Would you like to "meet" the players?

[Aimbot]

Would you be interested in a subplot that showed the players behind the PCs? And what do you think they'd be like?

I'd be apprehensive, I could see the PCs losing some significance if I'm suddenly familiar with the players. Instead of thinking "Haley will likely end up doing/thinking ___________" I'd probably think "Samantha will probably think ____ and make Haley do ___."

[Hinton]

Nope; and pretty much for the very reasons you said. While we may think/know that it's a D&D game, I like it this way.

[meep]

There are no players.

This ain't Erfworld.

[Aimbot]

There are no players.

This ain't Erfworld.
I disagree. The OOTS are PCs, they have acknowledged it themselves many times.. Part of being a PC is being controlled by a player. They regularly behave in a way that implies that they are players acting in a game rather than true identities. We also know several things about the players through the PCs. We know that Durkon's player isn't good with numbers and that V's player isn't good at remembering details of his/her character, for example.

[Darkxarth]

I definitely want to meet the players, but only in the last strip, not before.

[JetTheOne]

I disagree. The OOTS are PCs, they have acknowledged it themselves many times.. Part of being a PC is being controlled by a player. They regularly behave in a way that implies that they are players acting in a game rather than true identities. We also know several things about the players through the PCs. We know that Durkon's player isn't good with numbers and that V's player isn't good at remembering details of his/her character, for example.

o.O The Space Cats!? NOOOOOO!!!

[Rai Thunder]

I definitely want to meet the players, but only in the last strip, not before.

Amen.

Although I bet that V's player would be ambiguously-gendered, and that Belkar's might have severe emotional problems.

I tend never to think about the players in terms of the story though.

[Aimbot]

o.O The Space Cats!? NOOOOOO!!!
What?

I imagine V's player is the sort who's more into ego boosting than role playing. I'm not talking about a Min-Maxer, just someone who gets a bit more of a kick out of their pc's capabilities than is entirely healthy. I would guess that Durkon and Elan's players are newest to the game, as both have fairly well developed, if cliche ridden, characters, but Durkon's player doesn't have the best grasp on the rules and Elan seems to disregard pc potency. I imagine Durkon's player is the more typical gamer though while Elan's is the drama type who just picked up on D&D because his friends were playing and to help practice his acting. It's also worth noting that Elan breaks character least often. Haley and Roy's are less obvious, but I imagine they're both veterans. I see Belkar's player as the most experienced, as he can get noticeable results from a seemingly weak build. I see him as Brian, from Knights of the Dinner Table, only slumming it. You know, someone who's become a bit bored with the game so he's just trying to see what he can get away with.

[Parasocrates]

I disagree. The OOTS are PCs, they have acknowledged it themselves many times.. Part of being a PC is being controlled by a player. They regularly behave in a way that implies that they are players acting in a game rather than true identities. We also know several things about the players through the PCs. We know that Durkon's player isn't good with numbers and that V's player isn't good at remembering details of his/her character, for example.

This could also merely indicate that the characters themselves are aware of the fact that they are in a game world. Heck, the NPC's comment about game mechanics, too.

[Pyrian]

Can you all really deal with finding out that Haley is played by a guy?

[The Extinguisher]

There are no players. They simply live in a world that runs by D&D rules, which revolves around them.

If they did have players, then they must have a very lienient DM for all the OOCing and meta-gaming and the like.

So yeah, no players.

[brian c]

This has been brought up before, and the Giant has weighed in on it: there are no players. I don't know where exactly that was said, but it was. Sorry.

[taraxia]

Amen.

Although I bet that V's player would be ambiguously-gendered, and that Belkar's might have severe emotional problems.

I tend never to think about the players in terms of the story though.

Naw. People who play Belkar characters are often laid-back types who don't mind that their characters are the source of jokes and frequently the butt of jokes.

The people who like playing with ambiguous gender are more frequently themselves female than male, but it can vary. For some reason I doubt that someone who was themselves ambiguously gendered would like getting a lot of mileage out of gender-based humor, though.

[Querzis]

...Players? This is just a world with gaming rule, there is no players. I would really like to meet the characters though...could Wanda teleport me in the OOTS world please? Well...after the war is finished.

[Spiky]

Last thing I need to do is meet more geeky teenage boys. Ugh. Stay away from the 4th wall.

[Aimbot]

There are no players. They simply live in a world that runs by D&D rules, which revolves around them.

If they did have players, then they must have a very lienient DM for all the OOCing and meta-gaming and the like.

So yeah, no players.

That makes no sense. What distinguishes a PC from an NPC then? The implication is that the world was built around them and their exploits, but there's no cause for that if they are not role players within a game. The world chosen, and the vast majority of early humor, relies irreversibly on the concept of a player character. A player character is a character controlled by a player. I can see the argument that the Giant never fleshed out the players behind the characters, but their playing style and foibles are implied by the players they run. The players exist, at least in the same manner that Roy and company exist.

[gadren]

Belkar's player used to play in my gaming group. True story.

[tgva8889]

I don't think there are players. If there are players, though, it would be cool to meet them at the strip's end. A sort of ending scene, if you will.

What separates a PC from an NPC is that a PC is a protagonist. An NPC is any "supporting" role, whether it be a Villain (Xykon) or an ally (Shojo) or just some random guy (The Kind of Somewhere). At least, that's how I see it.

[Bilgore]

Belkar's player used to play in my gaming group. True story.

Mine, too.

Since my gaming group was out of town, I missed approximately half their gaming sessions. In one summer, three of my characters were sacrificed on altars (two in the same campaign).

[Iberiel]

Can you all really deal with finding out that Haley is played by a guy?

That was the first thing that came to my mind when I saw this thread.
Haley must be played by a guy. She's just too hot to be real! :smallwink:

[Jawajoey]

That makes no sense. What distinguishes a PC from an NPC then? The implication is that the world was built around them and their exploits, but there's no cause for that if they are not role players within a game. The world chosen, and the vast majority of early humor, relies irreversibly on the concept of a player character. A player character is a character controlled by a player. I can see the argument that the Giant never fleshed out the players behind the characters, but their playing style and foibles are implied by the players they run. The players exist, at least in the same manner that Roy and company exist.

It makes tons of sense. They live in the universe of the game of DnD. And in DnD, the world always revolves around the protagonists, the PC's. That doesn't mean their universe is being controlled by anyone.

If any other medium or story setting can have protagonists that aren't specifically controlled by other "real" beings, why can't OOTS?

PC just means they're the big important characters. It really doesn't mean anything more.

[Dusk_Rider]

Nah. I think meeting the players and stuff would kind of ruin the feel of the strip.

[Aimbot]

It makes tons of sense. They live in the universe of the game of DnD. And in DnD, the world always revolves around the protagonists, the PC's. That doesn't mean their universe is being controlled by anyone.

If any other medium or story setting can have protagonists that aren't specifically controlled by other "real" beings, why can't OOTS?

PC just means they're the big important characters. It really doesn't mean anything more.
If, in any other medium or story setting, the protagonists identified themselves with a term that literally meant "We are specifically controlled by other 'real' beings," then yes, I would be surprised if they weren't specifically controlled by other "real" beings, particularly if the setting they were in used that as a core principle.