Hmm, not quite sure how to phrase this, but am I expecting too much from my players to interact with the characters and the world on their own?
So, my players recently returned back from a mission, and the guild they are part of threw them a party in celebration.
As such, I gave the players some time to freeroam and talk to the other member of the guild, but they kind of .. didn't. There was some surface level banter, sure, and one player asked about some NPC that got injured in a previous sessions. But other than that? Nothing.
Now, when I asked them later, one player in particular mentioned he didn't feel like talking to any NPCs, because he didn't have any attachment to them.
Except, that's what the party was there for. So the players can have some time to talk with the guild members they don't get to talk to often and to, through their interaction with them, build an attachment. Maybe ask them about their favorite food, the place they hang out at or what plans they have for next week. To get to know them on a personal level and build a relationship. But ... nothing.
So, according to my players they won't interact with an NPC in a meaningful way, if they aren't attached to them. However, as far as I am concerned, the only way they can grow attached to the NPC is through interacting with them first.
This is something I've noticed time and time again. Players just not asking any question past the most surface level stuff ever -I guess because they don't feel connected to the character-, and then they are confused why they don't feel connected to any characters.
I dunno. Maybe I'm the problem? Maybe I'm just asking too much of my players? I don't think so.
And quiet frankly, I'm not quiet sure what their expectation is either. How am I supposed to make a character meaningful, without the players interacting on more than a surface level with them first?
How am I supposed to make a character meaningful, without the players interacting on more than a surface level with them first?
Visibly connect the things the players do invest in to the NPC roleplay and engagement.
If the players focus on Monster of the Week or We Exist to Kill Things and Take Loot aspects of the game make it clear that they need to talk to NPC's about it.
"Oh, you want to talk to Old Bob about the Sunken River Palace. You can find him at the Lost Flagon most afternoons."
Bob Encounter
Bob isn't talkative and needs to be "warmed up" before he'll trust anyone with more info. A DC 15 Persuasion Check (roleplay and roll play it) will loosen him up. If the players buy Old Bob a drink, the check will be at advantage. Bob doesn't take threats well, any Intimidation Check is at DC 15 and will make him hostile.
Be explicit about the encounter and its mechanics. "You need to convince Bob to tell you more. This will require a Persuasion or Intimidation Check after some roleplay to open him up."
I use the Insect analogy. Only 2 behaviors, approach or avoidance. Why would a PC manifest approach behavior?
They would have to know about a potential reward. They would need a way to assess potential risk. If the reward is within reach and the risk seems low, then they may formulate an approach. Any learned behavior has to happen in the context of an approach. Learning to interact with NPCs has to happen as part of an approach to assess the risk/reward.
Don't describe things that a PC can't interact with. Highlight only what they can interact with and give them a reason to do so.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hmm, not quite sure how to phrase this, but am I expecting too much from my players to interact with the characters and the world on their own?
So, my players recently returned back from a mission, and the guild they are part of threw them a party in celebration.
As such, I gave the players some time to freeroam and talk to the other member of the guild, but they kind of .. didn't. There was some surface level banter, sure, and one player asked about some NPC that got injured in a previous sessions. But other than that? Nothing.
Now, when I asked them later, one player in particular mentioned he didn't feel like talking to any NPCs, because he didn't have any attachment to them.
Except, that's what the party was there for. So the players can have some time to talk with the guild members they don't get to talk to often and to, through their interaction with them, build an attachment. Maybe ask them about their favorite food, the place they hang out at or what plans they have for next week. To get to know them on a personal level and build a relationship. But ... nothing.
So, according to my players they won't interact with an NPC in a meaningful way, if they aren't attached to them. However, as far as I am concerned, the only way they can grow attached to the NPC is through interacting with them first.
This is something I've noticed time and time again. Players just not asking any question past the most surface level stuff ever -I guess because they don't feel connected to the character-, and then they are confused why they don't feel connected to any characters.
I dunno. Maybe I'm the problem? Maybe I'm just asking too much of my players? I don't think so.
And quiet frankly, I'm not quiet sure what their expectation is either. How am I supposed to make a character meaningful, without the players interacting on more than a surface level with them first?
But what are you guys thinking?
Visibly connect the things the players do invest in to the NPC roleplay and engagement.
If the players focus on Monster of the Week or We Exist to Kill Things and Take Loot aspects of the game make it clear that they need to talk to NPC's about it.
"Oh, you want to talk to Old Bob about the Sunken River Palace. You can find him at the Lost Flagon most afternoons."
Bob Encounter
Bob isn't talkative and needs to be "warmed up" before he'll trust anyone with more info. A DC 15 Persuasion Check (roleplay and roll play it) will loosen him up. If the players buy Old Bob a drink, the check will be at advantage. Bob doesn't take threats well, any Intimidation Check is at DC 15 and will make him hostile.
Be explicit about the encounter and its mechanics. "You need to convince Bob to tell you more. This will require a Persuasion or Intimidation Check after some roleplay to open him up."
I use the Insect analogy. Only 2 behaviors, approach or avoidance. Why would a PC manifest approach behavior?
They would have to know about a potential reward. They would need a way to assess potential risk. If the reward is within reach and the risk seems low, then they may formulate an approach. Any learned behavior has to happen in the context of an approach. Learning to interact with NPCs has to happen as part of an approach to assess the risk/reward.
Don't describe things that a PC can't interact with. Highlight only what they can interact with and give them a reason to do so.