Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Gamemasters' Lounge => Topic started by: Dead Monky on <03-21-11/1711:37>
-
This question's been rolling around in what passes for my brain for some time now. How many of you GMs play a PC at the same time you're running the game?
-
This is a tricky line to navigate. GMPCs can lead to self favoritism and resentment of players. The GM is already responsible for every contact, every grunt, every lieutenant, every CEO, and all the prime runner foils for the PCs, why add a PC to that mix?
-
I haven't done it in the last few games we've played, but I used to always play a GMPC when running. Sometimes it was just to fill a hole in the party (like a healer in D&D) but sometimes it was just because I wanted to also play. I don't anymore, but that's not saying I wouldn't if the mood struck me. Though I'd be more likely to insert an NPC temporarily into the game for plot purposes than have a full GMPC.
-
I as a PC once asked a favor of my team. At the end of the adventure I GMed with my PC as the employer, who accompanies the team. The old GM was hired as an additional outside expert.
I kept him in the background not doing anything unless told so by the team. He was emotionally attached and confused at the time.
I would not recommend actually.
-
Never.
I use plenty of NPC's (love fleshing out contacts and giving them personality) but I wouldn't play a real PC while GM'ing, its just too messy, and in a game like Shadowrun, I don't even see why - just have the players hire an extra if they are short on someone to fill a role (or modify the scenario so they can do it without said role).
I am perfectly comfortable with the fact that as a GM "My character(s)" are NPC's, I put personality in them (sadly, sometimes more personality than some of the players put in their characters!) but they are mainly a source of information or out-of-combat help. I avoid bringing them into fights (or disable them with panic attacks or getting KOed if I can't avoid it).
Its the same reason you rarely see the Director of a movie also star in it - its simply best to keep things separate.
-
Because we have a couple of GM's for the games, each GM has a PC they play normally (as a player), and if GM'ing a small group (due to absences), we can slot these GM-NPC's in without any hassle.
I don't recommend these for permanent GM's for all the favouritism issues mentioned above. I personally much more enjoy flecshing out actual NPC's, that may/may not bite it at any opportunity :)
But the other players definitely appreciate having the familiar GM-NPC around when the group is small.
-
I've found that GMPCs tend to be overpowered and munchkiny, and heading into the realm of Mary/Marty Sues.
That said, sometimes the group needs a little bit of help...
-
I've found that GMPCs tend to be overpowered and munchkiny, and heading into the realm of Mary/Marty Sues.
That said, sometimes the group needs a little bit of help...
Mary/Marty Sues? ???
I don't get the reference.... :-\
-
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarySue
Be warned, TVTropes will ruin your life.
Basically Mary Sue is a character in a story who can do no wrong, always has the solution to any problem, and has permanent Plot Armor. Peter Petrelli of Heroes is a semi-recent example of this, although he's more of a God Mode Sue.
GMPCs can fall into this if the GM plays them in anything more than a support role, as it is really REALLY hard for anyone suffering from the human condition (i.e. all of us) to stab themselves when other targets are available.
-
I'm not a fan of GMPCs. As a player, I've seen them abused far too often. As a GM, I have plenty of bookkeeping work already.
Sometimes I practice this in reverse, however, by delegating GM responsibilities onto other players. Most commonly, I'll ask the other players for advice on a ruling, especially players with GM experience themselves. Occasionally, I'll have players take on the roles of NPCs or even villains.
-
I didn't intend to have a GMPC. It just sort of happened when my players decided to NPC the matrix. I made a few characters with different attitudes, styles, strengths and weaknesses.
They had them compete to be members of the team and picked the one that showed them what they liked.
They went with the Pixie Hacker Adept. Since then I can't get rid of it, they like it too much. I really shouldn't have come up with a Pixie voice and made it into a game to guess the gender of the androgynous Pixie. Recently I've had it get hit hard with Black IC and put into a coma, 1) to keep the GMPC out of the final climax of Ghost Cartels, it should be the players 100%, 2) If they really want to keep it then they should shell out some nuyen and time to get the pixie healthy again.
I try to keep it balanced by not giving it improvement karma and not coming up with much in the way of plans or knowledge he shouldn't know. In the end though, since the players have completely detatched from learning the matrix rules, his karma and power don't even matter... I just decide if I want him to succeed or fail. I long for a player hacker again, it just feels like to much control over the players.
-
I don't recommend GMPCs for immature GMs. You have to be fair and you have to be ready to watch them suffer along with the rest of the party.
-
I'll use the definition of "a character who is near--permanently attached to the party and run by the GM" as my definition of a GMPC. "NPC accomplice" might be a better term, implying the subordinate role such a character fills in my games.
I use them, when the group is small, or missing vital roles. Or, when it fits the story being told. However, they are near-universally weaker than the PCs (gen them as lower-level in DnD, less BP/Karma in Shadowrun, etc) and typically fairly passive.
They've also proven useful as a way to offer up reminders or plot information when the team gets stuck or forgets something important, though not to put them back on a pre-determined plot line. Think "Oh, hey, didn't we hear from that shaman a ways back that there's a powerful toxic spirit living in here? I don't know that we should just barge in..." as opposed to "Hey, we're supposed to be breaking into the bank vault for Mr. Johnson, not researching his sordid past & deciding to stick it to his mega-corp ass!"
That being said, as a full-time GM, there's enough on my plate, as others have previously said, I try to limit the use of such characters. More over, I try to use ones already viewed as fallible / inferior (to the party) NPCs to discourage any unconscious desire to be the center of attention. I'm already the whole universe, minus the stars of the show, so there's little need to stoke my ego. But, I'm metahuman, too, I wouldn't be surprised if I've tried to turn an "NPC accomplice" into the star of the show. Fortunately, I have a good group of runners who'll swat me upside the head, then kill the guy in his sleep to make it stop. And laugh at me mockingly if I try to railroad them.
If you guys are reading this, I kid, I kid. Maybe.
All the bad things people have said about GMPCs are valid & true. But, sometimes, that long-running NPC accomplice can help bring the world to life and gives the GM a way to pass along in-world advice and reminders to help keep the story rolling. If you're group is comfortable enough with you as a GM, and understand that when you speak as the party's NPC accomplice, you speak with his limited knowledge and capabilities, an NPC accomplice can be a great addition to the group.
The true GMPCs, where the GM expects to be a "star" of the show, control the story, rather than direct it, and handle the encounters, drown the group in a sense of pointlessness. The game goes on, with or without them.
-
Perhaps its my own fault, but my players NEVER trust anyone speaking with my voice. It doesn't seem to matter if it's a long running contact with 6 loyalty or the shifty "expert" the Johnson insists works with the group, if I'm the one controlling them they are automatically a suspect . So it's pretty easy for me to keep the NPC attitude. Even long term hirelings to fill mission critical roles are always kept partially in the dark and with backup plans in case they become a Judas. They must have been abused in the past because what I find ironic is that I've never had a contact flip on my players. I've always thought that a GM as a player was a bad idea. If you don't think it's a bad idea, tell one of your players the entire plotline of your game. Then tell them they cannot use any of that information in game because their character wouldn't know. See how well that works for ya.
-
I've occasionally run a decker or rigger when the team has needed one to complete a specific job, but for the most part I try not to mix GMing and playing; GMPC's are tricky to keep balanced, and all too often in my local gaming group I'm the leader-guy when I'm at the table. I don't want to let things revert to type and have PCs start reflexively looking to my GMPC for advice, orders, organization, and that sort of thing.
-
Like most people I run one when needed. It is hard for me to though, not in a bookkeeping or show stealing sense, but my players will always defer to the npc because I'm controlling it. In my group I'm the one who gets the ball rolling. Usually into trouble or pink mohawkishness.
-
I guess I am in the minority here. I usually run one or more GMPC's in most of my games. I got into GMing because I wanted an reliable opportunity to play. GMPC's allow me to experience the story as well as maintain a voice in the party. I got into SR to play GMing is just one more way I make that happen.
I have however seen a lot of new GM's "Mary Sue" things all to hell if given the chance. To guard against this I select co-GM's carefully. My co-GM and I often collaborate on plot and story to ensure we are not dominating events. I think with appropriate safeguards the impact to a game for running a GMPC is minimal.
-
I've only done it a few times, mostly in small groups to fill in a niche or for them to act as a guide. Although I did bring my normal PC in as a GMPC when running a group through Forgotten Realms' Shadowdale adventure. Mostly because they were the party that would loot everything and I knew there was a high-powered artifact sword in the book. To make sure there wasn't a TPK when they try to decide who bonded the sword, I had the GMPC "accidentally" bond it before they even had a chance.
-
I ran one for quite a while during an Iron Kingdoms game. It was the first time playing in the setting, and we didn't have enough close combat/tank characters. So I ran a fighter for the group. Even later, when more people joined the game, I kept him around. While he didn't do or say much other than offer his opinion or just lend a hand when beatings were needed, he seemed to develop a personality that the other players could bounce ideas off of.
At the end of his appearance in the game, some of the PC's liked him, one or two didn't. But they all knew his name.
Some advice for running a GMPC, if it ever comes up. Make them memorable in some way (give them a quirk or interesting characteristic), let them speak their minds once in a while (but only use in-game knowledge), keep them in the background (the PC's are the important ones, here), and do not get too attached to them. The last piece of advice is the most important, I think. Just think of them as recurring NPC's, ones that are useful, but ultimately can be thrown away when needed, and they work out just fine.
-
I've only done it a few times, mostly in small groups to fill in a niche or for them to act as a guide. Although I did bring my normal PC in as a GMPC when running a group through Forgotten Realms' Shadowdale adventure. Mostly because they were the party that would loot everything and I knew there was a high-powered artifact sword in the book. To make sure there wasn't a TPK when they try to decide who bonded the sword, I had the GMPC "accidentally" bond it before they even had a chance.
Ooooh, that's the sort of thing that would get a PC killed in most of my groups :P
Why not set them up for the Head of Vecna (http://www.blindpanic.com/humor/vecna.htm) option instead?
-
Part of why I brought this up is because I almost always have a GMPC. Now granted, it's because the groups I play with always seem to be really small so I usually need to have one to keep the group rounded. It's pretty hard to get far in SR with no hacker or mage.
I'm aware of the problems it can cause so I'm obsessive about keeping my GM responsibilities and knowledge separate from the my PC and mostly just have my PC follow along and let the players make all the decisions. (And try to come up with personalities for the character that lets his or her passivity make sense.) On occasion, I'll have them act as the voice of reason if the rest of the group is going to do something unreasonably self-destructive or psychotic. (That comes up way more often that I'd like.) But I'll let them do it if they want. And have my PC sigh heavily, roll their eyes and go along with it. Which is also my reaction.
-
I've only done it a few times, mostly in small groups to fill in a niche or for them to act as a guide. Although I did bring my normal PC in as a GMPC when running a group through Forgotten Realms' Shadowdale adventure. Mostly because they were the party that would loot everything and I knew there was a high-powered artifact sword in the book. To make sure there wasn't a TPK when they try to decide who bonded the sword, I had the GMPC "accidentally" bond it before they even had a chance.
Ooooh, that's the sort of thing that would get a PC killed in most of my groups :P
Why not set them up for the Head of Vecna (http://www.blindpanic.com/humor/vecna.htm) option instead?
Don't tempt me. It's been brought up in discussions about certain party members. ;)
-
Well, back in "The Bad Old Days" of Decking/Hacking/Whatever being a "Take the game away from everyone else", a lot of GMs would just have an NPC do that while the rest of the team had to "Watch his meat", then have him be useless for the rest.
And, of course, sitting at home in just his underwear and a pirate hat made from the New York Times while doing Matrix Overwatch while everyone else risks their bodies.
-
In my group I have a tendency to roll up characters that fill a much needed niche (face, brute force hacker) so when it's my turn to GM my players use their aquaintances as "contacts" and call them if they need their specific services. Usually it will be for a specific service like finding/buying or breaking into a single system and not an extended stay. The same goes for another player that plays a steet doc with a clinic which have given rise to my Face's catch phrase "I know this great Doc in the barrens..."
Now this doesn't count the time a player borrowed some nuyen to get a nice bit of 'ware and I paid the hospital a little extra to install a biomonitor to allow me to "keep an eye" on my investment. I'll usually make an appearance after he's gotten his teeth kicked in.
-
Seems we don't quite agree on where a NPC ends and a GMPC starts.. I see a lot of people talking about GMPC's but what they describe is really just a NPC.
GMPC:
- Made by the same rules as the other PC's
- Gets equal share of loot/karma
- Has spotlights in the plot like the other PC's.
- Same rules as for players (no GM hand-waving instead of rolls for instance)
NPC:
- A character controlled by the GM for shorter or longer periods to advance the plot or help the players through a tough time.
Feel free to add more to the distinction :)
-
I'm using the first definition: A full blown player character that's controlled by me, the GM, acting as a player.
EDIT
Fixed some typos.
-
I've used both. Mostly npcs though.
-
I use the first, but I have him act in the background like the second.
-
I feel compelled to throw my two cents in on this one.
I play a GMPC because, while I like GM'n I also am a RPG playing junkie...never leaves ya. But with that said we are also only a group of 4 (including myself) which I find works perfectly! It takes alot of practice but, I find it highly enjoyable to both craft the story but to also experience and be a part of it, like a director acting in his own film. To do this though you must be able to abide by the rules and relize that your character is just another one of the actors on the stage. (but I also designate another player to be my check in case I do something to OP from the other players perspective)
Other than that, I freaking love having a GMPC!
-J
-
GMPC:
- Made by the same rules as the other PC's
- Gets equal share of loot/karma
- Has spotlights in the plot like the other PC's.
- Same rules as for players (no GM hand-waving instead of rolls for instance)
NPC:
- A character controlled by the GM for shorter or longer periods to advance the plot or help the players through a tough time.
I'm fine with those definitions.
In our co-GM game, we use the GMPC's only as necessary, playing them as NPC/PC's as required.
I've also seen true abuses of GMPC (first pick of loot, first to find and loot secret passages etc), which need to be stomped out ASAP.
I've also had one campaign where I was a player, then took the reigns of GM due to his unavailability, I tried to retire my PC, but the rest of the group rebelled, and insisted he stay on as a GMPC. For me, this was a challenge to ensure there was zero favouritism, but seeing as I use a lot of random die rolls to determine whom gets targetted by attacks, this never turned out to be a problem.
-
I find it highly enjoyable to both craft the story but to also experience and be a part of it, like a director acting in his own film.
See, this part I don't quite get. I mean, if I'm the GM, I KNOW the fragging plot, I mean, I made it!, I think I would develop a split personality disorder to truly be able to enjoy my own plot. Its not just like being an acting director, its like being the writer, the directer, the actor AND the git who pays to go see the movie when its done - And somehow still be amazed at every step despite it being the same story all the time :P
-
Call me dumb, call me names for not being a natural English speaker, hell, call me what you want, but I never allow a hacker or a rigger PC in my campaigns. The rules are, personally, too difficult, and imo, they slow the game down.
Maybe it's a bad C2020 experience with hacking turns taking 45 minutes (of which the action part of the group would just play PS2), maybe it's just my difficulty with the rules. In any case, I always portray the group's hacker and/or rigger. They prefer it that way, too, and I can simplify the rules, so it's a win-win scenario.
</rant>
-
Call me dumb, call me names for not being a natural English speaker, hell, call me what you want, but I never allow a hacker or a rigger PC in my campaigns. The rules are, personally, too difficult, and imo, they slow the game down.
Maybe it's a bad C2020 experience with hacking turns taking 45 minutes (of which the action part of the group would just play PS2), maybe it's just my difficulty with the rules. In any case, I always portray the group's hacker and/or rigger. They prefer it that way, too, and I can simplify the rules, so it's a win-win scenario.
</rant>
For Deckers in previous editions I have done the same, and same goes for Hackers/TM's now, Riggers are fine however.
-
Call me dumb, call me names for not being a natural English speaker, hell, call me what you want, but I never allow a hacker or a rigger PC in my campaigns. The rules are, personally, too difficult, and imo, they slow the game down.
Maybe it's a bad C2020 experience with hacking turns taking 45 minutes (of which the action part of the group would just play PS2) ....
You get the same problem in reverse any time a fight breaks out where not everyone can participate (either because they're out of position or because they're not hitters). Basically, all Shadowrun combat is slow, regardless of whether it's physical, virtual, or astral. It gets even slower as you introduce more minions like agents, sprites, spirits, and drones. It's tough to deal with. You can encourage everyone to generalize so that they're useful in any situation, although that still doesn't help when the group gets stuck split up.
-
I alleviate the "hacking takes forever" portion by allowing people with extended tests to roll "in the background" until they reach the threshold. Or getting them to roll once & divide the threshold by the number of hits, this is now how long it takes to accomplish the goal (hacking, lockpicking, vehicle repair, weapon modification).
This isn't always the case, it depends on the current pacing, how interested everyone is in the outcomes, level of risk, etc.
As to combats where the party is split up & not everyone is involved, while there's no avoiding it sometimes, I generally take a card from movies & TV and have something requiring initiative happen at each site, simultaneously. No one seems to mind that the devil rats in the sewers appear to be coordinating with the guards in the alley, since it means everyone's engaged & part of the action.
Obviously, these strategies don't work every time, so you'll sometimes have one group sitting and waiting.
-
I haven't had too many problems with hacking taking too long. Of course I "forget" a lot of the steps and whatnot and generally try to have something else going on at the same time so the other players have something to do. Like shooting at the people trying to kill the hacker or rigging demo charges.
Once, back before my memory got so conveniently bad, the rest of the group got kind of pissy during the hacking and the player of the troll weapon specialist decided "Screw this boring shit." and had her character tear the entire database out of the wall. The team then dragged it back to the Johnson and told him to hack into it on his own time. Fun times.
-
Of course I "forget" a lot of the steps and whatnot and generally try to have something else going on at the same time so the other players have something to do. Like shooting at the people trying to kill the hacker or rigging demo charges.
Player 1: I start hacking the computer system
Player 2: I take cover!
Player 3: I start laying out suppression fire near the door on the north wall.
Player 4: I get ready to cast heal on the hacker
Problem with your approach is eventually players WILL notice the synergy between hacking and action happening shortly after and start preparing for it :P
-
Player 1: I start hacking the computer system
Player 2: I take cover!
Player 3: I start laying out suppression fire near the door on the north wall.
Player 4: I get ready to cast heal on the hacker
Problem with your approach is eventually players WILL notice the synergy between hacking and action happening shortly after and start preparing for it :P
They should be preparing for such complications anyway. :P
But I just used those for examples. I find other things for them to do too. Even if it is just having them hold a conversation in character while waiting for the hacker to finish. That gets pretty funny when he's in full VR.
"Anyone want to paint penises on him?"
"Let's put fire crackers in his pants."
"I know! Let's put a dress on him."
EDIT
Fixed tag error.
-
One of the 'problems' we had in our group was that the GM wasn't all that familiar with the hacking rules and I, as the hacker, was using them for the first time as well. So what I did was made a hacking cheat sheet, with all the possible matrix actions, from datasearch to hacking and cybercombat so we could find things back very quickly. That already made it faster as we didn't have to go through the books all the time (I put book pages with it as well, so we can go back if necessary). It's something that has proven very useful (if I find a way to post attachments here, I'll post it somewhere).
-
Once, back before my memory got so conveniently bad, the rest of the group got kind of pissy during the hacking and the player of the troll weapon specialist decided "Screw this boring shit." and had her character tear the entire database out of the wall. The team then dragged it back to the Johnson and told him to hack into it on his own time. Fun times.
That sounds exactly as something my group would do. Fun times indeed, and with a group of muscle/specialized combat/arcane hitters, why do we need a hacker, amirite?
-
I find other things for them to do too. Even if it is just having them hold a conversation in character while waiting for the hacker to finish. That gets pretty funny when he's in full VR.
"Anyone want to paint penises on him?"
"Let's put fire crackers in his pants."
"I know! Let's put a dress on him."
Man, our Russian Vory combat mage once threw a Fireball on our Elf samurai dude for doing some of those things on your list on him as he was in Astral mode. He overcharged it for Force 10 and got 7 hits.
-
"Anyone want to paint penises on him?"
"Let's put fire crackers in his pants."
"I know! Let's put a dress on him."
Man, our Russian Vory combat mage once threw a Fireball on our Elf samurai dude for doing some of those things on your list on him as he was in Astral mode. He overcharged it for Force 10 and got 7 hits.
Never do to someone something when they're unconscious that you wouldn't do to them when they are conscious. Eventually, everyone wakes up. Even if it is to wake up dead.
-
"Anyone want to paint penises on him?"
"Let's put fire crackers in his pants."
"I know! Let's put a dress on him."
Man, our Russian Vory combat mage once threw a Fireball on our Elf samurai dude for doing some of those things on your list on him as he was in Astral mode. He overcharged it for Force 10 and got 7 hits.
Never do to someone something when they're unconscious that you wouldn't do to them when they are conscious. Eventually, everyone wakes up. Even if it is to wake up dead.
Yeah, Yoshi-san learned that the hard way.
-
Really lit a fire under his hoop, eh?
-
Man, our Russian Vory combat mage once threw a Fireball on our Elf samurai dude for doing some of those things on your list on him as he was in Astral mode. He overcharged it for Force 10 and got 7 hits.
Hah! Nice.
What I listed and more has happened in our group. The face drew penises all over the hacker when he was in VR once and as revenge he forged a bunch of false purchase orders from her for bulk granny panties and incontinence medication then 'leaked' them to the network of her favorite club.
The weapon specialist dressed up the mage in a frilly dress while he was astral projecting and later found her place inhabited by a water elemental that turned her basement into a swimming pool and a bunch of watcher spirits that proceeded to follow her around announcing to everyone that she was "Lady Stinky Britches, Queen of the toilet."
And what happened to the poor adept after she pulled a prank on the technomancer is best left unsaid. *shudder*
-
And what happened to the poor adept after she pulled a prank on the technomancer is best left unsaid. *shudder*
No, no, no. You can't just drop a bomb like that and expect us to accept the curiosity! Now, what happened, omae?
-
Say it, say it! You've, literally, aired the dirty laundry about the rest of the group! :P
-
GM as a PC? Yeah sometimes I have to in order to keep the flow of a game going. More or less it's just an NPC that stays behind the PCs, sorta like the Torchbearer from D&D, however the NPC has a vested interest in helping out the PCs when he can. 'You've got the weapons after all'.
-
No, no, no. You can't just drop a bomb like that and expect us to accept the curiosity! Now, what happened, omae?
Say it, say it! You've, literally, aired the dirty laundry about the rest of the group! :P
Fine you two. I can't remember what the exact prank the adept pulled was, but I do recall that the techno kind of overreacted. They hacked the adept's 'link and dropped in a sprite that constantly worked to download and then broadcast Azzie porn feeds to everyone in her address book. Another sprite was dumped in her household node and had the house drones reenact episodes of BattleBots whenever she was home. And a third was given residence in her bike and told to turn the engine on and rev it when she tried to sleep or turn it off whenever the adept tried to start it. The adept ended up kicking in the techno's front door and kicking their ass.
-
No, no, no. You can't just drop a bomb like that and expect us to accept the curiosity! Now, what happened, omae?
Say it, say it! You've, literally, aired the dirty laundry about the rest of the group! :P
Fine you two. I can't remember what the exact prank the adept pulled was, but I do recall that the techno kind of overreacted. They hacked the adept's 'link and dropped in a sprite that constantly worked to download and then broadcast Azzie porn feeds to everyone in her address book. Another sprite was dumped in her household node and had the house drones reenact episodes of BattleBots whenever she was home. And a third was given residence in her bike and told to turn the engine on and rev it when she tried to sleep or turn it off whenever the adept tried to start it. The adept ended up kicking in the techno's front door and kicking their ass.
That's all just A-grade. Please give my props to the adept.
-
That's all just A-grade. Please give my props to the adept.
Indeed, full marks.
We once had a shaman (OK, it was me) sooo pissed off that he spent Karma to bind several Spirits of Man to completely screw with everything the Street Sammie did for several weeks.
- Used Movement powers on his vehicles at all time...slowing his custom eurocar westwind to about 50kph
- Used Accident powers on him whenever in a social event, especially if trying to pick up a ladyfriend
- Used Confusion powers at random times (causing trails of destruction in departments stoors, public footpaths and several broken home stereo systems)
That along with repeatedly summoned Watcher spirits in Psychic Manifested forms (ie, intangible to a mundane Street Sam) to follow the Street Sam and advise in annoyingly loud tones:
- Lady, he's got Herpes... don't touch him without gloves on
- Hey, bozo, your wife's calling
- Syphilis! Get your Syphilis here!
- Hey, don't let this guy in your ritzy nightclub. He's wanted for questioning on five counts of assaulting bouncers
Other magicians in the group were bound by the Initiation Group Brotherhood pact not to undo what was done, and the street sam eventually apologised, and the pranks were downgraded to just plain fun on all sides.
- Mental Note: When a Strippergram arrives for your birthday, it's very bad when after letting them in, the cake explodes with FAB Bacteria and Neurostun and you wake up handcuffed to a pole....on a street corner....*cough* naked *cough* ... and Trid footage is available for download on Shadowland.... Shaman was very glad he had 6 Charisma, as it was all very much on show....
-
Hey, might get the shaman some dates as the folks on Shadowland can see what that 6 Charisma looks like "Under the hood". :P
Of course, one of those Dates might be Bubba The Love Troll, but still...
-
Hah! I like your shaman's work. Revenge is fun, isn't it?
-
Hey, might get the shaman some dates as the folks on Shadowland can see what that 6 Charisma looks like "Under the hood". :P
Of course, one of those Dates might be Bubba The Love Troll, but still...
Under the hood indeed... someone been reading too much Order (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0027.html) of the Stick? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0028.html)
Note: I jest of course...you can NEVER have too much OotS....
-
I play in two groups, one has three players (including me): a Shinto magician punk, ex-mil jap razorgal, and an amnesiac Seoulpa hacker; the other group I run and it consists of two players: a devious hacker and a two-fisted trench. In the group I play in we cover all the bases, but in the group I run I use a magician 'doll' (see Darker than Black) to fill in their mage category. She sits in their HQ, providing intelligence with watcher spirits and sometimes using requested ritual magics (even sending a spirit to dance with a corp spirit). The doll does not have much of a personality, shows little to no emotion, and is kidnapped once in a while. The players care, because they immediately shell out their nuyen for a ridiculous drone or gadget to save her.
This way I can make sure they have their bases covered, not claim the spotlight, or risk them becoming streetmeat.
-
I have an NPC rigger that the PCs keep calling for back-up on runs. He does transport and eye in the sky sorts of tasks. Since he is an NPC I will periodically give him a beat down to create worry and panic in the PCs. Coms go down, their get-away car gets detained etc.
-
Me and my group of four (myself included) have only been playing for a month or so and we are all new to this game. As current GM i didnt want to miss out on making a char and playing with the group. That said, for me it has been a learning experience playing and GM'ing. For the most part my char (made the same way as the rest) usually stays in the background and keeps quiet until its fighting time. But now, I just had a baby five days ago, Lil Conan, cutest baby ever! Now we are trying a new approach, and i'm having one of the other players take over the GM role, Because i dont have the time, and we are talking about switching GM's every month or so. Each person doin thier own plot line and whatnot. Anyone else try this? We are all new and it dosnt go smoothly either way. But we still have fun, and thats whats important.
-
I've never done it, but I've heard a lot of groups that like it.
-
Me and my group of four (myself included) have only been playing for a month or so and we are all new to this game. As current GM i didnt want to miss out on making a char and playing with the group. That said, for me it has been a learning experience playing and GM'ing. For the most part my char (made the same way as the rest) usually stays in the background and keeps quiet until its fighting time. But now, I just had a baby five days ago, Lil Conan, cutest baby ever! Now we are trying a new approach, and i'm having one of the other players take over the GM role, Because i dont have the time, and we are talking about switching GM's every month or so. Each person doin thier own plot line and whatnot. Anyone else try this? We are all new and it dosnt go smoothly either way. But we still have fun, and thats whats important.
Congratz on the bub. Little Conan will be swinging weapons and destroying your house in no time ;)
As for the gaming style of rotating GM's my group have done this with varying levels of success.
A) We found a few members really weren't into the GM role
B) We found a few members who couldn't be relied on to show up (so GM'ing wasn't for them)
But in the end we found that 2-3 out of the 5-6 member campaigns, could regularly swap out GM roles, while having a GM-PC sitting on the sidelines.
We all learned a lot, and it meant that if a GM was sick/unavailable, the game could still go on.
So, there are pros and cons :)
-
Thanks gang! I love how positive this site is. It just goes to show that nerds are the best kind of people!
-
To answer the origional question: no, not really. I have never played a traditional charcter while GMing but I have done the long term NPC that stays with the group or had NPCs that come and go or been reoccurring. Some NPCs have started out at the same "level" as the PCs and advance as they do, but first pick of any good stuff usually go to the PCs. I do find it is advantageous to have such NPCs around, especially if a guest player or two show up so they can jump right in if they don't want to create a character yet. That and it's nice if all they do is roll dice for me.
;)
-
I have played as a gmpc for quite some time now in our group since the majority of the time it is a very small group. We have also rotated the role of the gmpc once in while. I will run the campaigns but when the others "guest spot" gmpc they will usually do one shot runs. Sometimes it can be tough playing the role of a gmpc but as stated in some of the other post, there is a fine line to walk and you have to be sure not to favor your character. You have to be sure your doing things that are based on character knowledge and not what you really know. I tend to play roles that allow the others to be the leaders and decision makers of the group and I just follow the lead of the group with minimal "character imput". Actually the characters I have played have been injured and near death much more then the others due to unavoidable circumstances, but being the gm I knew what the real potential dangers were awaiting me. Once again though there is that fine line of gm knowledge and character knowledge. I don't see anything wrong with it so long as you always play fair.
-
This question's been rolling around in what passes for my brain for some time now. How many of you GMs play a PC at the same time you're running the game?
Sometimes ,as a Player ,I help the GM with the Rules/Decisions or infuse the Game with Player empowerment.(creating NPCs and Places)
so sometimes its the other way round (for Me)
he who dances the other Way round
Medicineman
-
I haven't done this in Shandowrun in particular, but I have done it in other games when we were short on players. I find it works best if you can pick a "back rank", support style character. I had a long running 4th ed dnd campaign once in which I ran a laser cleric as a gmpc. There were only two PCs (small group, and even three characters is pushing it in 4th ed, 4 or 5 works better) and they didn't have a healer. Key points are to let the PCs do most of the talking, and make the decisions. For shadowrun, I think running the Hacker/Technomancer this way would be a good choice (and maybe making the hacking rules abstract or even just deciding on results as the plot allows) or rigger/drone character who stays in the vehicle, runs overwatch, and sends a couple of dobermans along if heavy fighting is anticipated.
-
Before 4e, I used to always NPC deckers because 1) no one wanted to play them because 2) running the matrix nine times out of ten brought the game to a screeching hault. The common joke was "matrix time, lets go have a smoke/get food/get out the cards/etc"
-
I do. Very much so. I love making characters and playing them.
Although, what we do is have three people doing GM duties. Our Face describes locations, I do NPC characters, and our mage describes the results of rolls. It works pretty well, at least as good as when we had one GM.
-
I'm playing a game right now where we have a 3 man team and I'm the muscle. Leaving the complicated stuff to the Players gives them all the spotlight and you provide the nessicary gunpower. I prefer to sport off as a tank or a brute force type.
-
My irl group always has the gm act as a character as well. It's a true test of your rp skills and it is surprisingly fun. We found that it works best if the gm plays more of a follower than a leader because it feels odd making all the big decisions and having access to all the information on the campaign. But as a follower, you can usually voice reasonable opinions without metagaming. It also gives the gm a lot more to look forward to and really keeps our campaigns running strong.
-
There is no such thing as a "GMPC".
There are PCs and NPCs. A GM is not the same thing as a player - any character that they are running is, by definition, an NPC.
An NPC that is also a party member is fine, as long as the GM uses them as an NPC. The moment the GM starts thinking of that character as being "their PC" you have a problem. You should be telling the story - you get an infinite number of characters to play as GM, and the trade off is that the players are the protagonists...not the GM.
I have run party member NPCs in most of my games. Henchmen, hirelings, filling roles no one wanted to play - they are a great way to influence the story without being heavy handed, or to introduce new plot elements, out even just to illicit emotion...let the party get attached, them kill em - instant fear, anger, whatever you are after.
But they aren't PCs. Thinking of them as such is a bad idea. The GM should be the ultimate and neutral arbiter...they are NOT players.
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
-
There is no such thing as a "GMPC".
There are PCs and NPCs. A GM is not the same thing as a player - any character that they are running is, by definition, an NPC.
An NPC that is also a party member is fine, as long as the GM uses them as an NPC. The moment the GM starts thinking of that character as being "their PC" you have a problem. You should be telling the story - you get an infinite number of characters to play as GM, and the trade off is that the players are the protagonists...not the GM.
Spot on.
One of the things I miss most about GenCon in Milwaukee (and I refuse to find out if they still do this now that they're in ::) Indiana) were the seminars on the philosophy and theories used in designing and running a top notch game (not just RPGs mind you).
-
There is no such thing as a "GMPC".
There are PCs and NPCs. A GM is not the same thing as a player - any character that they are running is, by definition, an NPC.
An NPC that is also a party member is fine, as long as the GM uses them as an NPC. The moment the GM starts thinking of that character as being "their PC" you have a problem. You should be telling the story - you get an infinite number of characters to play as GM, and the trade off is that the players are the protagonists...not the GM.
GMPC's do exist. They may be a subset of NPC, but they are definitely in a category of their own.
If a GM has taken the time to create an NPC with the same level of CharGen detail as a player, and has inserted that character into the game with the same rights as all other PC's at the table, then that is a GMPC.
There are reasons this can work, and especially under a rotating GM scenario, it's quite reasonable.
Also, if there is a massive gap in the player skills, then a permanent GMPC fixture may be warrnated (although IMHO a normal NPC is sufficient for this, but different strokes for different folks...)
The problems occur if at any stage the GM believed to be favouring the GMPC. When that happens, it's game over, no-one's having fun anymore.
Therefore, it's a risk vs reward scenario. Is having the GMPC at the table, worth the risk of spoiling everyone's fun for what may be just a misunderstanding in the end? Normally, the answer is Hell no, not worth it.
-
There is no such thing as a "GMPC".
There are PCs and NPCs. A GM is not the same thing as a player - any character that they are running is, by definition, an NPC.
An NPC that is also a party member is fine, as long as the GM uses them as an NPC. The moment the GM starts thinking of that character as being "their PC" you have a problem. You should be telling the story - you get an infinite number of characters to play as GM, and the trade off is that the players are the protagonists...not the GM.
GMPC's do exist. They may be a subset of NPC, but they are definitely in a category of their own.
If a GM has taken the time to create an NPC with the same level of CharGen detail as a player, and has inserted that character into the game with the same rights as all other PC's at the table, then that is a GMPC.
There are reasons this can work, and especially under a rotating GM scenario, it's quite reasonable.
Also, if there is a massive gap in the player skills, then a permanent GMPC fixture may be warrnated (although IMHO a normal NPC is sufficient for this, but different strokes for different folks...)
The problems occur if at any stage the GM believed to be favouring the GMPC. When that happens, it's game over, no-one's having fun anymore.
Therefore, it's a risk vs reward scenario. Is having the GMPC at the table, worth the risk of spoiling everyone's fun for what may be just a misunderstanding in the end? Normally, the answer is Hell no, not worth it.
I agree with this. The spoiler to the "there is not such thing as a GMPC" theory is a game with a rotating/shared gm duties. I also agree that is is CRITICAL not to give your "character" if you are the gm any special preferance, or allow them to act on any knowledge that the character would not reasonably have. Its a tough mental balancing act. In some ways, you have to less attached to the character than you would be if would be as a player. You know as a GM that the west door is a really, really bad idea, but if the character doesn't know, you can't let him say anything.
-
My irl rp group is very experienced and we always have the gm control a character they consider their own and try to avoid all metagaming. It absolutely can be done and in my opinion it is much more fun for the gm because they have their own character that can get a large part of the pc experience and also enjoy the anticipation of coming events just as any other gm can. I don't see why you would declare that gmpc's don't exist. You say that all characters controlled by the gm by definition are npc but that is not true if the gm considers one of the characters to be "his" character. I will say this though, playing a gmpc takes practice and if done poorly it could be quite problematic :P
-
One other way we prevent from metagaming when having a rotating GM role; when a GM has a character he is playing that is a character that will need to advance along with the other PCs, instead of the GM deciding how much karma his character will recieve at the end of a run we have the other people in the group unanimously decide how much that character will recieve. In fact in our group when I have been the GM and played a character at the same time the other members of my group have often said I was being to harsh to my own characters. So once again if done carefully I think a GM can play a character at the same time with out it becoming a issue. Majority of the time our group works together on the game mechanic duties and leaves the story telling strictly to the GM.
-
The only real rule is that you and your group have fun. :D
That said...Simply thinking of an NPC as "your PC" is showing a preference toward it.
The only difference between a "GMPC" and an NPC is that.
The GM is not a player. All of his characters are NPCs...or, if you prefer, all NPCs are his characters. Deciding that one is "yours" is saying that one NPC is special.
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
-
The only real rule is that you and your group have fun. :D
That said...Simply thinking of an NPC as "your PC" is showing a preference toward it.
The only difference between a "GMPC" and an NPC is that.
The GM is not a player. All of his characters are NPCs...or, if you prefer, all NPCs are his characters. Deciding that one is "yours" is saying that one NPC is special.
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
Nothing wrong with a GM having an NPC with "favored" status. Some of my best fixers, villians, contacts, etc are my "favorite" NPCs. Like you said, as long as everyone is having fun, I doubt anyone will notice.
-
I really disagree, Joe. When I gm I am attached to my npcs and my pc, they are all special to me in some way. Just because I consider one of them to be my character doesn't mean he/she gets any special treatment and I treat them exactly like I would if they were a pc. It seems like you haven't tried this before and have a negative impression of it. Either that or you saw a gm handle it poorly. An experienced gm can handle it so I don't see ANY reason to say that gmpc's don't exist.
The difference is that you are rping your character as not being privy to any of the details of your campaign that are not known by your pc. It takes true commitment to rp and it get's easier and easier to avoid metagaming.
-
I really disagree, Joe. When I gm I am attached to my npcs and my pc, they are all special to me in some way. Just because I consider one of them to be my character doesn't mean he/she gets any special treatment and I treat them exactly like I would if they were a pc. It seems like you haven't tried this before and have a negative impression of it. Either that or you saw a gm handle it poorly. An experienced gm can handle it so I don't see ANY reason to say that gmpc's don't exist.
The difference is that you are rping your character as not being privy to any of the details of your campaign that are not known by your pc. It takes true commitment to rp and it get's easier and easier to avoid metagaming.
An "experienced GM who can handle it" is probably a good 5 years from growing into an experienced GM that knows better.
-
Hehe I bet the gm I'm speaking of is better than any gm you've seen by a long shot :P Just because you can't do it doesn't mean others can't as well :P
-
Hehe I bet the gm I'm speaking of is better than any gm you've seen by a long shot :P Just because you can't do it doesn't mean others can't as well :P
Seeing as Onion Man is playing Missions under GM's with 20+ years experience, I'd watch the boasting....
-
Seeing as how anything anyone in this thread is talking about is just playing pretend with rules and dice, I think going easy on the boasting is a good idea all around. There's no "right way" or "wrong way" to play an RPG. Some folks don't mind having a GMPC around, some folks do. Neither side's right, it's just something that works at some game tables and not at others. There's no need for it to turn into a peein' contest, folks.
-
I don't like the concept in a vacuum as it creates a conflict of interest and also diminishes the impact of the players' actions. That being said, I have used my own PC as a Johnson and a small-time fixer.
Seeing as how anything anyone in this thread is talking about is just playing pretend with rules and dice, I think going easy on the boasting is a good idea all around. There's no "right way" or "wrong way" to play an RPG. Some folks don't mind having a GMPC around, some folks do. Neither side's right, it's just something that works at some game tables and not at others. There's no need for it to turn into a peein' contest, folks.
Did someone say challenge pissing? (NSFW) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sZuN0xXWLc)
-
The only real rule is that you and your group have fun. :D
That said...Simply thinking of an NPC as "your PC" is showing a preference toward it.
The only difference between a "GMPC" and an NPC is that.
The GM is not a player. All of his characters are NPCs...or, if you prefer, all NPCs are his characters. Deciding that one is "yours" is saying that one NPC is special.
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
Well, if the NPC travels, works, and generally spends all thier time with the group just like a regular group memember then they are special. An npc typically comes and goes, isn't in every story, certainly isn't in every scene. If the GM is running a character, built with the same rules as the PCs, who acts pretty much as a player character in the story, then its not a normal npc.
You are free to think this is a good or bad idea. YMMV depending on the people involved and how it is handled. I have seen it handled very well. I can image it being handled very poorly.
But there is not much sense in denying that it exists. GMs sometimes run characters. They are NOT just another NPC, they are a GM controlled character. There are boundaries that must be respected to make sure that everyone at the table feels that it is fair, the story does not suffer as a result, and the everyone is having fun.
-
I'm not boasting at all, I was merely commending a fellow gm I play with irl. He also has a ton of experience gming(as do I). There is no need to make assumptions on which gm is more experienced or superior without any real information. I will say this though, isn't the "Missions" gming pre-made adventures? That is something my group would never use as we prefer to create our own material and have no use in pre-made adventures. Trying to say someone is an amazing gm with 20 years experience but is using Missions is a lot less impressive than someone creating their own material. That being said, I'm not saying they aren't good gms as I don't know them and maybe they just like pre-made stuff or don't have time to create etc.
My original point is, don't assume the gm I'm speaking of is inexperienced based on nothing other than the fact that you don't agree with gmpc's. As others have mentioned, rp can be handled a million different ways and there is no wrong way to do it as long as you're having fun :)
And fwiw my Brother and I started a 2 man campaign last night with him as a gmpc and we had a great time. At no point did I notice or suspect metagaming on any level. We grew up with the same group of rp'ers and we're mostly split up now and we don't really want to find new players so we just play with 2-3 these days. We also go into great depth with our rp which can be quite time consuming and only gets worse with a large group so 2-3 works best for us and a gmpc is essential.
-
I'm not boasting at all, I was merely commending a fellow gm I play with irl. He also has a ton of experience gming(as do I). There is no need to make assumptions on which gm is more experienced or superior without any real information. I will say this though, isn't the "Missions" gming pre-made adventures? That is something my group would never use as we prefer to create our own material and have no use in pre-made adventures. Trying to say someone is an amazing gm with 20 years experience but is using Missions is a lot less impressive than someone creating their own material. That being said, I'm not saying they aren't good gms as I don't know them and maybe they just like pre-made stuff or don't have time to create etc.
My original point is, don't assume the gm I'm speaking of is inexperienced based on nothing other than the fact that you don't agree with gmpc's. As others have mentioned, rp can be handled a million different ways and there is no wrong way to do it as long as you're having fun :)
And fwiw my Brother and I started a 2 man campaign last night with him as a gmpc and we had a great time. At no point did I notice or suspect metagaming on any level. We grew up with the same group of rp'ers and we're mostly split up now and we don't really want to find new players so we just play with 2-3 these days. We also go into great depth with our rp which can be quite time consuming and only gets worse with a large group so 2-3 works best for us and a gmpc is essential.
*sigh*
This could very quickly devolve into a rant, so I'll be deliberately brief and blunt.
A) Pre-Made material is not necessarily easy
B) Home made material is not necessarily good nor impressive
C) Creativity is more than just putting unique ideas on paper
D) GMPC is not essential, even with a small group.
That all said, I've had both brillaint and terrible experiences with GMPC's at the table (both my own and those of other GM's. Each player/GM/group's Miles May Vary, so it's probably best to agree to disagree on whether GMPC's are good or bad. Argument is degenerating quickly....
-
Each player/GM/group's Miles May Vary, so it's probably best to agree to disagree on whether GMPC's are good or bad. Argument is degenerating quickly....
It's never best to agree to disagree (a false surrender).
@Shadowjack. You've just described (in further detail than before) the symptoms of what I'll call a sophomore GM. I'll spare the academics of competition theory and leave it as, you describe a game and a preference for games which shows a distinct lack in certain skillsets necessary to a high quality GM, among which are game balance (no GMPC should ever be needed if your GM can competently write custom modules for your PCs) and table managements (2-3 players? A bare bones table is generally 4 players and a GM, a skillful GM will be able to run maybe twice that, I draw my line at 6 (8 for D&D but that's second nature to me now)).
What we're looking at here is the contradiction of mystery. For those who understand no explanation is needed, for those who do not no explanation will suffice.
I suggest you sit down with some game designers (I don't mean the writers of an RPG, I mean the guys that design games from nothing into a set of rules and actions) and ask them specifically to explain competitive models, the 4th wall, and metaplay to you.
btw, the best GM I've had the privilege of playing with has been Ed Greenwood. He used to run an irregular game at the Game Guild in Lake Geneva and I had the privilege of sitting in after being eliminated early in a M:tG tournament. After the immortal Ed, there's a whole pack of expert GMs that I have played under (including Chris Tulach and other RPGA and Judges Guild bigwiigs), many of whom aren't just top notch convention GMs and writers, but literally have given seminars on how to GM effectively (I'll never forget the KISMIF anbd Illusion of Free Will seminars from classic GenCon in MKE).
-
Let's not forget who made the first snide remark.
A) Being handed everything you need to run adventures is much easier than creating it on your own.
B) Not sure what your point is here. Imo a truly good gm can create his own content. Sure not all gm's can do it.
C) Maybe. But it is certainly much more creative to make unique content than copy content that many other players have already used.
D) It isn't always essential but in my group it is because we don't feel like being regular gm's these days. Without gmpc's it wouldn't be nearly as fun for us.
Don't get too caught up in this, man. I don't agree with some things that were said too but I'm not going to let it affect my mood. One other thing I'll say is, Missions is not for me. I have been rping for ages and I never played through a module or anything similar. In my group, we all like to create our own material(or our own games) and I enjoy knowing that it is a unique experience that we share. I'll repeat this though, good gms can play Missions, I am not impressed by it at all though. I would always rather see new material.
-
@Onionman, you made a thread on how to force your pcs into doing what you want and essentially being reduced to characters in a novel with you as the writer, it doesn't get any weaker than that. I gm'd my first campaign big campaign at the age of 13 and I did the exact things you are seeking to do now and it is very low quality. As for discussions with those that make games, I have been working on one with my friend for years and it is far superior to most imo.
One other note, we could never manage an 8 player group because the character development per session would be far too thin. We have done many marathon sessions with just 3 people that was asbent on combat and pure rp. With each extra person who likes to rp to this extent the game becomes increasingly slow. The fact that you can run games with 8 players indicates an extreme low degree of actual rp.
-
@Onionman, you made a thread on how to force your pcs into doing what you want and essentially being reduced to characters in a novel with you as the write, it doesn't get any weaker than that. I gm'd my first campaign big campaign at the age of 13 and I did the exact things you are seeking to do now and it is very low quality. As for discussions with those that make games, I have been working on one with my friend for years and it is far superior to most imo.
You confuse the illusion of free will with leading by the nose and participant narrative.
Illusion of free will couldn't be further from the description you provide. Illusion of free will is an improvisational practice which allows numeric challenges to be used wherever the players choose (they tell the story, not me) and eliminates the existence of rails for an adventure to go off of.
Forcing players to follow your story (the most common GM failure) is most often a case of leading by the nose (no you can't go that way because my adventure is over here) or participant narrative (this is the story that is happening and no matter what you do my story is going to happen).
Keep designing your game, stay in school/keep your day job.
-
There's no need for it to turn into a peein' contest, folks.
This is the opposite of what was intended.
Fellas, I'm not a mod, but I could tell things were headed in this direction (because talkin' about another man's GM is about like talkin' about another man's wife, in certain social circles) -- y'all may want to ease up, before someone who is a mod takes notice.
-
Mod *is* taking notice.
You've both agreed to disagree on this, so either take the discussion to Private Messages or drop it completely.
-
I really disagree, Joe. When I gm I am attached to my npcs and my pc, they are all special to me in some way. Just because I consider one of them to be my character doesn't mean he/she gets any special treatment and I treat them exactly like I would if they were a pc. It seems like you haven't tried this before and have a negative impression of it. Either that or you saw a gm handle it poorly. An experienced gm can handle it so I don't see ANY reason to say that gmpc's don't exist.
The difference is that you are rping your character as not being privy to any of the details of your campaign that are not known by your pc. It takes true commitment to rp and it get's easier and easier to avoid metagaming.
An "experienced GM who can handle it" is probably a good 5 years from growing into an experienced GM that knows better.
I am going to say one thing and then abandon this thread. This is STAGGERINGLY arrogant on your part OnionMan. Basically you are saying you are the better GM and anyone else is too stupid to know they are doing it wrong. Wrong on both counts.
-
Now, why did you have to go there? :-\
I don't want to annoy Fastjack...that's just a bad idea.
But now you've gone and said that, and I am honor bound to defend Onion Man. *sigh*
What Onion Man said is in no way any more arrogant or condescending than what Shadowjack wrote. I don't say that to be argumentative, but to point out that Onion Man was defending me - or at least my point - not attacking Shadowjack.
This was a good topic...sad to see it go down like this.
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophit
-
Harumph. Mods never let me be disruptive in public...
@Spam
A fool learns from nothing.
An intelligent man learns the lessons of his own observations.
A wise man learns the lessons of the observations of others.
I've seen a lot of GMs grow through the decades, and have done so myself. A GM running a GMPC has failed at their craft or is fooling themselves into believing that the presence of their plot tool hasn't shattered the competitive dynamic of a role playing game.
-
Well, I asked nicely. Now I'm locking the thread until people can continue without impressing personal opinions on others.