[X] My Assistant

[ErrosCallidus]

About to start running a 2-3 player game. Is it feasible to run a character myself to round out any skillset deficincies in the PCs? I could tailor the setting to the PCs but only to a certain extent... E.G. no mages, DOESN'T mean you would never encounter any astral security measures. Rather than artificially hobbling the setting or blindsiding the characters (it's their first foray into SR) I'm looking for a "middle way."

[Kagetenshi]

IMO, no—it's very difficult to balance being on both sides of the GM's screen. Three players can cover all bases, but two can't—consider letting experienced players run a second character, which has its own problems but makes the game doable.

~J

[eidolon]

I'll give the counterpoint, because I refuse to see the so-called "GMPC" as anything but bad GMing. (So called in that people use the word when they really mean something else.)

Have you ever run a persistent NPC? Have you been able to do so while keeping in mind that NPC's motivations, goals, and desires? Then there is no reason that you can't run a persistent NPC that works with the PCs.

There are things to try and avoid, such as not letting the persistent NPC get "more powerful" than the PCs, being careful not to put the NPC in the spotlight too much or too frequently, being conscious of separating the NPC's knowledge from your GM knowledge, but none of this is impossible, or even that hard after a little practice. (For example, one thing I would do was to have a 3x5 index card with the goals and motivations and some personality notes, just as a reminder if I needed it; over time that stopped being necessary.)

It can be done. Talk it over with your players. Let them know what you're doing and why (running a persistent NPC in order to make the game seem more realistic, fun, etc). Let them know up front that you're not running a Mary Sue. Then show them that by making that NPC a real person.

[SuperFly]

I believe that with a 3 players team there is no need to include a fourth teammate -- the characters are more than capable of keeping up with the Jones' without one.

As an active GM constantly juggling my schedule with that of my players, I hate when it's necessary to NPC one of the team members. Each member of their team brings a unique and valuable outlook to any situation -- an outlook that the GM can only imitate, never duplicate. The Player/GM relationship is a symbiotic one. The players can't use their characters or run the shadows without you, the GM. And as the GM, your campaign or adventure is nothing but a long-winded story without the players to experience it or throw you curve balls through their creative thinking.

If you feel they need a fourth member of the team, try fleshing out their contacts lists with them before you start. This will give them more resources to tap when the shit hits the fan, and sets up freelance NPC's to help with jobs when the team needs it.

[James McMurray]

Our group (which usually has 1 GM and 2-3 players for Shadowrun) does it all the time. We typically leave the decker out of the mix and they hire one when they need him. IMO most people that don't like it have been bitten by the GMPC of the "Look, I'm Drizzt and Elminster" type. Make the guy with PC rules and don't min/max him more than any of the other characters (preferably a little less) and you'll be off to a good start. Make sure you treat the characters all fairly and you'll be fine.

[Kagetenshi]

As one of the outside-the-most people, I don't like it for two reasons: one, in my wasted youth I misused the GMPC, and two, I still find it more effort than it's worth to make sure that the character exists plausibly, acts appropriately, and doesn't steal spotlight.

~J

[Backgammon]

2-3 players is pretty much the ideal group size, IMO.

Making a GMPC is a bad idea because it always is. Making an NPC that the characters either know, or can hire, is a perfectly ok idea.

The line is really between a PC and NPCs. PCs have goals, solve puzzles, advance storylines. The GM cannot ever make a "fair and balanced" PC that advances the storyline or inputs ideas in anyway. It's like playing chess against yourself and saying you're not gonna cheat, It's retarded.

PCs, on the other hand, are tools for the PCs. They help out or hinder, but they don't TRY anything. They either do or don't, there is no try. They are not part of the game, they are the game.

[hyzmarca]

I say make the players work for it. As a player, I'd much rather be outmatched by the opposition due to my chargen choices than have the GM make a character for no other reason than to babysit my character.

Contrary to popular belief, mundanes can defeat magical security. It takes more effort for them to do it than it takes for magicians to do it and it can be more expensive for mundanes than for magicians, but it can be done.

First of all, Astral Patrols can be defeated with stealth and if they aren't then you are only as screwed as you would have been if a mundane defeated your stealth. A spirit can't attack across planes, after all, and a guard can call for backup on his headware radio as a free action.

Spell effects can be bought, for a price, as quickened and tattooed spells, anchors, and witches' charms. Free spirits can be bargained with and enlisted as independent contractors. The weaker one can even be bound by mundanes.
The only thing that prevents a mundane from having exceptional magical power at his disposal is the size of his wallet. In fact, the mundane Faustian or spirit hunter is far more viable than some would suspect.

[Kyoto Kid]

[ErrosCallidus]

I'd considered letting the players run 2 characters apiece... but it seems like more work than fun.

Oh the runs will be intense. I've only run a couple games for these guys before, but they all remember the particularly realistic portrayal of screwing up in the middle of a firefight. Different system, but just as lethal results :dead: It's one of my selling points as GM. I'll probably go with them figuring out that they actually CAN hire guys and working around their teams weaknesses. Make them USE those contact ratings! Now I'll just have to figure out how to hint (nonlethally) that they're forgetting something.

SIDE NOTE: Are quickened/tattooed spells in the BBB, cause I may have missed them if so...

[hyzmarca]

Quickening, Tattooing, and Anchoring are in Magic in the Shadows. Witches' charms are in State of the Art 2064.

[Lindt]

I have the same problem actually, with only 3 players. I agree that a GMPC is just bad on levels I dare not go to (one of my old GMs, well he was text book why GMPCs are bad {I have a faint memory of a scene where this guy was fireing an LMG from the back of a moterbike with one hand} so I have a good idea of what to look out for), but I very often am playing an NPC or 2 that gets hired during the course of the job.
And now that my players are comfterable with it, they really like the idea of being able to go to a 'database' (fixer) and pick people they can work with, negoate price with, and things like that. Makes an otherwise useless group a really flexible one. Sure its WAY more work on my part, but it exposes them to a wide range of skills.

For example, my current team is a AR sammi, a pistols adept/mage, and a social adept/driver. So between them they can barely set the time on their VCR, so they need to hire out people to do matrix work, steal files, ect. They also need a mage, as he put all 5 of his spell points into powerball (yes, he only has 1 point in magical power, but he admitted it was munchkin-esk, but provided a big avenue of advancement in the future) and cant do astral recon.

But its a matter of what you and your players are good with doing.

[James McMurray]

Don't let the naysayers convince you that all GMPCs are automatically evil, nor even that all characters that run with the group are automatically GMPCs. If you're a fair GM in other areas you'll almost assuredly be a fair GM with a GMPC. If you ever find yourself in a position where you or your players think you're being biased, immediately start an ambush using the GMPC's head as a bullet catcher. You'll have an exciting intro into a cool scene and also surprise the crap out of any players who were afraid you were heading down the wrong road. :)

[Sir_Psycho]

Always have the sniper aim for the GMPC/hired NPC runner first :D

[Kesslan]