Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bendris Noulg" data-source="post: 1511920" data-attributes="member: 6398">I would agree that Buffy is a bad example of this theory and relating it (a story centered on one character) to an RPG (a group event).  A better analogy to me would be ST:TNG, in which the characters routinely exchange what character type they are depending on the story-line and focus of the episode. I wouldn't think so because, over the course of many tales, this focus is indeed common.  Even the fantasy-epic of Arthur has this: Uthur is the focus, then Arthur is the focus, and then Lancelot, and then Gallahad, and then back to Arthur (note: this mirror's my favored version of the epic, other versions feature this shift differently; Mists of Avalon, for example, focuses first on Ygrain and then on Morganna). The fundamental purpose of an RPG is to provide functional game mechanics in which to resolve situations that arise in role-play.  Remove the story-line function of an RPG and all you have left is number-crunching and monster bashing (like Heroclicks or whatever that game is called), which might make a fun game for some, but is it really an RPG? Consequently, what makes a good novel often makes for an excellent campaign.  I'll continue this line of thought in a moment... This I agree with; I certainly wouldn't want to play in a game where I was constantly playing second-banana to another PC.  However, as a gamer, I realize that some story lines within a campaign will focus on other characters (often single individuals) while everyone else is there to support, assist, and aid that character in accomplishing a specific goal.  Insisting that it cannot happen this way is essentially the same as saying "If it isn't equally important to everyone, it shouldn't be important to anyone". For example, let's say I'm in a game and one of the other players has a Druid.  During some point, the Druid gets called to a grove to speak to some big-wig Druid.  During this session, I don't expect to be very important.  It's just the facts of the matter: I (my PC) accompanied his friend (the Druid) to a Druidic meeting (of which I am a 5th wheel).  Some might wail against such a session, but I can't really imagine why.  After all, later on in the campaign, my PC might be part of a War Councle, discussing tactics, weapons, supplies, logistics, etc., with other military-styled NPCs, during which the Druid is the one accompanying me. To be honest, I really can't conceive of a game where such things didn't happen in such a manner.  To me, that is entirely part of the experience.  An individual scenario, encounter, or adventure might place any single PC into the Protagonist role, but over the course of a campaign, there are a multitude of scenarios, encounters, and adventures that should provide each PC the opportunity to portray the Protagonist. Let me give a few examples: Adventure #1: I learn of an ancestral blade that was wielded by my great grandfather.  If I retrieve the blade, it will acknowledge me as the heir to a barony.  I go on a quest to retrieve it and my friends accompany me.  I am the Protagonist while the rest of the group fulfills the other roles. Adventure #2: The party Wizard learns of a required Power Component to create a magic item.  He quests to find and acquire this item.  He is the protagonist while the rest of the group (including myself) fulfill the other roles. Adventure #3: The party Druid learns of an ancient relic that will stop a horrible wilting that is plagueing the land.  He quests to recover the relic.  He is the protagonist while the rest of the group (once more, including me) fulfill the other roles. Ideally, the PCs should all be friends and allies.  If this is true, then the GM should not need to invent Protagonistic motivations for every PC in the group; their friendship should provide enough cohesion to the group and the assumption of these various character types will occur naturally.</blockquote>

Verification