My DM uses npcs to provide information, and guide the PCs. This usually works out very well. It gives him the ability to foreshadow situations that may be too dangerous. Also his roleplaying abilities of his npcs has given rise to some very memorable characters. Here is the problem... PCs now trust and listen to the npcs instead of working with the other PCs. PCs are less likely to take any initiative unless approved by a NPC. How can I help to fix this?
ok, i guess the first question is: are the players like this, or are the characters?
if it is the players, as a player, you should perhaps talk with your fellow players and suggest that they are being dependent upon the dm to give you trustworthy information every time. this is not necessarily bad, but the first time the dm uses this as a way to get your characters in trouble somehow, then they have no reason to complain, since the characters apparently believed the npc. the will have plenty of reason to hunt the offending npc, assuming they survive, but the players should not say the dm did it to hurt them.
if it is the characters, maybe there is a background reason they defer to information garnered from these npc's, but you should know better than i if they have that kind of reason. otherwise it sounds like maybe they are trying to get themselves killed by poor/misleading information.
just my thoughts,
tog
I always recommend talking it out in almost any situation revolving around DM and player concerns. So, talk to your DM, and express how much you've enjoyed interacting with the NPCs, and say that you think you'd now like the chance to figure stuff out on your own, as a group.
As a DM, I decide on how much information to give out via NPCs directly on how my players are able to process the information. If the players look at me like they have no idea what's going on, enter Joe NPC who gives out the information they need. When the players are able to pick up on little things here and there, Joe NPC says less, and the players work it out.
But, there's times as a DM that I've gone on too long and gave away something the players expected to figure out by themselves, and they'll tell me about.
Basically I think it is a subconscious affect on the players that developed over time. NPC given good advice, trust NPC. PC less often has good advice, ignore PC. I do try to talk to my DM and he sees a problem with a lack of initiative, I just need to go to him with a solid concise arguement so he does not think I am knocking the other players. Not to say that I am above falling into this trap, but being aware of it helps me avoid it.
It is often hard to discuss problems that may be psychological in nature.
My DM uses npcs to provide information, and guide the PCs. This usually works out very well. It gives him the ability to foreshadow situations that may be too dangerous. Also his roleplaying abilities of his npcs has given rise to some very memorable characters. Here is the problem... PCs now trust and listen to the npcs instead of working with the other PCs. PCs are less likely to take any initiative unless approved by a NPC. How can I help to fix this?
Your DM does this...you can't fix it - its the DMs fault and only s/he can fix it. You can point the problem out to the DM but your not in a position fix the problem - all you can do is play along if the DM is fixing the problem.
Actually I think the whole 'should the DM run NPCs in the party' is something of an intersting topic but one I'm pretty biased on. As a rule I really avoid having NPCs in the party at all. Its probably more difficult to pull this off consistently then its worth (no point in closing off every story line where the PCs meet an NPC) but if I do introduce one I try and have some good reasoning for the introduction and I try and outline what the PCs motives and views are ahead of time.
Basically my biggest problem with NPCs is that there is a danger that they wil take over the party and I really think that this is one of the things the DM should be avoiding at almost all costs. The PCs should have freedom of choice and having Sigard the super genius with the party and telling them what to do all the time makes this into a one man show where the DM plays both the party and the monsters.
So as a rule I avoid NPCs - when they add more then they ditract then I'll include them but their goals and motivations should be chosen - so far as possible - ahead of time so that the NPC is not making any kind of substantitive choices for the party. In fact if I can manage it I'll usually have the party run the NPCs communitivly with the ceveat that I'll step in if I think their choice of actions for the NPC is something the NPC would not normally do.
I would remind your DM about the important nature of handing out information. When I DM a critical NPC, one of the key things I concern myself with is, exactly what does this guy know, what does he think he knows, what does he want the party to know, etc. I like to keep information hidden as much as possible- give the party enough to go on about their adventure in the right direction, but no more. This means they are much less prepared for most enemies, making the encounters more challenging and memorable (our group likes really tense, close battles).
They seem to like this as well, both because of the danger it adds to fights, and for the sense that THEY are discoveering things and doing things on their own, not simply following the plans of whomever I plug into the game.
They are also rather suspicious of many NPCs that come out looking to be particulalry helpful, since they suspect a setup (especially after just such an event ended in a near TPK ambush once). So, I agree that they have no right to complain if the DM pulls something with bad info. In fact, I would encourage him to do so, as an educational tool. It's always better to teach players things with actions and consequences in the game when possible, as opposed to arbitrary DM statements, in my opinion.
As a DM I've had to run NPC's before. I usually let them hang out at the back of the party, and only piping in with his opinion when absolutely necessary. One of the NPC's was a young Half Orc Rogue named Whollup. He was rescued from an Orc encampment where he was to be killed. He helped the party get out of the camp by telling them the safest routes that he'd been able to scout out before getting caught. The PCs mostly made the right choices for the routes, but he had them change course a couple of times.
I try to let the players make the decisions, and, in the few cases, when there aren't enough players for a good game, I'll use an NPC the entire adventure. Sort of a Merc that the PCs picked up along the way. He is under command of the party leader and placed wherever he decides to send him. He rarely has any advice for the party unless directly asked and is basically just a killing machine at the party's disposal.
I would suggest that you talk to your DM if you are not liking the game play. D&D is supposed to be fun for everyone involved, and if you aren't having fun you need to talk to your DM.
A bit from my Hoarde
Have the NPCs go on vacation, or be sick, or do any one of the innumerable things that we all do IRL. Have them be late on their rental payments for their bar and have them jailed for it. An NPC of mine that was frequently consulted by the PCs went away to study at a retreat.
Little things like that.
yup thats a problem. well for my 2 cents i guess i'll take a Dm's side first, DM's want their players to have fun of course so if he sees that your enjoying it more with the Problematic NPC chances are he or she will just turn a blind eye to the problems and justify it as " they enjoy it so no biggie" however as my peers hav said, if you bring it up and address your concerns any good DM will carefully weigh the problem and solve it. Or If this was my problem as DM I'd have the NPC give players totaly false info that seems to be the most obvious solution. lead em into a dragons den even once cause of bad info and they should get the message that the NPC isnot a god of intel and can be fatally wrong.
Http://trce.proboards.com The Blue Flame Citadel
Thanks for the imput. The DM did in fact have someone totally fool the one player. The player was caught between two opinions. He found that the truth was somewhere in the middle. Now people are more cautious about trusting strangers but still jump if the NPC is known for a while. I hate to say this but it is almost as though the action is subconscious and will need more reinforcement. I guess were are better off now because the will to believe has been dented.
I do want to add that this can go the other way were players are betrayed so often they don't trust any NPCs.