RE: Re: Using Famous Characters

From: Bruce Ferrie <bruce_at_...>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 22:54:15 +0100


On Thursday, April 25, 2002 4:10 AM, Russell Hoyle wrote:
>

> The idea is that the *player* (as distinct from the character) must have
> some sort of emotional investment in the story at hand... too much focus on
> the big movers 'n shakers would seem to run contrary to that approach.
> I suppose another way of putting it is that Heroes should be *the* heroes in
> whatever game you're playing.

That's very true, but having a big famous character making the odd cameo to motivate the heroes can provide that sort of emotional investment. It can make their deeds seem more significant to players - like the knight in Pendragon who's knighted by Arthur himself.
Letting your heroes meet famous characters who will, say, entrust them with crucial missions or tasks, or even just praise their deeds is a good way of setting up:

  1. Scenario hooks.
  2. Character motivation and colour (in my game, a Vingan hero's most treasured possession is a medallion given to her by Kallyr Starbrow; she now has a fanatical devotion to Starbrow's cause).
  3. Fun rewards for heroes, as noted in point 2.

That said, letting major NPC heroes dominate the action is bad form. By definition, the player heroes are the most important in the story, so get to hog the glory. Famous NPCs get to motivate, praise, make speeches, look good and be mentors (in which case, they should die about halfway through the story <grin>).
Above all, use them sparingly. If your list of recent NPC appearances in your Heorlting farmer campaign reads: "Harrek, Argrath, Kallyr, another Argrath, Jar Eel, Moonson, Batman" then you just may be overdoing it.

Regards,

Bruce

Powered by hypermail