PDA

View Full Version : New DM, playing NPC party member



CyberWyld
2014-05-30, 11:15 AM
Starting my 1st Pathfinder Campaign on the 8th. I had previously (back in 07(ish) Homebrewed a class with my old DM for a divine gunslinger type of character. I have built my current campaign around said character now as a new DM. Or at least he's an integral plot hook in it. He will also serve as an additional party member for our very small group (3 players).

I'm looking for feedback/massive assistance in getting something put together for the game that will meet a few specific criteria. Some of these make building the character difficult, but are an important part of his fiction and thus the storyline for the campaign (like the two guns element). Any advice/assistance is greatly appreciated. Being new to the PF system I have been spending almost all of my time putting the actual campaign together and really need help with this character.

Character must have access to divine magic (really the source just has to be divine, the spell list is open)
Character must use 2 guns
Character must be balanced and not outshine the other players in the group, but still be a helpful addition.

Current party is going to be a Barb (tanky build), Ranger (Archer), Gunslinger (support). So I had planned on him filling a healer/support role if at all possible. I had looked at other builds (Like the Holy Gun) but almost all of them use one gun, and the Spellslinger wasn't what I was looking for all on its own. I'm providing a link to the homebrew I put together back in 3.5, but am NOT married to using a homebrew if I can do it with the core to meet the criteria stated.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?348998-New-PF-Player-Homebrew-Core-Class-Critique&p=17482374#post17482374

I'm basically looking for the most simple way to do specifically what I'm listing here. Thanks in advance for all the help. Feel free to ask as many questions as anyone needs to help me explain this better.

JusticeZero
2014-05-30, 11:34 AM
Don't do it. Do not have your own characters in your adventuring party, ever. I'm only slightly more stark about this than others who give allowance for non-adventuring NPCs that are being led to the slaughter. It's bad juju. Give them a CLW wand and let them figure out how to use it instead.

John Longarrow
2014-05-30, 11:48 AM
As you are new to DMing, my biggest suggestion would be to focus the game entirely around your players characters, not an NPC.

This will avoid a LOT of problems, especially the players seeing your main NPC as being the center of the campaign, not theirs.

JusticeZero may not have emphasized this enough. If you are playing your character in your game, the rest of the players will have an innate bias to see your "Golden Boy" as a Mary Sue character that can do no wrong. It takes a LOT of experience before your NPCs can be brought down to mortal levels when they are part of the party. I've seen it done, but I'm guessing you don't have 30 years of experience running a game.

RFTD-blog
2014-05-30, 11:54 AM
I have to disagree a little bit with you two, JusticeZero and John Longarrow. With only 2 characters, it might be nice to have a third. And it seems CyberWyld is pretty set on the idea, now only looking for execution.

However, the way you write it does worry me..."integral plot hook" and a "homebrewed divine gunslinger" when your other players are base classes from PHB? Maybe you should be a player and one of the others should DM.

How I handle this when it makes sense for an NPC to join is rotating. For example, in my current campaign, there's a friendly guard captain named Robert Newbart who uses his falchion and improved critical, but doesn't get involved in politics. Three clerics of Yondalla sit back on the ship researching ballistics and healing when the party comes by. A 12-year-old child gangster named Biggie ralllies the commonfolk to the PC side. The PCs have the agency to choose which of their NPC crew to bring along, depending on the situation.

But none of these NPCs ever outshine the PCs in combat, and more importantly, in roleplaying.

Having your NPC be an integral plot hook makes it dangerous. Having a conversation with yourself will not be fun for others.

However if you ARE looking to do this idea no matter what the naysayers do, have you considered letting your other players play homebrewed classes as well? What level are you starting at? No way you'll be able to make a dual-wielding divine gunslinger work at level 1. Maybe one of the other players wants to play the gunslinger, and you could play the ranger? Rangers can support too.

CLW wand is a great idea as well.

P.S. I tried to read through your class but couldn't find any BAB or spells. Maybe I'm a blubbering idiot. But if you want to use a divine gunslinger, they definitely shouldn't have full bab/full caster/class abilities. One strong (like full bab), one medium (like half caster), one weak (no class abilities whatsoever) would be the maximum strength I'd tried for the class, ESPECIALLY a non-player character...probably less than that.

Airk
2014-05-30, 12:00 PM
Yeah; This sounds like a baaaaad idea. "I've got this awesome idea for a character...!" is pretty much exactly the WRONG way to design a NPC who is going to help the party along and fill a needed skill gap.

John Longarrow
2014-05-30, 12:25 PM
RFTD-blog,
A better way would be for each player to run a PC and a cohort. This gives 4 bodies to fill rolls without the need for a new DM to try to keep character and DM separate during a game.

BWR
2014-05-30, 12:48 PM
Don't listen to the nay-sayers. There is nothing wrong with DMPCs per se. They are only a problem when they overshadow and become the focus of the game instead of the PCs.
I've played with DMPCs, as a player and as a DM, for more than 20 years and my groups never had a problem with it.

Having an extra body there to take some of the heat, fill in a needed role, if the players are truly stuck, give them a little nudge, and most importantly, be a fun character to interact with. That is the purpose of a DMPC. They should not be used to hog the spotlight, be the focus of the game (except in the way Zelda is the focus of Zelda games), or show up the PCs.

CyberWyld
2014-05-30, 12:57 PM
BWR you seem to get exactly what I'm saying. I should have specified that I am not a new DM entirely, just new to Pathfinder and haven't played the D&D system since 07. This campaign is an 8 month continuation leading up to finding this character, and I have been using a Paladin DMPC these entire 8 months and the party has loved him and there have been no issues. My reaching out here is an attempt to bring that same type of character through in this new addition. I don't want to break the game with him, I don't want him to outshine my players. I also want him to be able to fill the role they are missing. Not really bringing him in at all isn't an option. While I appreciate the other opinions, and they're all valid. Maybe the additional info here will help shed a bit more light on our current situation.

BWR feel free to PM me if you have some more in depth suggestions, I would love to hear them. Thanks to everybody for their contributions so far. I really appreciate it.

Airk
2014-05-30, 01:06 PM
Don't listen to the nay-sayers. There is nothing wrong with DMPCs per se. They are only a problem when they overshadow and become the focus of the game instead of the PCs.

No, there isn't, but everything about the OP screams 'warning signs'.


Having an extra body there to take some of the heat, fill in a needed role, if the players are truly stuck, give them a little nudge, and most importantly, be a fun character to interact with. That is the purpose of a DMPC. They should not be used to hog the spotlight, be the focus of the game (except in the way Zelda is the focus of Zelda games), or show up the PCs.

The question is...why can't an "ordinary" NPC do these things?

DMPCs are ground that generally shouldn't need to be trodden. They don't have appreciable advantages over a more 'normal' character.

Rhynn
2014-05-30, 01:47 PM
Oh, boy! A real by-the-book DMPC.


I have built my current campaign around said character now as a new DM.

Stop. No. Never.

If a campaign has to revolve around a character (a bad idea in itself, because if the game has random death as a possibility, you're going to have to cheat, possibly disempowering players), then at least make that character a PC. There is no good reason not to, and many many bad ones.

Stop building campaigns around (your) characters. Write short stories about them instead, let the game be a game. (Or, if you prefer story-building, let it be a story where your players have the big parts.)


Or at least he's an integral plot hook in it.

Still bad. This goes wrong so many ways so often. Also just reads like you're trying to excuse the earlier (verytelling) statement.


He will also serve as an additional party member for our very small group (3 players).

Party size isn't an excuse. The players can have more than one PC each, the PCs can have cohorts, they can have allies or hirelings to call on, whatever. Just no DMPC.

Source: I've run games for groups of 2-3 players for something like 8-10 years now. I've done just about everything except DMPCs. (I have done DMPCs, too - in my "not yet a good GM phase" and let me tell you, never again.)


Don't listen to the nay-sayers. There is nothing wrong with DMPCs per se.

There's nothing wrong with speeding per se, either, but it's still a bad idea and leads to bad results a lot. Just avoiding it is much better. Plus, you know, glaring warning signs and admitting the campaign will center on the DMPC.

These people are all correct:


Don't do it. Do not have your own characters in your adventuring party, ever. I'm only slightly more stark about this than others who give allowance for non-adventuring NPCs that are being led to the slaughter. It's bad juju. Give them a CLW wand and let them figure out how to use it instead.


As you are new to DMing, my biggest suggestion would be to focus the game entirely around your players characters, not an NPC.


Yeah; This sounds like a baaaaad idea. "I've got this awesome idea for a character...!" is pretty much exactly the WRONG way to design a NPC who is going to help the party along and fill a needed skill gap.


DMPCs are ground that generally shouldn't need to be trodden. They don't have appreciable advantages over a more 'normal' character.

So here's what you do instead:

You make it clear to the players that they don't have to go it alone. They can make allies. They can get cohorts, henchmen, hirelings, followers, whatever. You let them do it. You don't foist your precious special DMPC on them, you let them decide whether they need someone, and what they need. These NPCs can have their own little plotlines, but the PCs aren't required or forced to pursue them.

CyberWyld
2014-05-30, 01:58 PM
Thanks Rhynn

Millennium
2014-05-30, 02:09 PM
The question is...why can't an "ordinary" NPC do these things?

DMPCs are ground that generally shouldn't need to be trodden. They don't have appreciable advantages over a more 'normal' character.
I'm not sure I understand this. You could make an "ordinary" NPC do these things, but what would the difference be between an NPC who did this and a DMPC?

Airk
2014-05-30, 02:48 PM
I'm not sure I understand this. You could make an "ordinary" NPC do these things, but what would the difference be between an NPC who did this and a DMPC?

An ordinary NPC isn't "the DM's character."; Often they won't be built using standard character creation rules. They are... a character in the world that the party decided to bring along with them because, whatever, they needed some more healing. It's not some individual who is designed to be the GM's "avatar" in the game.

I mean, think about it. What makes a "DMPC" different from an ordinary NPC? It's -not- that they occasionally give the party a nudge in the right direction or that they provide another warm body. All the things that make you categorize a character as a "DMPC" rather than an "NPC" are the undesirable bits.

Full disclosure: I have a "DMPC" in a game I am running now, because it was originally supposed to be a rotating GM game. I've managed not to overshadow the party, but it's still a super pain in the arse and if I were to do the game again, I'd do without.

CyberWyld
2014-05-30, 03:03 PM
I appreciate the honest advice Airk. As I stated however, in our game so far it hasn't become an issue. I'm fully on board with the possibility that these characters have to be allowed to die and subject to the same rules that all of my other players are bound by. Which is why I've come to the community here to assist in helping me keep the character in check. It hasn't been easy to keep the DMPC in check at all times and not "metagame" him, and I"m sure I've failed occasionally, but so far *knocks on wood* my players haven't had any issues with the addition and I would even say have enjoyed and even valued them as party members. Maybe I've just been getting lucky?

For me, as a storyteller, it has been easier to add cast members to that story that have moved on with the party, and I see where it could be assumed that my goal is to make my players a supporting cast to my DMPC but I sincerely assure you that is not the case. I have instead allowed these characters to support the players in their own efforts. They have served more as a way to realign the campaign once they're strolled off on side quests and things of that nature. It feels more natural to me to do something as a "player" and them organically agree with that or follow actions made in that direction, rather then having the WORLD redirect them. Doesn't every DM constantly have to battle with telling a story and still allowing the players to make their own choices? Isn't the biggest struggle doing all of that and providing the illusion that the players are constantly in control of everything going on in their game? Isn't the major goal to make them stars of their own stories? Maybe that's just my immaturity as a DM so far?

I'm simply worried that if I go at creating a character that I've imagined to play with the party that the technical aspect of that character would get jacked up and hurt our game. As far as the RP or intent of the character, (again thus far) there haven't been any instances where the DMPC has hurt our game (and I have checked with my players periodically after sessions to gather their feelings on me playing a character AND DMing and the consensus has continually been that they enjoy it.

Would it have made this easier on myself to just say

"I want to make a character that is a Cleric with two pistols, can anyone assist in that? The character must use divine magic and use dual pistols. I would like this character to be a healer/support character".

I feel like providing all the other info I've actually made this more of a pain because my intent for the character has been the main subject of the responses. :( I apologize for that.

Rhynn
2014-05-30, 03:05 PM
I'm not sure I understand this. You could make an "ordinary" NPC do these things, but what would the difference be between an NPC who did this and a DMPC?

Well, it's not an exact science, but this is pretty much the perfect example of a DMPC (emphasis mine):


Starting my 1st Pathfinder Campaign on the 8th. I had previously (back in 07(ish) Homebrewed a class with my old DM for a divine gunslinger type of character. I have built my current campaign around said character now as a new DM.

A DMPC is, literally, "the Dungeon Master's Player Character." It is not the same thing as a NPC, that's why it's a separate term.

Oh boy, I can't wait for another 5 pages of arguing over this really simple and easy term and the meanings of many other words...


Full disclosure: I have a "DMPC" in a game I am running now, because it was originally supposed to be a rotating GM game. I've managed not to overshadow the party, but it's still a super pain in the arse and if I were to do the game again, I'd do without.

I ran a rotating GM game and whoever was the GM actually just let one of the other players play their PC, because it was just too awkward otherwise.

Airk
2014-05-30, 03:14 PM
Cyberwyld; Glad you're not offended. If it works for you, it works for you. I'm just raising the usual red flags.

Rhynn; Yeah, switching out characters might've been the wiser plan, in retrospect.

BWR
2014-05-30, 03:32 PM
There's nothing wrong with speeding per se, either, but it's still a bad idea and leads to bad results a lot. Just avoiding it is much better. Plus, you know, glaring warning signs and admitting the campaign will center on the DMPC.


Speeding is generally illegal, so yeah, wrong. And I listed situations where DMPCs can work, and when they don't.
It's just that people seem to have gotten it into their heads that DMPC = bad and don't stop to think if it necessarily has to be that way.

Tengu_temp
2014-05-30, 03:51 PM
I second the "don't listen to the naysayers" stance. DMPCs are not a bad concept, they can work very well, and none of the requirements the OP gave sound like warning signs to me. What matters is the execution, and a big part of making a well-executed DMPC is to make sure the players like the character. So focus on that. If they like the character, it doesn't matter if you make it a plot-important one, or give it a unique ability nobody else has, becase the players won't mind. But if they don't like it? Then make the character leave, and quietly drop or change the plot elements you planned for it so that they no longer revolve around the character.



So here's what you do instead:

You make it clear to the players that they don't have to go it alone. They can make allies. They can get cohorts, henchmen, hirelings, followers, whatever. You let them do it. You don't foist your precious special DMPC on them, you let them decide whether they need someone, and what they need. These NPCs can have their own little plotlines, but the PCs aren't required or forced to pursue them.

No. An improvised hireling will never be as interesting and fleshed out as an NPC you planned for a longer time. Most of the time, it will just be a warm body with maybe some rudimentary personality attached. All you have to do is make sure the players will want the DMPC around, and if they won't want it after all, make it leave and don't force them to keep it.

JusticeZero
2014-05-30, 08:46 PM
It's possible that a DMPC can be done well. It is also possible that Stalin will randomly spontaneously regenerate and crawl out of his grave to go into a new career of children's television. It is possible that the next presidential election will be won by a write in campaign by Oprah Winfrey, who immediately resigs to defect to Papua New Guinea. These are not strictly forbidden by probability. A DMPC can also be played well by a new GM in spite of the description tripping multiple Mary Sue warning signs. I have seen no sign of any of these things coming to pass.

PS: If your players tell you that you are doing a great job of running a DMPC without overshadowing them, either they are being very polite because it's that hard to find ANY GM, or they don't have enough experience with other games.

Thrudd
2014-05-30, 09:04 PM
Doesn't every DM constantly have to battle with telling a story and still allowing the players to make their own choices? Isn't the biggest struggle doing all of that and providing the illusion that the players are constantly in control of everything going on in their game? Isn't the major goal to make them stars of their own stories? Maybe that's just my immaturity as a DM so far?

I'm simply worried that if I go at creating a character that I've imagined to play with the party that the technical aspect of that character would get jacked up and hurt our game. As far as the RP or intent of the character, (again thus far) there haven't been any instances where the DMPC has hurt our game (and I have checked with my players periodically after sessions to gather their feelings on me playing a character AND DMing and the consensus has continually been that they enjoy it.

Would it have made this easier on myself to just say

"I want to make a character that is a Cleric with two pistols, can anyone assist in that? The character must use divine magic and use dual pistols. I would like this character to be a healer/support character".

I feel like providing all the other info I've actually made this more of a pain because my intent for the character has been the main subject of the responses. :( I apologize for that.

Mechanical issues about designing a new type of character for Pathfinder is not what the title of your subject suggest (and also that would be best in the 3.5/pathfinder forum). Also, people tend to give advice about random things whether we want it or not, that's what forums are for, aren't they? :smallbiggrin:

As to the questions in the quote above, every DM does not need to struggle with this, because the approach you are taking is not the only way to DM D&D(Pathfinder).

Ideally, you create a world where the players really do get to make their own choices, it isn't an illusion. They are the stars of their own story, which is being created as they go along. Your job is not to lead them along in a story and trick them into thinking their decisions actually matter. It is to give them an environment where stories can happen, and then let them play.

Their decisions really should matter, and you play the part of the world which reacts to their actions. Yes, sometimes it is appropriate to have NPC allies which accompany them, but they should really stay in the background and not make any decisions on behalf of the party, nor give advice. Let them be controlled by the players as much as possible, and use random means to determine what they do or what their opinions are, if it is something that is of consequence and would not be common sense. This way, you are not trying to really play a character as the DM.

The way I approach playing an NPC party member is to have as much of their behavior be controlled by either the players or the game mechanics as possible. In combat and exploration, they are usually controlled by the players. Dice determine if an NPC gets scared and runs away, how they react to actions of the characters and other NPCs, and what they know and don't know (to some extent). If players try to use an NPC to indirectly get advice from the DM, like asking the NPC what direction they should go, or what spells they think they should prepare, they either don't give an answer or give a randomized answer (equal chance that they will suggest all the possible options). Though players in my games generally would know not to do that.

I also think it is generally a bad idea to have an NPC join the party that has powers or abilities unavailable to the PC's, or that is more powerful than the PC's. Any NPC party member should be equal or less powerful than the PCs. More powerful NPCs might help out on a very limited basis (usually for a steep price), but will never be long-term members of the party.

Worgwood
2014-05-30, 09:59 PM
No. An improvised hireling will never be as interesting and fleshed out as an NPC you planned for a longer time. Most of the time, it will just be a warm body with maybe some rudimentary personality attached. All you have to do is make sure the players will want the DMPC around, and if they won't want it after all, make it leave and don't force them to keep it.
Whether or not the hireling is a "warm body with some rudimentary personality attached" depends entirely on the DM. If the DM runs them that way, then that's not the sort of person you want running a DMPC anyway.

CyberWyld
2014-05-30, 11:20 PM
Thanks for all the feedback and opinions. I appreciate all of them.

Demidos
2014-05-30, 11:30 PM
Thanks for all the feedback and opinions. I appreciate all of them.

Pssst. Since no one else seems to have noticed your question was about how to build the character and in answer to your question if you should have phrased it differently originally -- Probably, but that's why there's the "post a new thread" option. Just post a new one. Knowing this forum, yes, yes it'll go faster. I would help myself, but sadly suffer from a dearth of pathfinder knowledge.

CyberWyld
2014-05-30, 11:42 PM
Thanks Demidos, I appreciate it. ;) I'll do that.

Rhynn
2014-05-31, 12:14 AM
Pssst. Since no one else seems to have noticed your question was about how to build the character and in answer to your question if you should have phrased it differently originally -- Probably, but that's why there's the "post a new thread" option. Just post a new one. Knowing this forum, yes, yes it'll go faster. I would help myself, but sadly suffer from a dearth of pathfinder knowledge.

A PF build question should probably go in the PF/3.5 forum anyway.

CyberWyld
2014-05-31, 12:41 AM
A PF build question should probably go in the PF/3.5 forum anyway.

Absolutely, thanks Rhynn, I'll move my arse over there with this. Thanks again everyone!

Tengu_temp
2014-06-01, 06:16 AM
It's possible that a DMPC can be done well. It is also possible that Stalin will randomly spontaneously regenerate and crawl out of his grave to go into a new career of children's television. It is possible that the next presidential election will be won by a write in campaign by Oprah Winfrey, who immediately resigs to defect to Papua New Guinea. These are not strictly forbidden by probability. A DMPC can also be played well by a new GM in spite of the description tripping multiple Mary Sue warning signs. I have seen no sign of any of these things coming to pass.

PS: If your players tell you that you are doing a great job of running a DMPC without overshadowing them, either they are being very polite because it's that hard to find ANY GM, or they don't have enough experience with other games.

Bull****. I've seen DMPCs done well, more than once. Just because you didn't see them doesn't mean it cannot be done. And this whole "if your PCs are telling you they like your DMPC, they're either lying or noobs" thing is just incredibly arrogant and reeks of "my way to have fun is the only right way".

0/10


Whether or not the hireling is a "warm body with some rudimentary personality attached" depends entirely on the DM. If the DM runs them that way, then that's not the sort of person you want running a DMPC anyway.

Unless you're a grandmaster of improvising, a character you spent time working on will always be more fleshed-out and interesting than one you had to create on the spot.

Worgwood
2014-06-01, 08:51 AM
Unless you're a grandmaster of improvising, a character you spent time working on will always be more fleshed-out and interesting than one you had to create on the spot.
If you don't have some level of improvisational skill, then you shouldn't be DMing in the first place. The unexpected will - and inevitably does - happen.

For that matter, I'm sure it goes without saying that most games will stretch quite a ways beyond a single session. It's entirely possible to put thought into a character after they've been implemented into the game.

Tengu_temp
2014-06-01, 09:04 AM
There's a difference between having some level of improvisational skill, and being so awesome at it that your improvised games are as good as the ones you prepared for. Most DMs are the former, almost nobody is the latter.

It's true that you can add characterization as the game goes on, though. But it's even better if there's a solid base there from the start.

Jay R
2014-06-01, 09:26 AM
I recommend that you arrange for them to hire a couple of hirelings or henchmen that they play.

They DM's job is to treat all NPCs equally, with no emotional attachment to a specific one. Playing a character is the exact opposite. Many people think that they can do both at the same time. Nowhere near as many can. (I'll never do it again.)

To the extent that the character you're playing is important, necessary or useful, that's the extent that you're taking the campaign away from the players.

Worgwood
2014-06-01, 10:27 AM
There's a difference between having some level of improvisational skill, and being so awesome at it that your improvised games are as good as the ones you prepared for. Most DMs are the former, almost nobody is the latter.
I'm not saying anybody has to improvise the whole session: just one secondary character. You don't need a unique or outlandish skill set for that.


It's true that you can add characterization as the game goes on, though. But it's even better if there's a solid base there from the start.
That's somewhat subjective.

Norfire
2014-06-01, 11:27 AM
There is nothing wrong with having a party npc. As mentioned in small groups npc characters are useful and can be fun.

But it sounds like there is too much focus on the npc. Being a DM is about creating the world and showing all sorts of details in setting and characters. The main drivers of story though should be the players. Npc plots are great but should be optional. Also the npc sounds combat heavy and unique. Npc party members should fill in the empty spots left by players and be utility not aggressive. Players should be the ones dealing damage and shouldn't feel like they are competing with an npc. Npc characters have spare healing, or notice a piano on a rope that you can drop on an enemy that's kicking the **** out of the players, they figure things out or introduce new material for players. You are the dm not a player. Keep all your cool custom ideas for characters for when you play or for your players. Custom classes for npc only is going to get people upset especially if they are taking all the kills and doing all the cool stuff.

Another_Poet
2014-06-02, 02:01 AM
CyberWyld, is there any reason the character can't just be a quest giver, rather than a DMPC?

Spore
2014-06-02, 02:28 AM
Starting my 1st Pathfinder Campaign on the 8th. I had previously (back in 07(ish) Homebrewed a class with my old DM for a divine gunslinger type of character. I have built my current campaign around said character now as a new DM.


Short answer: No.
Long answer: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

I can understand that you like a character and I can understand DMs trying to make their NPCs convincing as part of their world. But please please PLEASE do not introduce a DMPC under those circumstances. The players are the heroes not some second-hand hired help by your NPC. If really really want a Paladin NPC on your world, let the group have him as quest giver. They complete the quest but the Paladin CANNOT under any cirumstances follow them around. Let him have duty as guard captain or similar, let him hand out helpful boons (you need SOMEONE to give equipment out, do you?) but first of all it is your job to DM not to play a DMPC.

If you worry about loosing control. This happens often enough with a character around and you can literally create fitting NPCs out of thin air where appropriate.