Image courtesy freeimages.com / Meredith B

So you’ve come up with a great character for your game and want to gain maximum value for your creativity? No problem. TV has been doing that in one-hour dramas for decades.

There are two paths to follow: the Good Guy path, and the Bad Guy Path.

The ‘Good Guy Path’ is all about establishing a connection between the character and the PCs, cementing the character into a long-term role within the campaign. The ‘bad Guy Path’ establishes a character as an antagonist of significance, though not necessarily one that will stick around for a long time.

Good mileage can sometimes be extracted by inverting the roles. Using the ‘bad guy’ path to introduce a new allied NPC sells the character as someone not to be fully trusted by the PCs and turns the revelation that the character is in fact an ally, possibly a hidden one, into a major plot twist. That can be tricky to handle properly – oversell or undersell that revelation and you damage the credibility of the character or the plot twist, which also damages the credibility of the character. But get it right, and you cement the NPC as a key element in the campaign.

Things are a little easier when using the good guy path to slowly build up and then reveal a hidden enemy. The sense of outrage and betrayal that accompanies the plot twist is almost impossible to deny, making both undersell and oversell virtual impossibilities, Play it down and the players will make up the difference; over-hype the significance and the players will simply assume that you are matching your rhetoric to the way they feel (assuming that you’ve done the job right so that they do in fact feel that way).

General Advice

Before I dig into the specifics, there are couple of points of general advice that I think need emphasizing.

Don’t Go Too Fast

At the very least, each stage in the character stories needs to be in a separate scene. If the character is to be important enough – a recurring character in at least one full “season” of adventures – one per adventure is a better choice. You want time for each encounter with the character’s story to sink and build up a cumulative effect that serves as a foundation for the relationship between the PCs and NPCs.

Don’t Go Too Slow

At the same time, you can’t go too long in between touching on the character’s story, and – ideally – expanding on it or reinforcing it. Certainly, no more than a single unrelated adventure in between each stage of the Character Story. However, as the number of past stages in the character’s story increases, the more the character becomes established within the campaign, and the more flexibility you have to violate this rule-of-thumb.

You can always defer a stage in the character’s story by an adventure if you incorporate some passing mention or reminder of the character into that adventure.

For example, if the next part of the character’s story is theoretically supposed to coincide with a plotline in which time is frozen for the character (amongst perhaps many others), it’s unreasonable to grant and justify an exemption from the time-freeze to the NPC. You have enough on your hands finding a plausible justification for the PCs being unaffected. Under such circumstances, or simply when an adventure is so busy that there’s no time to sneak the next phase in as a subplot, it makes sense to defer the next appearance of the NPC’s story. So drop in a plot sequence in passing in which a PC notices a gift from the NPC and realizes that the NPC is frozen like everybody else, or something of the sort.

You can always find some excuse to mention an established NPC in passing in this way. The less established they are, the less flexibility you have.

If an NPC’s last appearance was a more total involvement in the adventure than a mere subplot, you can usually add 1 to the permitted interval if necessary.

Keep the personality firmly in mind

Whenever part of the NPC’s story appears, keep the character’s personality firmly in mind. Consistency is utterly essential, especially early on.

Don’t confuse the two faces

Everyone has two faces – the one that they present to the outside world, and the more exposed one that people can see once the person grows sufficiently comfortable around someone that they can relax. As soon as a stranger enters the scene, the public persona with it’s barriers and self-protections reasserts itself.

Even though it may not be on display, and may not have been fully revealed to a PC, always keep both “faces” in mind. When a character acts on instinct, without time to think, it’s the private “face” that dictates the nature of those actions; when a character has time to think things through and respond intellectually to a situation, the “public” face calls the shots.

Contemplate a signature

A lot of GM advice advocates some sort of signature that becomes a mnemonic to the players of the character being played by the GM. It could be a turn of phrase, a way of speaking, a prop of some kind that is held or worn.

A lot of GMs use signatures of this sort, especially for important characters. What I’ve found, however, is that too many signatures become a confusing mish-mash that actually impedes the purpose of the signature.

So, while I will always contemplate a signature when preparing to introduce a character, I will rarely implement one. This is a decision that has to be made before a character first appears and that has to be maintained with scrupulous consistency thereafter.

… But don’t be too cheesy

What’s worse, a poorly thought-out signature, or a GM overestimating his ability to deliver the signature in a credible way every time, can transform that signature into a caricature of what the GM is trying to achieve, undermining the importance of the character.

For that reason, don’t think once about a signature – if you decide to go ahead with one, think twice about it. Save it for the most important characters only, and then underplay it. GMs frequently overact, so aiming for subtlety usually makes the signature have just the right level of presence.

Three Interaction Modes

Before I get into discussing the Good Guy Path that I have identified, I need to briefly discuss the three modes of interaction that are relevant. This is another key concept that the reader needs to understand before those discussions make sense.

Professional Mode

In professional mode, the characters (PC and NPC) interact because of the profession of one or both of them. This tends to be the easiest interaction mode to plan/write.

Personal Mode

In personal mode interactions, the characters interact through their personal or social lives. This is slightly more challenging to plan/write, but still easily manageable by a competent GM.

Casual Mode

Casual mode interactions have the characters coming together by accident. Which works fine once, but thereafter requires the GM to sell the players on the plausibility of coincidence – something that I discussed at length in ‘The Conundrum Of Coincidence. This is really hard to do successfully; coincidences happen far more in real life than seems credible in any sort of story.

One additional technique that works well for a limited number of interactions is to base the interaction on a personality trait of the PC.

For example, in a season 1 episode of NCIS, Tony Denozzo has an interaction with a jogger based on his personality trait of being a ladies’ man and her being physically attractive. When he later encounters her again, he is instrumental in bringing about a second interaction, attempting to move from the Casual Mode into the Personal Mode by scoring a date with the girl.

As a rule of thumb, one interaction in the Casual Mode is easy. Two is more difficult but quite possible based on the techniques discussed in the article linked to and the additional technique offered above. Three is really difficult to do credibly, but can be extremely successful at selling the NPC as “part of the furniture” of the campaign if you can pull it off. Note that doing three in succession is much harder than doing three with some other interaction mode in between.

The interaction modes are important in defining the nature of the relationship between the PC or PCs and the NPC. But the most successful interactions blend two of the modes – characters may come together professionally, but share a personal interaction in the process, for example. This imparts a depth to the interaction that adds significantly to the role of the NPC.

This becomes a problem when the NPC has attributes such as being “all business”, but it isn’t impossible. It simply redefines the non-professional interaction as being one-sided with a rebuff from the NPC – and then offering a subtle hint that the NPC was not quite as unaffected as they made out at the time.

This effectively amounts to a subtle redefinition of the restrictive trait “all business” to “all business when on the job” – but while the distinction may be small, it makes all the difference.

Each stage of the path that I’m about to discuss utilizes at least one of the modes, but which one or ones is entirely up to the GM and the individual circumstances.

The Good Guy Path

The usual structure of a story is to reduce it to three or four simple sections or acts. The pathways of plot that I am discussing are broader, more detailed, and more sophisticated, and lines can be drawn grouping the sections into the broader structure in various places.

These
stages or plot milestones in the character’s story may be small scenes, subplots, or integral elements of adventures. If the stages occur in isolated scenes, then all the comments about timing should be read as applying to the number of scenes before the next development;

It’s also possible to condense two stages into a single milestone event, or even to occasionally omit one. In some cases, the sequence can be reversed, for example swapping the “vulnerability” and “assist” stages. And some stages may require multiple interactions. So there is a great deal of flexibility available to the GM.

Something else that the reader will notice when they examine the list of stages is the degree of repetition. This is a process, not a plot outline per se, and the difference has to be clearly understood.

In an nutshell, the process involves introducing the character, establishing the character, exposing more information about the character, rounding out the character, getting the PC or PCs to care about the character, entangling the PC or PCs in the character’s life, and then… well, where the story goes from there is up to the GM, really. The steps that I’ve outlined do nothing but maintain the status quo that the preceding steps establish in a progressive manner, giving the relationships the opportunity to evolve over time.

This is the result of analyzing the development paths of a number of long-term supporting cast members in a great many TV series and comic books – too many to list individually. Everything from Gwen Stacy in The Amazing Spider man (#31 – #121) to Owen Granger in NCIS Los Angeles, from Max Klinger in M*A*S*H to several of the companions in recent seasons of Doctor Who, have gone into compiling this structure. The challenge has been integrating all these disparate sources without generalizing too far.

Here is the list that I’ve come up with:

1. Introduce.
2. First Impression.
3. Second Impression.
4. Appearance.
5. Vulnerability.
6. Appearance.
7. Assist.
8. Repeat the 4-7 cycle until character completely established.
9. Establish pattern.
10. Violate pattern.
11. Appearance within pattern (repeat until ready for 12).
12. Revelation.
13. Progression.
14. Repeat 11/13 cycle with occasional 12 recurrence until ready for 15.
15. Conclusion.

You’ll notice that 4 and 6 are the same thing, while 9 and 11 are also essentially the same thing, and three stages are essentially repetitions of multiple earlier stages.

Let’s walk through them briefly.

1. Introduce.

Introduce the character. This may precede their actual appearance, as in this sequence, or it may follow the first impression.

2. First Impression.

Tell the players just enough about the character for them to form first impressions. Pay particular attention to PC character traits and opinions, and key as much of the description of the person and their words and actions off those traits and opinions to kick-start character interactions at an individual level.

3. Second Impression.


A second impression can result from a change in opinions in the course of the first encounter with the NPC or from a different context in the second encounter. It can reinforce the first impression, or expose a completely different aspect of the character without contradicting the first impression, or even confine the first impression to describing only a limited aspect of the character. Whichever you choose, it is important for the NPC to reference and remind the player of the first impression, rather than the GM doing it via voiceover. That propels the personal engagement between the characters, whereas the latter undermines it by making the relationship seem artificial.

4. Appearance.

Appearance has nothing to do with what the NPC looks like; it has everything to do with the character making an appearance, i.e. appearing in an adventure as something more than window dressing. That doesn’t mean that their role has to be major, or even pivotal, but it does have to be important. For example, the NPC might give a PC a tip-off about something, or provide vital information – regardless of whether or not the PCs could get that information elsewhere, the fact that it brings the NPC into the plotline and gives them the opportunity to again showcase their personality and cement the relationship.

An appearance can also be simply an interaction of some sort – a phone call, a card, flowers, a gift, an invitation, sharing a piece of gossip. As a general rule of thumb, half of the character’s “appearances” should be of this type.

5. Vulnerability.

Someone needs to get into trouble in a way that prompts an interaction between the PC or PCs and the NPC. That could be the NPC, it could be a third party connected to either an PC or the NPC in some way, it could even be another PC. The purpose is, respectively, to make the NPC more fallibly human; to obligate one of the two parties in the relationship; and/or to show the NPC in a different context or light.

“Getting into trouble” can mean multiple things, and each offers something different to the development of the relationship. Being accused of something, for example, with the PC attempting to clear the NPC, is a great way for the PC to get behind the public face and see the private face, warts and all. Over-committing to helping someone else and getting in over your head is a great way to highlight the NPC’s humanity. Helping the PC get out of trouble means that the PC owes the NPC a favor, which can be either called in at some future point, or dismissed as “that’s what friends do for each other”. There are lots of variations – but what they all do is deepen the relationship between the PC(s) and NPC.

6. Appearance.

This is exactly the same as stage 4, but the significance has changed completely. In stage 4, it was an intensification and deepening of the relationship; Here, it’s more of a confirmation of the relationship, a place-marker and reminder.

Connections between characters are like whiskey, or wine – they take time to mature. But while they are maturing, you can’t let them become dated or forgotten.

7. Assist.

There’s a big difference between the NPC helping the PC or vice-versa, and one of the two needing the other’s help. This is the “give” to stage 5’s “take”. Or it might be both of them helping a third party.

Nor does the type of assistance need to be something earth-shaking. Conspiring to throw a surprise party for someone who has something to celebrate, for example.

8. Repeat the 4-7 cycle until character completely established.

The other purpose behind each and every one of these events is to give more information about the NPC, in small, digestible chunks, or to reveal to the NPC more information about the PCs with whom they have a developing relationship.

It’s a tricky decision to know when to close out the repeated instances of the 4-7 cycle. There are plenty of variations to employ, but the mere fact that they are all variations on a theme becomes fairly quickly apparent. You can never reveal everything there is to know about a character before that time runs out; so you need to prioritize and deliver the essentials within the limited window.

9. Establish pattern.

As soon as the essentials have been conveyed, it’s time to move into phase two of the process. That means putting the relationship onto the back-burner while keeping it ticking over until the players find it as comfortable as an old pair of shoes. Once you’ve achieved that status – and it won’t take as long as you might think – it’s time to plan the rest of phase two. This is very much a transition – the first time around.

10. Violate pattern.

When the opportunity is right, it’s time to break the pattern with an “unconventional” appearance – one that shakes up the status quo and evolves the relationship in some way.

11. Appearance within pattern (repeat until ready for 12).

This is simply repeating 9 to establish the new status quo.

12. Revelation.

Once everything becomes settled again, its’ time to shake things up, as one of those bits of background that you didn’t get to reveal (or that you deliberately saved for the purpose) becomes critically important. This could turn into a Vulnerability or an Assist.

13. Progression.

After every revelation, the relationship should progress. Sometimes that will be in the direction that the GM wants to be its ultimate shape, sometimes it will be away. Think of this part of the process as a romance – sometimes there are rough spots, but they get overcome in time.

14. Repeat 11/13 cycle with occasional 12 recurrence until ready for 15.

The notes on 13 make it clear that it is part of another repeating cycle. You might be wondering how to have a progression without having the revelation that causes it; the answer is that some events have delayed impacts, or domino effects. Some changes to a character’s life need time for the character to reassess their priorities; they might need to find a new job that reflects that change of priority, for example.

Progression doesn’t happen all at once; it’s about ripples. The character changes internally, and that then manifests in external changes to their priorities, which then manifest piece by piece in changes to their circumstances, all of which make changes in their relationships, which exposes them to new stimuli, which prompts a fresh evolution.

Although the ultimate outcome might seem inevitable in hindsight, life should never be so predictable looking ahead.

15. Conclusion.

All character stories come to an end, a conclusion. This pays off everything that has happened in getting to that point. It can either launch the characters involved into a whole new story or signal the departure of that character from the plotline – until the GM decides to bring them back, of course!

So we’re talking about NPCs becoming friends for life, or embittered enemies, or husbands and wives, or ex-partners, or rivals, or staunch allies, or something equally fundamental, But, in every case, looking back, there should be clearly identifiable turning points where the story could have moved in a different direction – opportunities lost, opportunities taken, mistakes made.

Some character stories are even more complicated – characters who are enemies on some occasions, allies at others. You can have characters who are required by politics to be enemies while maintaining a personal respect or friendship, or nominal allies who can’t be trusted – most of the time. You can have characters whose personal obsessions sometimes shift the relationship this way or that.

But the building blocks, turning points, and milestones of all these relationships bear a certain resemblance to each other, and that is what the pathway profile has set out to capture.

The Bad Guy Path

The “Bad Guy” path is similar to the good guy path already described, but there are some distinctive differences. The “bad guy” path is all about a character who is normally antagonistic toward the PCs. He may be a mastermind, making chess moves to advance his cause; he may be a character-driven enemy, obsessed with, well, his obsessions; he may be a bureaucrat or a personal enemy, or he might even be a good guy who believes that the ends justify the means, or who thinks that the PCs cut too close to that ethical shortcut.

One of the major differences is that with the “good guy” path, cause is seen in-game preceding effect and consequence, while the “bad guy” path usually presents effects before the PCs discover the cause, even though the cause took place earlier in chronological time. Only one side of the ‘consequences’ is usually presented – the consequences for the PCs and their allies; it’s normal for consequences affecting the NPC antagonist to happen behind the scenes, only to be discovered in the ’causes’ phase of the next encounter.

There are stages in the pathway at which the GM can have a lot of fun. The “vulnerability” phase, in which the PCs need the Antagonist’s help, or vice-versa, is subject to all sorts of permutations – this could mean anything from the antagonist manipulating the PCs into doing his dirty work for him, or clearing the way for him to advance his cause, for example. It could mean discovering an area of common ground with the PCs that yields a temporary truce. There are endless possibilities.

Equally, there is great variety in the ultimate outcome. The enemy could be reformed, or destroyed, or might even destroy one or more PCs before being brought down in a Pyrrhic victory. He might fail after personal changes alter his priorities to something more socially or personally acceptable.

It can also be fun to run an enemy down the “good guys” path (making him seem to be an ally or even a friend, only for the PCs to be betrayed), or to run an ally down the “Bad Guys” path, making them seem to be an enemy.

Structurally, there isn’t a lot of difference between the two pathways. Events usually occur in clumps of two, three, or even four, all within the one adventure, so they are more compressed; that can make the Bad Guys path more rapid than the good guys.

A typical substructure is effect – cause – confrontation – consequence. Mapping one or more of the stages of the path to that substructure relates it back to the main structure already described.

For example, the mapping might look like this:

4. Appearance: effect, cause
5. Vulnerability: confrontation
6. Appearance: consequence (PC)

or it might be:

4. Appearance: previous consequence (NPC)
5. Vulnerability: effect, cause
6. Appearance: confrontation, consequence

or even,

4. Appearance: effect, cause, confrontation, consequence (PC)
5. Vulnerability: effect, cause, revelation of consequence (NPC), confrontation, consequence (PC)

or any of a great many other possibilities. All the permutations of Vulnerability and Assist are in play, though often inverted or twisted in meaning.

That usually means that multiple stages of the development path occur within a single adventure. That usually indicates a more active engagement between the two factions (PCs and NPCs), but slower, lower-key antagonism is also possible, which spreads a single development stage over one or even two adventures.

Take, for example, the role of the Crown Prince in the Zenith-3 campaign. Nominally an ally, he certainly smooths the waters for them and (mostly) enables them to go about their business with a minimum of external difficulties. He has been a generous benefactor to the team on more than one occasion. But he always exacts a quid-pro-quo, often without asking, and is prone to announcing policy positions that antagonize his enemies into thinking that the PCs are also their enemies. He uses the PCs to bolster his own political position, embedding them and sometimes pushing them into corners when they would far prefer to remain apolitical. Officially, he is a self-declared ally, but in reality he sometimes provides a short-term benefit for the team while incurring a long-term disadvantage for them. Every interaction that they have ever had with him has ended well – for him – and most have ended uncomfortably for the PCs. At the moment, they can’t even be certain whether or not he’s on the “good guy” or “bad guy” path, let alone whether or not he is intended to ultimately be an ally or an enemy. They would prefer the first, but the price might ultimately be too high.

Or take Voodoo Willy from the same campaign, who I described in Ally, Enemy, Resource, and Opportunist: The four major NPC Roles (Part 1) not too long ago. He’s nominally an enemy, but he often behaves as an ally – extracting a quid-pro-quo that is advantageous for him. He is far more clearly on the bad-guy path – but right now his ultimate destiny within the campaign, and the final relationship with the PCs as either an enemy or an ally, hangs evenly in the balance. They agree on a lot more than they disagree on, but the few areas of disagreement are subjects that matter a lot to the PCs.

Both these are characters who are likely to phone the team’s leader (a PC) out of the blue – and which usually evoke a metaphoric palm to the face and the rhetorical question, “what now?”

The long and the short of it

The pathways can, in theory, construct a permanent relationship with the PCs in as little as two or three adventures that are centered around the development of that relationship, or it can be a road map to years of complex interplay between PCs and the NPC. Use it as a planning tool, part of a process of ongoing NPC character and relationship development within your campaigns an you will enrich the game of your players,their characters, and yourself.