Something Ive pointed out before is not saying "Can I narratively justify this?". You could very easily justify them being super nice because youll all die if you dont work together. Do NOT go off of justification, its too easy to do for whatever thing you want.

Ask what is fun while still making sense. What gives the player the best time? I am a DM of 15 campaigns, 40 players, thousands of hours, years of doing so. I can tell you right now, if this was a party at a D&D table theyd have quit the campaign. If I made all the NPCs like this, theyd have quit the campaign. In a game, the NPCs themselves are puzzles to solve so you make them harder to reach, less accessible and unlock. There is a difference between personality and person, though. A personality is someone who has thoughts and you can interact with. They can be a horrible evil monster but will still tell your zipper is down on your pants. So, to humanize these people, if you want to leave them spicy, there need to be other normal interactions where you get thoughts, feelings, hopes, whatever. Simple as "I hope it doesnt rain today, my cloak got a hole in it that last fight". Then in the morning its a downpour and you hear them grumbling occassionally.

Its stuff like that so you dont get 2 sentences from them per long rest, and both are abrasive. Need a ratio in there at some point. and again.

Is this the most fun we can be offering people while maintaining integrity to character concept and "gamification" of knowing them.


What is the problem you are solving? Does your proposed change solve the problem? Is your change feasible? What else will be affected by your change? Will your change impact revenue? Does your change align with the goals and strategies of the organizations (Larian, WotC)?