Why does the DM play characters?

No one has asked me directly, but the gods of Fangea know all and see all [img]wink.gif[/img]

I don't know if the fact that I play characters as well as DM bothers anyone, but I thought an explanation might allay any rankling or concerns.

The Caer Falken Inn is 2 years old at the end of this month, and it has come close to dying a few times. Sometimes due to lack of players, lack of interest, or DM frustration. The addition of characters played by me was to solve the following problems.

1. We have had to actually cancel games sessions because ther group showing up was either too small in number or two weak or imbalanced to survive the scheduled adventure. Having an extra character I can count on being there helps solve this problem.

2. There are times when there just isn't enough of a particular class or skill available. Last night was a perfect example of a warrior heavy party which had no wizard. I suspected Nivarin was not going to play, and so I created Moonwind. His presence assisted the group, and would have been critical had the druid and thief been unable to play, leaving only warriors.

3. A DM controlled character is a story telling device. Rather than giving everything you see as descriptive text, I can have my character reveal things in an organic way, interacting with the party and inducing role play.

4. Sometimes the party just doesn't get it. It happens. There are even times in which no one has the skills, feats or talent to even warrant an intelligent hint on my part. I can offer hints through an actual character rather than through divine inspiration or intervention.

5. I can throw out red herrings. My characters will not know what I know, and may sometimes suggest misleading, wrong or stupid solutions. This advice needs to go through the party as a filter, acting upon the good and disgarding the implausible.

6. I can help further role playing and story lines by acting upon insights I get as a DM, helping keep the party on track in many areas, including the esoteric ones that we don't always think about. If I notice a potential breach of alignment, it is far more effective for Garrick to discuss the morality of the situation, then to tell you as the DM that you have deviated from the path of good or law or whatever.

7. Actually taking a character through the game gives me player perspective which sometimes gets lost as a DM. If I can see a situation that is frustrating to Garrick or Nightwind or Moondance, I can be sure that it is fristrating to Aoborr, Vilarneseh and Stranng. This is a sort of self check system.

8. Controlling a character from scratch enables me to understand game mechanics better, familiarizes me more with spells, feats and the uses of skills and alertrs me to those nuances in the rules that I might overlook by only playing evil adversaries. By advancing and taking new feats, I can experience which things were mistakes and which worked out really well, and this will help me aid players in the future.

9. Lastly (not firstly as many might presume), it is fun to play a character, watch it advance, choose its skills, equip its weapons, spend the loot, etc. Understand that I have been a DM for over 25 years and seldom get to play. While this isn't exactly the same, it comes close, and I hope people do not begrudge me this little thrill.

Anyone with concerns about a character of mine stealing the lime light must understand that a party adventurer does this no more than the evil wizard or elven queen NPC, or even cattalinia for that matter. Does my character syphon off XP and wealth from others? Yes, but that is simply the price you pay by having another character's aid. His presence also allows me to plan more challenging scenarios which in the big picture, yield more XP and greater wealth.

I remember those early weeks shortly after the kickoff when there was often just the DM, Leandra and Shadell who showed up.

I don't mind the DM playing as well as running the adventure and NPCs. I've done that in as well when I've ST'd in the WoD.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Starshadow:
Anyone with concerns about a character of mine stealing the lime light must understand that a party adventurer does this no more than the evil wizard or elven queen NPC, or even cattalinia for that matter. Does my character syphon off XP and wealth from others? Yes, but that is simply the price you pay by having another character's aid. His presence also allows me to plan more challenging scenarios which in the big picture, yield more XP and greater wealth.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No concerns here, since your characters tend to blend in smoothly and, I've noticed, favor supporting roles I don't see any "intrusion" at all. Yes, sometimes they have to step forward, but I've never seen them 'steal' the limelight [img]smile.gif[/img]

I think the only time it bugged me was when Garrick (okay...the horses, and THEN Garrick) blew our cover when we were using the mists to hide from the wyvern riders. It seemed contrived, and felt as though a perfectly good strategy were being sabotaged in an unlikely fashion. However, such things need to happen in order to further the plot, I suppose. I haven't had any other issues with DM NPCs at all.

Contrived? Not really.

Horses are terrified of Wyverns. The party opted for horses to reach Devonshire sooner. Had Garrick or another NOT tried to control the horses, they would've run, or been attacked and killed, and we'd have lost them and any gear still with them.

Straang and the others chose to leave the mist area.

If you like to play a character well that is what it is. I believe we all understand that you go to great lengths in order to have a game ready every Friday night, and I think none of us would want to take away something that gives you pleasure. I would like to address a few points that you mentioned and some you may not be aware of:

1. I don't think there has been a low number of players since you started with Garrick nor do I think that there was a lack of figting types at the time

2. When I first learned that Garrick was under your control, at first I instantly regarded him with more wieght than the other characters..I was also new to the game so this may have been limited to me because of my lack of experience at the time.

3. I really love the roleplaying part of this game...And I think you may not be aware of how significantly a regular character under your direct control alters roleplaying. An example would be the conflict that was developing between Stythil and Stranng over the treatment of the Red Cloak in relation to Merilin's promise. I don't know if you felt that Stranng was acting out of alignment at the time or if you were uncomfortable with conflict between Stythil and Stranng. But the moment Garrick moved in and gave his opinion about what was going on, I as a player knew what ever would have transpired from that point on was kabashed. I as a player figured you wanted the situation to cease and perhaps that Stranng was wrong and I am sure the player of Stythil felt justified in his actions as a result of Garrick's intervention. If a different character had stepped in I think there may have been a different ending. I know what Stranng was doing seemed extreme but there are 2 players in addition to yourself that read Stranng's story and I believe it sheds light on such behavior...the others just don't know and that is the point....roleplaying. I think in that particular instance your intervention as a player directly altered the outcome of that confrontation and compromised the ecological validity (or organicness if you will) of the roleplaying end of the game at that point.

3. I also understand that this was an isolated incident. I feel that an additional PC, controled by you, added to the party may be imperative depending on the circumstances. I believe that roleplaying is important to you and that this may bring to light a point you may not have been aware of.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Stranng:
...But the moment Garrick moved in and gave his opinion about what was going on, I as a player knew what ever would have transpired from that point on was kabashed. I as a player figured you wanted the situation to cease and perhaps that Stranng was wrong and I am sure the player of Stythil felt justified in his actions as a result of Garrick's intervention.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And this is exactly what you should not have done. Characters should not make decisions based on player knowledge, and if Stranng's behavior was altered because of something his player knew, then that is not really different from a PC Fighter knowing the material components of a Lightning Bolt because the player happened to have read the Players Handbook. And that's not quite kosher.

If the character Garrick got through to Stranng, then that is fine. If Garrick pissed Stranng off further, then that was fine. If Stranng decided he now had a new target, also fine. And of course Stranng could have ignored Garrick or acted any other way which was in character for Stranng. The point is that, just like with any NPC, each of my characters is their own entity. They don't all think or act like me, they don't all know what I know and they most certainly are not angelic messengers from the gods, and should be treated just like any other character. In the case you mentioned, Garrick spoke out becaue that CHARACTER saw Stranng as unfairly lashing out at a comrade in arms. Garrick was acting within HIS character and HIS alignment, because it is not in HIS character to see his friends get bullied for acting in good concience. Likewise you are not likely to see Garrick stand by and watch a woman get raped, a child get beaten or a horse get abused. As the DM, I had no opinion whatsoever about Stranng's behavior, especially since it did not deviate from his Neutral alignment.

On the flip side, if I sneak in a hint or two through the characters, and those hints are ignored, unfavorable or annoying to the party, then that too is part of life. Essentially characters run by me are NPC's, just like Countess Thora, Unwin or Prism Berrycatcher...all of whom have traveled with your party and were basically my characters as well. The only true difference is that the newer characters will advance alongside yours for game balance and continuity purposes, as well as being there for the nine reasons previously listed.

Every reason you gave for playing characters I either assumed was true, or, in the case of the XP loss, you acknowledged. I don't think that concern is enough for me to be bothered by it, since it is, after all, your game, and you're far more likely to make a fun game if you enjoy it.

Just to clarify, you've also said that:
1) You may present information for the sake of smoother roleplaying through your characters;
2) You may present hints when the party is missing something important through your characters;
3) You may advise about possible alignment deviations through your characters; and
4) You may present false or misleading information through your characters.

Please let me know if I have represented you accurately. Thanks.

You have represented me accurately.