Character Dialogue

How do I encourage dialogue between characters?

My players are really good about being descriptive in combat, things like describing the swing of their weapon, or gathering energy for a spell, etc., as opposed to throwing spell names and attack modifiers at me. What they don't do is use any in-character dialogue and speech (with the exception of one player, who does a tremendous job, voice and accent included).

I know what the problem is, they don't feel engaged out of combat, but how do I fix this? They don't talk to each others' characters, they just talk everything out as players at a table do.

Use NPCs.

I do. They don't speak to them as characters though, they always discuss what's happening as the players, not the characters.

Example? If they perform a conversation with an NPC in third person, I don't think it's so bad.

I don't think I can properly get it into words, but what it boils down to is

1. Hearing what the NPC says
2. A lengthy out of character discussion about it
3. A response that the party collectively agreed was best
4. Repeat

Maybe enforce a sand timer for responses?

What system are you playing?

D&D 5th Edition. It's a classic fantasy setting, if that matters.

I suppose you told them already that you'r like them to talk in characters, so you can be a little brutal.

Don't get out of character. Don't wait for them. Insist on the conversation alone, respond as the NPC would.

Yeah, and I didn't want to resort to that, but it may be the kicker they need. Treat all tabletalk as in-character or something.

You don't have to be that direct. If they start talking amongst themselves while in a conversation with the NPC, just have the NPC ask (in character) what they're talking about. It usually forces them to divert their attention back to the NPC and you know, talk like normal people.

Might work, moght take a few times to actually reinforce the idea in their heads.

I think the problem is that 2 of the players are new (only been playing a few months). Oddly enough, the newest player is the one that does full voices and an accent for his character.

Hrm.

Well, you could start supporting more RP benefits to get your foot in the door. It probably won't solve all of your problems, but if you start awarding players for RP with ingame benefits, such as better bonuses on die rolls, better resolutions, and maybe more exp, that could engage them.

For some more ideas, try grabbing the virtue/vice system from NWOD. I don't remember if 5e has an action die system, but if you give them a pool of rerolls or bonus die, then allow them to refill this pool by 1 every day rested, fully when a character indulges in a virtue, and by 1 every time they indulge in a vice, it could support roleplay. If 5e doesn't have an action die system, look around or think of your own.

Additionally, the Exalted ruleset has something called the Stunt system. Better descriptions represent better bonuses:

"At the lowest level, one [level] stunts require a good description of an action, adjudicated by the storyteller."

"Two [level] stunts require that the character interact with the environment in some notable action, taking advantage of the scenery that the storyteller provided. This can be physical or things the character knows about the world.. No detail may be contradicted, but minor details may be reveal in the context of the character's actions."

"Three-[bonus] stunts are singular acts of greatness, stunning bravado, and visual poetry, defined by their capacity to leave other players astonished. If there's any doubt that a stunt is level 3, then it's not a level 3 stunt."

Every level could be +2 to the die roll.

This could get your players to start doing the very basics of roleplay - emphasizing awesome situations and making the crudest of interests.
What do your character's backstories look like? How much have you used them?

Also, make at least some of the characters' objectives attainable by social interaction.

>backstories
We're about to start up a new campaign, so I have very few details at this point, but I'm going to make a conscious effort to get each backstory to tie to the main plot in an important way.

Yeah, tried that, but see

Yea nah, experience doesn't really make a difference in how your players act at the table. Some will get right into it, others will just sit there and play it like a video game. Really the best way is just to lead by example and not let up on being in character.

Just don't allow the collective discussion what one player's character should say and you should be fine. Simple "shut up, you don't get to tell other players how to play their character" followed by one-on-one dialogue, you know?

>Yea nah
Australian?

These guys have the right idea, I think. If they're together and start talking among themselves, act indignant.
>EXCUSE ME SIR, I WAS SPEAKING TO YOU.
Bonus points if it happens in a situation where it would really be unacceptable like during an audience with a noble or something.

Or maybe if they're by themselves in-game and start consulting OOC, you can act like the NPC just saw the guy start talking to people who aren't there. (Sir? Are you alright? There's nobody here but us.)

Maybe it's just me but I feel like if you interact with them as if they're already playing the way you want them to, their choice will be to engage or look insane in-character.

Also, bad habits are really difficult to cut off for veterans.

Continued...

For a modern campaign I'm running in twilight 2000, the players are mercenaries in Southeast Asia. I know a bunch of them really liked money and equipment, so I intentionally set them up to be poor and dependent on NPCs to acquire good kit.

What this meant ingame was that every player had a few things:

* Primary Kit: equipment or weapons that are supposed to be the character's primary asset. Drivers could choose their car, shooters their gun, hackers their computer, rich socialites their money (or fake money), a big bag of ammo, medics their medical kit, or explosives experts their explosive kit. Within reason, they could have practically anything

* Secondary kit: all players had a backup weapon with a few magazines, either melee or ranged

* Primary Contact: all players had several NPCs to serve as contacts per the core rules, but primary contacts are essentially the most reliable, powerful asset characters possessed. The primary contact serves as a source of information, labor, or work. They also determined beginning game gear restrictions and how easy players could source particularly difficult to find gear or people. For instance, a tier 1 surgeon would have easy access to high end surgical gear or operating rooms, while a badass assassin was deeply linked with a major syndicate.

If/when players asked for things, I might grant or make a check for sourcing equipment(either 1d10 roll low or 3d6 roll high ala GURPS). Failure means that the contact cannot spare or source the request. Contacts also had a degree of separation from player requests, so an assassin had a small penalty to source explosives or military arms, while the Quartermaster had excellent access to one or the other. This was called a degree of separation.

You know it mate

This has been an excellent help with my game because most of my players are extremely combat focused. Facilitating their development in the plot and keeping more important kit on a shelf pushed the players into using their contacts and thinking about their relationship with the world.

In fact, their first job came from a primary contact, integrating that player into the story from the get-go. The more that you involve the players with the NPC, the more they could forget being absolutely rational and finally Get into their character.

I forgot to mention. If your choice of primary kit is some restricted gear (ex: tank), the only way you could get it at the start was to have a primary contact who could source it.