‘One Model Four Ways’ based on beautiful-18279 courtesy pixabay.com (CC0 public domain)

Most NPCs occupy one of four niches in terms of their impact within an adventure or an encounter: Ally, Enemy, Resource, and Opportunist. I use AERO as a mnemonic to remind me of them.

The four roles

These four roles define, in broad parameters, how an NPC will interact with the PCs and how that interaction relates to the plotline (and sometimes to the setting, in a broader context). If that’s not entirely clear, a closer examination of the roles should clarify my meaning.

Allies

Allies provide substantive support and assistance to the PCs. Some allies are of convenience, and the alliance persists only until the situation in which both parties have a mutual interest is resolved.

Some are formal, and these can sometimes be superficial or even largely false, these allies-in-name-only are actually mislabeled enemies, and the balance of this section does not apply to them..

Some alliances are limited to actions in furtherance of mutual agendas or beliefs.

Still others are more deeply-rooted and persist until one party to the alliance betrays the other, or betrays the principle or agenda that they have in common – the distinction is highly nuanced, and the affronted party is will often not make any distinction between the two forms of betrayal. Of course, if the two allies truly have deeply-rooted values in common, such betrayal is extremely unlikely; it is more likely that some action will be misconstrued as a betrayal than that a willful betrayal will take place.

In any event, allies have a very broad role in any adventure in which they are encountered. They provide assistance that goes beyond mere resources, fulfilling an active role in helping the PCs complete their mission or quest, whatever it might be, potentially placing themselves at risk in the process.

Enemies

Enemies try to hinder the PCs, to prevent them from achieving their goals. Some opposition arises because the PCs goal, or their actions in furtherance of it, would inconvenience the enemy. Some is due to misunderstandings, leaving the door open for an eventual alliance; the more baggage accumulated in the form of active opposition, though, the harder this becomes to overlook and the more entrenched the positions become.

Some opposition is formal – i.e. one party is required to oppose the other because of some other alliance they might have in good faith. “The friend of my enemy will act as my enemy.” It can be true that before a true target can be effectively engaged, a key ally must be neutralized or even persuaded to change sides.

Most opposition, however, is more deeply rooted. Fundamental goals or philosophies may be in opposition, and historical actions may be too divisive to permit a gap of antagonism to be bridged, and the enemy has to be defeated so thoroughly that a fundamental change in nature takes place, permitting a reappraisal of the established relationship.

Resources

Resources are enablers, permitting the PCs to carry out some task in furtherance of their goal, but not actively taking part in the quest or mission beyond providing the tools, equipment, or knowledge required. The PCs have to do the actual work, a Resource simply gives them what they need in order to do so.

One peculiar thing that I have noted about Resource NPCs, as they have appeared in various games in which I have played, modules that I have read, and articles that have been posted through the years: It always seems to be the case that they are highly over-developed or under-developed, relative to other NPCs. In some cases, they are viewed as a disposable “resource delivery system”; in others, they are the most complex and complicated characters within the adventure. Neither is best-practice, in my book; and both are undesirable.

Resources may be cooperative or compelled; providing the Resource that they posses willingly or because they are forced to do so. Some resources span both, unwilling to assist except in exchange for some service or payment.

Opportunists

Which brings us to Opportunists, who attempt to use the PCs and their efforts to benefit some cause or agenda of their own. Sometimes, these side quests are tasks the PCs are happy to undertake, at other times they can be the cause of considerable angst and reluctance. Sometimes – probably the most boring times – they simply want to be paid a fair remuneration.

Using opportunists properly is an art form. There are times when a side quest will merely increase the players’ frustration levels, and there are times when they will greatly intensify the anticipation. More than anything else, the way the GM treats Opportunists at any given moment should be a function of their emotional intensity planning, a subject that is beyond the scope of this article – if interested, or you don’t know what I’m talking about, check out Swell And Lull: Emotional Pacing in RPGs Part 1 and Part 2 and the Further Thoughts On Pacing four-part series which specifically deals with interruptions, including side quests and the other demands of Opportunists.

The Other Types: Nobodies & Motivators

Strictly speaking, there are two other types of NPC: Nobodies, who contribute nothing but color and verisimilitude (which includes no-name grunts to back up the enemies) by virtue of their presence, and Motivators, who provide motivation for the PCs to undertake the mission/quest/adventure and sometimes context. Since they make no contribution to the adventure itself beyond these extremely limited roles, they play no further part in terms of this article – but I thought I should at least mention them.

Adding Color Through a secondary role

It was strongly hinted at in the descriptions of the primary roles given above that characters become more interesting when you add a second function into the mix. Since like doesn’t add anything when partnered with like – allies and allies, for example – there are twelve combinations to consider. Some of these have already been touched on, but this is a more discrete and comprehensive list.

Allies

The first category are allies who are nominally something else.

1a. Enemies who ally

A perennial favorite, it’s possible to overuse this concept (but you have to try really hard). The question is always about motivation. Does the alliance further some agenda of the enemy? Does the primary enemy threaten the temporary ally? Is the enemy competing or contending with the temporary ally for a resource? Does the temporary ally have some moral or ethical common ground with the PCs? Is it simply a question of mutual survival? Is it simply a case of the temporary ally preferring a known enemy who has already been factored into his plans to an unknown threat? And these possibilities are far from the limit.

One of the favorite recurring NPCs in the Zenith-3 campaign is Voodoo Willy, named for the character in Predator 2, who explores the inherent contradictions in the concept of an “Ethical Drug-lord”. He sells to white collar workers, and is quite prepared to use violence to protect his turf, but he won’t sell to children, and there are certain drugs that he so vehemently opposes that he is perfectly willing to assist the PCs either directly as an ally or indirectly as a resource in wiping them out. He employs long-term planning, and is not afraid to take a short-term loss or reduction in profitability to support a long-term customer. He even helps his best customers get and keep good, well-paying employment – so that they can continue to fatten his wallet in the longer term. He survives by perpetually making himself the lesser of whatever evils are around at the time. He even recently (and temporarily) suspended his whole operation to try and assist the team in dealing with a problem that was affecting both of them. (If the players haven’t figured out that there is a long-term plan for this character’s role in the campaign, they’ve been sleeping through it!)

In fact, one of the themes of the whole Zenith-3 campaign is “shifting alliances”, as friends become enemies and enemies become friends, compelled by cosmic events reshaping the underlying ideologies of the entire multiverse in the lead-up to what is informally known as “The Apocalypse”, which is the planned epic conclusion to the entire campaign. The fun of combining such a theme with an ambiguous character like Willy is that he could go either way, becoming a reformed ex-enemy or a serious threat who has been able to build up his power base by never showing his full hand to the PCs.

Actually, calling Willy “ambiguous” is a disservice – he makes no bones about what he does and at all times exudes clarity of purpose and motivation. It’s just that the PCs can never tell what’s going to happen with him next…

1b. Resources who ally

Here, too, motivation is the essential that has to be rock-solid. It could be as simple as a mercenary action on the part of the Resource, or a response to a mutual threat, or signing on to the mission in order to protect carefully-curated resources that could be placed at risk if the PCs step over a line. Or it could be a mutually-beneficial alliance in which the NPC garners additional resources, some of which he has pledged to employ in supporting the primary mission objective of the PCs. Or, once again, a case of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend – at least for now.”

This actually turns an over-developed Resource character into an asset by providing a showcase for the depth of characterization,
a definite benefit if you are guilty of this commonplace error in time-management.

The converse is also interesting to contemplate – an NPC who would normally be considered an ally but who cannot support or be seen to support the current endeavor in any official capacity but who nevertheless makes vital information or other resources available to the PCs (usually by looking the other way momentarily). By placing implied limits on the alliance, you hint at the prospect of the alliance ending, adding an overtone of potential future enmity.

1c. Opportunists who ally

Mercenaries will sign on for monetary gain or other reward, but sometimes they can change their mind about the fee they are charging when confronted with the stakes, or when other priorities usurp the primacy of the profit motivation. Some opportunists may recognize the chance to gain (even if it’s only the PCs owing them a favor) and deem it valuable enough for the effort and the risk. Only very experienced and creative GMs should ever adopt this path without a clear understanding of what the Opportunist stands to gain and how they will employ whatever benefit they receive as a result. In particular, GMs should always have a clear idea of when any favors will be called in and what the PCs will be asked to do before implementing this NPC role.

Enemies

The second category are characters who function as enemies, even though they may nominally be something else.

2a. Allies who oppose

As the old saying goes, “with friends like these…” allies don’t always agree, and even when supposedly on the same side, there can often be good (or bad) reasons for them to oppose each other. In particular, allies will often be uncomfortable at the prospect of being relegated to the demeaning status of “junior partner”. Consequently, when the PCs are, or are perceived to be, representative of one of the partners in an alliance, they may find supposed allies getting in the way for reasons of their own.

If the antagonism that results is strong enough, lines may be crossed that can never be un-crossed, and the alliance itself placed at risk. This is especially likely to occur when short term ambitions and goals say one thing is beneficial, and long-term ambitions and principles advise something as “wise”. Inevitably, one partner in the alliance will consider the immediate problem or situation to be of paramount importance, even if it worsens the long-term outlook (no-one can predict the future with complete certainty so who knows what the long term will actually look like until you get there), while the other side is more willing to make short-term sacrifices for long-term gain. Such differences in perspective are sure to maroon the alliance on rocky ground, as the short-term / immediate-problem solvers behave in ways that are detrimental to what the long-term thinkers want to achieve.

In the worst-case scenario, party A can sacrifice the short-term for the long term, only to find that party B has performed actions or implemented decisions that make their short-term more secure at the price of completely undermining any hope of party A ever achieving whatever it is that they have sacrificed in order to achieve.

There are other variations. Two allies might agree completely on the long-term vision, but have completely different and mutually contradictory approaches to achieving it in the short term.

In fact, there are a host of reasons why one party to an alliance might perceive the actions of another as betraying that alliance for their own benefit.

All this is as much about the personalities and perspicacity of the strategic planners and key advisers on both sides as anything else. Even oxymorons can posses a political and strategic reality when viewed from the right perspective: “To make all men free, we must first conquer all men, liberating them from the oppression they now experience,” for example. Or, as Toby puts it at one point in the West Wing (when discussing the imposition of American Ideals and Values on the Middle East), “They’ll like us when we win.” Every revolution sets out to correct some social or political wrong, real or perceived – though the leaders of those revolutions may have less pure motivations.

2b. Resources who oppose

Just because you know, and are supposed to tell another, doesn’t mean that you necessarily want to do so. Just because you are willing to help may not mean that you are willing for it to be obvious or public that you are cooperating.

There’s already a question, when it comes to Resources – why are they not allies? There is almost always a danger, real or perceived, involved, and if that danger seems immediate enough, a resource may refuse to cooperate or even lie rather than embrace the danger.

Equally, some resources are beholden to others, and no matter how inclined to assist the Resource might be, the attitude of that superior may be markedly different.

Resources who are supposed to help, but instead hinder, are a fact of life.

2c. Opportunists who oppose

“I’ve received a better offer.” Opportunists have no loyalty to the cause of the PCs, and only their own personal morality to guide their behavior – and that can be very shaky ground upon which to erect any sort of trust.

The more ‘honest’ and ‘honorable’ may state their (bought and paid-for) loyalties or opposition up front; the less reputable may play along, a fifth column in the PCs’ ranks.

Resources

Resources can be, supposedly, something quite different. This never fails to add depth and complexity to a campaign, provided that the characters and characterizations are consistent (if you aren’t sure of the distinction, character is what a person does, and characterization is why they do it – motives and thought processes and fragilities of logic and so on. The latter is rendered more complex by the fact that someone can do something for one reason and think their motives are something completely different; we all have our blind spots!

3a. Allies with resources

If a supposed ally provides a resource and nothing more, there are clearly limits to the alliance. The question of why they are not participating more substantive in the adventure becomes a defining one for the relationship between the PCs (and/or whoever they represent) and the supposed ally and whoever or whatever they represent.

The various intelligence agencies of the US Government are all supposedly on the same side, i.e. allies. but that implies that they never keep secrets from each other (something that 9/11 proves not to be rue, never engage in turf wars, never compete with budgets, never oppose another agency even if it risks an asset of their own, and so on. It is self-evident, however, that none of these things are true.

An alliance is never a total commitment of support, even in operational terms. The limits placed on cooperation and depth of support always define the party to the alliance as much as they characterize the alliance itself..

3b. Enemies with resources

Time to dance with the devil… sometimes, only an enemy has the resources that the PCs need. Here, it’s always a question of the quid-pro-quo. It must be remembered that if the enemy had a genuine interest in the outcome, they would either actively oppose as enemies or actively support the PCs as allies, however temporary. So this inherently blends in a little of the Opportunist role as well, for a richly complex situation.

That, of course, assumes that the PCs don’t take the bull by the horns and simply treat the enemy as an enemy and go in after whatever it is that they need – and that makes for fun storytelling, too, but it pushes everyone further into intractably opposing ideological corners. Some groups are fine with that, while others will want to leave themselves some wriggle room. Even the debate over the correct course of action makes for fun roleplaying – though the GM should be wary of players over-identifying with their character’s positions, because that can sometimes become a problem in the heat of the moment.

3c. Opportunists with resources

In a way, this is the purest of definitions of the Opportunist, and of the Resource. This role says ‘I have what you need and these are my terms’. As is usually the case with the Opportunist, it really comes down to what they are demanding in return for the expenditure of their resources, and whether or not the players are willing for their characters to pay it.

It’s a favorite tactic to ask for something relatively benign, a price that the players are willing to pay or at least concede is reasonable, only for that deal to turn around in time and bite them because there is a consequence that they haven’t factored into their calculations, some assumption that they are making that the Opportunist can exploit. This very much depends on the GM knowing the players and their thinking, and in particular, what they may have overlooked, and it can lose a lot of its impact if the players think about the situation in-between game sessions; it’s just not as much fun if they work out the consequences for themselves instead of letting the GM swat them between the eyes with a plot twist.

Because players get smarter over time, and more used to this sort of deep thinking, this is the sort of thing that can be done only so often, so I tend to save it for the times when it really will make life more ‘interesting’ for the PCs; be careful not to waste the opportunity.

Opportunists

There are circumstances in which other roles can function as opportunists within the adventure. This is the last set of the two-fold combination patterns.

4a. Allies with agendas

The most obvious ones are allies with agendas of their own, who attempt to take advantage of whatever is going on in order to further that agenda. Every group, faction, or individual should always have an agenda of their own, even if it’s simply to keep things the way they are. This places allies in a particularly interesting situation since they are more likely than an enemy to learn about something that is going on through the alliance; if the actions being undertaken by the PCs are not in keeping with their agenda, they may act to “contain” the damage, rather than becoming enemies. This strains the alliance, and may require some fence-building afterwards. But it’s equally likely that they will simply take advantage of the actions of the PCs to push their agenda forward – for example, the PCs negotiate safe passage through the Orcish territories in order to deal with the Goblin Necromancer who is their real target, but one of the PCs allies learns of this and takes advantage of the distraction posed by the PCs to raid the Orcs. This furthers the agenda of the ally, who expands their territory at the expense of an enemy, but it also looks to the Orcs as though it is a betrayal of the truce between them and the PCs, so they send the PCs a warning – curb their ally, and punish him for his impudence, or be targeted. This puts the PCs in the difficult position of taking direct action against an ally, giving their real enemy the chance to better prepare to face them, or pressing on with the added complication of bands of Orcish Assassins dogging their every footstep, and potentially gatecrashing the most delicately-poised situations along the way. It may even open the door to negotiations between the Orcs and the Necromancer, doubling the PCs headaches.

All allies have agendas. Any agenda can complicate a situation. This should spell opportunity to the GM.

4b. Enemies who take opportunities

Enemies are even worse. An ally might at least restrain themselves because of the potential harm to their allies or to the principle of the alliance itself; an enemy usually has no such scruples. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: the GM should keep track of who enemies are, how they gather intelligence, what they already know, and what they are desirous of achieving, then review every situation that arises (or can be perceived or even mispercieved as arising) to see if it creates an opportunity for them to do something to further their cause while the PCs are busy and/or distracted.

Every plan the PCs come up with should include contingencies for dealing with Opportunistic enemies, or they are asking for trouble. They cannot commit their whole resources, or should not be able to do so, needing to keep something in reserve; which is a problem when it’s going to take everything the PCs have to deal with their immediate problems and priorities.

That’s a major reason why the PCs need allies – to watch their back and keep an eye on things while they are busy elsewhere. But, as noted in 4a, there is a price to pay for every ally…

4c. Resources who take opportunities

The final category of compound characterization to be considered is the notion of people providing resources to the PCs who perceive an opportunity for themselves in the process. It’s entire reasonable for a character to be helping with one hand (perhaps because he’s obligated to do so) while reaching out for everything that isn’t nailed down on his own behalf, perhaps even functioning as an enemy resource. Imagine this scenario: The PCs go to a resource for assistance, which he supplies – for a price. He then turns around and sells information about the PCs to their enemy, perhaps using an alias to disguise himself (so that the enemy can’t spill the beans)..

No matter who wins, the mercenary Resource will do quite well out of the resulting situation.

Adding Nuance with flexibility

The more roles that any given NPC is providing as a function within the adventure, the greater the flexibility and nuance that he has available for future appearances, and the more interesting the players will find those future appearances.

I’ve got more to say on the subject, but I’m out of time for this article. So I’ll just have to pick this up again, in part 2!