How to handle DM-controlled characters in the party?

[RndmNumGen]

Some background:

I'm DMing my first campaign right now, with only 3 players(a barbarian, a ranger, and a sorcerer). After the party's first dungeon I had them ambushed by bandits, who were demanding a toll for safe passage. The sorcerer decided he didn't want to pay, and started negotiations with a magic missile. I had the bandit's 2nd-in-command, a wizard, attack him with a wand of Scorching Ray. It hit and I rolled really high on the damage roll, and ended up unintentionally one-shotting him... perhaps I shouldn't have given the wizard a 2nd level wand, but what's done is done. Anyway, the barbarian raged after that and with the help of the ranger, they laid the rest of the bandits flat. After the battle, they found out that the bandit leader hadn't quite bled out yet, and they proceeded to heal him up for questioning, as I had planned.

The Issue:
What I didn't plan on is that after the questioning, the ranger, noting there was only the barbarian and himself, decided to offer employment to the bandit leader to escort them to the next town, where they sold off their considerable amount of loot. The ranger took some of his share of the money and extended of the offer of employment. I decided that the greedy bandit leader, seeing how much stuff they had, decided it would be profitable to stick with these guys, even though he doesn't like them.

I'm not quite sure how to handle this though. Drawing from the Miniature's Handbook, which is probably my favorite supplement ever, the bandit leader was stated out as a Marshal 2. Everyone else in the party is also level 2, except for the former sorcerer, who rerolled as a rogue. I'm controlling the bandit leader, but I'm not sure how to handle him in regards to ECL of the party and how much EXP/loot they should be given. Should I just treat him as another PC, giving them encounters appropriate for a 4-man party and having the bandit leader level up alongside them? Should I treat him as the ranger's cohort, even though the ranger doesn't have Leadership and has a poor Cha? Something different?

[Fouredged Sword]

I would throw encounters at the party and let the bandit leader take a section of the EXP like normal, but don't bother to keep track of his EXP. He levels when you want him to and be done with it. If you want him to tag along for a longer time let his level fall behind the group untill he is 2 levels lower than the rest. Now he is a party cohort and don't worry about his threat to encounters.

Otherwise find a reason for him to leave or kill him.

[Tiki Snakes]

Do not treat him as another PC. Do not think of him as another pc. Don't even think of thinking of him as another PC.

I'm not sure how the CR / ECL system handles allied NPC's, because I've never been able to comfortably get my head around the system at all. 4e would simply balance the points-value of the Bandit against the encounter (basically meaning if he's a level 2 whatever, the opposing side would get either a level 2 whatever or extra budget equal to that to compensate).

Perhaps that could work still in 3.5. It doesn't have to though, you could just let things be easier, give more-or-less full credit for the wins, until the Bandit Leader's inevitable betrayal?

[Scarlet-Devil]

I say just use your best judgment; my first DM used to have NPCs travel with us occasionally (because we wanted them to, kind of as a reward for good roleplaying I guess), and didn't have them take XP most of the time, though it was also his habit to kill them off the second we got attached to them...:smallsigh:

Anyway, I think the players would probably be kind of annoyed to find that this bandit was getting their XP, especially the rogue who's a level behind the rest now and probably feeling inadequate compared to the three warriors. If he stays on long term and you feel it's important that he keep up with the party power-wise then you could just discretely throw him a level now and then, and instead of having him share XP maybe just make encounters slightly harder without giving additional XP for it.

[Ingus]

You have several options available but I think only two ways to handle it in the short time:
1. As a PC. All the others take XP as a fourth men group, the Marshall levels when you want (as third out of four, maybe). He is not a PC, though, so he should not have initiative or plans of sort, other than help while he can.
2. As a distractor. Basicly, he distracts some of the enemy NPCs while the PCs deals with the rest of them. It is a bit forced, but it's the easiest way to not make him a factor.

[Doug Lampert]

1) Let the Ranger's player run him in combat, you step in if he's doing something out of character (like seriously risking his life), or if the player completely misses one of his important abilities, but the player can make routine tactical decisions and roll dice for him and track his HP and loot. The DM has enough to do without running both sides.

2) Don't upgrade the encounters too much to compensate for his presence, a player will be splitting attention between him and a PC, which will likely degrade their effectiveness at least slightly. But there needs to be slightly tougher opposition because it's four characters rather than three.

3) Since he's the same level in a PC class he gets a full share of XP and almost certainly of loot (although loot shares are based on negotiations and the terms he joined under). Adding a character makes surprisingly little difference to advancement rates especially given that they'll be facing slightly tougher challenges.

4) Don't actually track his XP, he advances about half the rate of the PCs till they either abandon him or he's a reasonable cohort or minor ally. (i.e. average party level -2 or so.) At that point you can drop him from the XP calculations and from then on simply advance him at the same rate as the PCs.

5) Decide how loyal he actually is to the party, given how he was added there's a good chance he'll abandon them any time it seems expedient. If he's disloyal then give them a chance with insight rolls to figure it out. If he's loyal then have them roll insight anyway, because it will make them entertainingly paranoid when you say "Well, as far as you can tell he's totally loyal".

[Tyndmyr]

By RAW? Hirelings don't take xp. Done deal.

It's not generally a problem since the added combat potential of a lower level character usually isn't nearly as big of a factor as another PC. Also, the money taken to hire them somewhat reduces the power of the PCs. So, mostly balancing.

Keep in mind that lower level hirelings are pretty vulnerable to aoes, too. He might either die, or decide that the risk to life and limb is too high to justify the pay, after a time.

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

I regularly run a DM PC in one of my groups, because 2-3 people is simply not enough sometimes. Basically, the way I do it:

I dont keep track of XP, but I do count it for the rest of the party as if he had taken a share.

He does get treasures and items, just like a normal party member would insist on.
However, using the wealth by level tables, its not like anyone is getting cheated. Everyone ends up with the same amount, whether the DMPC was there or not.

I often dont keep track of HP, or attack rolls, unless I feel its necessary. the character is there for support, not for stealing the show.

[Z3ro]

I'd make him a secret villian planning to betray the party at a later date, and make him a recurring party nemisis, maybe coming back with henchmen specifically designed to counter the party's strengths, which he was dutifly recording. But I'm just mean like that.

[RndmNumGen]

I regularly run a DM PC in one of my groups, because 2-3 people is simply not enough sometimes. Basically, the way I do it:

I dont keep track of XP, but I do count it for the rest of the party as if he had taken a share.

He does get treasures and items, just like a normal party member would insist on.
However, using the wealth by level tables, its not like anyone is getting cheated. Everyone ends up with the same amount, whether the DMPC was there or not.

Hmm... I like that idea. I'll probably go with something similar.


I'd make him a secret villian planning to betray the party at a later date, and make him a recurring party nemisis, maybe coming back with henchmen specifically designed to counter the party's strengths, which he was dutifly recording. But I'm just mean like that.
It's a possibility, but I don't think I will plan on such a thing happening. At the moment he is looking out for numero uno, and the best course of action as he sees it is to stick with the guys who made short work of his former gang.

[Keinnicht]

I run NPCs all the time because I generally have a small party. The NPC just fills whatever role missing.

It also seems to make new players more comfortable, because it gives them the impression of playing WITH the DM. Generally I give them the same cut of the XP and treasure (Just because they are, effectively, a party member.)

I also use my party member as a sponge for nastier attacks. Generally the other players take more hit point damage, not out of desire to preserve my character, but because my character is usually hanging back and shooting stuff while they're charging into melee. However, if there's a level drain/ability damage dealing monster, the level drain or ability damage is usually inflicted on me.

[Gamer Girl]

I often have tons and tons of NPC's in the game, and quite often they travel with the group.

They never quite 'join the group' though. They never get XP. At least until I feel like giving them a level.

Most NPC I use are more non combat folks, they are there for support. A lot of times they add very little to the battle.

And even when they are all about combat, they rarely make any difference in a battle. They often miss, or pick bad targets or such. And often enough they simply do things like 'shoot random cover fire'.

And as all my NPC are characters, they all have personalities....and that can reduce their effectiveness in a group too.

If you feel you must keep the NPC busy..it's easy enough. Just add a grapple type to the bad guys. Round 1 the NPC gets grappled and is out of the fight. This works just as well for spells like sleep.

[elpollo]

I had the bandit's 2nd-in-command, a wizard, attack him with a wand of Scorching Ray. It hit and I rolled really high on the damage roll, and ended up unintentionally one-shotting him...

The spell does 4d6 damage (average 14). A level 2 sorceror has [ 6.5 + (2 x Con mod) ] HP, on average. The sorceror would have to have a +4 con mod to still be concious when the ray hit. Targetting him with this was definately a mistake.

Did the wizard continue to use the wand after his first round? Do the party now have the wand?



Everyone else in the party is also level 2, except for the former sorcerer, who rerolled as a rogue.

Why is the rogue not level 2? Do you want him to have to make a new character again?



find a reason for him to leave or kill him.

This. Also make the rogue the same level as everyone else. It's not the player's fault that the character died.

[RndmNumGen]

The spell does 4d6 damage (average 14). A level 2 sorceror has [ 6.5 + (2 x Con mod) ] HP, on average. The sorceror would have to have a +4 con mod to still be concious when the ray hit. Targetting him with this was definately a mistake.

Did the wizard continue to use the wand after his first round? Do the party now have the wand?

Why is the rogue not level 2? Do you want him to have to make a new character again?

The barbarian killed the wizard immediately after the sorcerer was downed, so no, he didn't continue using it. The party was in possession of the wand, but they sold it. The encounter was supposed to be very difficult, and if they were defeated I can planned on having the party be captured; I never expected it to drop him to -10 in one hit, though. So yeah, still a bad call on my part.

Good point about how the rogue should be level 2, though.

[Draig]

The spell does 4d6 damage (average 14). A level 2 sorceror has [ 6.5 + (2 x Con mod) ] HP, on average. The sorceror would have to have a +4 con mod to still be concious when the ray hit. Targetting him with this was definately a mistake.

Did the wizard continue to use the wand after his first round? Do the party now have the wand?




Why is the rogue not level 2? Do you want him to have to make a new character again?




This. Also make the rogue the same level as everyone else. It's not the player's fault that the character died.

Ive thrown enemies at my party that may have had a weapon too powerful and the party adapts. The wizard may have only attacked him because the sorcerer attacked them first. Sort of punishment for blindsiding a bandit group.

As for the rogue being a level behind. Even if it isnt the PC's fault i always make them come back a level lower. If not a PC could inadvertantly become distant to the characters they make and start to use the logic of "Well ill just come back same level so no biggie." If one of my PC's Dies then regardless of the other players i make him/her come back one lower. If it was because the PC was stupid then his party suffers any consequences his character might have incured as well as being a level lower. U cant be nice all the time and be a good DM

[Grogmir]

Regard the Rogue - I would allow him to start at level 2 - with no more than that in XP. Thats how my guys come back or in anyway. Same level as the lowest guy.

Your NPC, I would take his stats, lower everything by 2 points, maybe restat him and give him to the party as a NPC they can control in battle.

Obviously increase the CR for each battle now they have these extra resources - but don't bother traking his XP.

In Game, As soon as possible he would leave the party (only the ranger sounds like he's trying to recruit an NPC/DMPC, ask him what his intentions are here out of game). He's level 1 / 2 - nowhere near a BBEG for these guys, he's a nobody really. He's also lost out recently, for my he would be a henceman for the next bbeg, either leveled up to a no.2 where they can diplo.bluff/ int him into switching sides right at the end. Or lowered on down, where they could do the same to get them into a camp or reveal some secret.

Happy Rollin'

[Paseo H]

One good use for dm characters in the party is to 'job' to the villain so the villain gets a good showing without neccesarily crippling the party right off the bat.

[elpollo]

I've thrown enemies at my party that may have had a weapon too powerful and the party adapts.

How can a player adapt if their character is dead?



The wizard may have only attacked him because the sorcerer attacked them first. Sort of punishment for blindsiding a bandit group.

Getting robbed is not heroic. Fighting off bandits on the road and returning stolen possessions is heroic. D&D is a game about heroes. Which of the two options are most players going to try and take? In my experience (ok, anecdotal evidence isn't exactly an argument winner but it's all I got) players generally believe that there is an unspoken agreement between them and the DM that the DM will not put them against an encounter that they can't (or at least probably won't) beat. An encounter may be difficult, but it's assumed that the DM is "doing their job" and giving the players a relatively fair game.



As for the rogue being a level behind. Even if it isnt the PC's fault I always make them come back a level lower. If not a PC could inadvertantly become distant to the characters they make and start to use the logic of "Well I'll just come back same level so no biggie." If one of my PC's Dies then regardless of the other players I make him/her come back one lower. If it was because the PC was stupid then his party suffers any consequences his character might have incurred as well as being a level lower.

But if a DM's misjudgement means a player dies before they can react (whether this is a SoD, crazy damage, unexpected effect, or whatever) and is now a level lower than everyone else making them feel less useful, as well as more likely to die again, it will be the DM that they hold responsible. Nobody wants to feel useless. And what happens if one player is extraordinarily unlucky and dies two or three times in quick succession (i.e. without levelling), through no fault of their own? This can quickly make players distant from their characters as they are no longer meaningful in the game.

What do you do about players bringing in new characters? Are they the same level as everyone else?



You can't be nice all the time and be a good DM.

I disagree with this. You don't necessarily have to play fair, but at the end of the day it's a group activity, and I don't believe players should be penalised for an unlucky roll.

[Paseo H]

Draig: "You can't be nice all the time and be a good dm?"

There is a reason why people with 'power' and 'authority' sometimes seems like sociopaths.

From Cracked:

Feelings of Power Trigger a Lack of Compassion

In theory, politicians in the age of democracy should feel almost too much compassion. They spend oceans of money and time getting elected to posts that exist solely for the continued well-being of the people they serve. They hold town hall meetings to listen to their constituents, and they risk their political futures trying to pass laws for the good of their people.

A study in an issue of Psychological Science set out to test this idea. The method was a little different, as instead of a role-playing exercise, the researchers actually surveyed subjects about how powerful they felt in their own lives. Then they were divided into powerful and powerless based on their answers.

The subjects were then paired up, and one was told to relay an emotionally scarring event that had happened to him. The listener was hooked up to an ECG machine, and all of his stress responses were measured.

The powerless people reacted the way you'd expect people would react when told a heart-wrenching tale. The powerful, on the other hand, felt nothing. Or at least, their responses couldn't be measured, whether they naturally felt no empathy or were just better at regulating their emotions.

The researchers had all of the subjects fill out a survey at the end and inquired about whether they'd like to stay in touch with the other experiment subjects after the experiment was over, to see if maybe they'd made any friends during this ordeal. The powerless subjects were into it. The powerful were not. They wanted nothing more to do with the stranger they'd just traded personal stories with.

This seems to indicate what we had always suspected -- that while politicians may pander to you by kissing your baby, they might as well be kissing a can of Beanee Weenees. The guy who stole your wallet at the laundromat will probably remember your name longer than they will.

http://www.cracked.com/article_18777_5-scientific-reasons-powerful-people-will-always-suck.html

It's on the second page. It's the #1 thing, actually.

Of course, as a DM myself, especially when the player makes things inconvenient for me, it's tempting to throw my weight around and say 'Because I'm the DM,' but if I did that, I would be the same as every heavy handed DM who is too much in love with his own power I've grown to despise.

So I try to keep at least an outward pretense of peer-ness with the player.

Because otherwise, I'd be nothing but a filthy hypocrite.