I've always liked to get player input in when I GM. I currently run a DnD Midnight game - hence a system that doesn't support plot input from players. This means I'm feeling my way pretty much and learning by trial and error, and on the whole the results exceed my wildest dreams.

I talk to players a lot to adapt the game to what's cool and meaningful for their PCs - some of this I've been doing for some time and feel confident about, some of it is new. One of the new and scary things (for me) is that I've introduced contact points. Once per scenario, each player can request an NPC contact.

One player took to that like a duck to water and I'm expecting a second one (away on holiday until a couple of days ago) to do the same, another ignored it until I helped him discover a way to a goal through a contact he might have if he asked for it (*hint, hint*), and my consistently non-engaging 'turtle' player about whom I've posted in another thread of course is steadfastly ignoring this abomination lest it draw him into the dangerous and unpredictable maelstrom of interacting with the game world.
Let me stress that I'm not concerned about the 'turtle' in this context, that's what the other thread is for.


I'm posting this thread because I'd like to better understand the whole system of letting players introduce NPCs. For those of you play/GM systems that have players 'writing' NPCs into scenes, do you have advice, cool or funny or disastrous stories? Beginner's tips, tools, techniques? What to do? What to avoid? How to encourage players?

Are there good guidelines I could give a player who's currently shy about using his contact point?

What else is essential but looks as if I'm likely blissfully ignorant of it? :)


EDIT: I've only started playtesting the contact point system, it seemed the best approach for a DnD-trained group who tend to feel most comforatble with tangible, limited, numerical benefits. If the group takes to player "contacts", I'll be more than happy to increase the number of points or drop points and let a more freeform style develop.

Seems like an intriguing idea to me. I've been looking for some ways to get my players more into the game and directing the plot a little more as well, or at least getting them to a point where they feel that they are part of the story and have some control over the direction of the story as well.

I guess I'm just a second voice in this looking for advice as well. :)

StalkingBlue: What have the players done with this in your game so far, specifically. Is it something they have used to get out of a jam, or something they used to add an element to the story?

Bogie_71 wrote: Seems like an intriguing idea to me. I've been looking for some ways to get my players more into the game and directing the plot a little more as well, or at least getting them to a point where they feel that they are part of the story and have some control over the direction of the story as well.

I guess I'm just a second voice in this looking for advice as well. :)

StalkingBlue: What have the players done with this in your game so far, specifically. Is it something they have used to get out of a jam, or something they used to add an element to the story?

StalkingBlue wrote:
The player of this native PC was very proactive and had his PC run around talk to everyone I'd introduced and when he'd exhausted all immediately apparent options asked, "Can I know someone like a confessor or advisor at the court?" "Are you willing to spend your contact point?" I said, and he looked surprised that he had one and agreed. He immediately lapsed into a conversation with this new NPC (whom he named and I played, with some clear cues from the player's way of talking to the NPC about what kind of person he envisioned the NPC to be).

Thanks for the play example!

DannyK wrote: Yeah, this is an excellent technique -- give the players a strong but undefined NPC, and then fill him in to complement the player's interests.

This is an interesting question ... I never thought about specific techniques for players introducing NPCs, though we do this fairly often in my group. For little over a year we've been playing mostly The Pool (after over 10 years of D&D and AD&D) so the players became pretty much used to introduce several elements into the story, including NPCs.

After thinking a while, I realize we do this in several diferent ways.

1) At campaign start we, as a group, create a few supporting NPCs. For instance in our Time Travel campaign (called Project Aurora), we created most of the "ground staff" (the scientists and other people that don't go around traveling in time, as opposed to the PCs) with input from everyone and then built a kind of relationship map for them.

2) Sometimes the players create a NPC on the fly without even noticing. Like when a PC says something like "You know? Last night at Joe's I ran into Linda, that blonde from Linguistics, and she told me that ...". And that's it, now we have a blonde called Linda that works at the Linguistics department of Project Aurora.

3) And at times, when the player wants to introduce a useful contact, he simply rolls stating something like "Since my PC used to work for the CIA he probably knows someone that can help us in this matter. So I'd like to roll for that". As per The Pool rules, if he succeeds he can narrate the outcome that might be something like "So my PC called his friend Mike at CIA and asked him to find out something about this Ayala guy. After a couple of days Mike returned the call and told him ...". Of course, that if he fails the roll I, the GM, might narrate something like: "Your PC calls his friend Fred at the CIA and asks him to find out something about Ayala. A couple of days latter, Fred's wife calls and tells him Fred's been found dead in his car". :-)

And there was one interesting thing that happened in our time travel campaign.

The first time the PCs traveled back in time they went to ancient Egypt. They wandered into a small village near the Nile and met a young boy in the market who was looking for customers for his mother's inn.

The boy led them to the inn and, to the PC's surprise, the boy's mother recognized both of them. After some talk, they found out that they had been in that village 10 years before. Some stuff happened and then, when they were leaving the inn, one of the players said: "Mike (his PC) asks Rudolf (the other PC) if he noticed how the boy looked just like him". And just like that one of the PCs suddenly had a son in ancient Egypt.


Notice that the GM didn't plan for this and, as usual in the Pool, had to do quite a few changes to his initial plot idea. :-)

Andreas

Another bit of play experience, fresh from last night - this time I was the player.

A friend ran a one-off 'martial arts action movie' style solo game for me. It was fantastic on many levels, and for the first time I experienced actual cooperation in creating the game.

We had a situation when I described a shot with my PC counting out money from a big wad of banknotes, and the driver's eyes framed in the rearview mirror. The GM paused and said, "Hm, I think this would be a good moment for a car chase, but not too sure how justify that. Obviously that guy who's after your cash is still dangling off that hook back on the train." - "Ok," I said (feeling almost indecent at intruding on plot), "why can't there be more than one party after me and my cash? I don't know what's going on here anyway." The GM grinned and had a car pull out after the taxi my PC was sitting in - then on a hunch I asked, "Can my driver be female?" "Oh. Sure," said the GM. And something clicked.

"Friends of yours?" I (PC) ask the driver. "Nope. yours?" "No." Driver floors it, car chase follows. I get to leap onto the other car and kick bad guys around acrobatically, she gets to shoot one in the head ("Ow. He has lost a lot of face."), we win and drive away to my rendezvous at the abandoned warehouse. Where our taxi driver NPC gets to take out all the mooks on her own while I'm running around looking silly and important, vaulting on and off roofs and kidnapping the bad boss by mistake.

The GM said afterwards that up to the moment I asked, the taxi driver hadn't even been a character - instead, she ended up being the main supporting character in the game.

It was brilliant. I want to be able to do that. I want to be able to create an environment in which players feel encouraged to suggest stuff on the fly to make the story cooler.

Interesting stuff aplath! Why did you decide to change to playing The Pool, rather than any other system, when you grew tired of DnD? Is is an easy switch to make, would you say?

I'm thinking perhaps looking at other game systems might help me figure out how to present an environment that encourages players to contribute more to the story. I don't think we're ready to change systems yet, but even seeing what else is possible opens the mind - three of us in my current group have read Sword&Sorcerer and it has really changed our outlook and our personal play styles, even though we still use DnD rules.

StalkingBlue wrote: Interesting stuff aplath! Why did you decide to change to playing The Pool, rather than any other system, when you grew tired of DnD?

Is is an easy switch to make, would you say?

I'm thinking perhaps looking at other game systems might help me figure out how to present an environment that encourages players to contribute more to the story. I don't think we're ready to change systems yet, but even seeing what else is possible opens the mind - three of us in my current group have read Sword&Sorcerer and it has really changed our outlook and our personal play styles, even though we still use DnD rules.

Wow, thanks. This is exactly the kind of stuff I was looking for.

aplath wrote: We looked into The Window, Fudge and The Pool. Of the three, Fudge needed too much customization for our taste. The Window was cool enough but we decided on The Pool because the idea of the game mechanic supporting player input was too interesting to let pass.

aplath wrote: I've been playing The Pool with some guys that split from our original D&D group. We were very lucky because these were exactly the guys who had a more narrativist bent in their play style. So this helped a lot. As a comparison, we also ran a playtest with the rest of the group (a mix of gamist and simulationist styles) and even though they found it fun to play a one-shot, they didn't like the gaming style at first, though probably some of them would like it if given enough time to get it.

aplath wrote: Even with the players buying into the system really fast, it took sometime to get D&D out of the system. Our first campaign was designed to do exactly that. It was called the X-Riders and it was about a couple of bikers traveling around small town Brazil and facing a few supernatural challenges.

It was a fun experience because the PCs had opposite views of the world. A bit like Mulder and Scully. So the GM usually set up a situation where something rather strange happened and the players used their narrative opportunities to shape the outcome towards his PC view of the world. The end result is that sometimes there was a pretty mundane explanation for the situation and other times ETs and Werewolves were involved. :-)

aplath wrote: After this first campaign, we discussed what we have learned and decided that several changes were needed, mainly in the techniques we used to play. So the concepts of Bangs, Kickers and Relationship maps came into play. Also we decided to prepare the following campaign (the time travel one) together and not only the GM.

aplath wrote: Even before we changed systems we had already introduced some new ideas. For example, there was this session (playing D&D) when one of the characters went ahead of the group to check on a bridge they would have to cross in enemy territory. I was the GM and told the player of the character:

GM: "After a while your PC returned to the camp and told the others what he saw on the bridge."

Player: "Ok, but ... what did he see?"

GM: "I don't know ... you tell me."

aplath wrote: Also we started to give players some freedom to introduce elements at will like NPCs or simple facts about the story. For example, there was this time when the party was meeting a particular important NPC. This NPC was described as an important noble and swordsman called Sir Thomas. When they are first face to face, one of the players, voicing his PC, says:

"Well, Sir Thomas, we meet again."

This was done without previous discussion but the GM just played along. Of course, for this kind of freedom to work, the unwritten (but agreed) social contract allowed the GM simply to say "Sorry, not this time" if he thought the player was too out there. Then we simply rolled back what just happened and played it again.

aplath wrote: The bottom line is that, whatever you do, the key will be to keep every one on the same page. So, talk a lot with your players, share your ideas and get them to share theirs.

And have fun! :-)

Andreas

StalkingBlue wrote: At first reading, Mark Whithers's variation sounds the most elegant, balanced and streamlined to me but of course I haven't seen it in play.

What did you do to prepare the campaign together? What specifically did you all prepare? Did you share tasks, brainstorm everything together, or what?

(On a side note, I'm finding the concepts of Bangs, Kickers and Relationship Maps appealing but slightly daunting, even after reading and rereading articles and some threads here - it's all very abstract and difficult for me to relate to actual play. Would be able to give any examples from your games that might help me, perhaps?)

aplath wrote: GM: "After a while your PC returned to the camp and told the others what he saw on the bridge."

Player: "Ok, but ... what did he see?"

GM: "I don't know ... you tell me."

Oh wow. You were several steps ahead of us there, it feels like. I like this a lot. How did the player respond, do you remember? This is one scene I'd especially want to tell my DnD players about, to see what they'd think of stuff like that going on in our game.

aplath wrote: That's the one we use. Only diference is that we still restrict the character story to 50 words at char gen.

aplath wrote: Well, we designed the fundamentals of the setting together. Things like how time travel works, who sponsors the program, organization chart, mission procedures, NPCs, fictional equipment and stuff like that. Then we designed a pool of six PCs (three teams of two people each) that were the "timenauts" to be shared among the players while we rotated GMs. Some of the PCs had kickers, others not.

aplath wrote: Last week we played a one shot game of Mage. The PC had a kicker that was: "He wakes up in cheap motel room and realizes he doesnt't remember anything, including his name". This was entirely made up by the player without GM input and is a way of bringing to the table what kind of stuff he wants to play. As a kicker it clearly defines something the PC would want resolved, in this case his quest for identity.

In the very first scene of this game, the GM dropped the first bang: "While you are still looking at the mirror trying to remember at least your name, a phone rings. You pick up and the female voice on the other end is clearly familiar though you can't link it to neither name or face. The voice speaks fast and in a worried tone: - They are already in the building and will be crashing through your door any second now. The only way out is the window. Meet me at the subway station down the block. <click>"

So the player has something to decide. Now. Any choice he makes will have a consequence though neither would be right or wrong in the sense that either way it moves the story forward. This is a bang.

aplath wrote: He was one of the narrativism bent guys so he simply turned to the other players and told them in character about the orc patrol that was guarding the bridge. A few of the other players were surprised but most of them in a good way.

aplath wrote: I guess that one important factor when trying to introduce this kind of thing is to start small. Ask for input in stuff that isn't too relevant to the current plot. In this example, they were trying to flee back home through enemy territory. It wasn't really important if there was a patrol or not on the bridge. So you might say I was simply asking the player: do you want some combat on the bridge or not?

aplath wrote: A cool system to exercise this kind of play is Donjon. Even though it is gamist, it has an excelent mechanic for player input.

Andreas

StalkingBlue wrote: I'm also thinking of using the Death's Door rule from the original rules set, but haven't had a chance to discuss this with the two people I've invited for a one-shot to try the system out. We all three GM DnD in one form or another, would llike to go more Narr, but I think find the idea of no risk of death whatsoever strange and slightly scary. :)

Did everyone play the same PC under the same GM every time, or did you just pull characters from the pool as needed?

aplath wrote: Oh yes ... we use the Death Door rule too. Only we never came to the point of actually using it ... hmmmm ... wonder why?

aplath wrote: Each player has two PCs and usually plays the same PC under one particular GM. However, this is not planned to be this way and there were exceptions.

Andreas