{"id":21648,"date":"2017-12-29T00:01:17","date_gmt":"2017-12-28T13:01:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/?p=21648"},"modified":"2017-12-21T11:29:52","modified_gmt":"2017-12-21T00:29:52","slug":"characters-by-design","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/characters-by-design\/","title":{"rendered":"Characters By Design: A road map for purposeful creation"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"

I’ve chosen to extensively illustrate this article. This image, like all the others used (unless otherwise credited) was sourced from Pixabay.com. Some have been modified by me, and some of those extensively, but the derivation remains and should be acknowledged, even though the terms of use don’t mandate it.<\/p><\/div>\n

I was reflecting on the process that I use to design NPCs for my campaigns, the other day, and I don’t think that I’ve ever described it here at Campaign Mastery, let alone explained it. That simply won’t do.<\/p>\n

There are a number of considerations that go into the design of an NPC, and I have a fairly strict hierarchy in taking them into account. In sequence, they are:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. [Metagame] Purpose<\/li>\n
  2. Concept<\/li>\n
  3. PC Relationships<\/li>\n
  4. Diversity<\/li>\n
  5. Genre Conventions<\/li>\n
  6. Objective and Motive<\/li>\n
  7. Personality<\/li>\n
  8. Justification and History<\/li>\n
  9. Environment<\/li>\n
  10. Expressive Appearance<\/li>\n
  11. Personal Limitations<\/li>\n
  12. Game Mechanics<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    As usual,let’s look at each of these in turn….<\/p>\n

    [Metagame] Purpose<\/h3>\n

    My first question is always, “What is this character’s purpose? Why are they appearing in this adventure? In this campaign? What is <\/em>MY Purpose in having them here?”<\/em><\/p>\n

    There are a wide range of possible answers. Their purpose might be to deliver information (or misinformation) to the PCs, to complicate one or more PCs lives, to be a low-level or a high-level antagonist, to pose a functional challenge for the PCs to overcome in order to progress the adventure, as a stalking horse<\/a> or red herring, to befriend or ingratiate themselves with one or more PCs, to provide color or verisimilitude, to represent a particular organization, group, race, culture, nationality, or perspective, to facilitate the evolution of a threat to the PCs or their objectives, to gather intelligence on behalf of an enemy, to advance a PC’s current plot arc, or an NPC’s plot arc, or any of several other possibilities.<\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/p>\n

    The important point is this: if the NPC doesn’t serve the purpose that justifies their inclusion in the adventure, you should junk either the NPC (if they haven’t appeared in the campaign previously), choose another NPC to perform the function (if the first choice has<\/em> appeared before), or even rework the adventure so that this NPC will<\/em> work in their designated role.<\/p>\n

    The first two options are first preferences, but things can become trickier when the NPC has multiple functions and it isn’t possible for some reason to separate them. The last choice is generally a lot more work and has far greater risks, especially given my adventure and campaign design processes, most recently described in Tying Plot Threads Together: Concepts to Executable Plot<\/a>, and Round-Robin Adventure Structure<\/a>. In essence, if you’ve spent time in previous adventures foreshadowing (refer The Echo Of Events To Come: foreshadowing in a campaign structure<\/a>) and maneuvering various campaign elements into a position that will produce a particular intersection at the right time, a particular set of in-game circumstances, you are to a certain extent already committed; the problems only get worse if this adventure in turn is supposed to be a stepping stone toward something bigger within the campaign.<\/p>\n

    So Purpose is an all-important consideration that can override just about anything and everything else.<\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/p>\n

    Concept<\/h3>\n

    There are times when the purpose of an NPC is to embody or reflect a high concept, which in turn manifests as themes and undercurrents that influence and shape everything else. When that’s the case, as it was with Mortus (Pieces of Creation<\/a>, Dec 31, 2017,) this becomes my number-two consideration. When it isn’t, this is completely ignored.<\/p>\n

    Everything possible about the NPC – what they can do, how they do it, why they do it, how they think, what they want, and even occasionally their Purpose within the adventure, should be subordinated to the concept. I think of these characters as natural forces within the campaign, and one of the key stages in adventure design is making sure that there are no such forces of nature that should<\/em> be involved in the adventure and aren’t<\/em>. It may be necessary to either rework the adventure to incorporate such a force of nature or rework it to include a plot sequence that explains and justifies the absence. Whenever possible, I like to actually dedicate an adventure to that specific purpose – as I said, it’s all about maneuvering campaign elements into the right position for an interesting intersection to take place.<\/p>\n

    PC Relationships<\/h3>\n

    This can get complicated, too. Not only does the NPC have a potential relationship of some kind with one or more of the PCs, and vice-versa (because the way one side views the relationship may be completely different to the way the other does), but there are also secondary relationships with other PCs, and between those PCs and other NPCs into which this NPC can become a complicating third party.<\/p>\n<\/a> This diagram contains representations of the complex relationships that an NPC can be a part of. It does not show every possible configuration between these individuals. It’s at the lower limit for resolution of details, or even a little beyond – there are some elements that I can only make out because I know<\/strong> they are there! If you need it, you can access a larger version in a new tab by clicking on the image.\n

    Let’s break down what this illustration is depicting.<\/p>\n