Ed Chauvin IV:
Why would/should a "good" GM not identify with his
character and/or be emotionally invested in them?
I think it stems from the powers the gamesmaster has to determine what
happens in the game world, and the associated responsibilities to be
objective.
In the case of antagonist characters - characters against which the
player characters are supposed to fight - identifying with or being
emotionally invested in the antagonists may result in a temptation to
fudge things in those antagonists' favor. This can be particularly
insidious if the game is set up in a way where the gamesmaster can
fudge things without realizing it, thinking that he is being
objective. While few gamesmasters actually cause such antagonists to
win - the game wouldn't last long in that case - I've seen a fair
number of cases where the gamesmaster repeatedly save particular
antagonists to fight again another day, even when the player
characters have been clever enough to set up a situation that should
not allow for escape.
It's less of an issue in the case of characters who are on the player
characters' side, but even there, the temptation can be to create a
story around the gamesmaster character, rather than allowing the
player characters to drive the action during play sessions.
Warren J. Dew
