Character-centricity

TornZero · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **TornZero** on Sun Apr 28, 2013 1:59 am

What do you all think of roleplays that serve to do little more than be about a single, all-important character (obviously played by none other than the GM)?

Personally, I think they should screw the roleplaying and just try writing a book.

Bosch · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Bosch** on Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:30 am

Agreed.

RPing is a totally different proposition from writing a book, it's collaborative and therefore more fluid. To me a good GM is able to keep all characters engaged simultaneously. Most RPers tend to see their character as the main character which makes sense as its the character they are writing about. A good GM is able to make the plot and setting their character and adapt it to the needs of their RPers. Trouble comes when a GM's plot isn't robust enough to allow players choice this can quickly devolve into the situation you mentioned above. The key is to remember RPs are ensemble pieces.

At the end of the day GMing is a tough gig, sure it's fun (more fun than RPing to some) but to make it work you do need to walk a fine line between micromanagement and anarchy.

VitaminHeart · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **VitaminHeart** on Sun Apr 28, 2013 5:03 am

99% of the time? Hate hate hate hate hate it.

I don't like to pre-judge plots as there are a lot of things that are generally not well done in RP that can be done well with a skilled writer, I feel like 'Every character wants X character for some reason' type plot lines are not conducive to a good RPing atmosphere.

To me, what sets RPing apart from regular prose is that you can have multiple protagonists, and you should adjust accordingly because of that. Ideally these plots should allow for a varied cast, and let each character have his/her/its moment in the sun. By only allowing for one central character you are relegating all the others to a less important role, not by their actions, but by the GM's mandate.

This brings up another issue. The protagonist character, from what I've seen, generally doesn't have a lot to justify their sudden importance. They don't do great things, they're not out to change the world, they're not some great leader of men, most of the time they only have this role due to being some sort of dubiously 'chosen' or 'magic' character. Essentially, the only reason they're there is because the GM said so, and they have no merits that would allow them to assume such a role.

So you could essentially have a character who has spent all their life preparing for a task, only to find themselves being effortlessly surpassed by the GM's character and be relegated to either background colour or babysitter.

It gets to be additionally a problem when the other characters seem to be there to try and win said protagonist over and keep them happy, as it means that characters are not even allowed to have an understandable resentment towards the person. They have to be nice to them too.

In my opinion, characters should gain importance in an RP through their actions. They should carve a niche by doing awesome things, leaving an impact on others' lives, and growing as a character. They should be good enough to make people want to support their struggles when they take place and want to gain their support. Forcing characters to do so is a very poor substitute to me.

Patcharoo · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Patcharoo** on Sun Apr 28, 2013 9:32 am

There is potential in there for a good story, but it must be handled well. The drama can come from the individual being so significant, and allows for a lot of angst and anger from those around the main character.

But when its just blatant center of attention self-insert/mary sue BS, nevermind.

starkandskinny · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **starkandskinny** on Sun Apr 28, 2013 3:34 pm

I don't usually like being a GM, but when I am, it's really hard for me to understand why GMs should have characters in the first place. I mean, sure, you can play some minor characters that in one way or another relate to the players' characters, in order to move the plot forward etc., but honestly, most of the time when I'm a GM I don't feel the necessity of even having my own character. The whole point, to me anyway, is to get the players to use their characters and develop them as much as possible within the plot. Group RPs are about everyone as a group, not about the GM.

Absenthia · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Absenthia** on Wed May 01, 2013 11:47 am

I've always had issues being the GM, either I'm too hard on people or not hard enough. In the end RP's I run tend to dissolve into chaos. I enjoy things that are joint efforts, and while a premade or already outlined plot can be useful, it can also be to the detriment of the RP.

I find that outlines are a good place to jump off from, or make sure you keep the RP moving. No one ever said you had to outline every single detail that happens between major events.

On the other hand if you micro manage and tell everyone what they can/cant do with a character in your plot can really discourage people, and stall out the RP as a whole I feel.

Kestrel · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Kestrel** on Thu May 02, 2013 3:43 am

Bosch wrote:Agreed.

RPing is a totally different proposition from writing a book, it's collaborative and therefore more fluid. To me a good GM is able to keep all characters engaged simultaneously. Most RPers tend to see their character as the main character which makes sense as its the character they are writing about. A good GM is able to make the plot and setting their character and adapt it to the needs of their RPers. Trouble comes when a GM's plot isn't robust enough to allow players choice this can quickly devolve into the situation you mentioned above. The key is to remember RPs are ensemble pieces.

At the end of the day GMing is a tough gig, sure it's fun (more fun than RPing to some) but to make it work you do need to walk a fine line between micromanagement and anarchy.

This mostly.

If you want to have a character as a GM you have to make sure your character doesn't compete with one of the main focuses of the RP. A fairly effective way I've found (in a heavy-combat RP) is to have your character be a non-combatant and hire people to fight/guide/cook/etc. for them. Then go out of your way to support your players with your character. Have your char treat their wounds, haggle for them at the store so they can get the price of that awesome, but otherwise too expensive, sword down to a number they can afford, etc. The PC's their main motivation will likely by money, or adventure. Or maybe it's getting stronger, using the 'main character' to get connections, or get him/her in their debt etc. Maybe it just so happens that a character is looking for their lost little sister but it's too dangerous to scout the area solo and too expensive to buy their own team of mercenaries. Whatever it is, just make sure a character's motivation isn't "I want to help main character." Because of this you want to keep the main motivation for your character low profile.

Because, in this scenario, your character doesn't compete for most bad-ass fighter, most intriguing motivation/backstory, and (for the love of) isn't some kind of celebrity that every NPC and their dog recognises. tl;dr doesn't compete for the spotlight, you can focus very much on the events without the players feeling they're pushed away from the main character spot. To them, your character is a support character that just so happens to provide them with a means to meet their goals. I find this the most effective way of RP'ing with a 'plot-centric' character as a GM, experienced as well as witnessed.

shadowty · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **shadowty** on Thu May 02, 2013 7:59 am

I say there should be limits to what players can do with characters. The pimp my charater mentality is not fun at all no matter who uses it. I would rather see characters strugle hard for their goals.

Ylanne · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Ylanne** on Sun May 05, 2013 12:00 am

The best roleplay experiences I've had were truly collaborative, where no one person was "in charge," and no one or even few characters were the sole center of attention or plot significance. We bounce ideas off of each other constantly, and revise other ideas about character backstories, development arcs, and plot ideas accordingly, so that we have both solid plans and fluid ideas subject to change on a whim. The fun is in the collaborative development of character and plot, so that we're truly meshing things together and creating collaboratively rather than trying to come up with character or plot ideas to fit a preset theme.

VitaminHeart · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **VitaminHeart** on Sun May 05, 2013 5:51 am

Ylanne wrote:The best roleplay experiences I've had were truly collaborative, where no one person was "in charge," and no one or even few characters were the sole center of attention or plot significance. We bounce ideas off of each other constantly, and revise other ideas about character backstories, development arcs, and plot ideas accordingly, so that we have both solid plans and fluid ideas subject to change on a whim. The fun is in the collaborative development of character and plot, so that we're truly meshing things together and creating collaboratively rather than trying to come up with character or plot ideas to fit a preset theme.

This. Lots of this.

The most enjoyable and longest lasting RPs I've taken part in have been very much collaborative, and have generally had the 'main' role swapping round from arc to arc, focusing on a few characters for a period and switching round so different characters were developed.

Most of the development of these arcs has come from the participants, and the GM has served as a balancing role making sure all the threads interact properly and don't interrupt one another's progress.

This sort of thing does come from an atmosphere where participants have gotten past the whole 'my character is the most important thing to me' thing that some RPers have. Once people start actually working in the mindset of ' If my character did this that would be cool development for X's character, I can't wait to see how they deal with that', then you tend to lose the problem of characters stealing the limelight, as you utilize your own characters in order to create things for other characters to do.

Ylanne · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Ylanne** on Sun May 05, 2013 9:02 pm

These roleplays also tend to be settings in which every roleplayer involved actually has multiple characters. One of the maxims that I use is "There are no minor characters." The feeling of mutual excitement with collaboration tends to arise when each roleplayer begins to care about everyone else's characters in the same way that they do for their own characters. This lends itself to a collaborative creating environment where notions of GMing, main characters, or focusing too much attention on one player/character tend to disappear pretty rapidly.

Character-centricity

a topic in Game Design Workshop, a part of the RPG forum.

Character-centricity

Re: Character-centricity

Re: Character-centricity

Re: Character-centricity

Re: Character-centricity

Re: Character-centricity

Re: Character-centricity

Re: Character-centricity

Re: Character-centricity

Re: Character-centricity

Re: Character-centricity

Post a reply

Make a Donation

Who is online