generic guidelines are in place, for instance, if it's a faction NPC, anyone in the faction can request a scene with them, etc.) re: whatever services/offers that NPC makes to players of their rank/status/affiliation/whatever.

Not real keen on the notion of people grousing that Joe got laid, so he shouldn't be denied some hawt staff-NPC TS, as Joe's equal whatever. That's a whole world of nope.

I mean, if the TS is part of the questline and everyone can join the questline and TS the NPC then hey, go for it. Then it would be just like a video game and everyone can be the Titular Character.

But MUs aren't Mass Effect or Dragon Age or...

[surreality]

@Auspice ...and omg the day 'staff duties' involve 'TS dispenser'/'efucks on demand', I am fucking something, all right: the hell out of this hobby, with speed.

[Auspice]

@surreality said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

@Auspice ...and omg the day 'staff duties' involve 'TS dispenser'/'efucks on demand', I am fucking something, all right: the hell out of this hobby, with speed.

NPC GDoc includes 'canned TS poses' along side the prepped set poses for the next +event ...

[Roz]

I generally think that PCs should have generally equitable routes to pursue engagement with NPCs, but the idea that NPCs should always be required to provide the same types of scenes to any PC is odd to me. I wouldn't agree that's a necessary part of a game.

[juke]

@Auspice said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

I believe NPCs should be Staff Property - playable by any member of Staff 'as needed' - for a plot scene, for a scene with PCs (a leader discussing disciplinary action, handing out a quest, etc etc), and so on. Their plot, their progress (such as sheets), and major actions should be tracked and shared (potentially discussed depending on scale) with the rest of Staff. Things like GDoc are great for this.

Once an NPC is being played by a Staffer on a regular basis in casual, day-to-day RP and is exclusively played by them (particularly if they are playing in personal, intimate friendships and relationships) they are no longer, IMO, an NPC and become a PC and should then be governed by the same rules as PCs.

I don't like this.

There are definitely cases in which this is useful: major comic book villains, etc. The kind of big-bads that are on-screen almost never. But I still prefer NPCs to be the specific responsibility of one person for many, many reasons. It's not just about consistency of tone, it's also about that person knowing everything the character has been involved in. You can say that it's staff's responsibility to share every interaction and keep everyone else up to date about all of the happenings, but even if you share the bulletpoints of it, things still get lost. Perspectives differ. A nuance that was important in a scene between a PC and an important NPC can utterly fail to register as important to someone else, or even be a thing they're just not capable of doing well in RP.

Plus, as a storyteller, when I make an NPC I make them with very specific thoughts in mind about what they're like, what they want, where their boundaries are. I make them in relation to my thoughts, feelings, and intuition concerning the characters they're likely to be interacting with. They have a specific flavor. If they exist to breathe life into the world, that core identity matters.

It doesn't matter how well someone else knows the other characters involved, or me -- they're never going to be consistent enough that they won't do something with my NPC that I look at and go 'eugh, not how I would have done that,' and then some of the magic is gone.

YMMV, of course. For some people this is definitely not an issue. It gives me hives, though.

[Auspice]

@juke

A large part of why I feel they should be shared (though I get your points and I understand them!) is availability.

A daytime EST staffer isn't available for the overnight (or Euro) crowd, so that means their NPC would never get to interact with them unless one or the other specifically scheduled at an awkward time.

If a Staffer disappears suddenly, their NPC is just gone without a trace unless they left extremely extensive notes.

Again, I totally understand and can appreciate your reasoning, but a big part of mine is both accountability and access. It really sucks to be someone beholden to scheduling and never get a chance to interact with an NPC that might be vital to your character just because of scheduling conflicts.

[faraday]

@krmbm said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

Should staff NPCs be wandering around, roleplaying random mini-golf games that don't do anything for the story? Setting? Pretty much anything but their own desire to have a mini-golf scene?

It depends on what kind of NPC it is. Nothing says that all "staff-run NPCs" need to be these big quest-givers who only show up to send people off to destroy the One Ring. NPCs come in all shapes and sizes.

Should the King be chilling at the bar every other weekend? Almost certainly not. But could the Admiral show up for karaoke night and cause some lulz? Sure. That can bring richness to the character and make their interactions with other PCs more than just "click on me for a quest".

[Ghost]

A good bit of GM advice I got a while back was: "A player only gets one character, the GM gets everyone else in the universe". Another bit of advice I got (and followed) is to "remember that the GM isn't a player, but a narrator who helps sell the story."

These 2 pieces of advice stuck with me, and I think they apply to the topic at hand.

My outlook is that NPCs are a vehicle and nothing more. In a game, the PCs are the "main cast members" and NPCs are "supporting cast/extras". So with that in mind, I think it's easy to forget to focus on the players if a GM is heavily investing in an NPC as if it's a PC. There's a difficult boundary there.

IMO, GMs should take off their GM cap when playing, and take off their player cap when GMing. While a GM may get "everyone else in the universe", you've got to let NPCs be NPCs. Sometimes theyre some kind of "mission giver" with an exclamation point above their head, an assistance with backstory, but IMO they should always be 2nd place to the PCs. Otherwise you end up with bored PCs and NPCs who fix all pf the problems.

I don't want to dig much into the concept of "NPCs as romantic partners", but I will say this: I don't think it's a good idea, at least in a mushing sense, for a few reasons.

1. Staff/GM are there to guide the plot and game process. IC attachments of that kind are preferable between PCs. You want the story to be there.
2. NPCs are a commodity to be used, but in a mushing sense, a staff NPC in a deep relationship with a PC can very quickly become a lot of demand on a GM to give highly individualized RP sessions. This can lead to weird things like cries of favoritism, increased strain on staff availability, and TECHNICALLY if it's a staff NPC, then it should be able to be RPed by any staffer/GM. If someone isn't okay with any available GM roleplaying an NPC romantic interest, then it's not an NPC.

Anyway, tl;dr: I believe in keeping a very clear dividing line between PCs and NPCs. You can switch between the two, but can should only fill one role at a time.

[faraday]

@Thenomain said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

But what does that mean, "like a PC"?

Circling back to this one for a second...

In a TTRPG I think this is much easier to quantify because PCs have one or more other defining characteristics: complete character sheets, presence in every session as a core team member, gaining XP and loot on par with the other PCs, etc. Granted this may not apply everywhere, but it's reasonably universal.

But I think that the biggest defining characteristic for a PC in a TTRPG is that the player is trying to succeed. What "succeed" means may vary - get to level 20, complete the mission, kill the Big Bad, survive, whatever. But generally PCs have an agenda.

Players of NPCs shouldn't have an agenda beyond "play fair and tell a good story". Of course your NPC ICly has an agenda, but the minute the player becomes too invested in that agenda, they're being played like a PC.

(I will refrain from rambling on about my utopian dream that all players would go into the game with no agenda beyond "play fair and tell a good story". While that would sure be nice, even I'm not that naive :))

[Kanye Qwest]

@scar said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

It depends on the story you're telling.

It really, really does.

[Sparks]

@bear_necessities said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

This isnt a pearl clutch. I will just never understand why staff feels the need to utilize their NPCs to have "romantic plot" or bring a child into the world or fuck somebody (which again, does that benefit the game or at least a certain group of PCs? Because it sounds like it benefits 2. The PC you are boning and the NPC).

So, let's say you're in a modern setting but where a lot of the conspiracies around secret societies are real. The Illuminati, the Templars, and so on. And there's an NPC, a senator who is a mid-level member of the Illuminati. And he'll do favors for the PCs, pull strings to get them resources, but he always asks things in return. And owing him open-ended favors is... unsettling, because sometimes when he calls them in, the people who are called come back subtly different.

Now, here's your character, who needs a piece of information they know that NPC has. The price, however, will be too high. So your PC decides to seduce the NPC senator. Maybe this is because they think if they succeed, the NPC will feel more inclined to do them a favor without demanding one in return. Maybe this is because they think if the NPC takes them back to a hotel room, they'll be able to take his phone while he's asleep, use his fingerprint to unlock it, and get the information for free.

Either way, this is a situation where the PC seeking romance/sex with the NPC serves the story; the PC can gain something which advances their storyline. If they were trying to get that information for a plot involving multiple people, it advances storyline for multiple PC's!

Or maybe the PC has been pushing something politically which a sinister secret society wants stopped. PC knows they want this, but has refused to be cowed by their demands, to a point that the society has decided to act. The NPC is a master assassin hired by that society, and wants to get close to the PC in order to poison them in private; once poisoned, they can blackmail the PC into doing what they want by withholding the antidote. Try to force them to turn on their allies and serve this society's interests instead. And what better way to get them in private and poison them than to seduce them?

Here's a place where the NPC seeking sex with the PC serves the story.

There honestly are reasons where it can serve story. I'm not saying it always does when people do it, but I think it absolutely can.

[surreality]

@Sparks One of the things with this that I think is quite relevant is that these are scenarios that are easy candidates for FTB.

I suspect that if these things were off-screen, or handled by rolls in an FTB, the issues would be negligible at best.

Where the trouble comes in is when players feel obligated to TS staffers to get ahead, or staffers feel obligated to write out an NPC spreading 'em for a player who asks or makes the right rolls. Both of these scenarios are nightmaretown.

[Sparks]

@faraday said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

Players of NPCs shouldn't have an agenda beyond "play fair and tell a good story". Of course your NPC ICly has an agenda, but the minute the player becomes too invested in that agenda, they're being played like a PC.

I'd also say the other defining trait is that the NPC does not get to be the protagonist. The story you're telling is not their story; they're not the hero who saves the day. They're the ancient sage the protagonist seeks guidance from. They're the powerful antagonist the protagonist has to overcome. They're the mentor, the teacher who helps the protagonist master a skill and helps them along their path. They can play a major role in the plot, but it is not their plot.

If you were playing Star Wars: A New Hope as as a plot on a game, the NPC doesn't get to be Luke Skywalker. They could be Obi-Wan Kenobi, however.

As such, an NPC should never roll in to save the day; even if they could, you find ways to let the heroes resolve the plot. Obi-Wan Kenobi fights Darth Vader to buy the PCs (Luke, Han, Leia) time to get away, but dies. Whups, now the PCs are on their own; the NPC helped them along the path, but the big hero moments—like blowing up the Death Star—go to PCs.

The spotlight, the real star moments, the 'big damn hero' beats... those should go to the PCs. The NPCs are there to help the PCs get to those.

That's my take on NPCs, at least.

[bored]

While I'm pretty pro fuckery...

@Wretched said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

Addendum: ALSO PLEASE STOP TSING PEOPLE WITH YOUR NPC'S AUGH

Yeah, I'm gonna come down on the 'if you use it to TS, it's a PC,' regardless of how pure you think you are about your separation of conflicts of interest etc.

If teh sex is needed to move plot along, that's fine. But teh sex (or, whatever, meaningful romance) can happen in summary without spending 4 hours typing elaborate bullshit with one hand. Once you're doing that, there's a player motivation involved that has nothing to do with any of the things that are supposed to be on the mind of a GM doing GM things. You're also by necessity devoting huge amounts of time to this person and that alone is a form of favoritism; people who are looking for NPC interaction to move their own plots along are not getting it in that time, and we know that time is precious in our aging hobby.

I can see why some of the people defending it are defending it, but. Yeah, c'mon. You can't pretend it doesn't open a huge can of worms.