• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Are The Players The Heroes?

JamesonCourage

Adventurer
When I GM, I don't have my players be the Heroes. By "Heroes," I don't mean 'altruistic good guys'. I mean, 'the setting does not revolve around them'. They are but a few humble characters in the world.

Now, the plot seems to revolve around them, because it's all they interact with. While it progresses, however, the world does not stay stagnant. Skirmishes between other nations happen on the same continent; demons invade the homeland of the immortal races in an attempt to steal their immortality; powerful creatures imprisoned long ago have agents working to free them from their magical bonds. These are not things merely to keep the world seeming "alive" in my game. No, these things happen because it is more realistic.

When I GM a game for my players, we play out the story of these characters. They are not more important to fate than any NPC. They are not more important than any other PC. They are one in a million, in the most mundane sense of the word. They are a statistic. Should they reach hit die 20, and a rain of arrows fall upon them, or they fall 150 feet, or they are poisoned with the most lethal poison one can craft, then they will almost certainly die.

The players in my game are part of a larger story. The focus is on them, and that's the part we will all invest ourselves into. The setting is important, but it not nearly so interesting without the characters, and specifically the player characters. However, in my game, they are not special. They are not unique. They are not "heroes" when compared to others in their field, unless their skill dictates it so.

In short, the player characters are entitled to nothing in my game. Should they act a certain way, they should expect the realistic consequences of those actions. Kill someone in a bar fight? Depending on the government, there is a real chance that you will be imprisoned or executed. However, should you skip town and make it to a nearby forest, they probably will not pursue you -after all, who knows where he's going, how far it will be, etc? Get reports of him (armor, weapons, race, temperament, distinguishing features, etc.), and tack it to the wall in the barracks, then forget about it eventually if he doesn't resurface. Punishment for crimes are usually more brutal, though it's much harder to track down those who run away*.

At any rate, enough about me and my style. My players like it, and I like it, and that's all that matters for our particular group. I want to see how many people have a similar mindset (mind you, not the same mindset):

When you run your game (or when you play in a game that your GM runs), are the players the Heroes? Are they those special few which fate smiles upon even from lower levels? Or, rather, are they a small part of the multiverse, entitled to nothing, even at high levels? Are they something in between, or even more extreme?

I'm curious.



*We are playing my own creation of a game, where magic is rare, though powerful. Divinations are rare, and only divination specialist magicians would have the power to track down someone like they wish. Also, transportation magic has been greatly reduced in power, and it is difficult to even move miles with a single spell (again, a transportation specialist can achieve such feats of transportation).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

anest1s

First Post
In the latest campaign, we are the heroes. We have some sort of overgods infused with our souls by accident. On the beginning of the campaign we got captured,tortured and killed by a pit fiend and several chain devils. Then we got saved by solar angels. Then the rumors were that we killed all the devils, and we now are the Demonslayers.

So yeah, I guess we are the heroes.

Except that the DM tries to make us evil.

Different from what you describe, but it is funny as hell.
 

AuraSeer

Prismatic Programmer
The point of my game is for everybody to have fun, because it would otherwise be a waste of a perfectly good Monday night. And playing a named character in the movie is more fun than playing Disposable Red-Shirted Ensign #29,792.

Fate doesn't smile on my PCs; they do suffer realistic consequences. Awful things happen to them pretty regularly. They get beaten up and even killed when appropriate. At the moment they've been exiled from half the nations on the continent and are wanted criminals in a few others. It sounds like the only difference from your style is that my guys' actions might have the potential to make a difference to somebody, somewhere, sometime.
 

Alexander123

First Post
The point of my game is for everybody to have fun, because it would otherwise be a waste of a perfectly good Monday night. And playing a named character in the movie is more fun than playing Disposable Red-Shirted Ensign #29,792.

Agreed.

If the producers of Pirates of the Caribean had decided that Jack Sparrow was not going to be the protagonist of the story, if Ayn Rand in her book Atlas Shrugged (I recommend her books by the way, both fiction and non-fiction.) had decided not to make John Galt the hero of the story do you think anybody would have bothered to go watch the movie or read the book? The purpose of a RPG game is to have fun and enjoy a fantasy world where your characters are the heroes, something like watching a movie or reading a book. Its purpose is not in my opinion to play commoner level 3.
 

Sekhmet

First Post
In the latest campaign, we are the heroes. We have some sort of overgods infused with our souls by accident. On the beginning of the campaign we got captured,tortured and killed by a pit fiend and several chain devils. Then we got saved by solar angels. Then the rumors were that we killed all the devils, and we now are the Demonslayers.

So yeah, I guess we are the heroes.

Except that the DM tries to make us evil.

Different from what you describe, but it is funny as hell.
Your DM seems to really like Supernatural.
I've had to listen to it for the last few weeks while my wife watched it across the room. One after another.

My players are not "the heroes". I've been considering DMing a campaign that way lately, but I'm still on the ropes about it.
Occasionally, they will meet the heroes or work with them for a time toward a common goal, but to say that they were the main focus of the universe would be an overstatement.

Even "the heroes" are just playing their role. They are all pawns.
 


anest1s

First Post
I have asked my DM why should we be the heroes, and not just regular guys.

The reply can be summarized to "It wouldn't be a story worthy to be told".
If we weren't the heroes, we would be NPCs.

From DM perspective, when I started making the story I thought..."what would be awesome if I was a player?" and obviously, being just an other commoner wouldn't be that.

However, not being hero would be cool with me. But I would have to be someone awesome (could be villain, scoundrel, infamous barkeeper). Or I would get bored.
 

JamesonCourage

Adventurer
The point of my game is for everybody to have fun, because it would otherwise be a waste of a perfectly good Monday night. And playing a named character in the movie is more fun than playing Disposable Red-Shirted Ensign #29,792.

Fate doesn't smile on my PCs; they do suffer realistic consequences. Awful things happen to them pretty regularly. They get beaten up and even killed when appropriate. At the moment they've been exiled from half the nations on the continent and are wanted criminals in a few others. It sounds like the only difference from your style is that my guys' actions might have the potential to make a difference to somebody, somewhere, sometime.

Perhaps you misread my post, or perhaps I misguided you. My PCs make a difference in the setting. However, as I wrote, they do not define it by any means. They have helped strengthen the bonds on one of the evil imprisoned creatures I mentioned; they have aided a prince in retaking his castle from demonic forces (and were fairly instrumental, though arguably not entirely instrumental); they have defended the immortals and fought off the lesser invading forces while the stronger invading forces were dealt with by dozens of more powerful defenders.

My PCs can change the setting. It does not revolve around them. They are as subject to it as anyone else in the setting is. I hope this clarified things for you.

Agreed.

If the producers of Pirates of the Caribean had decided that Jack Sparrow was not going to be the protagonist of the story, if Ayn Rand in her book Atlas Shrugged (I recommend her books by the way, both fiction and non-fiction.) had decided not to make John Galt the hero of the story do you think anybody would have bothered to go watch the movie or read the book? The purpose of a RPG game is to have fun and enjoy a fantasy world where your characters are the heroes, something like watching a movie or reading a book. Its purpose is not in my opinion to play commoner level 3.

Well, I suppose we disagree on some fundamental level (as I personally cannot stand most of Ayn Rand), but enjoyment is subjective. You do not need to be the person defining the setting to have enjoyment in a roleplaying game. You might really enjoy playing a humble warrior looking to defend his people from small mundane threats, or you might really enjoy playing a scholar well-versed in tactics and history; you might enjoy playing an undead character, come back to avenge those who killed him in battle, or you might even enjoy playing an aristocratic performer, with little to offer other than guidance, gold, and status.

Fun is subjective when you're roleplaying. If your group has fun being the Heroes, always changing the Fate Of The Multiverse, that's fine. I've played in games like that before. However, in a roleplaying game, you don't need to be the heroes to have fun. You don't even need to have combat to have fun (even if we all enjoy it). The hobby is multi-faceted, and enjoying the simplicities of roleplaying a mundane character in a large world is appealing to many people.

Play what you like, though :)

I have a similar mindset.

Good to know there are others with similar mindsets out there :)

I have asked my DM why should we be the heroes, and not just regular guys.

The reply can be summarized to "It wouldn't be a story worthy to be told".
If we weren't the heroes, we would be NPCs.

From DM perspective, when I started making the story I thought..."what would be awesome if I was a player?" and obviously, being just an other commoner wouldn't be that.

However, not being hero would be cool with me. But I would have to be someone awesome (could be villain, scoundrel, infamous barkeeper). Or I would get bored.

Perhaps my original post wasn't as clear as it should be, or perhaps people assume too much. I suspect the former.

At any rate, not being the center of the setting does not mean that you are both a commoner and also not the center of the story. Players are always the center of the story. The "camera" always follows them, their deeds, catalogs their successes and failures.

However, just because my player is playing a warrior, I am not going to make an NPC be automatically worse at it. Since I run a classless system, it's harder to do anyways, unless I arbitrarily drop NPC attributes, which I refuse to do. I make no distinction between PC and NPC in character creation. All options are available to both. PCs have no advantage on NPCs inherently, and the reverse it true as well. Anything one can achieve, the other can as well.

When I ran 3.X D&D, I did not use the "warrior" or "commoner" NPC classes. I used "fighter" or "expert" instead. I despised the idea that NPCs were inherently less powerful than PCs. It breaks immersion, and in my group (which is completely subjective), breaking immersion hurts roleplaying. I think that I don't necessarily need to make NPCs have a base level of power now, but I still do not like the idea of players being more powerful simply for the fact that they are players. It still breaks immersion.

As I stated, the players are entitled to nothing extra, but they can earn it, just like anyone else. The setting does not revolve around them, but the story does. They have no advantages inherently given to them for being PCs, but the NPCs have no advantages inherently given to them for being NPCs.

Again, play what you like. That's why you're playing. Since several people seemed to extrapolate concepts of my style that I do not embrace, I though I'd explain it further. This is not an attempt at arguing which is better. I am simply curious about others and the reasoning why. The base answer should always be "because it is more fun to play with" in my book, but hey, play what you like :)
 
Last edited:

Celebrim

Legend
They are the protagonists. Whether or not they are the heroes is up to them.

Theirs is not the only story. But, it is the story we are telling right now, and they are the most important characters in it.
 

JamesonCourage

Adventurer
They are the protagonists. Whether or not they are the heroes is up to them.

Theirs is not the only story. But, it is the story we are telling right now, and they are the most important characters in it.

+1 Exp didn't work. I don't think that the players are more important than NPCs, but their story definitely is to me.
 

Remove ads

Top