What Would Neri Do?

The real question here is what constitutes success in a role playing game. Is it killing a monster? Finding a trap? Making your Search roll? In some senses, yes. But that’s all quite mechanical.

I want you all to think in terms of a different kind of success: a success that is based around playing your character the way that character aught to be played, reacting to situations in a manner that you feel is appropriate for your character, and in general playing your character rather than playing the game. What does that mean?
Well, the truth of the matter is when you play your character, you may actually be doing things which are not solving the crisis. You may, in fact, be causing the crisis. By playing your character correctly, you may be making things complicated, you may be getting in the way, you may be doing things that you’re not supposed to do, or which, in the grand scheme of things, people don’t want you to do. When you’re playing the game, you’re every consideration about your character’s actions revolves around the health and success of the party, the ending of the adventure, and the gaining of treasure. In essence, you put who the character is on the backburner so as to consider these other factors. But this is a role playing game. Playing the character correctly in order to make him or her come alive is not only a hell of a lot more important, it’s also a lot more fun.

So, how is it done? Well, it's actually a lot less complicated than its made out to be. It involves asking the question that titles this bit of writing: what would your character do? Of every situation the character is in, ask yourself that: what would your character do? You’ve met a group of humanoid monsters that want to lay down the sword and join the human empire, what would your character do? How would your character feel about such a prospect? You’ve met up with a group of Halflings traveling through a war-torn land with children. What would your character do? The Halflings believe in casually thievery and taking people in confidence schemes. How does your character react to this? You find a town completely abandoned or you see people by the side of a battlefield looting fallen soldiers. These are not simply moments for you to listen to the story. This is not scenery. These are moments for you to add to the story line by playing your character.

In the end, Dungeons and Dragons isn’t really a story told by the D.M. to his or her players. There is a story, but when it is good, it is as much created by the players as it is by the Dungeon Master.

And that means you need to be prepared for your character to disagree with the other characters. That means that you need to be prepared to make your character do things that aren’t in the story line or to do hold on to information that they don’t think everyone in the party needs to know (or that they know will cause some members of the party to do the wrong thing). This goes for good characters and not so good characters. If it’s something that the cleric would do, then the cleric should spend the rest of the week attending to the sick, and if the Barbarian wants to move on, well, that’s just too bad. Same thing in reverse. Everybody wants to go to bed, but the thief wants to go robbing houses.

Now, I am not saying that you need to create nonstop tension in your party. Characters may be convinced to do something besides what it is there first inclination to do. The cleric might, for instance, be convinced that there are pressing matters at hand, but then that too is a place for you to play your character. What sorts of arguments will convince the cleric. What sorts of things has the cleric heard before.
Ultimately, you’re not playing the game to find the simplest path to some undisclosed finale. You’re playing the game to play your character.

Now, brass tacks. A lot of what you can use to determine what your character does revolves around your alignment, your class, and your character conception. Gringulia is a mercenary. She’s based her character on Jane from Firefly. Okay, good. Now, whenever she gets in a situation, she need only picture what it is that Jane would do and do that. She isn’t likely to stop to help people unless there’s a monetary reward. She isn’t likely to do things out of the kindness of her heart—that’s not her character conception.

As far as alignment goes, if you’re chaotic, then you don’t like rules that dictate yours or anyone else’s behavior. You don’t work well with people telling you what to do. This goes doubly for big structures. The chaotic neutral character isn’t necessarily an outlaw, but they don’t see the law as something that inherently should be allowed to rule people’s lives.

Lawful characters like order. They hold people to codes of behavior and decency and they don’t like it when things are amiss or out of the ordinary.
Neutral characters could care less really. They understand why there are laws but they also see why there are situations where people break them.

As for good and evil. Good people want the greatest good for the greatest number of people. They believe in the power of safety and what everyone to be healthy. Good characters are natural helpers.

Evil characters want power. So, good thinks of others. Evil thinks only of themselves, and neutral characters are willing to think of both.

The lawful good character wants to see the strongest parts of society rise up against tyranny and chaos to create peace and harmony. The neutral good character wants peace and harmony as well, but isn’t necessarily sure that it needs to be achieved by honoring arbitrary rules (though it might). A chaotic good character wants peace and harmony but feels that this can only be achieved if everyone is given their own ability to choose.

Which brings me finally, to class. If you’re a thief, you look at the world from a thief’s eyes. You want to steal stuff. You want to sneak around. You don’t want to be at the center of attention. If you’re a cleric of Moradin, then you pray to the god that sets the world to order. It stands to reason that you also must feel the need to bring order to the world. This isn’t a passive opinion that you share with others as you walk by scenes of human suffering and chaos; this is reason for you to get everyone else to stop. The Druid must be attuned to the balance of nature. If the Sentinel Plain has been swept by fey creatures from the positive material plain that have caused entire caravans to disappear, this is a good reason for an investigation by someone who seeks to maintain some kind of balance.

Lastly, the question has to come up: “Well, if we start playing our characters, wouldn’t we realistically just start heading off in random directions? Why would we even hang out together?” Good questions, but not yours to worry about. I will produce enough reasons to keep you working together as a team so as to keep you together even if you don’t always agree on the right course of action. But if it helps, let me forward this: you’re characters are returning from war to a world that is inherently alien (it’s human and you aren’t) and due to recent events quite corrupt. Your characters probably won’t know who to turn to except for each other. The way that the campaign is designed is that you will have to face off against disaster and, as you can’t trust others to do this for you, you will be forced to rely on one another to this purpose. This is something that you know as players, not something your characters necessarily know as of yet, but you will see it soon.