Small party, lots of NPCs?

[Hollysword]

Currently my party has two members in it. Two feels small, so I was thinking of having a list of NPCs built as PCs, other adventurers in the world, that the party can encounter during their adventures. They won't be permanent, as they have their own places and bonds, and may leave at the end of an adventure... although they might meet up again in the future.

What do you think of this method? It makes the world more believable that there are other adventurers all around the world.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Many people would find that uncomfortably close to DMPCs... but it could work if you presented them more as super-fleshed-out hirelings. Or like, squires, apprentices, acolytes, etc. The key is to make sure they contribute to your PCs' story, rather than being the story in and of themselves.

So if, for example, one of your PCs was a paladin whose flaw was that they have trouble taking responsibility for anything, you could prepare a squire-type NPC who needs the PC to train and educate them, so that the when the squire is raised to knighthood, the player has achieved something and the PC can experience some character growth.

[Dimcair]

Many people would find that uncomfortably close to DMPCs... but it could work if you presented them more as super-fleshed-out hirelings.

By extension, should they be played collectively by the DM and the players then? Imagine it as a mind controlling spell, the players dictate most of their hirelings actions, unless it goes directly against something they believe in etc..

[lperkins2]

It can work quite well. The key is to let the players drive the story. The time I did this, I let each player come up with 3 NPCs that are perfectly loyal to the player for personal reasons (family friend, sworn bondsman, old mentor, et cetera). Only one player decided that they would all be adventurers, the rest used them more as an information/safehouse network. All told, 3 players had a party of 8 adventurers (3 PCs + 5 NPCs). The NPCs' personalities were defined by the players, just like a second PC (and were backup characters for if the mains died). It was a low magic setting, which probably helped it go as amazingly as it did. The big advantage is it adds a great deal of flexibility. The extra characters, who were firmly under PC control during combat, allowed larger pitched battles than you typically can run. It also allows for splitting the party without splitting the players. Have two things you have to do? Send the main PCs one way and the alts the other. Out of combat, I'd more or less run the NPCs, including having them split off on their own some of the time. For the most part, they just stayed in the background, only getting involved in the planning if it directly related to them or the PCs asked.

A word of warning, the encounter difficulty table can easily get totally thrown off by anything along these lines. The amount of coordination possible when you're running multiple specialized characters in combat lets you do all sorts of fun things.

[Hollysword]

With a group this small, DMPC is pretty needed to round out the party numbers. But I've made sure these NPCs are NOT the story, rather they're fellow adventurers who happen to be doing the same quest (or at least the quests come together close enough).

[hymer]

With a group this small, DMPC is pretty needed to round out the party numbers. But I've made sure these NPCs are NOT the story, rather they're fellow adventurers who happen to be doing the same quest (or at least the quests come together close enough).

I recently had a short campaign with only two players. They regularly had simple NPCs along for the ride, which the players controlled in battle. That made it easier for me as the DM, and meant less waiting for their turn for the players. The key is having players who can manage that easily enough, and having the NPCs being less able than the PCs, and yet able to contribute. Someone who can hit enemies with bits of metal and withstand a minor hammering themselves are usually welcome, and need no special abilities to be mastered.

[Hollysword]

Is 3 a reasonable party size? 2 PCs, 1 NPC

[hymer]

Is 3 a reasonable party size? 2 PCs, 1 NPC

Depends what you mean by reasonable, I'm afraid. The game is designed with a party of about 4 players, and generally speaking works the smoothest with that number. I think 5 works better than 3, but in any case this leaves a three-person party in third best spot. *shrug* You may find it's different for you and your players, of course, but only experience can guide you there.

[Hollysword]

How about party of 3 (PCs + NPC) compared to party of 2 (PCs only). I'm still worried about the monsters being a little strong.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Depends what you mean by reasonable, I'm afraid. The game is designed with a party of about 4 players, and generally speaking works the smoothest with that number. I think 5 works better than 3, but in any case this leaves a three-person party in third best spot. *shrug* You may find it's different for you and your players, of course, but only experience can guide you there.

I ran a PbP with 2 PCs a while back and it seemed to work pretty well, though unfortunately it didn't last long enough to really test the theory. Personally, I quite like 3-man bands - it might even be my favourite party size. You have to use smaller monsters, obviously, but that's hardly a problem.

If you let the players run the NPCs, as has been suggested above, giving them one each might be the best solution.

[Hollysword]

So pretty much each player has 2 characters. Party of 4, no NPCs. Simpler, but kind of takes off the in-party debates because the 'pairs' will always think the same way.

[Ninja_Prawn]

So pretty much each player has 2 characters. Party of 4, no NPCs. Simpler, but kind of takes off the in-party debates because the 'pairs' will always think the same way.

Possibly. Depends on your players. And you're not going to have much more in the way of debate even if you pilot the NPC(s) yourself; the players aren't going to want to argue with an NPC that's ostensibly on their side.

Either way, it's an option.

[Hollysword]

Maybe I'll try out the party of 2, and if the party is struggling, add the NPC. But given both of them are healers, they should be able to last.

[Kurt Kurageous]

I've written two complimentary arcs designed for ONE player that works well with two. The arcs are supposed to support a fighter archetype. Shared links attached.

The Imperial version
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzHVsiBMMb98T1c1elpmdmp6X1E/view?usp=sharing

The Tribal version
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzHVsiBMMb98LUNvTGh2bTh1dFU/view?usp=sharing

The Commander Archetype (optional)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzHVsiBMMb98Qkh1dklrT1BQMXc/view?usp=sharing

Breakdown
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzHVsiBMMb98MHRwbTNDM0xVMkE/view?usp=sharing

Let me know if this helps. I've run all at least once each, the Imperial three times. It worked.

[Joe the Rat]

Party of 4 is a default. Having 2 extra can work here.

You can have your players run 2 PCs (backup character is right there), or you have 2npcs that you roleplay out of combat (and they take a back seat to the players), but they control in combat (which is really where you need the numbers.

You can also try running two, but that ramps up the danger by about 2.5.

[Zman]

There is a lot of hate and resistance to the idea of DMPCs, don't listen to it. There are risks, primarily for bad DMs, in using them but they can be effectively used with minimal or no negative effects.

What I would suggest is...

Let your players each have two characters.

Allow the companions as suggested, but have the players be the primary controllers.


If the companions are transitory it helps keep the focus on the two primary characters, the companions won't feel like theirs, but will be easy to form attatch,nets to.


I think your suggestion is very workable or alternatively letting each run two Pcs will be just fine.

[BW022]

Understand, there is no reason you need an NPC.

A good DM should just adjust the encounters -- numbers, equipment, hit points, etc. Reduce numbers by 1/3 or so if you are using a published adventure. It should be fine. This is the easiest way to handle small parties. It is much better than a DMPC. This is a game where the players are heroes. Even in the most well-intentioned DMPC... it is obvious that the players couldn't succeed without them. It also uses up game time, takes the DMs focus off running the game, makes for awkward roleplaying, etc. It is also so easy for even the best DM to use a DMNPC as way to impart information or steer players down the adventure path. It can make an adventure seem railroading no matter how innocuous a DMNPC suggestion might be. Better not to have them and let the PCs go the 'wrong' way or handle it differently.

If you have a fairly small group (especially two), it encourages creative play, out-of-the-box thinking, and players do get a heck of a sense of reward -- even if you scaled back the encounters. My recommendation is Don't ruin this golden opportunity!

Yes... in small parties, occasionally have an NPC help once in a blue moon. Typically not in top encounters unless the encounter was specifically designed for it.

I'll also give a few other suggestions for small parties...


"Get out of jail" item. Consider giving the party a fairly powerful limited use item as protection from mistakes (DM or theirs) against encounters which go wrong. A stone which t-ports them (once) home, a scroll of cure wounds (at 4th-level slot), a wand of magic missiles (at 3rd-level slot, with 4 charges), etc. In this way, if an encounter does go bad, they have a way out. Chances are they'll hoard the item and not use it, but it is insurance against a badly scaled DM encounter.
If they have specific gaps in their party, consider an item which helps make up for it. If they don't have any way to open locks... consider they find a wand of knock with say 15 charges. If they don't have any stealth... maybe the first item they should find is a cloak of elvenkind. If they can't detect magic, maybe the find an amulet which can cast it once per day. Even small items, like a bell which allows casting alarm once per day, can be massively useful to PCs -- as it can reduce the need for guard duties.
Give advice. Have NPCs help them out with advice, preparations, etc. Remember that one of the biggest downsides of small groups is less players thinking about options, plans, or issues with plans.
Give out more XP at low levels. Get them through 1st and 2nd, quickly. Bonus XP for good play is also smart. Also, don't worry if they get above the level of the adventure.
Take the chance to roleplay with them. Two party games can move much quicker so you can spend more time roleplaying, custom scenarios, or player driver plots. Go with it.
Structure rests so that they can use them. Avoid longer dungeon crawls. Outdoors, city, etc. often work well in allowing them to recover abilities between combats.
Followers, henchmen, animals, etc. Let the player control them. A war dog, a non-combat bard who carries stuff. Animals are often better simply as they don't steal glory.
If you must use NPCs to help... make use of the PCs race, class, background, backstory, etc. I.e. if a PC is a paladin and they ask their church for help and they send a lower level cleric to aid them... at least the players feels he is helping since his character's class/background got them help.

[Hollysword]

How about NPCs that are tied to the current quest, they're there to give the world some realism where the PCs aren't the only adventurers. Would that be ok?

[Laserlight]

How about NPCs that are tied to the current quest, they're there to give the world some realism where the PCs aren't the only adventurers. Would that be ok?

Anything that works for your table is okay.

That said, I'd suggest starting with one PC per player and see how that goes, rather than starting with two each, because a) I think it's easier to roleplay if you're not switching viewpoints, and b) it's easier to learn one character's capabilities and maneuvers at a time. If you need to add more later, you can.

As far as making up stables of NPCs, it depends on how much work you want to put into it. I'd probably aim for a simplified version. The caster might have four spell slots, all the same level, and know one Heal, one Buff, and one Control spell, plus an attack cantrip and a couple of utility cantrips. The mercenary archer has a longbow attack, a melee attack, and skills in Survival and Medicine, but not all maneuvers and fighting styles and Action Surge and such.