Forum

So I'm new to Dragonbane (my core edition arrives Friday!) and TTRPGs in general. The groups I play with know less about the game than I do, so I will be de facto dedicated GM for the foreseeable future. The thing is, I really want to be able to build and take along a PC of my own. Is this unorthodox or frowned upon in the TTRPG/Dragonbane community? Is there any reason it wouldn't work?

I really appreciate any feedback!

I used to do that back in the days when we played. Even though combat runs very smoothly in this game, I would recommend to have a more support/scholar oriented character for this.

I used to do that back in the days when we played. Even though combat runs very smoothly in this game, I would recommend to have a more support/scholar oriented character for this.

Thanks! That is sort of what I was thinking; make a support build character that can be useful and help balance things out, but don't take a leading role in the adventure.

I'm doing this most of the time, in any RPG - mostly because the group is just short of one player, or nobody wants to play a certain character but the group needs the skills.

Those characters are most likely to die along the way, as I want to test different concepts. My players always scourn me for doing this.

The trick is, to detach from the GM-seat when using the character. You make decisions based on the knowledge of the character alone, and they may sometimes be bad. This works, of course, best in a free-flowing game without a strict stoyline.
Playing a rather simple-minded character can also help, as nobody expects them to come up with some brilliant idea.

So I'm new to Dragonbane (my core edition arrives Friday!) and TTRPGs in general. The groups I play with know less about the game than I do, so I will be de facto dedicated GM for the foreseeable future. The thing is, I really want to be able to build and take along a PC of my own. Is this unorthodox or frowned upon in the TTRPG/Dragonbane community? Is there any reason it wouldn't work?

I really appreciate any feedback!

A very good rule of thumb is never never ever have a GM character in a game. The GM gets to run the NPCs, design the world and control events but the playing of the game is the province of the players.

I agree with Borusa on this. The GM plays NPCs, not PCs.

Sometimes there is a small difference. If the party makes friends with Grub in Riddermound, for example. He tags along and is played by the GM. The party decides whether to trust Grub and share loot with him, etc. That decision is part of the game for the players, a fun part. They never really know Grub - will he fight with them?; will he run away at the next opportunity?; what side is Grub on if they're attacked by goblins?; is he telling the truth about Maladûk?

A PC, on the other hand, is an equal in every way. PCs' motivations can be a bit fuzzy. The player is finding their place exploring the GM's world.

I have played with a GM who used a so called "GMPC." As a player, I found it confusing and weird. I couldn't figure out that character's purpose and even after the GM said that they simply wanted to participate playing, I could never see that character as "one of us". Every time they said something, it was unclear to me whether the GM wanted to steer us in some direction, or get us to think in a different way about our plans. I felt myself not wanting the GMPC's input.

Sure, allow an NPC to join the party, but only every now and then. Use NPCs with a purpose and preferably who are already described in the adventure you are using. For the GM, such NPCs' motivations must be kept extremely clear. The players can be left guessing.

Same advice here, not to include a GM-run character.

I'm having a little difficulty with the distinctions being made here. Back in the day hirelings were fairly common, and were controlled, more or less, by the GM. NPCs are controlled by the GM, and if you have an NPC that sticks around a little more and a little longer than usual that shouldn't really be a problem. I think as long as they stay mostly in the background and don't ride rough shot over the PCs it should be fine.

I remember back in the early 80s no one in our play group ever wanted to play a cleric, so Cecil the cleric was a mainstay in most of our games, regardless of who was DMing at the time.

I think if you're careful, stay out of the decision making, and let the players feel like they have a valuable ally, there's no harm in essentially having a permanent NPC around. If done properly it can actually be a lot of fun, and GMs are supposed to be having fun too.

I'd definitely be careful and mindful of my players' feelings, but give it a shot and see how it goes. I'd love to hear if it worked out for you...