Is it Weird...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Because I came to text-based roleplaying after some time doing tabletop (the former of which I've come to enjoy a little more because I'm terrible at maths and combat strategy), this is really the only way that makes sense/is comfortable to me. Having a character who is running around with the PCs, leading them (even if from the back seat) and fighting alongside them leaves open the possibility of accidentally stealing the limelight from the players.

I don't think I've dealt with many GMPCs, but I doubt they were handled very well whenever I did. I could imagine scenarios where the GMPC is taking on a much more powerful antagonist while the party has to help them by keeping various mooks clear, or the GMPC setting the party up for cool feats and attacks, but I still tend to more or less agree with Kestrel, despite their... insistent contrarian stance on the issue.

All that aside, GMing is usually enough of a handful on its own. <_<;
 
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?
go for it
 
  • Bucket of Rainbows
Reactions: Lawkheart
I know @Elendra prefers to not have a player character in RPs she runs
It's true, I do prefer not to. I also prefer when other GMs don't have GMPCs. While it's ultimately personal taste, I find the notion of a GMPC to be.... in poor form. I do not like it, and find it to be something best avoided. Unless a part of the experience makes everyone the GM, or have the GM rotate between people, or something like that; that's fine.

But in more traditionally structured RPs, I feel that it is bad for the GM to control a protagonist, which is what a PC is. The P in PC isn't just Player, I feel it should equally stand for Protagonist. So NPCs are also Non-Protagonist Characters, and a GMPC is a Game Master Protagonist Character, and that just irks me. Can it be done well? I suppose, but with all else being equal, given the choice between a RP with a GMPC and a RP without I'd go for the one without over the one with in a heartbeat.

However, to address the OP, it's totally fine. Actually as @dreamshell mentioned, in pen and paper games it's the norm (and that may be part of the reason I feel the way I do; I first RPed in those as well). You shouldn't feel weird to do it yourself in play by post games. Remember, NPCs are still characters, they're still able to have thoughts, feelings, emotions, actions, importance, be cool, whatever... they're just not protagonists.
 
  • Bucket of Rainbows
Reactions: Lawkheart
I would like to point out that there's a big difference between when an RP focuses on a GM's character, and when a GM simply has a player character.

In most of my RP's, I have a player character (or maybe several, if I've also allowed multiple-character ownership for everyone else) who I do not consider to be a "GMPC". I know that GMPC probably technically refers to any character played by the GM, but, given how GMPC's are generally used, I simply don't think of my other PC's as such. They don't have any special significance to the story that sets them apart from the other PC's. They're just part of the PC group, and I play them like I would any character I would have in an RP that is not my own. And you know what? This system usually works out fantastically. Because not only do I not steal the spotlight from the other characters, as my own PC's only have as much relevance in it all as the players do, but I still get to enjoy the world and setup I've created by playing through it like any other player would. And I get to add just a bit more activity to the RP so that it doesn't suffer from having too few characters, and I can sometimes mindfully place my characters in situations that would improve the overall flow of interaction (like if there's a newcomer to the RP who needs someone to interact with, one of my characters can interact with them and more easily integrate them into the rest of the group). This, though, is usually the extent of how much my characters serve a GM-related purpose. Otherwise, they're just doing what any other player would have it within their power to do, and most plotting done for them comes from side-plots collaborated between myself and the players, rather than relating to whatever grand scheme I might have laid out for everyone.

However, there have been times when I've created characters that would be more along the lines of a more traditional GMPC -- one that serves a definite purpose to the GM and is something that not just any player could create. These include antagonists, and protagonists that the other PC's are supposed to support, like with what Brovo was trying to say. I currently have an RP like this currently running (which somehow has lived to be at least a year old now, maybe two), though I will acknowledge that it is definitely flawed. The whole issue of my GMPC stealing the spotlight has happened, though I did not intend it to, and it's a difficult problem to fix. I find the other PC's consistently becoming dependent on my GMPC to lead the story for them, and it's a hard rut to get out of and help them lead. So, it's an RP pretty much constantly afflicted by problems arising due to flaws in its very setup that I just didn't think through very well at the time. >> And, looking back on it, this is pretty much what has happened with a lot of other RP's where I created important GMPC's, as well. Hence why it's something I try to avoid now.

So yeah, I totally understand a lot of people's concerns for GM's having PC's, but I feel like a lot of those concerns really only apply to the latter scenario. In which case, yes, proceed with caution. I'm not saying it's impossible to make work well, but, avoiding a situation where the entire story revolves around you and most of your players could be removed without anyone noticing can be a bit tricky.

However, it's entirely possible for a GM to play characters that don't come with this problem, because they're pretty much the same sorts of characters that any one of the players could come up with. They fit whatever role(s) the RP description has laid out for player characters, and they don't have any sort of traits or purpose in the story that a normal PC wouldn't be able to have. They're not NPC's designed for a specific purpose or a PC that the GM created for the story to revolve around; they're simply PC's controlled by the GM, interacting along with the other PC's, and playing by all the same rules as the other PC's, nothing more. And I see nothing wrong with that.
 
  • Bucket of Rainbows
Reactions: Lawkheart
However, it's entirely possible for a GM to play characters that don't come with this problem, because they're pretty much the same sorts of characters that any one of the players could come up with. They fit whatever role(s) the RP description has laid out for player characters, and they don't have any sort of traits or purpose in the story that a normal PC wouldn't be able to have. They're not NPC's designed for a specific purpose or a PC that the GM created for the story to revolve around; they're simply PC's controlled by the GM, interacting along with the other PC's, and playing by all the same rules as the other PC's, nothing more. And I see nothing wrong with that.
You may be right, but in my... oh my god has it been a decade? I think it has. Wow, suddenly I feel a bit old. Well, er, in that decade of me doing RP stuff, I have never encountered it done well, nor done it well myself, although I haven't tried in years. At best I've seen it done poorly. At worst I've seen it completely destroy RPs. I've seen others claim they did it well multiple times, but in the RPs I was in I would disagree with their claims, and in the RPs I wasn't I can't really properly judge one way or the other. Maybe they were right, or maybe the RPs I tend to join are not conducive to that behaviour working out; there are differing styles of RP and I imagine some lend themselves to what you describe far more than others (such as RPs that are more like collaborative stories than writing games).

But this wasn't really the point of the thread. This back and forth seems more like a debate on the merits of GMPCs, maybe? Or a discussion of their merits and problems at the very least, which maybe that's fine as that's definitely related to the OP's question, but not directly? I dunno. Probably fine.

That said, I think we've clearly answered the question of the OP.

Q) Can a RP be done without GMPCs?

A) Yes, just don't ask us whether or not it should be. We'll never agree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dreamshell
You may be right, but in my... oh my god has it been a decade? I think it has. Wow, suddenly I feel a bit old. Well, er, in that decade of me doing RP stuff, I have never encountered it done well, nor done it well myself, although I haven't tried in years. At best I've seen it done poorly. At worst I've seen it completely destroy RPs. I've seen others claim they did it well multiple times, but in the RPs I was in I would disagree with their claims, and in the RPs I wasn't I can't really properly judge one way or the other. Maybe they were right, or maybe the RPs I tend to join are not conducive to that behaviour working out; there are differing styles of RP and I imagine some lend themselves to what you describe far more than others (such as RPs that are more like collaborative stories than writing games).

But this wasn't really the point of the thread. This back and forth seems more like a debate on the merits of GMPCs, maybe? Or a discussion of their merits and problems at the very least, which maybe that's fine as that's definitely related to the OP's question, but not directly? I dunno. Probably fine.

That said, I think we've clearly answered the question of the OP.

Q) Can a RP be done without GMPCs?

A) Yes, just don't ask us whether or not it should be. We'll never agree.
Eh, fair enough. I just felt it was worth mentioning, since everyone seemed to only mention GMPC's as used as a focus of the story, rather than characters that could fit in with the other PC's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrattyCommissar
I'm not a particular fan of it, and it also ties into what I generally see as the 'thrill-seeking' RP community, people who make 5 posts on a story and then disappear. Ideas are sexy but hollow without plot, powerful themes, and characters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dreamshell
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.
That's basically being a Dungeon Master. :P
Completely normal.
 
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.

That's just shitty GMing in general. O___O That has nothing to do with whether or not the plot is focused on a GM's character. A game master's job is to make sure all player characters reach their full potential and not just be accessories. It's the GM at fault, not the style.

As a GM who mostly runs roleplays with a GM protagonist, I can tell you that I give my players the freedom to be full on protagonists in their own right, with their own staring plots and importance to the story at large. But I have also been in plenty of RPs where a GM did it the shitty way, where it was all only about their character and none of the player characters had any meaning or purpose for being there. @___@



BUT TO ANSWER THE OPENING QUESTION: No not weird. 8D Sometimes you just want to be "the world" and puppet master all the characters. It's a fan way to do things.
 
  • Bucket of Rainbows
Reactions: Lawkheart
DONT RP AT ALL!
Problemo solved! :D
Just remember to Believe
Also become a Chat Bum
So much easier...
So Yep... uh, dont Rp and itll be easier.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.