Hello fellow Gamemasters! I started playing a few ,months ago and being the only one with the rulebook I was forced to assume the role of GM. But I created anyway a character who now plays along the other players . I'd like to know what you people think of this.
Thank you,
B.Kaedran

I think that having the GM actually play in the same game as he's GM is a bad idea and I wouldn't do it. On the other hand I pretty much always have NPC:s through which I interact with the players. Gives them some hints, maybe some help to save them from a pitch and stuff like that.

As a GM who has done both... having an npc in the game as a 'player' or going without one, let me add a couple of insights:

I don't think it's a bad idea overall, especially if there is only 2 or 3 players to start a campaign. Often players fail to take into account how important certain classes are. Take Adept for example. An Adept is almost always necessary, or at least a player who gains a number of different pertinent lores, so the players will have a good chance to figure things out. Tech-Priests and Psykers can fill those roles. But I have had my share of campaigns start with an Assassin, Guardsman and an Arbitrator. Still, elite classes can fill some of the void, at least until more players join the game.

Once you have 4 or more players, you should have that npc fade away... or just elevate them into a Legate (or Interrogator or Inquisitor) position and move them off stage left. It's up to the players to fill the gaps, not you as the GM.

I have to admit, there have been times wherein I have created the 'super' npc... or it just seems so sometimes. But when you are the one running the scenario, you know what skills you will need for the players to suceed. So it's easy to create the character who has those abilities. If your player can do too much, then he becomes the star, and you risk alienating your players.

Believe me on this one point, players NEED to be the stars of the show, or you won't have much of a show to run.

It's pretty difficult. You know what is going to happen, what has happened, how strong the opponents are, what abilities they have, who to fight and who to run from, even where the traps are. You know which npc has which clues, who will be helpful and who won't.

And from a resource management perspective it splits your focus.

I understand your desire to have a pc, I prefer to play myself, but best to make it a 'favourite' npc I think.

Thank you all for your replies.
But apart from the fact that I rather enjoy having a character ,the thing is we sometimes swap roles by which I mean that one of my player (even though it's not relevant,the Tech-priest) assumes the role of GM.Thus I need a character anyway in game so he can earn xp.
Also ,my players have a serious lack of roleplay and tend not to do much in game so I use my character to nudge them in the right direction.
Should I still stop?
B.Kaedran

Baalkaedran said:

Mate if it is working for your group then don't even ask. The key is to ask whether you're all having fun. If someone is unhappy, then find out why and make adjustments. If everyone is happy, no problems.

Oh yeah, I forgot to talk about your 'role playing' issue. Just a couple of tips.

Suggest they think of a movie character that they kind of identify with their character - the same personality type. Then get them to act like that, this is easy-cheesy, but it will get them started down the right path. Who cares if it results in a bunch of cliches and one liners. Catch phrases are good like this too e.g. "Know the mutant, kill the mutant!" because it opens up the question of why they feel tat way which is an insight to the character's personality and expereince.

Also, give an xp award for role playing. Best role playing 'in character' gets the award. This has to be for role playing though not just who cracked the best joke or what have you. Also allow the players to award one as a group. This should only be half as much as the award you give, and you get to veto it if it is not based on role playing. If it is problem solving that is the issue (i.e. they all sit there blankly staring at you expecting to be entertained) then give a 'best idea' or 'aha!' award as well. Again, this should be smaller than the gm awarded role playing award.

Heck if for example, say John is playing Tyrus the Arbitrator, you can single him out in a particular instance and say something like "well John, Tyrus would be familiar with these sort of situations, what do you think he would say or do in a situation like this?" or even address them directly by their characters name e.g. "How does Tyrus feel about that?".

You could even introduce a 'No out of game names' rule and get them to only refer to each other in character.

These are all small things that will help get the role playing going. It's make believe, they haveto have the confidence to pretend to be their characters, and not be afraid that the others will laugh at them. This is perhaps most important, and it won't hurt to incentivise it as I have described. If you put in place the above ideas,it will help break down that fear many players have of 'what will they think of me'. Let's face it, most role players are introverts to some extent (except the ones that love the 'acting' aspects) so you need to encourage them out of that shell. The above should help.

Yeah,these are rather good ideas. I must admit that indeed roleplaying is hard because of this fear or being ludicrous .
Anyways I really appreciate your help and also really like the 'names only' rule.
Thanks a lot !
B.Kaedran

P.S: All of this reminds me that I have another issue abot xp awards ,which I'll bring up in another post...
I feel needy...

I've been playing RPGs for a few decades now and the GM (usually myself) has always had a character in the party without it ever being a problem. Thinking back on these characters:

• The groups tend to be around 3 players - the GM's character tends to round out skills (combat-oriented if they are not and vice-versa.) Of course the characters are the stars but if they need to interface with the machine spirits and nobody else simply has that ability it keeps the plot moving.
• A GM character is not always guaranteed to be embraced by the party! I've had characters that I've thought were great that the group could take or leave. So I've found that giving these characters useful skills the party is lacking tends to increase the odds of acceptance. With all NPCs I try to give them something memorable - either a striking visual description, or an accent/repeated phrase, I've even know GMs that have particular songs they play when a NPC makes an appearance.
• The GM character doesn't make decisions on the group's course of action - this is what the players are for. They can advise and offer their opinion but you just have to remember what they would know and play them in character. If you are running a RPG game this shouldn't be too difficult for you.
• Related to the above - of the most successful GM characters one was a mute - which was hysterical as all communication had to essentially be mimed. But it neatly resolved the issue of having useful skills to round out the party without "knowing too much." The other was a drunk (ahem, "in-character" hopefully) and this character while being an insanely good fighter was simply unreliable as far as decision-making. Actually considered making this character have special skills on a sliding scale where the more he'd imbibed the better his combat skills increased but the worse his communication skills became - having the other characters make increasingly difficult rolls just to understand him.
• I've actually gotten in the habit now of roleplaying the GM character but handing the stats to another player to run it during combat - as I've got my hands full running the foes and keeping the combat organized overall. The players love having another character to open up with when the fighting starts.

This is just my experience but a GM character can totally work. My players understand that the GM character is a member of the party but in a supplementary role - they are the ones who are in the driver's seat of the adventure. Upon reflection I suppose this is more of a party mascot than a full-fledged member. The usefulness of a GM character has always outweighed the drawbacks for me.

I'm not keen on GMPCs, not using them myself and having had bad experiences with them as a player (the players being relegated to watching the NPCs do the job for them). Keeping GM and player knowledge seperate is tough, and that's assuming the GM is trying conciously not to give their character an unfair advantage. For smaller groups who need the backup, some of the suggestions above could work out (I confess to liking the mime idea).

In short, do what works for your group but make sure everyone is cool with it.

we had a GMPC in our DH when we 1st started out to round out group. during this current game, he has been relegated to the sideline/support roll..

as we have add 2 more players.

but he did very good to keep player knowledge from GM knowledge, and many time in combat our adept player ran the GMPC as well.

Howdy!

I feel your pain, as I have been the DM since DH came out, but anyone you run is an npc. We had a one session BC game that ended when everyone tried to kill the DM PC and he just would not die, I got to be DM again. So just because you have the book does not mean no one else can run. There are tons of free adventures on this site and others.

I feel your pain, but please no exp, and no pc.

I wanted to share our GM's experience thus far, Baalkaedran, as I think it reinforces what Dommael said about the GMPC being a supplementary role.

Like most of the posters in this thread who have run with GMPCs, our group is small (2 + GM) and needed a GMPC to complement some missing roles. Players are a skill-focused scum, and a combat assassin. The GM introduced both an Arbite and an Adept as other party members. It was generally understood that the Adept would generally serve as an NPC while the Arbite would tag along fairly constantly. Plans changed prior to our first mission following some abysmal fellowship rolls and role playing, as the assassin/scum duo refused direct help from the Arbite. The GM took this in stride, surprised but happy that we were forging our own (likely doomed) path. It's now several missions later, and we desperately need some assistance, so he will (hopefully) agree to have the Arbite play a more active role. His willingness to place the Arbite in and out of the adventure shows that the story is following the Players, not the GMPC. As Zakalwe pointed out, we enjoy this solution because it works for us . If our GM adamantly wanted to run a character alongside us constantly, we might have gone that route instead. I've even stepped out of the scum role for one make-shift mission (he was seeing to equipment and contacts) and took on an NPC temporarily, showing that we're mostly interested in driving the story along than anything else. If we were more interested in character action, the GM might have run two separate encounters, one for the hive-bound scum, and the other for the assassin.

Well, half the fun of being a GM is making up lovely NPCs, making the players really like them, and then having them killed in nasty and horrible ways to upset the players. Can't do all that while focusing too much on your own "PC", imnsho

How...? Swapped GM? So... Everyone knows the conspiracy running underneath?

I have WAY too many NPCs, locations, weather cycles, daylight hours, shopping, lazers, maps, battleboards, thoughts, and general player guffin to deal with without making my own PC as well to be secretly omniscient and 'help' the PCs.

Too much to do. I have an entire world to Roleplay as GM, they all just got one dude, I like not giving myself more work.

Agreed with the above! Not to mention, seeing as I run mostly investigations, it would be VERY hard to have an actual PC be completely neutral.

I already know who the murderer/heretic/spy/concealed xenos is..

Saldre said:

Suddenly, a PC appears!

"follow me! I know where the Corrupt Arbitrator's bookmark is with the symbol of Chaos on it!"

/Facepalm

It's a lovely idea for bumping up party numbers, but 5 times the work for a GM.