PDA

View Full Version : How do you handle party NPC's



Frywick
2016-06-12, 02:53 PM
In my current game I have three players so I thought I'd add a wizard in to add a magic user in a party of none and to get the party up to a nice 4 man set. But when it comes to combat it feels like I'm fighting my self and the players arent really involved, and when it comes to out of combat encounters like a puzzle or a social encounter, he doesn't contribute because I feel since I know the answer, he would almost give them a clue that would make most of it trivial and that would take the fun out it for them. So how could I implement him better so it feels like he's an actual member of the party and I'm not just rolling dice against myself while the players watch.

Honest Tiefling
2016-06-12, 03:04 PM
Do you have fun playing this character? If not, have the others rotate in controlling him. Do the other players enjoy his presence? If not, just give him a reason to wander off and dump some magic items on the party.

I do have to ask, is this a combat focused group or an roleplay focused group? You haven't mentioned his character so I lean to the former, but I could be wrong in my assumption. The answer, however, is dependent on this.

Assuming this is DnD, one thing you could do is make him a sorcerer. Sorcerers don't have a lot of intelligence, and just boost Bluff as his only social skill. The team can utilize his ability to lie, or he could simply play along with the rest of the party if they have a particular scheme in mind. You don't have to worry about spells prepared, either, and it'll be easier for players to make suggestions on how to use his spells if there is a smaller list.

If this is not DnD, make him specialized and reduce non-combat skills or abilities that aren't fitting to helping the players.

SilverLeaf167
2016-06-12, 03:07 PM
Well, having a NPC go on adventures with the party is always difficult for the reasons you've already noticed. However, consider this: the only reason they need a Wizard (played by you) is if the challenges they face (created by you) require one. You might have to rethink some encounters, but if you simply adapt the game to their needs, there will be no reason for the Wizard to even exist.

Another option is that the Wizard doesn't really go on every adventure with them, but the party can ask him for help if they decide they need some kind of spell. This way the players get to think of the solutions on their own and the Wizard doesn't have to get involved when he's not needed. Of course, this might not work if the party travels all over the world, as is often the case.

Darth Ultron
2016-06-12, 03:34 PM
Make the NPC a character. Not a player character, as a DM you can make the character ''less than perfect'' and ''have real flaws'' in ways players will never willing do.

Basically, you can have the NPC be whatever you want them to be. If you don't want the NPC helping with clues, for example, make the character stupid. If you don't want them helping too much in a fight make them a coward, or stupid or slow.

Now a good thing to do for combat is to make a buffer spellcaster, on that casts spells on the PCs, not the monsters. Then the PC's are in the spotlight while the NPC hangs back.

Area control is another good spot of a NPC. They can do things that block or slow down a couple foes. This can be a huge help in a fight. If ten goblins attack four PCs, and the NPC wizard can slow down even just four, it makes the fight much more even.

The not great spellcaster works. They do things that only help....a little. Like casting web to trap one kobold. There are tons of less then great spells too...

For social stuff, having the NPC have a crazy answer is a great one. So they say stuff like ''lets just set them all on fire'' or "I always pick number one''.

To help, it works best if you write up a good paragraph about the NPC and what he knows...kepping in mind ''less then perfect'' and ''flaws''. So we have Zinfab the wizard. He loves magic..maybe too much. He talks about magic a lot and thinks of himself as an expert...though he only knows a little. He thinks human magic is all powerful, but other races have weak magic. He secretly hopes to find a long lost spellbook of magic secrets so he can become and expert. He will blindly take risks to gain more magic. He cares very little for mundane things and is easily distracted by even a hint of magic.

So, for example, Zinfab would say that a trade of ''all the groups loot'' for a ''single rare spell scroll'' would be a good deal....

SirBellias
2016-06-12, 03:39 PM
I usually don't, unless it would honestly not make sense for them not to, such as a guide to a place of interest. The main question to ask is why the party needs a magic user. If it's just so they have the options available, then if they wanted those options, they should have made a character with those available. That's my theory, at least.

If you really want to improve your ability to use said character, or the parties viability through said character, I suggest not having as many combat spells available. If they can't do anything to directly murder things in a fight, it will feel less like you are fighting yourself, and will put the other characters more in the spotlight. I don't really have an idea for what to do about the puzzles, maybe have said NPC get distracted by something they think is much more interesting? But that could get annoying fast.

Edit: Darth Ultron's suggestions about buffer and area casters are the way I would do it. But I'd make sure with an area caster to not make them too effective, or don't deal with lethal effects.

Darth Ultron
2016-06-12, 04:22 PM
Edit: Darth Ultron's suggestions about buffer and area casters are the way I would do it. But I'd make sure with an area caster to not make them too effective, or don't deal with lethal effects.

A good thing to do is make a normal, UN-optimized character. So the wizard has the feats of like ''skill focus profession cook'', has an intelligence of 10 and spells like ''create snowball''.

SilverLeaf167
2016-06-12, 04:25 PM
A good thing to do is make a normal, UN-optimized character. So the wizard has the feats of like ''skill focus profession cook'', has an intelligence of 10 and spells like ''create snowball''.

More like ANTI-optimized. Not sure how making the character completely useless is going to help here, when the point was to make him useful without stealing the show.

SirBellias
2016-06-12, 04:26 PM
A good thing to do is make a normal, UN-optimized character. So the wizard has the feats of like ''skill focus profession cook'', has an intelligence of 10 and spells like ''create snowball''.

Yeah, exactly. You don't want the character to be too effective.

Edit: Obviously intelligence 10 wouldn't be useful at all, but I took that as an exaggeration. Just make sure they have defined traits and aren't stealing the spotlight.

Darth Ultron
2016-06-12, 04:43 PM
More like ANTI-optimized. Not sure how making the character completely useless is going to help here, when the point was to make him useful without stealing the show.

Your not making the character useless, just normal. The ''every character must be Superman'' is just wrong. Just as the DC for Zinfabs spells at first level is 10, does not make him a useless character. Same way if a barbarian has just a club, they are not useless.

And sure ''most'' players that are of that mindset would never play such a ''weak'' character.....but the whole point IS to make a weak character.


Yeah, exactly. You don't want the character to be too effective.

Edit: Obviously intelligence 10 wouldn't be useful at all, but I took that as an exaggeration. Just make sure they have defined traits and aren't stealing the spotlight.

It's not an exaggeration. Low stats are a great way to weaken a character. Not ever spellcaster ''must'' have +10 to DC's at first level.

SirBellias
2016-06-12, 04:51 PM
Your not making the character useless, just normal. The ''every character must be Superman'' is just wrong. Just as the DC for Zinfabs spells at first level is 10, does not make him a useless character. Same way if a barbarian has just a club, they are not useless.

And sure ''most'' players that are of that mindset would never play such a ''weak'' character.....but the whole point IS to make a weak character.

It's not an exaggeration. Low stats are a great way to weaken a character. Not ever spellcaster ''must'' have +10 to DC's at first level.

For some reason I was assuming 3.5. In which such a character with INT 10 could not cast any spells. But this is fine in 5e and any other system I know of.

Darth Ultron
2016-06-12, 05:49 PM
For some reason I was assuming 3.5. In which such a character with INT 10 could not cast any spells. But this is fine in 5e and any other system I know of.

Note Zinfab the Int 10 wizard in 3.5 can still cast cantrips.....

ClintACK
2016-06-12, 06:40 PM
In my current game I have three players so I thought I'd add a wizard in to add a magic user in a party of none and to get the party up to a nice 4 man set. But when it comes to combat it feels like I'm fighting my self and the players arent really involved, and when it comes to out of combat encounters like a puzzle or a social encounter, he doesn't contribute because I feel since I know the answer, he would almost give them a clue that would make most of it trivial and that would take the fun out it for them. So how could I implement him better so it feels like he's an actual member of the party and I'm not just rolling dice against myself while the players watch.

Make him very absent-minded and introspective. (Easy to play this for humor.) And give him basically no agency -- a follower, not a self-starter.

Let him do things only when one of the PCs suggests something to him -- like asking him a question to trigger a Knowledge skill check, or asking him to cast invisibility on the rogue. Or, "Hey -- could you look at this potion while we rest?"

You could even let the players direct him during battle -- they are making plans, right? If their plans include what he's supposed to do, he does it. If they don't, he defaults to "toss a firebolt" or fumbles around ineffectively until someone tells him what to do.

As you say, the thing to avoid is having your players watch you play the game.

Jay R
2016-06-13, 07:00 AM
Have the players run him, as if he were a follower or cohort. Then you are not adding hints to the puzzle or additional information to the tactics.

Quertus
2016-06-13, 11:35 AM
Now a good thing to do for combat is to make a buffer spellcaster, on that casts spells on the PCs, not the monsters. Then the PC's are in the spotlight while the NPC hangs back.

This is a great plan.


Area control is another good spot of a NPC. They can do things that block or slow down a couple foes. This can be a huge help in a fight. If ten goblins attack four PCs, and the NPC wizard can slow down even just four, it makes the fight much more even.

I thought this was a great plan. When I mentioned this idea to one of my play groups, the sheer negativity of their response was shocking. Seems like, for some, this is the definition of OP spotlight stealing. Guess it depends on the group...


The not great spellcaster works. They do things that only help....a little. Like casting web to trap one kobold. There are tons of less then great spells too...

For social stuff, having the NPC have a crazy answer is a great one. So they say stuff like ''lets just set them all on fire'' or "I always pick number one''.

To help, it works best if you write up a good paragraph about the NPC and what he knows...kepping in mind ''less then perfect'' and ''flaws''. So we have Zinfab the wizard. He loves magic..maybe too much. He talks about magic a lot and thinks of himself as an expert...though he only knows a little. He thinks human magic is all powerful, but other races have weak magic. He secretly hopes to find a long lost spellbook of magic secrets so he can become and expert. He will blindly take risks to gain more magic. He cares very little for mundane things and is easily distracted by even a hint of magic.

So, for example, Zinfab would say that a trade of ''all the groups loot'' for a ''single rare spell scroll'' would be a good deal....

Make him very absent-minded and introspective. (Easy to play this for humor.) And give him basically no agency -- a follower, not a self-starter.

Let him do things only when one of the PCs suggests something to him -- like asking him a question to trigger a Knowledge skill check, or asking him to cast invisibility on the rogue. Or, "Hey -- could you look at this potion while we rest?"

You could even let the players direct him during battle -- they are making plans, right? If their plans include what he's supposed to do, he does it. If they don't, he defaults to "toss a firebolt" or fumbles around ineffectively until someone tells him what to do.

As you say, the thing to avoid is having your players watch you play the game.

I almost hate to admit it, but my signature character, after whom I named this account, probably makes a better NPC/DMPC than a PC. :smallredface:

He's very focused on magic, absent-minded, generally reading some arcane tome in the middle of the dungeon / middle of battle / middle of discussion with the king / etc. His contribution is often, "You guys got this? Good. <flip to the next page>." When he does contribute, he is (almost) completely tactically inept. But he's very good at what he does... which I'll oversimplify to "know stuff" and "have a vast array of spells (published and custom, powerful and otherwise)".

-----

To make the game feel less like, "rolling the dice against yourself while the players watch", do what you can to make the NPCs' turns quick.

For example, one group I ran insisted on "adopting" more NPCs than there were PCs! I tended to pre-estimate how those NPCs would interact with my encounters, and every couple of rounds, I might cut to one (or more) of the NPCs, to give the party an update on what they might care about. So, for example, 50 goblins rush the party! 2 rounds in, I mention that the NPC rogue is holding his own, the NPC assassin is nowhere to be seen, the NPC Cleric #1 has been backed into a corner. Round 3, I mention NPC Cleric #2 is surrounded in some holy nimbus they have never seen before. Round 5 (if they rescued her), NPC Cleric #1 probably heals someone (if they did not rescue her, I mention that she drops), and the NPC dragon wakes up, peeks out from under the tarp, gobbles up a terrified goblin, and goes back to sleep. After the battle, the NPC Rogue comments, "I got X (based on how long the battle lasted), how many'd you guys get?" At this point, after giving the PCs time to respond, the NPC Assassin would show up, and might claim a larger number, might ignore him, or might just shrug (but would never claim or admit to a smaller number - unless it was to hold up the head of something obviously scarier than a goblin). To the extent that the players would let me, I'd run the NPCs (seemingly) less mechanically than cinematically during combat. Not sure if this style would help in your specific situation, but it is a potential way to put the focus on the PCs rather than "rolling dice against yourself".