PDA

View Full Version : DM controled character.



Doomboy911
2009-12-18, 10:45 PM
Well we were walking through a town under martial law. We left and came back and the city lifted off the ground (an oaken defender) We we're about to deal with some extra planar deal so out of annoyance I grabbed some rope and got ready to leave. The commander would let us leave unless one of his soldiers came along.So now the DM is controlling this female demon soldier. we already have a large party and the DM controlling this soldier doesn't help.
How can I get rid of this soldier (bear in mind should I kill her they'd kill me).

Flickerdart
2009-12-18, 10:50 PM
Why get rid of her, when you can force her to serve you (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/planarbindinglesser.htm)? Get her in the circle, then pile CHA reducer upon CHA reducer, grab a Circlet of Persuasion and make her an offer she can't refuse, such as servitude for the maximum duration of the spell in exchange for you sparing her life. Lather, rinse, repeat.

RandomNPC
2009-12-18, 10:52 PM
have your character praise this DMPCs abilitys and after a few days, send them out to scout the next few hours of the trip, get the lay of the land, things like that. Soon as they go on a few hour hike, head off in a random direction.

Duos Greanleef
2009-12-18, 10:53 PM
Sneakily poison the Demon's food.
Poisons are ALWAYS a good choice... Unless of course this is a non-eating variety of demon, in which case I suggest...
Well crap, I don't know, find a cliff to push her off of "accidentally."
:amused:

Pluto
2009-12-18, 11:01 PM
If that doesn't work, you can tie her to a metal pole during a lightning storm.
And as a last resort, you can try burning her on a big pile of wood.

...That's sure to do the trick.

Flickerdart
2009-12-18, 11:03 PM
You're all missing the point: he can't kill her. Not even then.

Psychosis
2009-12-18, 11:23 PM
Sneakily poison the Demon's food.
Poisons are ALWAYS a good choice... Unless of course this is a non-eating variety of demon, in which case I suggest...
Well crap, I don't know, find a cliff to push her off of "accidentally."
:amused:
I didn't think demons were affected by poison?

Doomboy911
2009-12-18, 11:23 PM
Also at all points the DM can save her.Plus he can keep doing things to improve the character.

Serpentine
2009-12-18, 11:26 PM
What's so terrible about this character? Do you not trust your DM at all? (the two questions are separate, and serious, not snarky)

Psychosis
2009-12-18, 11:26 PM
Also at all points the DM can save her.Plus he can keep doing things to improve the character.
Then you're not getting rid of her. I've been down this road, and if the DM so much as suspects that you are intentionally ditching her she will somehow find her way around it and put you in a worse spot. Grin and bare it, because unless the DM changes his mind you drew the short stick.

Duos Greanleef
2009-12-18, 11:36 PM
@ Psychosis
I guess it never occurred to me that ALL demons are immune to poisons... I never got cozy with them in 3.5, choosing rather to avoid them at all reasonable costs.

@Doomboy911
I guess I caught up on how do I kill it and forgot about the part where it's the DMs character.
Good luck killing her. I'd deem it nearly impossible.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-19, 01:03 AM
Then you're not getting rid of her. I've been down this road, and if the DM so much as suspects that you are intentionally ditching her she will somehow find her way around it and put you in a worse spot. Grin and bare it, because unless the DM changes his mind you drew the short stick.

Find out whatever you can about the stats of said DMPC. Bring them hear, and let the optimization folks come up with a foolproof way to kill it.

Get the other players on your side. With the advantage of surprise, and an entire party in melee range...anything can be killed. I strongly suggest making sure *everyone* has protection against evil, btw.

If the DM keeps pulling unlikely stunts to bring her back, on a given cue, have everyone ignore her. Celebrate her death, then go wildly off the rails. All of you pretend she doesn't exist, and ignore any DM statement regarding her or her actions.

Not only is it hilarious, but odds are good that he'll give up out of exasperation eventually. If not, you can eventually just tell him that it's a stupid, lame idea.

Psychosis
2009-12-19, 01:12 AM
A bunch of win.
Ignore me, this is what you want to do.

Krazddndfreek
2009-12-19, 01:15 AM
In all honesty, I don't think it would be a very good idea to torture your DM like that. The DM pours a lot of hard work into making these things work and when the players intentionally screw with them, its not fun, its frustrating.

However, I can see that this DMPC deal is also pretty frustrating. In order to remedy this, you could simply ask your DM outside of the session to remove the DMPC because she takes an extra turn and loot, etc. Also mention that other players might worry about favoritism for that character. Tell him that this will no doubt lead to harsh arguments. If your DM does not listen, go ahead and torture him/her. Because frankly, if they're not willing to listen and be flexible, a DM isn't doing their job.

Zincorium
2009-12-19, 01:38 AM
Um, tell him you don't like the character being there.

If the DM wants to have the DMPC in the game more than he wants you in the game, well, I think the answer is pretty obvious.

taltamir
2009-12-19, 01:47 AM
In all honesty, I don't think it would be a very good idea to torture your DM like that. The DM pours a lot of hard work into making these things work and when the players intentionally screw with them, its not fun, its frustrating.

However, I can see that this DMPC deal is also pretty frustrating. In order to remedy this, you could simply ask your DM outside of the session to remove the DMPC because she takes an extra turn and loot, etc. Also mention that other players might worry about favoritism for that character. Tell him that this will no doubt lead to harsh arguments. If your DM does not listen, go ahead and torture him/her. Because frankly, if they're not willing to listen and be flexible, a DM isn't doing their job.

exactly... your options are:
1. convince the DM to get rid of her
2. convince the group to get rid of the DM
3. Leave.

Asking for an in game solution is laughable... You simply can't do it in game.

Serpentine
2009-12-19, 02:16 AM
I have yet to see any reason, at all, why this DM controlled character is in any way a negative addition to the game. Only "DMPC BAD BAD BAD KIIIIIIILLLLLL". Well, except for the large party part, although it wasn't said the addition of the character has ACTUALLY caused any problems, only that the OP is anticipating them.
Mostly, I'm waiting on the OP to explain just what, exactly, is so bad about this character, and how this DM is so untrustworthy as to not be given the benefit of the doubt that the DMPC is in the game for a reason, or will be played well.
In the meantime, I suggest that IF this character does become a problem, then the OP should discuss the problems with the DM, and if the removal of the DMPC is the only solution then explain why the OP wants them gone.

Zincorium
2009-12-19, 05:00 AM
I have yet to see any reason, at all, why this DM controlled character is in any way a negative addition to the game.

Isn't 'it makes the game less fun' a good enough reason?

As the DM, you have incredible amounts of stuff that you not only can do, but that you have to do. Your time to do this is usually sharply limited- so if you're spending time thinking up a character's personality, statting them out, and integrating them into the campaign, it's not entirely unreasonable to think that will end up being at the expense of everything the players like about your DMing.

I shouldn't have to come up with good reasons why someone shouldn't be allowed to both deal and play blackjack- they should come up with good reasons why they should.

JellyPooga
2009-12-19, 07:45 AM
As the DM, you have incredible amounts of stuff that you not only can do, but that you have to do. Your time to do this is usually sharply limited- so if you're spending time thinking up a character's personality, statting them out, and integrating them into the campaign, it's not entirely unreasonable to think that will end up being at the expense of everything the players like about your DMing.

But isn't this what the DM has to do for any major NPC anyway? The misconceptions about DMPCs arise because some DMs have their DMPCs be something more than any of their other NPCs. A good DM keeps tight reins on the impact of DMPCs on the game. A bad DM lets their DMPC overshadow the PCs. If the DM in question is a good one (and the OP hasn't really indicated otherwise) then I see no reason why they should not be given the benefit of the doubt until they prove otherwise. If this particular DMPC is causing problems, then the OP has legitimate reason to want it out. If the OP is just railing against this DMPC solely on the grounds that it is a DMPC then the OP should be asking themselves whether that is reason enough. I (and Serp) am (are) suggesting that it is not. If this DMPC is causing problems then telling us what those problems are might help in solving them.

Gamerlord
2009-12-19, 07:55 AM
What's so terrible about this character? Do you not trust your DM at all-

NEVER.TRUST.A.DM. :smalltongue:

Emmerask
2009-12-19, 08:04 AM
I have yet to see any reason, at all, why this DM controlled character is in any way a negative addition to the game. Only "DMPC BAD BAD BAD KIIIIIIILLLLLL". Well, except for the large party part, although it wasn't said the addition of the character has ACTUALLY caused any problems, only that the OP is anticipating them.
Mostly, I'm waiting on the OP to explain just what, exactly, is so bad about this character, and how this DM is so untrustworthy as to not be given the benefit of the doubt that the DMPC is in the game for a reason, or will be played well.
In the meantime, I suggest that IF this character does become a problem, then the OP should discuss the problems with the DM, and if the removal of the DMPC is the only solution then explain why the OP wants them gone.

yep I agree with this

Temet Nosce
2009-12-19, 08:10 AM
Find out whatever you can about the stats of said DMPC. Bring them hear, and let the optimization folks come up with a foolproof way to kill it.

Get the other players on your side. With the advantage of surprise, and an entire party in melee range...anything can be killed. I strongly suggest making sure *everyone* has protection against evil, btw.

If the DM keeps pulling unlikely stunts to bring her back, on a given cue, have everyone ignore her. Celebrate her death, then go wildly off the rails. All of you pretend she doesn't exist, and ignore any DM statement regarding her or her actions.

Not only is it hilarious, but odds are good that he'll give up out of exasperation eventually. If not, you can eventually just tell him that it's a stupid, lame idea.

... I feel like rubbing you to make myself calmer and more content. You remind me of a cat. No, seriously that is exactly the first thing to leap to mind for me. Work out a way to kill it without fail, kill it, and manipulate the game to prevent recurrences.

That said, @Op... You'd probably get a better result just quitting. The DM has created a situation where there are no possible good outcomes, just less bad ones.

Doomboy911
2009-12-19, 08:37 AM
The thing I'm worried about is that the DM intends to make her his character should one of us take over DMing for awhile so in the mean time he can buff up his character than stop DMing.I think one of the best solutions is to take her back to her village.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-12-19, 08:40 AM
Hit her over the head with an eggbeater.

Emmerask
2009-12-19, 08:43 AM
The thing I'm worried about is that the DM intends to make her his character should one of us take over DMing for awhile so in the mean time he can buff up his character than stop DMing.I think one of the best solutions is to take her back to her village.

okay this is a legitimate concern and reallly should not be done to much conflict of interest involved here.
Normally a dmpc that joins the party for one adventure is okay if the dm follows some rules:
-donīt ever steal the spotlight
-dmpcs should be passive characters not active
-donīt steal the partys loot ^^
-have a good reason why the dmpc should join for example the group works for some guild who wants to have an observer with them for the mission or somesuch

edit: oh and the dmpc betrays the party is getting old really fast donīt do this more then once in a campaign if at all :smalleek:

JellyPooga
2009-12-19, 08:52 AM
The thing I'm worried about is that the DM intends to make her his character should one of us take over DMing for awhile so in the mean time he can buff up his character than stop DMing.I think one of the best solutions is to take her back to her village.

This is somewhat of a problem...NPCs (whether DMPC or not) should always be NPCs. If the mantle of DM-ship should pass to another person, so does control of all NPCs, including any DMPCs. As Emmerask points out there is something of a conflict of interests.

Having said that, should this DMPC be played fairly (i.e. no special advantage is given to it over the other PCs), then I don't technically see any reason why the current DM shouldn't be able to remove the "DM" from his DMPC should he stop being DM. If, as you suggest this is not the case then this is blatantly just an attempt to get an "uber-character" or whatever and should be stopped in its tracks here and now.

This can't be solved in game (as mentioned by others) and should be resolved on the sofa with a beer (or cup of tea/coffee/beverage of choice), not round the gaming table. Talk it out with your DM and express your concerns. If they're unwilling to budge on the subject then there's likely not a lot you can do except refuse to play in their game.

Slayn82
2009-12-19, 08:53 AM
Well, in game? If the party doesnt like walking with a female demon around (very sensible idea, in most cases), its a big world, lose the NPC as you please and skip town to a city with good temple, confess your sins to a holy priest, make a small donation to the temple, then go find something else.
A good GM must be ready to improvise when PCs derail and give something else for them to do.

If you ever need to come back to that town, well, you will just need to be sneaky, disguise yourselves, etc.

Out of game - talk with your DM. If he is really allured by the idea of a NPC, you will probably end with a holy palladin. And that could very well be even worse in some cases - like a party with neutral or evil tendencies. Settle for a cloistered cleric, if he really want one DMPC.

Of course, you should in game find a reason to dislike said NPCs. People disliking Palladins or Demons fortunatelly is easy to find.

Reaper_Monkey
2009-12-19, 09:30 AM
The commander would let us leave unless one of his soldiers came along.So now the DM is controlling this female demon soldier. we already have a large party and the DM controlling this soldier doesn't help.
How can I get rid of this soldier (bear in mind should I kill her they'd kill me).

How does this differ from any other sort of NPC, other that they're tagging along for an indeterminable about of time? You could've refused aid from the commander, regardless of their insistence, or even just talk to this soldier and explain that they really aint needed or welcome.

Having a large party isn't really good grounds to dispose of a NPC, they might be able to provide knowledge on things you need to know, or provide access to places you otherwise couldn't get to etc. Infact no doubt you've already been informed of why she is with you as to why the commander stated she should come along. It just seems like you've misjudged the NPC's role and are over-reacting as such. I'd run with it and drop her off at the next available opportunity if she doesn't leave on her own accord anyway (which is what I'd place my bet on).

Zincorium
2009-12-19, 09:45 AM
@Reaper Monkey:

Read the rest of his posts, if you haven't already. This is obviously not just some NPC according to the OP. And you can't really disagree with him on what's happening in his own game without having been there- suggesting he's misjudging and overreacting seems more offensive than helpful.

Asking her to leave would be a good first step, except that it is quite apparent the DM does not want her to leave, and in fact intervenes with Deus Ex Machina on her behalf.

bosssmiley
2009-12-19, 09:49 AM
You're all missing the point: he can't kill her. Not even then.

He totally can. He's free to take any action he can within the limits of his character's abilities. He's also free to take the consequences...

Having the DM introduce his next PC as a "pvp=0" escort quest nuisance is just bad form. @OP: have you thought of staging a coup within the group? :smallamused:

Vizzerdrix
2009-12-19, 09:55 AM
Is it a true DMPC, or just a tag along npc? The first should be killed like a diseased stray with a hammer gun and a book thrown at the DM's head, (hard) especially in any group with more than 4 or 5 pcs. The second can be okay, just so long as it doesn't pupate into the first.

Serpentine
2009-12-19, 10:02 AM
The thing I'm worried about is that the DM intends to make her his character should one of us take over DMing for awhile so in the mean time he can buff up his character than stop DMing.I think one of the best solutions is to take her back to her village.Three things, in recommended chronological order:
1. Is this a legitimate concern? Do you have reason to suspect your DM of this, or are you just making assumptions? You've given us a valid concern, but nothing, yet, to indicate that your concern is anything but speculation.
2. If your concerns are valid and the DMPC is becoming more powerful than other characters, talk to the DM about the fact that they are running a bad DMPC. This goes for all the other hallmarks of a bad DMPC - spotlight hogging, leading by the nose, etc.
3. If the present DM wants to keep the DMPC when they're no longer DMing, then the new DM should go over the character sheet to make sure it's all legit and comparable to the other characters. Maybe even get them to remake the character from scratch, like any other character (personally, my own DMPC is already built just like any other character. A bit gimped, cuz several of her items and abilities are mount-oriented, and her horse drowned).

Emmerask and JellyPooga: Thanks. It's nice to know it's not just me vs. the hoards :smallsmile:

Doomboy911
2009-12-19, 11:31 AM
I don't think a coup would work the metallic barbarian would pop my head .
The best I could have is our new character joining could take up her role.

Melamoto
2009-12-19, 11:44 AM
The way the OP described it, I don't think this is a true DMPC. It's just a temporary tag along NPC, who is there entirely for RP reasons and who could probably be removed with them as well with a bit of creativity. In the end, they're probably just there to railroad you a bit (Although if it's too much railroading then you may want to ask your DM to stop). This is not a DMPC.

And DMPCs aren't all that bad anyway. In my group, my DMPC:

Fills 2 important roles that the party is missing
Is intentionally suboptimal
Will always recieve only half GP value of what the other party members get (And there is more loot, so the rest of the party gets no less)
Provides plot hooks (Non-compulsory)
Gives the party a lead when they really get stuck on something

It's only when you have a DM run one because they want to play as well that they get caught up with favouritism and invincibility (Also, I have read several stories where there was an intentionally annoying DMPC, made for the party to kill/die horribly from the BBEG).

Tyndmyr
2009-12-19, 12:01 PM
In the end, they're probably just there to railroad you a bit

You say this like it's a good thing.

DMs using DMPCs are invariably bad. Kill them with fire. Also, kill the DMPC.

Melamoto
2009-12-19, 02:12 PM
You say this like it's a good thing.

Railroading is not always a bad thing, and sometimes it does good to turn the group in the direction that they can walk on without ending the session.

Solaris
2009-12-19, 02:26 PM
I have yet to see any reason, at all, why this DM controlled character is in any way a negative addition to the game. Only "DMPC BAD BAD BAD KIIIIIIILLLLLL". Well, except for the large party part, although it wasn't said the addition of the character has ACTUALLY caused any problems, only that the OP is anticipating them.
Mostly, I'm waiting on the OP to explain just what, exactly, is so bad about this character, and how this DM is so untrustworthy as to not be given the benefit of the doubt that the DMPC is in the game for a reason, or will be played well.
In the meantime, I suggest that IF this character does become a problem, then the OP should discuss the problems with the DM, and if the removal of the DMPC is the only solution then explain why the OP wants them gone.

Shush, you're saying things they don't like to hear. We can't have the players starting to think that DMs are people too. That's just madness.

All I know is, if one of my players kills someone else in the party odds are pretty good he won't be coming back for the next session. Maybe the DM wants a character of his own - how often does he get to play?


The thing I'm worried about is that the DM intends to make her his character should one of us take over DMing for awhile so in the mean time he can buff up his character than stop DMing.I think one of the best solutions is to take her back to her village.

This is a red flag, but not a game-breaker. Has he actually done it, or are you just concerned he will?


Three things, in recommended chronological order:
1. Is this a legitimate concern? Do you have reason to suspect your DM of this, or are you just making assumptions? You've given us a valid concern, but nothing, yet, to indicate that your concern is anything but speculation.
2. If your concerns are valid and the DMPC is becoming more powerful than other characters, talk to the DM about the fact that they are running a bad DMPC. This goes for all the other hallmarks of a bad DMPC - spotlight hogging, leading by the nose, etc.
3. If the present DM wants to keep the DMPC when they're no longer DMing, then the new DM should go over the character sheet to make sure it's all legit and comparable to the other characters. Maybe even get them to remake the character from scratch, like any other character (personally, my own DMPC is already built just like any other character. A bit gimped, cuz several of her items and abilities are mount-oriented, and her horse drowned).

What she said. Allow me to reiterate: A DM running a character is not always a bad thing. Give the guy a chance to, y'know, not screw up before auto-assuming he will and always will play the DMPC badly. Who knows? Maybe bringing up your concerns will work, especially if the other players have the same concerns. Don't be afraid to call him out on BS when you catch him doing it, too. It's the only way he'll learn.
Also, dammit Serp, quit saying things I was about to say!


Railroading is not always a bad thing, and sometimes it does good to turn the group in the direction that they can walk on without ending the session.

What do you mean, the players should try to follow the adventure path the DM worked on for X hours rather than force him to come up with things on the fly? Nonsense! Blasphemy! DMs aren't people, they don't have feelings, and if they did they'd be happy to pitch their whole campaign into the trash because the party felt like burning taverns and murdering commoners rather than going through the adventures he worked up.
Disclaimer: It's okay if the player comes up with something he wants to do - but he really ought to give the DM a chance to prep for it first.

Zincorium
2009-12-19, 04:16 PM
Solaris- I'm going to bring up the sports referee argument again.

The DM must remain an ostensibly neutral party when it comes to rule disputes and such. To take the 'side' that the monsters are on, and attempt to make them win, is going to piss the players off pretty quickly. Being a player as well as a DM might put you on the side of the players, and there's no other side to complain about it, but do you expect to be immune from accusations of favoritism for your charcter?

Additionally, you seem to be making the argument that the DM will not be able to have fun without this character- if that's the case, I already recommended dropping the campaign. The DM has options the players don't- he can roleplay fifty different personalities in a session, can plan out massive tactical battles after choosing the pieces, can change and create the very rules of the setting. You don't need to shoe-in with the other players.


It is possible that the DM running a PC of their own will not end in failure. But defending it as some sort of right on the DM's part leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

Solaris
2009-12-19, 04:54 PM
Solaris- I'm going to bring up the sports referee argument again.

The DM must remain an ostensibly neutral party when it comes to rule disputes and such. To take the 'side' that the monsters are on, and attempt to make them win, is going to piss the players off pretty quickly. Being a player as well as a DM might put you on the side of the players, and there's no other side to complain about it, but do you expect to be immune from accusations of favoritism for your charcter?

Right, and I understand that mistake. Yes. A mistake. I've never heard of a DM who was totally and completely neutral outside of a computer. The illusion of being neutral is a good thing, especially if your players are prone to whining. The ability to tell a story is more important than whose side you're on. My players 'know' I'm gunning for the monsters because I act like I am - but they're the sort who enjoy a challenge, and I've yet to throw anything that would TPK them (... except for a squad of hobgoblins with rifles, but it was our first time running firearms in D&D and they didn't figure out 'run away' is a viable tactic).

The best way to avoid accusations of favoritism for your character is (aside from not running one, obviously) to avoid favoritism for your character. There are people who will whine no matter what happens, DMPC or no DMPC. I recommend not playing with those people. If they just have an objection to the DMPC on the grounds that it's a DM-run PC and haven't actually seen me run a game but are just making a judgment because of what one DM did back when they were fourteen, then that's their problem.
I've found I get a better reaction if the monster attacks the PCs more often (if it's just DM vs DMPC, they don't care about the fight!), but I have the DMPC there as a handy soak in case one of the PCs goes down too far. Like I've said before, I've had no problems and heard no complaints doing this.


Additionally, you seem to be making the argument that the DM will not be able to have fun without this character- if that's the case, I already recommended dropping the campaign. The DM has options the players don't- he can roleplay fifty different personalities in a session, can plan out massive tactical battles after choosing the pieces, can change and create the very rules of the setting. You don't need to shoe-in with the other players.

Well, that's not what I meant. Not exactly. Sometimes if you've been DMing (and nothing but) for a long enough time you kinda want to run a character who isn't some NPC the players are going to forget about before they're done talking to him. You still DM because there probably isn't anyone else to do the job (or because you like to DM). A DM and a player don't necessarily need to be two separate people.
You are, however, correct about not needing to force a character in with the party. If any of my players were to object to a particular DMPC's presence, I'd have no problems packing it on a bus. Similarly, it is entirely possible to run a game and have fun doing it without a DMPC. I have done it in large chunks of my campaigns, especially if the party numbers six or more.


It is possible that the DM running a PC of their own will not end in failure. But defending it as some sort of right on the DM's part leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

Possible? I do it with just about every campaign I run. By now everyone in this thread has read the important parts to making a non-failure DMPC, but I think the most important part with the DMPC (as with any other character) is to actually give it a personality.

It's no more or less a right of the DM to attach a NPC to the party than it is his right to just quit running the game. He shouldn't force it on the players, which is what this DM's doing, but by the same token I don't think players ought to have a kneejerk negative reaction to it unless this DM's demonstrated a previous tendency towards negative railroading (as opposed to positive, which is bringing them on track when they get lost rather than forcing them on track when they want to do something else) and spotlighting his own characters. A rookie DM shouldn't do it, but a veteran such as myself really doesn't have much trouble.

Doomboy911
2009-12-19, 05:52 PM
I suppose he's made the character join us to help us move on with the mission but after we find the "sword of a thousand truths" it would be a pain to keep her around. I think the best option is to work the story in a way to get rid of her like run back to the village.We were moving with the village until we heard it was going to some evil dimension so I did what any french would and leaped off the side with a grappling hook and rope.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-19, 07:06 PM
Railroading is not always a bad thing, and sometimes it does good to turn the group in the direction that they can walk on without ending the session.

Yes, railroading is always a bad thing.

You can give players information without railroading, yknow. Like....suggest that they can make a gather information check or some such. Railroading is when you try to force them to stay on the rails.

JellyPooga
2009-12-19, 07:38 PM
Yes, railroading is always a bad thing.

Correction: A little Railroading goes a long way. A lot of Railroading makes your players feel like they're on a cross-continental freight train...and they don't even have so much as a deck of cards to keep them amused.

All DMs railroad to an extent and players, on the whole, accept it as part of the campaign they're playing...after all, if the party decides that they don't want to take the (oft times blatantly obvious) plot hook(s) proffered by the DM, then they're going to have to deal with a half-baked improvised couple of sessions whilst the DM thinks up a new campaign to pit them against...or, the DM can put them on a set of tracks for a minute or two, just to get the ball rolling, before plunging them straight into the plot he already has figured out. Railroading, like any tool, can be misused but the efficacy of it lies not in the tool itself but in the wielder. A bad DM is going to be bad and one of the more obvious indicators of a bad DM is extensive railroading. A good DM can railroad the players and the players will enjoy the game regardless or even because of it...in fact, one sign of a good GM is that he can railroad his players without them even realising it.

Coidzor
2009-12-19, 07:41 PM
Hmm.. I recommend a liberal dose of alcohol and pilfering the DM's notes and erasing all mention of said character.

JellyPooga
2009-12-19, 07:57 PM
Hmm.. I recommend a liberal dose of alcohol and pilfering the DM's notes and erasing all mention of said character.

Who gets the liberal dose of alcohol?

I guess you could apply it to the DM in question or yourself. In the case of the former, the booze is a distraction whilst you do the pilfering. In the latter case I suppose it's so you can claim drunkeness in defence of said pilferage.

Hell, why not do both? It'd be more fun for all involved :smallbiggrin:

Tyndmyr
2009-12-19, 08:04 PM
All DMs railroad to an extent....<stuff>

Nope. Definitely not. Last time I dmed, we had a massive bar fight. In the bar owned by their employer. It had absolutely no purpose whatsoever, outside of players deciding to be needlessly violent and bloodthirsty, and was most certainly not in any plot. So, I rolled with it. I find the idea of them pissing off their employers to be a perfectly valid plot twist, and really don't care that they do so.

See also, sandbox games and improv-heavy DMs. Just because you like to railroad, or feel it necessary, does not mean everyone does.

JellyPooga
2009-12-19, 08:36 PM
Nope. Definitely not. Last time I dmed, we had a massive bar fight. In the bar owned by their employer. It had absolutely no purpose whatsoever, outside of players deciding to be needlessly violent and bloodthirsty, and was most certainly not in any plot. So, I rolled with it. I find the idea of them pissing off their employers to be a perfectly valid plot twist, and really don't care that they do so.

See also, sandbox games and improv-heavy DMs. Just because you like to railroad, or feel it necessary, does not mean everyone does.

I don't mean to preach, but you give an example of a single scene out of a whole campaign and claim it as evidence that you never railroad. Colour me unconvinced! Even so much as laying out the setting your campaign is in is railroading to an extent. If, for example, you decide that Elves don't exist in your campaign, that's a railroad of sorts. Same goes for almost every decision a DM makes during the course of his/her game.

Whether he's saying "no" to the Barbarian asking if "Ye Olde Magicke Shoppe" has a +3 battleaxe in stock or telling the party that the surrounding forest is reputed to be infested with rhinocerous riding Sprites, he's telling the players what is in the world and what is not and that's a form of railroading. Now a good GM, for example, might only reveal said information because one of the players decided to ask for local rumours at the pub. From there, upon investigating, the party might discover that there's a price being offered for hunting the sprites on rhinos. A bad GM might have a villager run up to the party screaming about sprites on rhinos and then have the local guard sergeant force them to go hunt them down or face the penalties for not having an adventuring licence in this particular town. Either DM is using a railroad technique, it's just that the former is guiding the PCs down the path he wants them to take and the latter is shoving it down their throats. Now there is an argument that says that should the PCs decide not to go hunting rhino-sprites, the good GM would let them go find something else to do. However, if the rhino-sprite adventure was just being used as a set-up for a larger plot, then the good GM is well within his/her rights to have the PCs get embroiled with them regardless of their decision. Being captured, ambushed on the road, the town being invaded or any other number of situations could arise to get the PCs involved with the rhino-sprites "against their will" without it being a negative use of railroading techniques.

I've no contention with the concept of sandbox games or DMs with heavy improvisational technique (I'm one of the latter myself), but to have a coherant campaign, a DM must force the PCs along certain lines eventually. If he doesn't then plots will tend towards the short and unsatisfying end of the spectrum and (in my experience) usually end up crumbling from lack of interest on the players part.

Serpentine
2009-12-19, 09:32 PM
DMs using DMPCs are invariably bad. Kill them with fire. Also, kill the DMPC.DMPCs are always brilliant, helpful and well-run.
I can make gross generalisations and blanket statements too! :smallbiggrin:


The DM must remain an ostensibly neutral party when it comes to rule disputes and such. To take the 'side' that the monsters are on, and attempt to make them win, is going to piss the players off pretty quickly. Being a player as well as a DM might put you on the side of the players, and there's no other side to complain about it, but do you expect to be immune from accusations of favoritism for your charcter?I am, because I don't favouritise my character. She's died at least as many times as any other character (once because I screwed up as DM AND as a player - didn't check how much of the ship would be taken up by the Drowned's aura, and forgot to give her a ranged weapon), never gets first pick of treasure, isn't spectacularly powerful or beautiful or wise or anything... The only thing she does is get hit more than the others, because most of the other characters are magical or ranged. This bothers me, which is part of why I'm removing her at some point, but I've checked with my players several times and they're quite okay with someone else getting hit so they don't.
The only complaint I've ever had about this character (and I often ask for feedback) is that she's not very fleshed-out. There are 3 reasons for this: I wanted her to be a type that would fade into the background, I haven't played her as just a player so I don't have as good a feel for her personality as I should, and I'm not a good enough DM to give her enough roleplaying attention to make her interesting and handle all my DMing duties properly. Regarding the latter, I'm not, but many others are, and it would be easier if I'd played her enough already.

Giving the party a reminder of clues they may have forgotten or a suggestion that perhaps we should find the kidnapped princess before she's devoured is NOT railroading. What was that quote someone has in their signature? "Railroading is not saying "there is a wall there". It is saying "there is a wall everywhere but there." Something like that. I would LOVE to be able to do a sandbox-style game. How many DMs, more experienced than me, even, can actually manage it? If it's not true sandbox, then there must be plot. Plot IS NOT railroading, though it may require a few nudges - which apparently, according to Tyndre, is pure railroading and therefore completely and utterly unacceptable - to keep things on track. A DMPC can do this. So can various other things, but DMPCs are a valid tool for this purpose. Or, to put it another way:
See also, sandbox games and improv-heavy DMs. Just because you like to railroad, or feel it necessary, does not mean everyone does.Just because you find sandbox games to be the only acceptable game format, and just because you're super-skilled at improvisation, doesn't mean that everyone else does and is.


To the OP, yet again: What, exactly, is so bad about this (arguable) DMPC, beyond "it's a DMPC kiiiiiiiiiiilllllllll iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit!"?

Doomboy911
2009-12-20, 09:30 AM
I'm going to just update this next time we play and tell you how things work out and see if its a problem.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-20, 08:10 PM
Hmm.. I recommend a liberal dose of alcohol and pilfering the DM's notes and erasing all mention of said character.

Good point. Alcohol, like fire, solves all problems.

Note: For maximum effect, combine the two.

Solaris
2009-12-20, 08:39 PM
You say this like it's a good thing.

Not dropping the adventure typically is, yes. Players who make a habit of completely ignoring the adventure hook don't get invited back to my games - it is, after all, quite rude to thumb your nose at all the work the DM's done to put it together.


DMs using DMPCs are invariably bad. Kill them with fire. Also, kill the DMPC.

Really now? Well, now I know something new about myself.
Oh. Wait. Just because you think it doesn't make it true, especially when you're providing an absolute generalization. C'mon, Tyndmyr. Now you're just saying stuff to get people riled up. You're better than that.


See also, sandbox games and improv-heavy DMs. Just because you like to railroad, or feel it necessary, does not mean everyone does.

But by the same token, there are otherwise good DMs who aren't that great at improvisation. Myself, for an example. I can generally roll with pretty much anything within the adventures I plot out, but if they decide they don't want to do that adventure at all then the session's pretty much over. This is in offline games - there is only so much I can come up with while maintaining a certain quality of play. I can do generic crap all day, every day - and there's been times where that was all we really wanted. I'm okay with just going out and slaughtering goblins, but if you want a good story then I gotta have a spot of time to come up with a rough framework for it.
PbP games are where the sandbox style of play really shines.


I'm going to just update this next time we play and tell you how things work out and see if its a problem.

Yeah, let us know if your DM screws it up - then point him towards this forum. Serp and I can set him straight on the how-to's of running a decent DMPC.

Doomboy911
2009-12-21, 11:39 PM
Problem my friend intends to make his DMPC a permanent part of the party. By all means I can't see how he can have him and play fair.

absolmorph
2009-12-22, 01:11 AM
Hit her over the head with an eggbeater.
Only if you jump out of a closet with a bra on your head.