How Do you DMPC?

[questionmark693]

When you need to use a DMPC because your party only has three players that aren't any good at optimizing, how do you do it? I'm asking for advice because I may soon be in that position. Clearly, outshining them is a bad idea. Past that though, I have no experience with the matter, so any advice is welcome.

[JungleChicken]

Why should they have to optimize?

Optimizing is the bane of good character and fluff

[questionmark693]

I;m not saying they should. But when they think a fighter is an example of a stellar class, and there's only three people, I want them to have a companion to make sure they don't die because I accidentally gave them a CR appropriate encounter.

[SowZ]

I don't. I don't think you should, either. If you make a character who is equally unoptimized, it won't make much of a difference. If you make one who is optimized, it will outshine everyone. Why not do one of two things-

A. Just scale the encounters down.
B. Let them do gestalt.

Even with poor optimizers, gestalt leads to decent power.

[Twilightwyrm]

I don't always DMPC, but when I do, I choose bards.

(Actually, I don't typically have any given supporting NPC adventure with the PCs for any length of time. One way you can stay adaptable, and lessen the player perception of a DMPC, is to constantly switch up who exactly they are traveling with. This way they remain the focus of the story, have the support they need, and view said NPCs simply as a colorful cast of traveling companions. Of course, if they go out of their way to ask one of your NPCs to travel with them (presumably because they like them), then by all means allow yourself to add them as a regular companion. If it increases the enjoyment of the players, go with it.)

[questionmark693]

The reason I won't do gestalt is because they've never played any version of D&D before, or any tabletop that ';m aware of. I want them to have the opportunity to play it normal before they learn the variants, if that makes any sense. Scaling back the encounters is a very viable option, and I think I kind of lean more towards that. Though if I do DMPC, the idea of a Bard (or any other party buffing character) probably makes sense as the way to go.

[Jormengand]

Use a healbot/buffbot. Someone like a cleric, bard, hells, a truenamer who is built for it will do. Your DMPC is there to make the PCs more badass, not to be badass themselves unless strictly necessary.

[Ravens_cry]

I don't always DMPC, but when I do, I choose bards.
Good choice. I choose healbot clerics. It's a role few enjoy playing, so why not stick an NPC at it? Another possibility is a party buffer wizard.

[Zanos]

Why should they have to optimize?

Optimizing is the bane of good character and fluff
You should probably look up the stormwind fallacy.



That said, just tailor the encounters to their level of play. You should get a decent gauge of what they can handle in the first couple of fights. If they don't want to optimize at all, then just turn the encounters down a notch. Everything should be fine as long as you can get a feel for what they're capable of.

[JungleChicken]

You should probably look up the stormwind fallacy.



That said, just tailor the encounters to their level of play. You should get a decent gauge of what they can handle in the first couple of fights. If they don't want to optimize at all, then just turn the encounters down a notch. Everything should be fine as long as you can get a feel for what they're capable of.

I have read it. I just don't agree with it very much and am using my personal experiences over the years as my own basis. It also happens that if you talk to anyone about "that guy" in a group then it's always an optimizer

[sambouchah]

My knee jerk reaction is to say "You Don't!", but I've run DMPCs before and it wasn't too much of a pain. Just don't optimize too much, don't do anything game breaking, don't tailor items for yourself, don't boast about anything your character does.

I had a DM run a DMPC who was Plot Armored, boastful and irritating as the Nine Hells to be in a party with. We would do something we were proud of and his character would do the same thing ten fold, not because it was actually possible, but because he was the DM and quite full of himself.

My DMPC was a Half-Orc Barbarian, simple. He carried a Double Axe(not a great choice), Raged when needed, and occasionally Intimidated an opponent. He wasn't anything special, never bothered to outshine his team mates and didn't take loot until everyone had taken what they wanted. He ended up dying and it wasn't a big deal.

Anyways, that's my two cents:smallbiggrin:

[Irk]

I have read it. I just don't agree with it very much and am using my personal experiences over the years as my own basis. It also happens that if you talk to anyone about "that guy" in a group then it's always an optimizer

In my own group, I optimize more than anyone else, yet I also RP more than anyone else. I suggest you look at some of the campaign experiences of Stormwind's group here (http://community.wizards.com/content/forum-topic/3502556) and here (http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-general/threads/1114906). All very high powered, but there is doubtlessly fluff.

[Darth Stabber]

You should probably look up the stormwind fallacy.

I'm glad you said it. I would have launched into a fiery tirade of invective that likely would get me in trouble with the mods.

Optimization has no correlation with roleplaying, and those that perpetuate that myth tend to be bad at both.

To answer your question you let the players operate the character in combat. You as the GM do the roleplaying, but by letting the players make the combat decisions they don't feel messed with. Making said character socially incompetent also gets them out of noncombat situations.

[zlefin]

Use adventure paths with terribly unoptimized monsters; and play monsters unintelligently.

Or just use lower CR monsters than you normally would.

I'd try to avoid true dmpc's if possible. If the party truly needs the extra strength, I'd arrange to have them hire/be put in charge of some guy(s) who are one to two levels lower than the party and are quite unoptimized, and preferably in supporting classes.

[TuggyNE]

I feel a strong urge to point in the general direction of Defining DMPCs, if only to sort out the terminology. Some of the classification axes in there might also be instructive to consider, though: in particular, try to work out whether your chosen C-NPC or GM's-PC could be annoying through agency, plot focus, (lack of) OOC or IC agreement, or role.

Building a character around party buffing, status removal, and healing is a fairly reliable way to get a nicely underpowered party cohort, though, so with a bit of care and luck you should do all right.

[Craft (Cheese)]

As others have said, the best way to deal with this situation is to scale the encounters back and tailor the obstacles to your players' capabilities. The only exception might be if you're running a module, because rewriting all the material sort of negates the point of running one. In which case you're better off just giving the players more power (you all get a free 2 levels in any class you want/you all find a giant sack of gold waaaaay above your wbl), rather than force a DMPC on them.

When a DMPC is called for though, rule #1 is to give control to the players. Give them a reason why they'd be loyal and willing to follow the party's orders without question (within reason; If the party orders them to tear out their own eyes with a rusty spoon without providing a very good reason, the party should be told to go **** themselves), then collectively give control of them to the rest of the party. Decide their actions yourself only if the party doesn't have any orders for them at the moment. This way, the NPC feels like a boon rather than an albatross around their necks.

Rule #2 is never give the party a DMPC unless they ask for one. Never ask them if they want one, wait for them to ask you.

[AlltheBooks]

You don't. Really not needed. 1 character? Let them bend WBL a tad. Have a bunch of interesting NPC's join the cause for a while and then leave. One DMPC becomes too much the DM's PC.

Otherwise just adjust your play style a bit. One PC can pull off some really neat ambush stuff normally not seen in game due to one person stealing the spotlight. Combining effects on items may come in handy if you normally don't use those rules. Lot's you can do.

Lol at second post on page. Quite the opposite little one.

[Spore]

I really dislike DMPCs. Playing with one for me feels like a school trip with the teacher always up in my neck.

[Evandar]

My players have generally liked the DMPCs I've used. I'm very careful to keep them hugely unoptimized, assign them humorous dialogue and make them take up support roles for the most part of the campaign.

The first DMPC I ran was just a straight Fighter that was helping the party out. They grew really attached to him, going to some extreeeme lengths to save him when he needed saving. Eventually he was killed by an encounter way about their CR, but they decided to go down avenging him. They rolled about five crits in a row, killed some obscenely powerful god's avatar and I ended the campaign there because like, damn, that was an amazing high note to end on.

It helped to keep their dialogue relatively short, snappy, insightful and ensuring they had a good relationship with the PCs. That was really as simple as setting up flanks, doing something risky from time to time and complimenting them on being hardcore.

[Curmudgeon]

When you need to use a DMPC because your party only has three players that aren't any good at optimizing, how do you do it?
The premise you stated is wrong; you don't need a DMPC. If you've got three weak players instead of four average players, you can give them weaker encounters on average. If you're thinking about using a module designed for four average characters there are other ways to adjust things than throwing in a DMPC.

Consider an easier module.
Tone down each encounter in the module.
Add loot, which you've selected to shore up weaknesses in the characters, early in the module.
Add consumables (such as healing potions) to correct for PC mistakes.
I use DMPCs in only two situations:

The campaign is already under way, and one player doesn't show up for a session. Having a DMPC pop in, for that session only, removes the need to rebalance the campaign on the fly for a smaller party.
An unanticipated need for an NPC in a brief encounter arises, and one of my PCs comes close to fitting the bill.

[lytokk]

I'm currently running a DMPC in my game. It started out as a nameless NPC cleric who rolled abysmally on 3 successive heal checks. The players loved the fluff I gave to the guys actions so much they demanded I name him. Later on the group was swarmed by undead and due to circumstances that I didn't even think about, he was hiding in the groups wagon, and turned a bunch of them away, really aiding the PC's. At that point, they decided they wanted him along with them, which I initially fought, but they really want him.

In the end, I rolled him out as an archer cleric. Playing him as more of a healbot/buffer offering ranged support to the party. This should serve to keep him out of the limelight and let the pc's really shine. Also gave him brew potion just to keep the party supplied with all their wonderful potions.

[Karoht]

Abjuration/Counterspelling specialized Sorcerer.
Basically, a dude with nothing but "NO" buttons. Which are really "Yes" buttons for the party, but "NO" buttons for the enemies. No offences, just "NO" buttons and maybe some utility here and there.
If not that, Bards. Bards who sing and dance and buff people and hold standard actions to counterspell with Dispel Magic where possible.

Also, I agree, scale back the encounters. Subtract 2 or 3 for what is considered level appropriate. Level appropriate for these guys is probably a boss encounter.


If you want, add in some drawbacks of adventuring with this guy. IE-He's a wanted man. He's got people after him. Who he may not have told the party completely about. Eventually the party will make the choice of either cutting him loose or taking time to deal with his problems. If it makes for an interesting party choice, it might not be such a bad idea. Just saying.

[Threadnaught]

When you need to use a DMPC because your party only has three players that aren't any good at optimizing, how do you do it? I'm asking for advice because I may soon be in that position. Clearly, outshining them is a bad idea. Past that though, I have no experience with the matter, so any advice is welcome.

Don't have a single DMPC, have several and switch them out at points. Make the DMPCs have their own personalities and goals, give them their reasons for travelling with and leaving the PCs.


My players always want to hang out with their favourite DMPCs, while ignoring others and avoiding their least favourite. I have about a dozen of them and my players are mostly grateful for all of them. :smallcool:

[Brookshw]

I don't though I'm familiar with some dm's who use them in support/heal roles which sounds fine.

[SiuiS]

Why should they have to optimize?

Optimizing is the bane of good character and fluff

I disagree. In fact, for some fluff you must optimize. Otherwise the idea will be too weak to be viable and you'll actually hurt the party.

DMPC, I find the best way is to have a stable. A group of NPCS who all know and at times work with the party like supporting cast. It's okay if they outshine the party at the npc's specific role, or sometimes if they outshine the party at the party member's role. They'll either be specialized differently, really chummy about having a friend who knows the business, or be the benchmark by which growth can be measured.

[AKA_Bait]

Use a healbot/buffbot. Someone like a cleric, bard, hells, a truenamer who is built for it will do. Your DMPC is there to make the PCs more badass, not to be badass themselves unless strictly necessary.


You don't. Really not needed. 1 character? Let them bend WBL a tad. Have a bunch of interesting NPC's join the cause for a while and then leave.

I agree with these suggestions. First, I don't think that you need a DMPC at all to balance unoptimized players. Just arrange to have them acquire magical items that compensate for their weaknesses. If you can weave their acquisition of such items into the adventure in a way that makes them feel awesome, all the better. If you are really concerned about TPKing them, adjust your encounters down or fudge it by (1) leveling them faster than normal, (2) just straight up cheating on your own save DCs/die rolls/etc.

If you feel you must add an additional character, I also agree with the suggestions that it be a support character. One option for this that I have not seen suggested would be a sapient magical item (say a staff) that functions as a heal-buff bot and helps the party at particular times because "I don't want to spend the next thirty years lying in some trolls pile of filthy rags."

[Eldan]

I think the actual build chosen isn't really the problem. I've done things one might interpret as DMPCing a few times before and this is what I think about it:

1) Let the players choose. Usually, in my adventures, I like to let the party meet a few people who mention that they wouldn't be opposed to come along on an adventure or two. There's different ways to do this. I've had a demon who offered his services as a familiar to the party caster. I've had guides or caravan guards for hire. Bards who had heard about the party and wanted to tell their story. Travellers who were just going in the same direction. All of those can work. Then be prepared for the party picking up the one NPC in the story you weren't prepared for. The important thing is that you don't force the party to take along anyone they don't like, but let them take along anyone they do like.

2) Don't give them too much agency. Don't play them stupidly or overly obedient, but make sure that the party are calling the shots. When my party hired a scout, they still told him "Go scout the path to the right, then come back and tell us what you see". They would then act on it. If you give them a guide, maybe let the guide suggest a few paths and let them choose one. "You told me we need to reach the Silver City in six days. We may try to ford the Flamewaters in winter and then cut straight through the Carrion Woods, or go around them and over the Blasted Ridge during the mating season of the Thunderbulls. Neither will be easy." Never have the DMPC tell the party what to do.

3) Don't give them the one way or power to solve the plot. I hope this one is obvious.

[danzibr]

I don't. I don't think you should, either. If you make a character who is equally unoptimized, it won't make much of a difference. If you make one who is optimized, it will outshine everyone. Why not do one of two things-

A. Just scale the encounters down.
B. Let them do gestalt.

Even with poor optimizers, gestalt leads to decent power.
I think this is good advice.

I only DMPC when it's related to plot. /like rescuing a prisoner capable of fighting.

[BWR]

When I'm running the game they've only shown up in one on one games. Some times it's nice for the player to have an extra character to talk to, an extra person in combat and a way for me to nudge the player along when she's stuck.

As for GMPCs in games I've played in, there were several in a long-running Dragonlance game, but I never felt they outshined the party. They were characters we like, the helped move the story along, they could help in a fight but we were the heroes.
And other times, in another one on one game with my gf, DMPCs are often family of the PC, and may become the PC in the next adventure, while a former PC may be the DMPC. Family or not, they are all excellent characters and enhance the game immensely.

[GreenETC]

I'd say you could get away with a DMPC/NPC Bard, focused entirely on just healing them or getting them rooms in taverns, like a manager. Make him be some Bard who is 100% sure that these guys will be people legends are told about in the future, and he wants to tag along to tell those tales.

[BRC]

There are situations where a DMPC is a good idea, this is not one of them.

At best, the DMPC will serve no purpose, at worst, it will outshine the unoptimized PC's.

Plus, a DMPC is no guarantee against a TPK. A too-tough encounter could wipe out your PC's before the DMPC gets a chance to save them.

No, instead you need to just be more careful with your encounters, be generous with fudging dice and having your monsters act stupid. If you send three enemies against your PC's, don't have them mob the wizard and go for the kill, have them (stupidly) each engage a PC alone, so that once one PC dispatches their enemy they can team up on the others. Give the PC's the element of surprise (Surprise rounds are HUGE), give them superior positioning.

You can make up for their unoptomized deficiencies by getting creative with treasure. The fighter conveniently finds an Undead Bane Greatsword shortly before the fight with the necromancer, or the Rogue gets some sort of magical tattoo that boost his dexterity at night or something like that.

Your PC's don't know what is going on behind the scenes. If they're getting killed, then chop twenty HP off the dragon's hit point total, they don't know the monster manual. There are a billion ways to coddle them while STILL making them feel like the biggest badasses in the world.

[Flickerdart]

A DMPC is great when you need to rub in the lethality of an encounter. Murder him first. :smallamused:

[Tyndmyr]

When you need to use a DMPC because your party only has three players that aren't any good at optimizing, how do you do it? I'm asking for advice because I may soon be in that position. Clearly, outshining them is a bad idea. Past that though, I have no experience with the matter, so any advice is welcome.

You don't.

You don't NEED people to optimize or not optimize. You need them to play well with each other. If they're all in roughly the same power class, whatever, just roll with whatever level of power that is.

[MonochromeTiger]

in both my groups DMPCs have been focused down to once specific function, they exist as throwaway characters for the specific purpose of having a skill the group needs but hasn't trained in for part of an adventure. door only opens by use of a magical item and the group doesn't have points in UMD? DMPC just for that, it can immediately run in and die to showcase the enemies in the building after that.

too much involvement and the DMPC winds up stealing the story from the group which no DM should do, too little and the DMPC has no story reason to even be there which makes their inclusion pointless as anything more than a "you should've trained in this".

[Novawurmson]

I played a DMPC for two years (and am playing another one now). Most of the general advice here has been sound.

Heal/buff/support is best for crunch. My long-term character was a Cleric, and my current character is a Psion. In either case, they focused on abilities that help the rest of the party shine or debuffing the opponents so the party can take them out.

Likewise, a supportive personality is also good. My long-term character was the peacemaker of the group. He would never suggest plot-relevant information to the party, but when the party had a disagreement, he'd usually come up with a compromise. My players still affectionately refer to the character as the "dad" of that party. The current DMPC has an upbeat and encouraging personality, which I can use to keep the tone of the current campaign fun (the current campaign has some fairly dark and stressful themes).

[Eldan]

Oh, and one other thing. Every DM has, from time to time, the urge to say "Are you sure you want to do this? Like, really, really sure? Can't you come up with a better plan than putting the fighter in a barrel, setting it on fire and rolling it down a cliff to "surprise" the enemy army while the rest of you try luring monsters into the camp by wrapping yourself in hot bacon and running through the forest?"

Having a DMPC means you have a way to say those things in character.

[Big Fau]

I have read it. I just don't agree with it very much and am using my personal experiences over the years as my own basis. It also happens that if you talk to anyone about "that guy" in a group then it's always an optimizer

You're misappropriating the term "Optimizer" with the term "Munchkin". The former will play by the rules and hold back if he realizes he is overdoing it (or if asked by the DM). A munchkin doesn't do that, and will often ignore rules outright if it makes his character more powerful.

The traditional "That Guy" is a Munchkin through and through, not a proper Optimizer.

[SassyQuatch]

If my current campaign is any guide, then I DMPC as a PC who also happens to be the DM.

Many posts on this forum to the contrary, but DMs are allowed to have some enjoyment from the game and are not a players' doormat.

[Craft (Cheese)]

If my current campaign is any guide, then I DMPC as a PC who also happens to be the DM.

Many posts on this forum to the contrary, but DMs are allowed to have some enjoyment from the game and are not a players' doormat.

You're the DM. You are literally completely omnipotent with regards to every aspect of the world, so long as the players aren't currently looking at it, including retroactive modifications of past events. You have immense power to have anything you want happen with something while the players *are* looking at it: The only limit is your players' suspension of disbelief. You control the results of all rolls if you so desire, since the rolls the enemies make and the DCs for the rolls the players make are (or should be) kept secret. You hold the puppet-strings that control all the gods, all the angels, all the demons, all the villains, all the allies, all the random passers-by on the street, including their motivations. Your hands forge the planes themselves, and you can unmake them with but a thought.

I'm sure you can find some way to amuse yourself besides rolling up a PC.

[LadyLexi]

Animal Companion. Give them a warpony with a bad attitude!

[Hida Reju]

Everytime I have seen a DMPC in my groups it has been because we are swapping out DM's about every 3-5 sessions.

So since we are taking turns running the game our character moves into the background of the story and is just there for his role in the party not to lead the story around by the nose or get instant SUPA POWAH.

Really what you need to do is just let the players know what the DMPC is there for. If its to play some then they need to step up and run thing sometimes so your PC can then step up an shine more.

If it's just to be a heal bot and not affecting the story then its not really a DM PC it's a hireling that is getting 100% of the loot.

[Tyndmyr]

You're the DM. You are literally completely omnipotent with regards to every aspect of the world, so long as the players aren't currently looking at it, including retroactive modifications of past events. You have immense power to have anything you want happen with something while the players *are* looking at it: The only limit is your players' suspension of disbelief. You control the results of all rolls if you so desire, since the rolls the enemies make and the DCs for the rolls the players make are (or should be) kept secret. You hold the puppet-strings that control all the gods, all the angels, all the demons, all the villains, all the allies, all the random passers-by on the street, including their motivations. Your hands forge the planes themselves, and you can unmake them with but a thought.

I'm sure you can find some way to amuse yourself besides rolling up a PC.

This. If the absolute, only way you have fun at all is playing a PC, you may wish to consider why you are DMing in the first place.

Many things about DMing can be entertaining...consider, you get to play not merely one char, but an entire host of them. If there is a certain char you feel would be fun to roleplay, then as a DM, you can totally do that. I question why being part of the party, getting a share of the loot, etc would be essential, especially when you're setting up the challenges yourself. Certainly, surprise and an element of challenge would be missing. Making a fight for me to fight through seems to be just tedious, and I generally avoid it.

However, the original reason seems even more unrelated. Level of optimization played at would seem to be entirely unconnected to DMPCing practices. Optimization choices are only really an issue for other reasons, like one player wanting to be god, and another wanting to be a samurai. It's like seeing a nail sticking out and a guy grabbing a protractor. There's *got* to be another reason there.

[Coidzor]

If I were to do it, it would primarily be out of combat support (a character or characters that primarily act as a sage or healer or skillmonkey, maybe some measure of Utility Casting from a demiGOD caster that primarily focuses on buffing and counteracting enemy buffing/BFC) or if they neglected a crucial combat role, something similar to mediocre melee that's primarily able to survive and act as a blocker/tank/distraction while they work to actually resolve the encounter.

I'd probably go more for a small, possibly rotating, cast of Support NPCs over an out-and-out DMPC though. Give them a couple of ECL-(2 to 3) Warriors lead by an ECL-(1 to 2) Knight or Marshall instead of an equal level Crusader for their tanking and some damage output if they focused on Battlefield Control or Blasting or a contingent of archers doing volleys to support or provide cover to them if they neglected ranged and such was necessary. (edit: And even then, much like the let players control one another's cohorts idea, I'm about 50-50 on whether to adjudicate their actions myself based upon the input from the PCs or let the players each control one or two of them depending upon how things go. Also, the expanded Mob Template (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=143.0)'s Unit variant always struck me as potentially of interest here...)

It'd almost certainly require tweaking as I've never actually done it before, but I've been fond of the idea of giving a small "squad" of ECL -(3 to 4) NPCs instead of the whole brouhaha of Leadership(and instead having a different feat for gaining/forming an organization comprised of or with a core of loyal followers), though I've never done more than toy around with it.

[The Oni]

I have a DMPC in one of my games named James. He's more or less the town sheriff who uses a nodachi (this is not setting-inappropriate in this world, but I did think it was funny because DMPCs go hand in hand with katanas like Mary Sues and heterochromia). Insufferably polite, and obsessed with lawful handing out of justice.

Buuuuut...He's also a fighter, with no special tricks (outside the weird weapon), and a level lower than everyone else in the party. No one's complained about him so far.

Point being, don't overshadow the party. Be a supporting character at best; a background character if you can make it happen.

[SassyQuatch]

{{scrubbed}}

[Zman]

I run a DMPC in games I DM, especially in PBP. This medium lets me compartmentalize my thoughts, enjoy the benefits of playing a PC, while still creating an enjoyable, rich, and well thought out world for the group.

Many in this thread have a very different opinion, feeling you can't have a DMPC without favoring them, stealing the limelight, or simply fulfilling a role. I strongly believe they are wrong. To insinuate those who DM with a DMPC shouldn't DM is insulting and juvenile. Many DMs cannot effectively do it, some certainly can.

I DM because it's the only way I know a game will be successful. In general, the DMs in the games I've joined have been terrible for many different reasons, often simultaneously. I know when I DM we will have a well crafted world, Psuedo sandbox style game with decisions and consequences, with well made combats, intricate and thought out plots, and most importantly a fast posting pace and enjoyment for all.

It's as simple as compartmentalizing your thoughts, and avoiding using knowledge the party doesn't have, and not out shining or minima listing the others in the party. In the exact same way I make the decisions for the Big Bad, or the Regent, etc. Often, my characters idea is not good, but it is the idea he/she would have come up with. If absolutely need be, they can offer a suggestion to nudge the party the right way. Best part, the other players never feel like they are playing second fiddle, nor do they feel inconsequential.

This is how I enjoy dnd, and if we all enjoy the game and can have fast paced long term successful games, who are any of you to say we are playing wrong, and that I shouldn't have a DMPC.

[Doug Lampert]

I'm glad you said it. I would have launched into a fiery tirade of invective that likely would get me in trouble with the mods.

Optimization has no correlation with roleplaying, and those that perpetuate that myth tend to be bad at both.

To answer your question you let the players operate the character in combat. You as the GM do the roleplaying, but by letting the players make the combat decisions they don't feel messed with. Making said character socially incompetent also gets them out of noncombat situations.

This. The GM has more to do in combat than everyone else at the table put together. You should dump as much of the load as you can on the players, and that definitely includes running any NPC allies.

[prufock]

If you can run NPCs without favouring them, giving them all the answers, and having them succeed all the time, you can run DMPCs without favouring them, giving them all the answers, and having them succeed all the time. A DMPC is just an NPC that is part of the party. Party support characters are probably the best.

That said, there are pitfalls if the DM starts to care too much about the character. I don't really think a DMPC is ever really necessary, but sometimes they are appropriate. There are alternate ways to handle gaps in the party - hirelings, Leadership, items, higher point buy, etc. And remember that adjusting the difficulty of monsters and encounters is an option.

[Darth Stabber]

This. The GM has more to do in combat than everyone else at the table put together. You should dump as much of the load as you can on the players, and that definitely includes running any NPC allies.

I use gmpc in a game I'm currently running for sessions where a player can't show. He's charge focused barbarian/warblade, in a caster party. The players constantly outshine him, because all he does is a butt load of damage (and most of it is dependent on getting the charge off, he would play better if I was running him, but the other players don't understand the weird hidden nuances because I haven't told them about them, and they only get his sheet during combat). He was created because I thought another player would take over GMing, and I thought I would get to play, but that didn't happen, and there were several compelling plot reasons why the previous back-up dmpc couldn't be there (a half orc bard dual wielding maraca maces, he was aweful).

Unfortunately the warblade is a liitle too wrapped in the plot at the moment, so I have to take great pains to keep him out of combat when everyone shows up, but without ruining his characterization.

[Mithril Leaf]

Have a warforged bard with the party that plays all your background music. Perfect in game explanation for why you hear exciting adventure music as you climb the volcano to fight the big bad dragon. He can be painfully stoic and only following them around because he thinks they'll be his ticket to the big time, and he has the lifespan to take those sorts of risks.

[Kelb_Panthera]

As at least a few others have said, the premise of your question is, at best, suspect. If you -need- a fourth character of roughly the PC's level then it's because you either lack the skill or the drive to build the encounters to fit the party instead of demanding that they fit the encounters. This is hardly an inexcusable fault. Being a beginner or having other, more pressing concerns than building encounters in extreme detail are things that happen.

That said, when I use an important NPC that will stay with the party for a good while I tend to run them as supporting and/or background characters. They do -not- guide the party's actions unless directly asked to do so. They are not intentionally given the spotlight by me as the DM at all unless the players push circumstances in that direction and it becomes unavoidable, short of hitting the NPC with the proverbial falling rocks. Even calling them DMPC's strikes me as looking at them with the wrong attitude. No NPC, save the BBEG, should ever be looked at as equal to the PC's in the dramatic sense.

[Craft (Cheese)]

{{scrubbed}}

That's not what I'm saying at all. Taking the DM's chair and rolling up a DMPC because you feel like playing is like going to a 5-star restaurant and ordering chicken nuggets. There's nothing wrong with liking chicken nuggets, it's just a waste of an opportunity.

"I don't want to DM but I'm stuck doing it because nobody else wants to either" is a real problem though. Try Fiasco?

[Togo]

I would suggest avoiding a DMPC. There are a lot of hidden pitfalls. Particularly for the more experienced DM who knows what they're doing.

If they need more warm bodies in a fight, give them an NPC who is a healbot, or a support character, and encourage them to direct what actions he takes. Ideally, you want a situation where the players themselves are experimenting and finding out what works and what doesn't. But don't try and play them as a full character. Your energies should be directed into the rest of the game.

While we're at it, the original stormwind fallacy, on the WotC boards, was that there is no necessary connection between optimisation and roleplaying. That still leaves the door wide open to them being correlated, as was extensively discussed in the original discussion. In my experience, the person who ends up with a character vastly more optimised than anyone else is rarely a good roleplayer. It's not that it's impossible, merely less likely, in the same way that it's less likely for the guy who always plays a half-naked barbarian with a big axe, irrespective of the game. You're dealing with a limited subset of builds, reducing the potential variety, and you're indulging in certain priorities over others. That doesn't make it impossible, but it reduces your room to manuoevre.

[killem2]

I;m all about DMPCs but a lack of optimization is not a good reason. That should make a dm's job rather easy.


Now, if they lack tactical insight, that an entirely different matter.

[The Grue]

Very first campaign I played in highschool, we had a DMPC who was in retrospect pretty bad. Central to the "main plot", aloof and mysterious manner, and...well let's just say he once essentially transformed into a colossal Ent and did battle with another large beastie.

He got snatched up(in tiny mode) by an actual Ent and required saving from the actual players. It occured to the party blaster that ents were vulnerable to fire, so he lobbed a couple of fireballs at the arm holding the DMPC - who, being held, had a Dex penalty, failed his reflex save, and then rolled near-max damage.

The campaign ended shortly thereafter, ostensibly for unrelated reasons.

The one time I ran a DMPC, it was for a very short two-person dungeon crawl. Their builds were a little squishy, so I drew up a Paladin to act as meatshield. Played a little fast and loose with Lawful Good, interpreted through the eyes of a devotee of the Trade/Commerce god - essentially a crusader for capitalism, part of a Knights Templar-ish sect who rented out their swords to merchants and travellers at competitive rates. The terms of the contract were quite specific, and I was only too happy to have him tut-tut and "excuse" himself whenever he could get away with it, which was whenever I didn't want the players using him as a crutch.

And then there was this other campaign I was in, where a crucial questgiver NPC was basically the character the DM had played in the last guy's campaign. Except that actually worked, because he was off trying to build a frontier town while we trudged through the wilderness in search of treasure, so he was really only around when we actively went to find him.

As a rule, I'd try to avoid it if at all possible. But if you have to do it try to make the character interesting and useful enough that the players will seek them out on their own, but not so much that they steal the spotlight and get bat-phoned for every little thing, especially if the party can enlist aid at no cost. If it gets them XP and loots and doesn't make them feel less cool, a party will call in as many NPCs as it can get away with for backup.

[Karoht]

Another thing DM's forget about DMPC's. Leading by example rarely works. You could show them how to play better, play smarter. Heck, the DMPC could literally give them the tools to idiot proof some tactics. Chances are, the party won't bite.

IE-Caster showed up with Goggles granting Snowsight and a wand of Sleetstorm. The party complained that they couldn't do anything to fight that tactic at all. When they beat the caster, they found a box containing more goggles granting Snowsight and another wand with a few charges of Sleetstorm.
They party proceeded to complain some more about not getting loot they could use.
/facepalm

DM literally handed them all the tools they needed to pull off the same tactic, without all but writing the equipment onto their character sheets or playing for them.

So using a DMPC to show off tactics? Probably worse idea.

[Craft (Cheese)]

The one time I ran a DMPC, it was for a very short two-person dungeon crawl. Their builds were a little squishy, so I drew up a Paladin to act as meatshield. Played a little fast and loose with Lawful Good, interpreted through the eyes of a devotee of the Trade/Commerce god - essentially a crusader for capitalism, part of a Knights Templar-ish sect who rented out their swords to merchants and travellers at competitive rates. The terms of the contract were quite specific, and I was only too happy to have him tut-tut and "excuse" himself whenever he could get away with it, which was whenever I didn't want the players using him as a crutch.

"Crusaders For Capitalism" sounds like an awesome band name.

[Kudaku]

You should note that "DMPC" is a severely negatively charged word for a lot of posters on this forum - you might get more nuanced answers if you use a different term.

That said, when I do (rarely) use NPCs travelling along with the party I tend to run them much like other party members in computer RPGs:
Don't optimize him so much that he outshines the party.
Don't make him completely incompetent.
He should have his own personality, his own agendas and his own goals. Those might correlate with the party's, they might not, they might start off aligning and then sliding off-key or vice versa.
Make sure the party appreciates he is an individual and not a "bot".
Have a decent idea of how long he'll stick around. Frequently I don't assign "DMPC"s XP or level them up with the party. This is nice as it lets the party get a feeling that they're "outgrowing" the surroundings instead of always encountering strangely appropriate levels of challenges (ie the Oblivion problem).

The beautiful thing about "DMPCs" is that you can replace them frequently, offering the party an array of contacts, friends and allies that might aid them at various stages of the campaign.

Some of the best intra-party role playing I saw in my last campaign was when they interacted with DMPCs.
One such moment was the aftermath when the fighter they hired to round up their party refused to attack a particular enemy for personal reasons. This caught the party completely by surprise, and it was absolutely fascinating to see the realization dawn on the players that he wasn't just a walking HP number with power attack attached.

Another moment was when they hired a local sage to help them identify and translate a series of strange runes found in the ruins underneath the village they lived in (RotRL, Chask, Catacombs of Wrath). I played him as a dry-witted veteran ex-adventurer bard Archivist (level 3, mainly support and knowledge spells and skills) and the party absolutely fell in love with him. They made a solid friendship and would frequently seek him out for advice, even when they had leveled up into their teens and he really didn't have much to contribute anymore.

The chance to let an NPC travel with the party is a wonderful chance to inject background, flavour and context in your campaign setting. The trick is to balance his input and efficiency with the rest of the party. They should enjoy the company, never resent it.

[killem2]

So using a DMPC to show off tactics? Probably worse idea.

Agreed, but if your groups poor tactics, are in such a sorry state that it gets them killed on a regular basis, a DMPC can help, not to teach, but to just offer support.

When I say poor tactics, I mean wizards going up with touch spells every time, or a melee guy who picked up a cross bow with a 13 dex and no ranged feats and thinks oh this should be cool, I can be Daryl!

[Craft (Cheese)]

The beautiful thing about "DMPCs" is that you can replace them frequently, offering the party an array of contacts, friends and allies that might aid them at various stages of the campaign.

One thing I've always wanted to do? Run a comedy campaign with a DMPC Elf named Ammarth. At the end of the first session, he gets killed off in some whacky way.

Next session, the PCs meet another DMPC Elf, named Ammarth the Second...

If you get the joke with the name, you are officially awesome.

[Karoht]

A menagerie of NPCs (humanoid and animal alike) who offer different services and skills is pretty easy to work in. Think of a group of medieval knights. Behind those knights would travel their entourage of Squires and indentured servants. These people would do things like dress them, carry supplies, cook and clean and set up/tear down camp, and even stand guard to a degree. Squires were responsible for the care and maintenance of the knights weapons and armor.

In a recent campaign, our group slowly but steadily formed such an entourage following a ways behind us. The DM never had them attacked, since we were the real threat the bad guys would go after us while the troupe just maintained a healthy distance. We picked up some interesting people along the way. A few minor casters, a few skill monkeys, various animals (some pack animals to haul everything, some dogs and a wolf or two to provide some scouting, some birds for yet more scouting, etc), and just useful people who felt like traveling with us. Anyone we rescued stayed with us and enjoyed our hospitality until we hit a town.
Would you believe that most of the party was evil?

As others have pointed out, plenty of ways one can use a group of NPC's for flavor and purpose rather than using a DMPC.

[Kelb_Panthera]

One thing I've always wanted to do? Run a comedy campaign with a DMPC Elf named Ammarth. At the end of the first session, he gets killed off in some whacky way.

Next session, the PCs meet another DMPC Elf, named Ammarth the Second...

If you get the joke with the name, you are officially awesome.

Did Ammarth happen to be a bard in a certain low-budget movie about gaming enthusiasts?

[AKA_Bait]

On further reflection, this seems like the perfect opportunity to actually make use of a Gray Render.

[johnbragg]

I;m not saying they should. But when they think a fighter is an example of a stellar class, and there's only three people, I want them to have a companion to make sure they don't die because I accidentally gave them a CR appropriate encounter.

Tone down the encounters before you automatically give them an NPC.

That said, do we know what the players are playing? And what level are you playing at? I'd say have an NPC rogue and an NPC healbot cleric rolled up and ready to go if it's at very low levels, an NPC bard ready if it's at mid to high levels--he's mostly there to make sure that a locked door or a character knocked unconscious isn't an accidental session-ending problem.

[Pinkie Pyro]

Having been in the exact same situation, all I can say is:
treat yourself like a player. A DMPC is fine so long as it doesn't seem like the entire campaign is centered around them.

[pwykersotz]

In my own group, I optimize more than anyone else, yet I also RP more than anyone else. I suggest you look at some of the campaign experiences of Stormwind's group here (http://community.wizards.com/content/forum-topic/3502556) and here (http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-general/threads/1114906). All very high powered, but there is doubtlessly fluff.

It certainly can be done, but I notice that those with a high degree of system mastery spend more time using meta-knowledge on a situation than immersing themselves, at least amongst my players. They do try to roleplay, and sometimes they succeed wonderfully, but more often they rules-lawyer or metagame their way out of a situation.

Note that this is just my personal experience, not a critique of optimizers in general, but I suspect it's the experience a lot of opponents of optimization have as well.

[Coidzor]

It certainly can be done, but I notice that those with a high degree of system mastery spend more time using meta-knowledge on a situation than immersing themselves, at least amongst my players. They do try to roleplay, and sometimes they succeed wonderfully, but more often they rules-lawyer or metagame their way out of a situation.

I can only imagine you mean that they know the rules and use the abilities that they have to resolve situations in game rather than being mystified by problems they encounter due to their personal ignorance of the options they have available. :smallconfused:

[Craft (Cheese)]

"Oh no! These trolls are regenerating the damage I deal to them with these ice blasts! Whatever shall I do!?" is not roleplaying. At the very least, not the type of roleplaying I care about.

[Kudaku]

Your sorcerer uses Ice Magic? Pfft, not a real roleplayer! Cold is too optimized, real RPers only use thematically appropriate fire spells.

Does Stormwind Fallacy work in reverse? Let's find out!

[Darth Stabber]

The only "good uses" for DMPC (barring very careful play, if you think you are being careful enough you aren't) are healbots for parties incapable of doing so (and they should probably be dull as dishwater to ensure they don't grab focus), and fill ins for missing players. The other kinds are a bad kind of fire to be messing around with, as they can sink things quickly. Even if you are very careful and scrupulous about playing one the risk is one of perception, and as social a game as we are dealing with, the player's perceptions are effectively reality. Even if you keep the dmpc as low key as possible it means nothing if they players develop a negative perception. Undoubtedly there are going to be some contradictory results of dmpc'ing working out well, but these are the exception not the rule. The two specific examples I named avoid that fate for specific reasons. The healbot keeps the party moving without a player having to do it, which is often very appreciated. The fill-in otoh has more leeway in use and personality, given that by it's very nature it is temporary, and likewise fulfills a specific role that is easily understood. Outside of those specific cases you lack that thematic and functional cover, which leads to greater risks.

[Raezeman]

I used one DMPC once. It was a wizard named Jinto that used nothing but buffs (haste, greater magic weapon, bull's strength, eagle's splendor) and rebuffs (ray of enfeeblement, ray of clumsiness). He was a higher level then the party and with his help they were able to defeat a rather strong enemy team in an epic battle.
My players liked this, as it was a great battle and they now love Jinto, as they often mention "Jinto is awesome" when appropriate. (Which will make it so much worse when Jinto goes missing and at some point they are attacked by undead Jinto!)

[Yahzi]

The answer is, "you don't."

Most of the comments here have been about NPCs, not DMPCs. If the party wants to hire a healer or a mage or a fighter or a dozen fighters, that's totally OK. Those people can have personalities and agendas of their own. But they're not PCs, in the sense that if the group decides to leave them behind, the story stops being about them.

Consider: if a PC gets separated from the party, the DM takes time to work through his adventure. But if an NPC gets separated from the party, the DM at best rolls a dice to determine NPC's fate. The NPC might still affect the story in some way, but it's not gamed out. No game session time is spent on the NPCs unless it directly affects the PCs.

For a party of newbs, simply give them -3 ECL. That is, consider a balanced fight to be a CR 3 steps lower than their party. Above all - and I cannot stress this enough - above all do not put an NPC with all the privileges of a PC (can't be kicked out of the group, etc.) in the group to teach them how to do it right. You will only succeed in generating vast and unquenchable rage. :smallbiggrin:

[Juzer]

...i got 2 DMPCs: one died, the second jointed the party few weeks ago

the first one was the party's healer and buffer, and conscientiously made to fill the part's gap:
for you familiar with fourth edition, was a charismatic warlord, because before they had no healer, weaker melee and no one focused in strength- and charisma-based skills

So I didn't feared one single second for a DMPC trained in Diplomacy, Intimidate and Bluff whereas the PGs had no such trained skills: the point was, I let the DMPC never shine over the PGs, it was a friendly and trustworthy companion which gave them sometimes strategic insight

fluff-wise, the DMPC was useful, because he had a un-shiny background which related to the other PGs backgrounds, allowing me to begin the adventure with PGs which knew and trusted each other already

about social skills, most of the time the DMPC suggested their friends "tell me what do you want to say to these people, then I'm gonna explain it better", so he mostly substituted the skill's roll

he did personally stuff just when background-related (he was once a militia sergeant, so in a town he refused to attack the guards, even the corrupted ones, until there was the opportunity to do everything low-profile without blood-splattering)

Second DMPC is a rogue, with same insights:
- background-wise is the awkward and unforeseen twin brother of a PG, and this helps to explain some information about the game's world and help this PG to feel more related to a quest other PGs wants to follow
- combat-wise the party is very low on damages and tactics, so encounters are very long and boring: a rogue speeds fights, has some dexterity-based skills the party isn't trained to, suggest some tactics to get backstab bonuses for himself
- this PG also is the opposite oh shiny: almost dumb, demure, timorous, helpful, epileptic

In this second case some PGs argument about the his high damage rolls, so first I'm always ready to get rid of him if the DMPC became an annoyance, secondly in the meantime he will show the PGs basic tactics they don't use and explaining "I'm hitting hard because it's the best thing I can do: everyone has to do what he's best for"
-> we are playing in D&D 4th edition, were everyone in combat has a proper cooperative role, and defenders are just supposed not to do the same damages as a striker like a rogue

So, I don't know if you're gonna classify these 2 characters as NPCs or DMPC, but I feel they're working pretty well because are supposed to help and not to get she PGs spot