Played for 1 year taking a turn as DM need some tips

[kumarpr227]

I just joined this forum and some others to gather some more info about Dming.

A short D and D history for me.

I am 32 and playing with mostly Americans, 1 English guy, and 1 Chinese girl who’s English is great but it’s her 2nd language.

I started playing D and D for the first time about March of 2011. Since then we have two on going campaigns with the same core group with two different DM. We do a story arc with one DM, he then is a player for the 2nd campaign for the other DM.

I want to throw my hat in and start up a 3rd campaign. I also figure that I will learn a ton more about the game once I do it.

The first campaign is more railroad the 2nd is more sand box. Asking around players said there was good and bad with both. One way I want to address this is by having 2 characters that I will play in the party. I will use them based on trying to achieve the fine line between sand boxing and railroading.

I have a great story planned. Think The Walking Dead and Fallen Skies set in D and D.

The problem I am faced with is information over load. I first started playing as a Wizard, boy was that a lot of info. I thought about playing a summoner but felt that there was a big chance I could make a loser char so I choose to play a Magus.

I don’t plan on learning everything there is to know about every class and every spell and feat and combinations of all. I trust my players and will tell them where they go this info and then make a decision.

Also with combat. This is the hardest thing for me right now. What level should the npc be, how many of them, etc. I have read other posts and it seems like if you’re unsure take a few npc out. You can always add more during the combat but it’s worse if you take them out to make the combat easier.

I am trying to come up with a way to be able to access different NPC stats from a master list.

I will be using my phone and laptop quite a bit. Does anyone have any pointers for this? I am thinking about making an excel spread sheet. Where each NPC is given a rank based on level and cross referenced in different groups based on climate, time of day, location, etc.

If anyone could give me any pointers it would be great. So I will trust my players to not cheat when playing their toons in combat and that will give me time to focus on battle.

Thanks in advance for any help.

[Flickerdart]

1) A DMPC is generally a terrible idea.
1.5) TWO DMPCs is twice as bad of an idea.
1.75) If you absolutely must have a DMPC, make it a healer and do not have it participate in combat except to heal PCs.

[killem2]

As a DM who has a player character, it is fun, and I can see more fun to come along.

I don't think its a bad idea to have a player character, but I also don't think I could handle TWO player characters on top of everything else.

My player character is a focused evoker, so basically a machine gun on legs, and I banned illusion, necro, and enchantment.


Overall, DM isn't too hard. If you can't write for yourself and come up with your own stories, mixing and matching cultural aspects can work. I know I'll be robbing a little bit from final fantasy three (us), and maybe some parasite eve. If you don't do that, its ok, you have a bunch of modules ready for you to read.

The thing you want to remember is, what kind of game did the other players really enjoy, did you notice anything that really got them excited or more involved? And the player who was the DM, you might want to ask them what they like in RPGs.

[DrDeth]

Right. No DMPC. It’s a bad idea even for really experienced DM, it’s a disaster for a newbie.

Next, put some restrictions on the PCs= Limit them to books you KNOW. Next, tell them they are all part of a TEAM, and have them set up some background. You should also ban Evil and CN alignments.

Here is something I wrote about DMPCs a little while ago: Confessions of a repentant DMPC running DM
Hi, I have been DMing since around 1975 or so. And, like many of you, I used to run DMPCs. Funny, most of the time, when other DM’s did it, I didn’t much care for it, or even actively hated it. But I never said anything about it to my DM. I did complain to my fellow players and once I even stopped showing up for the games.
Then, I got into a conversation with one of my players, and we’d both been playing in another DM’s game, where that DM ran a DMPC. The other player & I were complaining about this. Then, I thought smugly to myself- “But of course, everyone likes it when *I* run a DMPC…” …then it hit me. No, they didn’t. It was just that I wasn’t obnoxious about it like the guy most of us walked out on.
Then I thought, well, maybe sometimes the party needs another PC Usually a healer)- then I thought about seeing others introduce a NPC, which was roleplayed by the DM during the introduction, then handed over to the players to run- with the DM stepping in if the players got silly or stupid.
I then thought back about the ONE DM I had where we all loved her DMPCs- then realized her DMPCs never did anything- well maybe healed us after battle or said things like “Hmm, I wonder what the Elvish word for “friend” is?”. Sure, she roleplayed, but the party was always her protector, not the other way around, and during combat or adventuring she did almost nothing. In fact many times we had no idea of what class she was- and of course, it didn’t matter. Her DMPC was just a Macguffin.
I then swore off the bad habit forever. Now, if the party needs another PC, I give them a real NPC- as above, one they run.

[killem2]

Right. No DMPC. It’s a bad idea even for really experienced DM, it’s a disaster for a newbie.

No it isn't.

Its just not recommended. To the OP, if you know what your doing, and your head is on straight, a DMPC is really overdramatized here. Like.. badly. More so than that old show "Rescue 9-1-1" or "Unsolved Mysteries."

[Tyndmyr]

1) A DMPC is generally a terrible idea.
1.5) TWO DMPCs is twice as bad of an idea.
1.75) If you absolutely must have a DMPC, make it a healer and do not have it participate in combat except to heal PCs.

This.

There is no drama here...DMPCs correlate highly with really terrible games. And, while all rules tend to have some weird corner case where they can be broken, it is ESPECIALLY not good to do this when you're new at something. It's like going to art class, and being taught rules of art. Yes, people HAVE broken them and created awesome things, but those people were never the people making their first painting.

Having two DMPCs is especially bad. Especially given that you already have at least four PCs. D&D functions *much* better with a reasonably sized party. 4 is about optimal, but you can stretch it to 6 or so. I've played with anywhere from 2 to 12, and let me tell you, things get remarkably slow and tedious as you expand the number of players.

If you don't want a sandbox campaign...don't play sandbox. Pick a more themed adventure, instead of trying to 'fix' it with DMPCs(ie, railroading).

Also, despite being a very popular idea, note that D&D is not especially good at Walking Dead style games. The reason for this is simple...the zombies are basically a static threat. Zombies are zombies are zombies. Char power level increases rapidly. Also, classes like rogues tend to be very unhappy. There's nothing wrong with the campaign idea itself(the comics are great), but consider a different system is you want to keep that feel. AFMBE or possibly D20 M(at low levels only). CoC if you're feeling like playing up the horror rather a lot.

[Arbane]

Also, despite being a very popular idea, note that D&D is not especially good at Walking Dead style games. The reason for this is simple...the zombies are basically a static threat. Zombies are zombies are zombies. Char power level increases rapidly. Also, classes like rogues tend to be very unhappy. There's nothing wrong with the campaign idea itself(the comics are great), but consider a different system is you want to keep that feel. AFMBE or possibly D20 M(at low levels only). CoC if you're feeling like playing up the horror rather a lot.

On the other hand, Silverclawshift was in an AWESOME zombapocalypse D&D game (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116836), although the problem was rather different than the standard Zombie Plague.

But yes, probably not enough variety there to sustain a long campaign.

[Flickerdart]

Eh, you could probably make a zombocalypse work if you focused on its cause rather than its effects. Zombies are fine and dandy, but if the necromantic elder evil responsible for them is creating more and more powerful undead as it awakens from its millenial slumber, there's a bit more you can do with that.

[Zeikstraal]

I also stopped with DMPC's.

When a player of mine was still DMing, and we where newbie's, nobody ever wanted to play the Cleric. Cause we thought he was just a healer.
And the Dm's PC where always stupid, only healing, never talking, and when we asked something he just said Yes, No or maybe.

Whit my last campaign I also had an Dmpc, a Cleric. But full fledged, same scores etc. He was a Battle Cleric. And I thought that a full character maybe would be fun.

In the end it turned out that he got too much crits, I rolled open for the PC so everybody could see it, but still they where complaining. 2 people made almost useless characters. So with the Cleric they felt completely useless. The Dwarven fighter was complaing the cleric always hit with attacks and he don't. Was his own fault, walking around with 2 Dwarven Waraxes at level 1. So he was attacking with -1/-1.

When an old player joined again and wanted a cleric, i let the DMPC retire. Only to return once when 3 players couldn't make it, but the others where already here.

So i made up a little side questst about Orcs attacking a nearby farm. The cleric already was at the farm and met them their. they where happy too see him. I rolled realy crap with him, and he was the only one too get hit by the orcs.

Now I'm not gonna throw in a DMPC anymore, most of them play 5 years D&D now, so if they don't want a cleric it is their problem.
A DMPC is never good i think. If he is full fledged, they will complain, if he is too crap they will complain. My party is only happy when the Full Fledged gets his ass kicked.
And if they realy want a cleric they can always hire one.

[bloodtide]

Also with combat. This is the hardest thing for me right now. What level should the npc be, how many of them, etc. I have read other posts and it seems like if you’re unsure take a few npc out. You can always add more during the combat but it’s worse if you take them out to make the combat easier.

Don't even bother trying to figure this out using the rules. Just wing it.

If you need some bandits, just pick a number. After a couple rounds of the fight, see the way the encounter is going and then pick the bandits levels and such.

Even if say 12 orcs surround the players, not all 12 must attack every round(D&D is not a WoW type video game). You can have only 6 attack and the rest hang back or such.

If an NPC is 'suddenly' too tough, you can simply have them make a mistake(do a Bond Villain speech, for example). Or they can make a lesser attack, such as not use power attack or use just a 2nd level spell.

And if the NPC is too week, you can add in something helpful to them.

[Tyndmyr]

Yeah, a fight being too weak is better than a fight being too hard. If you say "24 damage", and the player says that kills him, so you swap it less? Kind of destroys any feeling of danger.

A fight goes easier than planned? No great loss. They make it through perhaps one more fight before resting. And the occasional easy fight lets the players show off and feel powerful. Plus, it makes the difficult fights a lot more special. If every fight is difficult, none stand out.

[georgie_leech]

DMPC's have the potential to be a useful plot device or help for low-op groups (e.g. 3 rogues and a ranger who desperately need something that heal well), but they're FAR easier to screw up, turning them into kill stealers or, worse, Mary Sue's.

However, I still laugh about the last DMPC my old DM used. Our party was level 12-ish, and usually pretty good at what we did. For whatever reason, the DM introduces a Large (unexplained how) knight... crusader... paladin... thing (he never gave an actual class) with ridculous strength etc. and wearing a set of armour made of what we liked to call Mary-nium that was suppossed to make him next to invincible. He claimed the guy was level 20. Needless to say, we were a bit irked, but went along with it in the interest of not disrupting the campaign. Now, this seems like a perfect example of what is most hated about DMPC's, but we all still laugh about it. Why? He was incompetent at everything he tried to do. I don't mean he was built poorly or anything. No, the dice themselves sabotaged this guy. His attack rolls were almost always 6 or lower (frequently 1's), enemies were rolling crits on him left and right for high damage, and I don't recall him ever saving against anything...

I've chalked it up to the dice gods getting tired of his long list of arbitrary over-powered characters.