Is it Weird...

[Lawkheart]

To want to host group roleplays but not participate in them with a main character? I've been wondering if it'd be weird to have a thread of plot ideas people could use (So long as I am asked before hand and credited properly). This also led me to wondering what it would be like to actually host a roleplay but not create my own characters for it. I'd play as NPC's but no one important to the main story.

What do you guys think? Is this weird? Something interesting that I should try out?

 

[Kaddoc]

Not weird at all.

I've always wanted to be NPCs or a bringing of unfortunate random events without being character in m RPs.

Never could get it to work so...welcome to my world? Insomnia induced...

 

[Lawkheart]

Not weird at all.

I've always wanted to be NPCs or a bringing of unfortunate random events without being character in m RPs.

Never could get it to work so...welcome to my world? Insomnia induced...

So fucking true... Insomnia sucks... although the creativity that comes around hour 19 of being awake is nice.

 

[Kaddoc]

So fucking true... Insomnia sucks... although the creativity that comes around hour 19 of being awake is nice.

Not all insomnia induced ideas are cool or "healthy" but happy to be a contributor of your cause if there is any to be had at this conjecture.

If you can figure out a way to make this work without making a main character or being the main character without being the main character let me know.

 

[Lawkheart]

Not all insomnia induced ideas are cool or "healthy" but happy to be a contributor of your cause if there is any to be had at this conjecture.

If you can figure out a way to make this work without making a main character or being the main character without being the main character let me know.

Definitely, on both points.

That's got me curious... what would be the weirdest idea someone came up with during the insomnia induced creative moment?

 

[Saito Hajime]

First RP I ever participated in, the GM decided to take a backseat and just manage the thread (including NPCs).

One thing I would say is that while it's perfectly normal and reasonable, it might be a little impractical. Many threads struggle to have enough people involved even with the GM playing a character, so it might make your IC group a little lean.

Of course, if having a small group suits you, then all the better.

I personally wouldn't want to because I love character interaction too much and hate to be in too small a group. I feel like more people gives me more to work with.

 

[Kaddoc]

Definitely, on both points.

That's got me curious... what would be the weirdest idea someone came up with during the insomnia induced creative moment?

An atomicpunk based RP set in the old west where bounty hunters are mounted on cyborg velociraptors and shoot people with laser powered Winchesters.

Weed may have been involved but that's mine. I think...

 

[Lawkheart]

An atomicpunk based RP set in the old west where bounty hunters are mounted on cyborg velociraptors and shoot people with laser powered Winchesters.

Weed may have been involved but that's mine. I think...

...That's not that bad.

Mine would have to be... Oh! Medieval ninja knights who could transform into dragons and time travel. Kinda like a ripped off samurai with heavy platted armor and british accents.

 

[Kaddoc]

...That's not that bad.

Mine would have to be... Oh! Medieval ninja knights who could transform into dragons and time travel. Kinda like a ripped off samurai with heavy platted armor and british accents.

Insomnia induced with or without the aid of weed or alcohol.

I dunno sometimes my mind does funny stuff.

I won't dare repeat the ideas I had when I had an acid trip. Yes, I made a habit of killing my braincells in my youth whenever possible.

 

[Jorick]

Not weird at all. Plenty of GMs run games where they're in control of NPCs but don't have a player character of their own. To tag a couple of them and get them in on the discussion, I know @Elendra prefers to not have a player character in RPs she runs, and @Brovo runs games of all sizes where he has NPCs of varying levels of importance while letting the players keep the spotlight.

Most GMs do seem to prefer joining in with their own character, but it's not all that strange (at least in my experience) to find some who go the other way. It's totally doable while keeping your game alive and active.

 

[Brovo]

It's not weird at all, no. Just different styles of storytelling as a GM. You have to ask yourself a simple question when you start weaving your world building and plot construction into a coherent narrative: Is the premise of the RP built around a central character? If it is, the players are supporting cast that help the main protagonist (controlled by the GM) to achieve objectives in the story. If it isn't, then the players are the main protagonists who drive the story forward, and it's more appropriate to focus on NPC's as the supporting cast and antagonists to the player's actions and choices.

Remember the most pertinent questions as a GM: "How can I enable my players to do things? Why should they do those things?" You've created a world for them to play in, now what is their purpose in that world? Do they need a player character from the GM to unite them, or will the premise do that by itself? Because if the premise does that by itself, then shoving a GMPC in will only feel awkward.

 

[Kestrel]

I'd go as far as to argue that in group RP's this;

If it is, the players are supporting cast that help the main protagonist (controlled by the GM) to achieve objectives in the story.

Is a bad form of GM'ing. And because I'm too lazy to write why, I'ma c/p myself from here.

• Make sure everyone can grab the spotlight. Don't appoint (or banish the though, make your own) main character, unless you want your roleplay to die. Die hard. No matter how interesting said main character is. For every player, their own character is the main character. Respect that. If you choose to fight the dragon, don't make it's only weakness an arrow to the eye. Or at the very least, force everyone to work together to create an opening for the archer to take their shot.

Anyway, not playing a character is totally fine. I do it all the time. You can be the environment, because that's where the challenges to overcome come from anyway. I mean, unless you go total sandbox, how else are you going to GM?

 

[Brovo]

Is a bad form of GM'ing. And because I'm too lazy to write why, I'ma c/p myself from here.

No, it's not. I don't think you understand the power of a supporting cast if you believe that none of them can ever have the spotlight. There's a reason they're called the supporting cast. Generally it means that the main protagonist the premise is built around (magic princess, chosen one, rich nobleman, warlord, starship captain, et cetera) needs the help of others to achieve their goal. That intrinsically implies that the supporting cast is important, and thus will get spotlight time by sheer arbitration. The only exception to this is when a main protagonist is written poorly, ala Mary Sue, at which point, such an issue would persist with or without the main protagonist. (ex: Godlike antagonists, or side characters that resolve all problems.) You could compare this kind of writing to Star Trek, where every character on the ship from the main protagonist (Captain Kirk) to most members of the supporting cast (Spock, Dr McCoy, Mr Sulu, et cetera) each have a memorable moment of glory at least once. Kirk is the main protagonist, but he generally can't resolve the problem of the day without his crew.

So, basically, the issue of the spotlight not ending up being shared to supporting cast members with the premise centered around a main protagonist is an issue of poor writing on the part of the GM. The concept itself, while notorious, isn't inherently bad. It's just a different kind of story, with a different kind of point. Some people like playing giant fantasy adventures slaying dragons with large parties, others like simple 1x1 storylines about finding true love in the coffee shop. If there can be that wide of a gap in terms of narrative taste, then the same applies to narrative tools.

 

[Kestrel]

No, it's not. I don't think you understand the power of a supporting cast if you believe that none of them can ever have the spotlight. There's a reason they're called the supporting cast. Generally it means that the main protagonist the premise is built around (magic princess, chosen one, rich nobleman, warlord, starship captain, et cetera) needs the help of others to achieve their goal. That intrinsically implies that the supporting cast is important, and thus will get spotlight time by sheer arbitration. The only exception to this is when a main protagonist is written poorly, ala Mary Sue, at which point, such an issue would persist with or without the main protagonist. (ex: Godlike antagonists, or side characters that resolve all problems.) You could compare this kind of writing to Star Trek, where every character on the ship from the main protagonist (Captain Kirk) to most members of the supporting cast (Spock, Dr McCoy, Mr Sulu, et cetera) each have a memorable moment of glory at least once. Kirk is the main protagonist, but he generally can't resolve the problem of the day without his crew.

So, basically, the issue of the spotlight not ending up being shared to supporting cast members with the premise centered around a main protagonist is an issue of poor writing on the part of the GM. The concept itself, while notorious, isn't inherently bad. It's just a different kind of story, with a different kind of point. Some people like playing giant fantasy adventures slaying dragons with large parties, others like simple 1x1 storylines about finding true love in the coffee shop. If there can be that wide of a gap in terms of narrative taste, then the same applies to narrative tools.

Thing is, taking a gander at Renalta, the PC's are deciding the course for the story. They are the driving force. They are the main characters. They're not just there for the sake of enabling it, they're deciding it. Even if the main conflict is Queen Kouri versus the demons. Her goal is supported, but she is not the main protagonist.

 

[redblood]

I was almost thinking about not making a character for Eternal Grief, but in the end I figured it was good to have her in the beginning to get things going easier. She will have the potential to die early on though and after that I will only create random events, build atmosphere, create rooms and play ghosts (which basically are the events). (It will basically be like the first part in my first EG post. The first part was an overview over everything (+back story, cause first post) and gave people something to react to (in this case it was just the owl scream). The second part was specifically for Alice and didn't give the players (except for the person being in her car) anything to work with.)

I once knew a person who wanted to try it out first to see how it would work out in a roleplay, so we did a one on one in which she gave me scenes and choices but we had no characters interacting with each other.

So you could always try it out in a 1x1 first (or a smaller test group) before making a group for it. ^^ That way you can see what works and not and let them give you some critique so you know what works for the players and not.

 

[Brovo]

Thing is, taking a gander at Renalta, the PC's are deciding the course for the story. They are the driving force. They are the main characters. They're not just there for the sake of enabling it, they're deciding it. Even if the main conflict is Queen Kouri versus the demons. Her goal is supported, but she is not the main protagonist.

Okay, I didn't draw my own role play into this, you did, so...

Legend of Renalta 1: Gathered around Princess Kouri. She was the one that led players from location to location, acquiring maps and other such devices to progress the story. She participated in battles and often took tactical command of situations. She was, by every definition, the main protagonist, with everyone else there to help achieve her objectives. They were still important individually--some as problem solvers, others are combatants, and others still at helping influence her decisions by helping her grow as a person--but overall, she drove the plot forward and others followed. The RP lasted four-ish years, and ended, leading to...

Legend of Renalta 2: An RP where the central premise is not tied to Queen Kouri. She's important in the story, but not as a driver of the conflict: She doesn't go out to battles, she doesn't complete objectives, she sends other people out to do that instead. The main premise of the storyline is ending the invasion of the nine hells: That particular objective is not tied to anyone. The Queen of Renalta could die and the conflict wouldn't be over, even if her death would be an impactful loss. That's really the key point there, Kouri is not core to the premise, because the premise would go on with or without Kouri. Ergo, the players--who go out and achieve objectives by choosing for themselves which missions are most important to do--are the main drivers of the plot.

Two different stories, with two entirely separate and distinct premises. One of which was built around a main protagonist GMPC, the other is not.

Please don't try to use my RP's to prove your point. I guarantee you that I know them better than you do.

 

[Kestrel]

Two different stories, with two entirely separate and distinct premises. One of which was built around a main protagonist GMPC, the other is not.

And why do you think I'm a lot more interested in the sequel than the original? ;)

 

[Brovo]

And why do you think I'm a lot more interested in the sequel than the original? ;)

Because that's your personal taste. Lots of people were interested in the original too.

Beware trying to dictate your personal tastes as being objectively good or bad. I don't particularly enjoy romantic comedies, but that doesn't mean that all romantic comedies are bad. Lawkheart asked if it was weird to not use a GMPC. I answered by explaining that the decision to use a GMPC or not is entirely based on whether the premise needs one. If it does: Use it. If it doesn't: Don't bother. Nothing strange about using them or not using them. In short: Irrelevant to how I feel about these tools, they are just tools, and it's how you use them, and who you attract, that determines whether the RP succeeds or fails.

 

[Kestrel]

Beware trying to dictate your personal tastes as being objectively good or bad.

I don't like being a tool to the main character. I think this is a bad style of GM'ing because it inhibits player freedom.

Is that more clear? I mean.

What do you guys think?

 

[October Knight]

Not weird at all.

I've thought about doing that, too. Instead of playing a lead role, being more of a story director and creating very flavorful NPCs for my players to interact with.