GMs - Do you get bored when you're a player?

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
It's not just this game. Other games with other GMs I've had... 1) A medic in a system where you can't heal. 2) A magic user focused on identifying magic items and creatures, when the GM decides to tell us everything without rolling. 3) A wealthy celebrity in Call of Cthulhu where our group has all the money we need due to a benefactor.

(2) and (3) sound like exceedingly bad GM/player communication of some form or other. We could probably run an entire thread diagnosing the missteps involved there.

Though, honestly, (3) isn't so bad in my eyes. CoC, for me, isn't about mechanical effectiveness anyway. That game could have been how a celebrity who nominally has everything manages to retain sanity in the face of horror. Lots of internal roleplay to be had there.

I don't know how (1) could happen. How do you manage to build a medic character when the system itself won't support it? If there are no skills or powers for healing, ho/why did you make that character?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

payn

I don't believe in the no-win scenario
I tend to think of myself as a "GM-player" - like someone who tries to see what the GM is doing and support the other players and making that fun scene occur. For example, encouraging others to take the quest, or if there's a fun encounter planned, for us to engage with it.
Other than that, I like creating fun, memorable PCs - not power gamers - just ones with interesting play options, roleplaying quirks, etc.
However, in many games, those play options don't come up. Recently, I created a character that could teleport around the battlefield as a very mobile fighter - it was written into his backstory in a unique way and was trying out a new class from a splat book.
As it turned out, I'm the frontline tank. I can't move. I have to stand there in heavy armor. Because of the way I built my character (which wasn't my intent), I am a worse fighter and worse at doing what I created my character to do.
This is pretty informative. Some RPGs do need that role fulfillment to work. A sort of bump, set, and spike design for combat. This requires a discussion amongst all the players in a session zero so you know who is looking to do what, and also how they are looking to do it. Did you make this character independently from the others?
It's not just this game. Other games with other GMs I've had... 1) A medic in a system where you can't heal.
Can't heal as in a game specific action? Was the RPG skill based? You may have wandered into a narrative type RPG looking for that game blueprint and/or carrying assumptions from the specific combat roles of other RPGs.
2) A magic user focused on identifying magic items and creatures, when the GM decides to tell us everything without rolling.
Was there a session zero and/or campaign players guide? This seems like something id definitely discuss with my GM before creating. While as a GM I try to help fulfill my players desires for character identities, sometimes play style and/or mechanics are a mismatch. For example, I might find identifying items and creatures to be tedious and besides the point of the game. I'd tell a player that if I didnt want it to be a focus. Though, if my player was really excited about it, id find a way to make it work.
3) A wealthy celebrity in Call of Cthulhu where our group has all the money we need due to a benefactor.
Well, it sounds like the character wasnt just wealthy, but a celebrity too? Surely there were some other aspects to play up about that? Im sensing a certain theme in these descriptions. A singular purpose, or a shtick the character must perform to be actualized. Like episodic television where you know at some point in the episode its going to go like this;
Player1: If only we had a helicopter or a plane!
Wealthy Celebrity: One plane coming right up! /Whips out credit card

If the above isnt necessary, or the GM isnt providing opportunities for it to occur, the character is boring/bad. This makes some sense coming from a GM who is used to creating not just schticky NPCs, but custom creating situations for them to do their schticky things. You have control over both the usefulness of said schtick, and situations in which to apply them as GM. As a player, however, you are stuck with a single schtick, and worse, at the whims of the GM creating situations in which your schtick is useful or applicable.
It seems that in every game I've played in recent memory, I'd be better suited just being a generic warrior-type.
That seems like a conclusion based on being able to do a singular thing in every situation for particular RPGs. I'd say in the future focus on session zero with both your fellow players and GM. Also, Id consider what RPG means to you. If its really important to be able rock, paper, scissor in design, id avoid skill based and narrative RPGs.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
Other than that, I like creating fun, memorable PCs - not power gamers - just ones with interesting play options, roleplaying quirks, etc.
However, in many games, those play options don't come up.

As a follow-up...

It is pretty common for a GM to design an NPC with some one important thing they can do. They can have a shtick, one thing they are good at, and be fine, because the bulk of NPCs are on screen only to do that one thing, only present for a short period of time. And, as a GM, if you need greater depth, you can add it on the spot.

This will often fail as a PC design. It is even more likely to fail if you don't vet that shtick with the GM and the rest of the party, to make sure they need or work well with that shtick. If that one shtick doesn't work, you're stuck, because you can't add more depth in play.

For more than a one-shot, it often pays a player to design a bit of depth, rather than focused optimization - it means you're more likely to have something to do that's relevant to play.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
Well, it sounds like the character wasnt just wealthy, but a celebrity too? Surely there were some other aspects to play up about that?

Actually, just last night, I watched a movie, "Late Night with the Devil" (available on Netflix and Hulu) that has this very situation, and I feel it was done very well.
 

UngainlyTitan

Legend
Supporter
No, I like playing, only really get game has a lot of faffing about, which is, as often as not, the GMs fault.
I am a person who prefers to play, the DM role falls to me because i will do it, if no one else wants to.
 

Retreater

Legend
Can't heal as in a game specific action? Was the RPG skill based? You may have wandered into a narrative type RPG looking for that game blueprint and/or carrying assumptions from the specific combat roles of other RPGs.
Maxing out healing skills in a system that ends up having healing checks happen during downtime - so your character might as well not go on the adventure at all.

For example, I might find identifying items and creatures to be tedious and besides the point of the game. I'd tell a player that if I didnt want it to be a focus. Though, if my player was really excited about it, id find a way to make it work.
This was in Numenera, where a key component was supposed to be recovering lost devices, figuring out what they do, and using them almost as a currency. And then determining the weaknesses of the monsters. None of this came up, so I was left with the equivalent of a underpowered cantrip as my only action in the game.

Though, honestly, (3) isn't so bad in my eyes. CoC, for me, isn't about mechanical effectiveness anyway. That game could have been how a celebrity who nominally has everything manages to retain sanity in the face of horror. Lots of internal roleplay to be had there.
Yeah, but it's not as nice as the guy who has occult knowledge and able to figure out stuff. Or the mechanic who can fix stuff and break into buildings, or the private eye who can fight and sneak around. My guy - I just sort of do nothing.
 

payn

I don't believe in the no-win scenario
Maxing out healing skills in a system that ends up having healing checks happen during downtime - so your character might as well not go on the adventure at all.
There is nothing the character can do in this system except heal in downtime? The adventure needs nothing from a medic whatsoever? No knowledge/skill checks? Outside of being a medic this character has no aspirations or abilities?

I have run into some folks who let the system entirely dictate the worth of their character. If they dont get XP for it, they dont do it. If there isnt a mechanical binary check system; they dont do it. Adventure also means combat and if you are not combat built you are a waste of space. Of course, it takes two to bring about this perception. If GMs dont offer you opportunities, then I can see why everything outside the schtick is a dead end.
This was in Numenera, where a key component was supposed to be recovering lost devices, figuring out what they do, and using them almost as a currency. And then determining the weaknesses of the monsters. None of this came up, so I was left with the equivalent of a underpowered cantrip as my only action in the game.
That sounds like bait and switch or the GM just gave up on the concept after kick off. I'd just make sure in the future to really dig into session zero before playing so this doesnt happen. Or, you can just make bland warriors as insurance against such I guess.
Yeah, but it's not as nice as the guy who has occult knowledge and able to figure out stuff. Or the mechanic who can fix stuff and break into buildings, or the private eye who can fight and sneak around. My guy - I just sort of do nothing.
A celebrity would know people I assume. They would also make a really good distraction, if folks needed one. Open doors by their fame, not their mechanical skill. I think characters need to think outside the box for opportunity sake. What did you have in mind when you made a wealthy celebrity PC?
 


aramis erak

Legend
As someone accustomed to being a "Forever GM," I find myself growing bored when I'm a player. Having one character with one action with potentially minimal impact in a combat, waiting until my turn comes around again, possibly fighting a creature immune or highly resistant to my attacks - it's just not as exciting as controlling a squad of bad guys, shaping the story and world, controlling the pace of the game, etc.
Does anybody else feel the same way? Any tips about transitioning from being a GM to a "good player?"
Yes.
Sometimes, I even get bored as a GM....
 


Remove ads

Top