Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay, cropped and background color added by Mike.

“Sometimes I’m a foodie, and sometimes I revert to good old American comfort food.”

That was said, in-character, by one of my players in the course of this weekend’s game session, and it is at the heart of today’s article.

First, some information on the narrative thread that led to this line of conversation:

Four PCs and two NPCs; all but two of the first were busy doing in-game things, which left the first two to fetch meals for the group.

Because they can be eaten both hot and as room-temperature leftovers, one of the NPCs suggested Pizza.

Which begs the question: “What do you want on your Pizza?”

Having posed the question, as GM, I then answered for the NPCs, and then for a PC whose player was absent:

• GM as NPC #1: Jack answers promptly, “I’ll have Chicken and Mushroom with Spicy Sauce and a side-order of salad.”
• …as NPC #2: Zantar thinks for a moment, and then responds, “Meat Lovers’ with BBQ Sauce and a side order of Spicy Buffalo Wings.”
• PC #1 (player absent, so I spoke for him as GM, having done the appropriate research): “The most popular variety of Pizza in Norway is Ground Beef and Red Capsicum – what the Americans call Bell Pepper – with Extra Cheese on a Tomato Sauce pizza base. Specter will have that, or as close as you can get, also with a side-order of Salad.”
• GM, turning to the player of PC#2: “I also looked up the most popular pizza topping in Denmark, but it’s not something that will be available here. You can get close to it, though, with a Seafood Pizza on Tomato Sauce, over which you squeeze a slice of Lemon.” [This was followed by a comment relevant to the campaign but not to this discussion].
• The player of PC#2: “I can see that working. Lemon and seafood go together. But it’s not something I’m ever likely to try, myself. All right, that’s what I’ll have.”
• PC#3: “There’s something a little snobbish about it, but I’ll have a Supreme because it has the most interesting variety of flavor combinations.”
• GM to PC#4, a non-human with strange dietary requirements: It’s up to you what you get, but you find yourself craving a plain pizza (no sauce or cheese) with eggplant and anchovies – the last two being high in Manganese, which your body uses to build muscle. You suspect that the hard pace of the last few days (crossing Mexico the long way, mostly on foot, in just four days) has triggered muscle development. What are you ordering?”
• PC#4:“I take it there’s nothing with a lot of Boron in it, so I guess that’ll do. And stop by the aquarium on the way past and pick me up a couple of packets of the fish food, which is full of useful minerals.”

It’s not often that I find it impossible to choose between a number of illustrations for an article – but this was one such occasion! This image is by Anastasia Gepp from Pixabay.

A little later in the same game session:

• GM to player #2:“It’s time for lunch. Something fairly quick and easy seems appropriate.”

  [Some byplay then happens with NPC#2 and his activities that’s not relevant here].

• GM to player #2:Eventually, you get his order: some sort of fish-burger with cheese, preferably three or four of them, and a quart of milk.
• PC#2: “Ohhhhkay. I guess we can do that. Fast food, for everyone, then.”
• GM for PC #1 (player absent): “Spectre will have a hamburger with the lot and a Cherry Cola.”
• PC#3: Really? Too sweet for me.
• NPC#1 “Union Jack orders a Chicken and Salad club sandwich on a roll with mayo AND English mustard, and a cup of tea with 1 sugar – he doesn’t care if it’s black or white.”
• PC#2: “I see he’s feeling all British today.”
• GM: – prompts player for PC#3’s answer.
• PC#3: “Sometimes I’m a foodie, and sometimes I revert to good old American comfort food. I’ll have a Hamburger with the lot, too.”
• GM: “And anything to drink? It’s 1986, Diet Coke has been out for a few months now, but you’ve never tried it.”

  [Side-discussion followed between everyone present on the history of diet drinks in Australia, as compared to the US, for a few minutes. Player#3 admits that he doesn’t remember what Saccharine tastes like, and isn’t sure that he’s ever tried it. I have, and so – as GM – I describe the bitter aftertaste that seems to accumulate, the more you consume. This gives player #3 time to reach a decision, and relevant input into that decision].

• PC#3: “I might get a Diet Coke just to try it. I don’t expect it to become a regular substitute for coffee, though.” [The character’s ‘coffee addiction’ has been a character-driven subplot for years. This begins expanding ti to a broader love of caffeine in various forms.]
• GM to PC #2:Since he’s ordering it as an experiment, do you want to get him a regular coke as well, just in case?”
• PC#2 “Sounds like a good idea to me, yes I will.”
• GM to PC#2: “And what are you going to have?”
• PC#2 “I don’t know, I’ll make up my mind when I get there and see the menu. Maybe a salad, maybe fried fish.”
• GM only has to look at the player of PC#4 to prompt him.
• PC#4: “I can’t digest any of that. Looks like I’ll be dipping into my Crystal Collection again.”

These interactions are an example of using preference and trivial decisions to get inside a character’s head.

Illustration choice #3 is an image by Stefan Keller from Pixabay.

The examples reveal to the players some insight into the NPCs, as characters, and to both the GM and the other players, some insight into the PCs that each is respectively inhabiting.

This not only fosters interaction between the characters, it enables the GM to better tailor his adventures to the PCs – not just to their abilities, but to their characters. The end result goes beyond the mild fun of these two scenes, establishing personalities and individuality.

There was also a brief point when the characters almost stopped at a fast food place named “Panda Express” (after much joking about what Panda tasted like), but PC #4 made the point that it was probably some form of Asian cuisine and there would be nothing on the menu cooked without oil, which her digestive system didn’t tolerate. She would vastly prefer Italian, where she could get a salad made without dressing.

Still later in the day’s play, the PCs stopped at a BBQ grill and petrol station to buy food for their evening meal and refill their cars, to discover that Camel-burgers and Fried Armadillo were on the menu. Reaction to the first of these was so strong that I don’t think the players even heard the second item mentioned. “I may be a foodie but I don’t think I’m ready to try Camel-burger” – “I don’t think Spectre will EVER be ready for Camel-burger” – “You know, in my time in Africa, I might have had fried camel-meat. But I can’t see my character liking it.”

Because the players were in their character’s head-space, the very mention of “Camel-burgers” had them reacting on behalf of their characters, rather than any personal preferences. Roleplay, in other words, came naturally to them.

That’s a lot of benefit from a reasonably trivial question, “What do you want for lunch?”

There are a number of things to note concerning these examples, lessons to learn in how and why this works.

1. GM Instigation

Without a prompt from the GM’s chair – i.e. asking the question – this roleplaying scene probably wouldn’t have happened. It’s also worth observing that if the players hadn’t responded well to the ‘pizza’ question, hadn’t taken the bait, I could have bailed out of the other occurrences and dropped in something else off the top of my head.

Getting the players into character is as much a GM responsibility as it is the duty of the players – you need to create the opportunities.

2. Setting The Standard

The NPCs went first for a reason – to set the standard and establish replying in character. This demonstrated to the players how the plot micro-sequence was to be handled and helped them get into the appropriate head-space.

3. Spotlight Equality

Everyone got their share of attention. But PC#2, who wasn’t engaged in doing something else in-game, was the center of attention during these sequences, equalizing input into the game overall. If it hadn’t worked as sequence of events, and I canceled the take-away and camel-burger occurrences, I always have a standby of some sort if one is needed to balance out screen time, carefully stockpiled for when I need them.

In fact, I decided toward the end of the day (when I needed a filler for a few moments, to use one of those stockpiled standbys, aimed at Player #4.

4. Repetition

The first interaction, the Pizzas, got everyone into their character’s headspace. The second interaction played out the way it did only because the players were already in that headspace, as did the third. And the combination primed the players for the spontaneous in-character reactions to the later prompt, “Camel-burgers”. At the same time, it was important for each of the four to be different; if they had been too repetitive, there would have been not only no stretching deeper into the characterization, there would have been a decline in player interest.

My fourth choice to illustrate this article is by John Hain from Pixabay. I made some slight tweaks to the contrast and added the shadow.

5. Changing Sequence

Notice that the sequence of the characters changes between interaction one and interaction two. The first time, NPCs went first (as noted in point 2), the second time they went first but in a different sequence (and a PC occupied the spotlight in between even though his player was absent). And the third and fourth interactions, because they were spontaneous, happened with the players reacting and interacting without significant prompting.

6. Deepening Engagement

Each time, the players were able to get deeper into their characters because they had already made the mental transition the first time. Switching between rules and roleplay interactions gets easier with practice, and gets easier once you’re “warmed up” – it’s harder to do it for the first time in a session of play, in other words.

7. Research

I had done research to inform and assist the players. There is nothing wrong with the GM advising the players – what to do with the information is always up to the player. But because I had done that, I was also able to make stuff up and have it be plausible. I’m not sure of exactly when Diet Coke first came out beyond the early-to-mid-80s – but 1985 was an entirely plausible date. And I have no idea about the Manganese content of different foods – but it sounds entirely credible. It took me about 5 minutes to do enough research to ‘sell’ the whole.

8. Player Triggers

I knew that one of the players remembered the introduction of Diet Cola and had opinions on the history, because he has mentioned it before. I deliberately triggered him because that helps get the player’s heads into the era in which the game was set (late May of 1986). On top of that, it adds a slight element of nostalgic appeal to the game.

9. Happy Memories

At the same time, any mention of Diet Coke always reminds me (and, probably, the others) of a mutual friend who drank a can of the stuff with every meal. He may have passed away, but he’s still with us in spirit. That reminder always reminds us of his playful personality and lightens the mood at the table. For that reason, I reference him in one way or another several times a year. This is so subtle that I don’t think the players are even aware that it’s being done deliberately. As with item 8 above, this adds to the pleasurability of the game for the players (and the GM) – and no game is so great that it can ignore advantages like these. The trick is to identify them, because they will differ from group to group.

10. Meta-level benefits

In addition to everyone getting to know the characters better, and even in some instances extending their characterization, the players also get to discover things about each other. This is just a side-benefit, but it’s a valuable one.

The Personalized Campaign

There are some players who seem to think that any time spent in non-combat activities is a waste of their time. To me, an all-combat game is akin to a game of multiplayer chess – which can be entertaining in its own right, but doesn’t hold a candle to proper roleplaying. At best, a tactical focus (other than as an occasional exception to the general rule) ignores or downplays a major source of the pleasure that can be derived from RPGs. Because I make no bones about my campaigns’ priorities, if asked, I have attracted players with a similar attitude.

I am smart enough to know that not everyone prioritizes game-play elements in the same way, and it’s not up to the GM to determine where players find their enjoyment. If some of them find the tactical element more enjoyable than any other aspect of the game, it’s up to the GM to cater to that – which means that he should be looking for ways of connecting tactical advantages with the character’s headspace, the PC’s perspective. For example, being asked to choose between a sword with a +3 against chain mail – but +0 against anything else – and a straight +1 weapon gets into the enemies that the PC expects to face, and their usual equipment.

Building in on-ramps into a character’s personality – be it recurring NPC or a recurring-by-definition PC – is not a waste of time. It’s never a waste of time – unless the ‘bait’ is not taken. Even then, if the GM learns from the experience, and doesn’t present that specific trigger to that group again, he still increases the enjoyment at the table in the longer term – so you could argue that it’s still not a waste of time.

Get into your characters’ head-space in the course of play. Help your players get into the head-space of their characters, too. The benefits are too great to ignore – and as with everything else, the more of it that you do, the better you’ll get at it, and the more readily you can access those benefits. Every GM should now be asking themselves whether or not they do this (and what their players and PCs triggers are), and, if not, why not?