PDA

View Full Version : DMPC's - Do they work?



Leicontis
2007-08-19, 11:59 AM
I've often considered inserting a DMPC into the games I run, but there are things I'm not sure about. How do I avoid giving unfair breaks to the character? How do I have this PC contribute without abusing his player's knowledge? When the party is debating what solution they should take, advocating the correct solution would be cheating, and would be robbing the players. On the other hand, having my character doing something I know is a bad idea would really grate. The best idea I can think of so far would be to make a character that's lazy, but has very high Sense Motive and Diplomacy so that he can reasonably take advantage of the knowledge I have of NPCs' personalities.

What experiences have you had with DMPCs? How do you make them work, or can you even do so? Is it worth the effort, or is it not as satisfying as playing a regular PC?

Solo
2007-08-19, 12:02 PM
When I DMPC's my Cleric, I just had him act liek normal, except just a bit more subdued, and he'd hint as to what course the party should take when they had a tough time deciding, but didn't pursue it forcefully.

Anxe
2007-08-19, 12:05 PM
A DMPC should usually be some holy guy or an adviser. They're hard to do well though.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-08-19, 12:06 PM
Unless you have a story reason or the party is in lacking a certain role that it is important to fill I would not recommend it.

It seems you would simply like to be a PC and that is rarely successful for the reason you yourself mention.

It is not as satisfying either because (unless you have mental issues) what comes next is usually not that surprising.

If you have certain things you would like to try I suggest that you use NPCs and perhaps have them follow the party for a short while.

Green Bean
2007-08-19, 12:09 PM
I find that DMPCs are best as primary melee. Spellcasters have a great deal of power, and draw attention to themselves, a big no no. Rogues and other skill-monkeys have whole sections where they're the only ones doing stuff (negotiating, bluffing, breaking into the evil castle to let people in), so that may cause resentment. Primary melee guys help, but don't overshadow unless they're built to do massive damage.

Raolin_Fenix
2007-08-19, 12:10 PM
Play a DMPC who doesn't always have very good ideas. Like, play a barbarian whose immediate thought on a mission to break an innocent victim out of prison is to storm the fortress, killing anyone who stands in his way, break the bars, and carry the victim out.

Saph
2007-08-19, 12:15 PM
The idea of a 'good DMPC' is a bit of an oxymoron, as 'DMPC' has the connotations of 'DM wants to play a PC but can't, so includes an NPC into the party who acts like own personal PC who then gets favourite treatment'.

It is possible to have an NPC with the party and have it work okay, but it significantly increases the amount of work for the DM and takes time away from the PCs. It also can lead to awkward situations where the NPC is doing something with other NPCs, leading to the DM having an involved conversation with himself while the players watch either in amusement or boredom, depending on how you play it.

I've run NPCs who hang around with the party on a few occasions, and my recommendations would be:

Don't do it if you don't have to. If there's a way to give the PCs what they need without having a NPC accompany the party, do that instead.

If you do have an NPC accompanying the party, try to have her relate only to the PCs rather than to other NPCs. This will minimise the chance of you being mistaken for a lunatic with multiple personality disorder holding an animated conversation with himself.

It's always better to have the NPC err on the side of too ignorant, rather than too knowledgeable. If the NPC seems to know what she's talking about, the PCs will take every word that comes out of her mouth as the truth.

Make sure the NPC has a fairly distinctive personality, preferably one that can be summed up with a single adjective ('angry', 'helpful', 'dedicated', etc). If the NPC has no personality, the PCs will treat her as a walking resource battery. They might still do that anyway, but at least it'll be more interesting when they do.

Give serious consideration to leaving the NPC out of combats. Having the DM run both sides of a combat is never good, unless you think the players will enjoy watching you play solitaire. Either come up with an explanation (NPC is nonviolent/inexperienced/disinterested) or just ignore the NPC once combat starts.

The last NPC I used who hung around with the party was a character who, due to her race and background, was incredibly knowledgeable about certain very advanced subjects, and completely ignorant about almost everything else. Playing up her naivete made for some entertaining conversations, and stopped the PCs from treating her as a metagaming tool. She helped the PCs with her area of expertise, and followed their directions the rest of the time.

And finally, remember the Golden Rule of adventure stories: The sidekick should never be cooler than the heroes. When you're running an NPC, the NPC is always the sidekick, no matter how powerful or important she might be. :)

- Saph

RiOrius
2007-08-19, 12:19 PM
The only reason I would recommend using a DMPC is if your party is lacking something crucial (such as a healer). And in such a case, I would craft a DMPC which is solely concerned with doing that one duty, and not encroaching onto anything else (puzzle solving, decision making, etc.).

For instance, if you needed to make a DMPC fighter available, have him be a gruff mercenary the party can hire. If the PC's ever ask him "What do you think of this puzzle?", a typical response would be "You pay me to fight, not to think. Solve your own problem."

Or if the party needs a healer, have a low-Int, high-Wis Cleric tag a long, capable of little more than "You have boo-boo! Me make it better!"

Basically, fill the hole your party needs filled, and don't do anything more than that. Let the players have as much of the action as they want, and you can fill in the stuff they leave behind.

Scissors
2007-08-19, 12:27 PM
DMPCs are tough; as people have already pointed out, they often get "favorite treatment," and if you attempt to compensate by making them a silent lockpicker/healer/whatever then you stick a flat, wooden character right into the center of your campaign. A good way to make NPCs seem important, however, is to have them occasionally directly assist the party (effectively DMPCing them for a while)- PCs will be more invested in your characters if they are, in some sense, "part of the group."

Totally Guy
2007-08-19, 12:34 PM
I added a Lawful Neutral Halfling Rogue into as this role with a small backstory. The PCs at some time in the past had gone to fight an old evil wizard in a tower but when they got there wizard had died of old age and the Rogue was acting as a butler with very low free will, just following the orders of the deceased wizard.

I then had the rogue just do whatever the partymembers commanded within reason. Any treasure was given to the party first and then they could choose to pass things to the rogue.

Zincorium
2007-08-19, 12:40 PM
My main reason for never having NPCs that stick with the group, let alone DMPCs, is that it's a division of my concentration when I need it least.

As DM, I have to come up with reasonably realistic personalities, appearances, and dialogue for a lot of different NPCs over the course of the game. They tend to break down a bit if the PCs get too in depth with them. Between that, arbitrating the game, running the monsters in combat, and describing the adventure in general, my attention is spoken for.

DMPCing in the classic sense, that of playing a character in a group you DM, is almost always a bad idea. If there is a specific problem, that the best solution you can think of is to have an NPC with character levels along with the party, then do so to the smallest degree you can get away with.

Raum
2007-08-19, 01:08 PM
I've often considered inserting a DMPC into the games I run, but there are things I'm not sure about. How do I avoid giving unfair breaks to the character? How do I have this PC contribute without abusing his player's knowledge?To be blunt, don't run a "DMPC" if the players need help let them hire an NPC whom they give orders / requests to. Even that should be avoided if possible.


When the party is debating what solution they should take, advocating the correct solution would be cheating, and would be robbing the players. On the other hand, having my character doing something I know is a bad idea would really grate. The best idea I can think of so far would be to make a character that's lazy, but has very high Sense Motive and Diplomacy so that he can reasonably take advantage of the knowledge I have of NPCs' personalities.Avoid becoming personally involved with the NPC. It shouldn't be "you character" it's just another NPC hireling. If / when the PCs want to fire the character, there shouldn't be a problem with them doing so.


What experiences have you had with DMPCs? How do you make them work, or can you even do so? Is it worth the effort, or is it not as satisfying as playing a regular PC?In more than 20 years of gaming, I've never seen a DMPC done well. Most DMs spend enough time on plot and background, taking time away from that to worry about playing a PC doesn't help make the plot or background better.

What are you trying to accomplish by inserting a DMPC?
- If you simply want to play a character, I'd suggest getting someone else to DM for a while. Or rotate DMs.
- If you're trying to fill some holes in the group's lineup, let them look for a hireling. Your input into what the hireling does should seldom be more than vetoing outrageous orders - basically, the hireling shouldn't (usually) be suicidal.
- If you're trying to "guide" the group with a PC leader...don't. It's almost always a bad idea.

goat
2007-08-19, 01:09 PM
The times I've seen it done best were DMPC's as apprentices and hirelings. Generally lower powered than the PCs, little active input unless something is requested of them, characters that are aware that they're supposed to be following, not leading.

It lets skills that are needed be available, and the occasional plot-hook set-up to be run through, but the DMPC should never be taking a leading role in the goings on.

An example could be the nobles son: trained in various "soft" arts (i.e. high skills in knowledges and diplomacy) who is now being groomed as an agent. They've been taught some lockpicking and stealth, but have been sent out with the PCs to gain active experience and some combat tricks.

The character would be ineffective in most combat situations, but able to provide information for the party and some skills they may not have. However, most of the problems that the party encounters will be far outside their experience, and they'll have little input to offer.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-08-19, 01:19 PM
After getting some experience with it, I seem to do best by just making it a regular NPC that I happen to take extra special care of leveling and sees combat alongside the party more often. Any time I include him, it's either for story purposes or to match a CR that would otherwise be outside the party's scope. I roleplay a bit of ignorance into them, "accidentally" having them use poor attacks and such to show the rest of the players weaknesses they can exploit, and only having them nab plot-central treasure that I've deemed necessary for them to have.

Practice taking the Mary Sue out of your DMPC if you plan to play one, basically. Force mistakes and be willing to let them die in fights or even random traps. But ultimately, it's probably best if you just find a second game to play where you can be a PC instead of the DM. I'd only recommend even trying a DMPC if there just aren't any other DM's in the area.

Dervag
2007-08-19, 01:40 PM
I've seen DMPCs work. The fundamental problem with DMPCs is the 'Mary Sue' effect, and that can be avoided by a disciplined DM.

The second problem, of course, is that there will be a certain category of challenges which the DM sets for the party and which the DM overcomes (such as the locks picked by the NPC locksmith or the DMPC rogue). That's harder to squash, but if nobody in your group wanted to play the rogue anyway then it probably won't annoy them that the rogue-work is being done by someone else.

As long as you remember the Viscount's words about avoiding the 'Mary Sue' effect, you should be fine. The DMPC should be no more powerful than other members of the party, should not be trying to force themselves into a leadership role, and should not get the benefit of DM-created 'luck' that the PCs wouldn't get themselves. It's OK to cheat and save the DMPC's life if and only if you are doing the same thing for the PCs. It's OK to come up with a cool build for the DMPC, if and only if the players are coming up with cool powerful builds for their own characters. And so it goes.

Dausuul
2007-08-19, 01:46 PM
What experiences have you had with DMPCs? How do you make them work, or can you even do so? Is it worth the effort, or is it not as satisfying as playing a regular PC?

IMO, it is completely not worth the effort. As a DM, I will go to considerable lengths to avoid having to run an NPC party member.

Don't get me wrong, I like playing a character--more than I like DMing, frankly. But when I am DMing, there's no satisfaction for me in playing a DMPC. In combat, I have plenty to do keeping track of the monsters. Out of combat, the DMPC can't really contribute anything without taking away from the rest of the party.

I have played in campaigns with DMPCs. They don't go well. At best, it's a drag on the DM's time and attention and slows down combat. At worst, the DMPC outshines the PCs at everything and makes them all feel unnecessary.

Kiero
2007-08-19, 01:48 PM
I've heard of very few examples of GMPCs being a positive influence. The GM shouldn't be personally invested in any NPC, that's what players do. Playing ordinary NPCs as hirelings and sidekicks, fine. Playing an NPC as their own PC even while GMing is an irresolvable conflict of interest. You shouldn't be trying to steal any of the limelight from the players when running a game.

Crow
2007-08-19, 02:25 PM
Well it looks like the OP is thinking of doing some inserting so to speak, so I will share knowledge from my own experience as a DM. This is probably not the best topic to post in for my opening post at this board, and lots of people will disagree with me but here it goes anyways;

I run a DMPC almost every session.

I don't see that there is any problem with it, unless you encounter some of the problems that people have outlined earlier, which I admit I have. However, my group has gotten so accustomed to having a DMPC in the group, that when we are thinking of starting a new campaign, they ask me what I am going to play. If I say something like "I'm going to sit this one out and just DM.", my players are bummed out.

A DMPC works with our group, but your milage may vary.

My current DMPC is a specialist wizard, a transmuter, specializing in buffing spells. She uses a shortbow, makes scrolls and potions, and gets an even share of all the loot. I know some people are probably wide-eyed and aghast by now, but like I said, it works for our group. She doesn't initiate dialogue with NPC's (avoiding the dreaded multiple personalities!), aside from a wisecrack every now and then, or to spit out a cutting remark when somebody says something stupid. When the party gets their marching order together, they tell me where I am in the order. If I run into the trap first, so be it. If the party comes up to a puzzle, I let the party solve it. If the party is planning an attack or some other action, they may ask me for advice or if I have any ideas. However, they know that any ideas I may have may not be such good ideas. Sometimes, the party takes one of those bad ideas and runs with it, spawning a bastardized plan using the bad idea as the root. Sometimes it works. Before combat, She buffs the party with her spells, and if anything is left over, might give herself some as well. Usually though, she'll hold onto those last few spells, just in case someone else in the party needs it in an emergency. She will plink a few enemies with her bow, but being a wizard, it mostly serves to keep her out of reach of the badguys while waiting to see if anybody needs assistance.

So for us it works. The group loves going toe-to-toe with monsters who by their CR should be able to annihilate the party, but with buffs can be taken down. The look of satisfaction of my players' faces is priceless after such an encounter. She gets her fair share of the loot afterwards as a result of this, which she then uses to make scrolls and potions for the party. We even have a second wizard in the group, when a piece of good wizard gear ends up in the loot, he insists that we share evenly. It is also worth noting that we go entirely by the random treasure tables too.

All that said, I also have a virtual "Great Elephant Burial Ground" of dead DMPC's. I may cheat a little in the favor of my players if I feel I screwed up or put them in a terrible situation (but only if it's my fault). Though I give no such benefits to my DMPCs. Still, it is gratifying to have my players insist upon paying to ressurect my DMPC after a rough battle, even when I tell them they don't have to.

So, as I said, it works for us. As long as your players are still the star of the show, it can be fun for everybody.

BardicDuelist
2007-08-19, 02:28 PM
If I play a DMPC it is either a non-violent healer (because the party needs one), or a bard. I have the bard sit back and spew buffs all over the place when combat starts to make the PCs better. When I have him interact it is usually 'off camera' with other NPCs (he has a higher diplomacy or w/e and doesn't want the PCs screwing it up). Also bardic knowledge is great for throwing in subplots.

My DM tends to like to use DMPCs and they tend to steal the spotlight. That is annoying, so I try to avoid DMPCs when possible and when not (or when I REALLY want to have a character but have to DM) I use DMPCs that function as support rather than 'heros.'

If it isn't working, kill your DMPC or have him captured (yes, even if you spent more time on him that the entire campaign, or rather especially so). It furthers the plot and keeps the players in the action.

The_Werebear
2007-08-19, 03:47 PM
To sum it all up- DMPC's can work, but they need to be in the background buffing, not stealing any spotlight.

Ashtar
2007-08-19, 04:27 PM
I've had many campaigns with DMPCs, some good, some bad. As a DM, they can sometimes be a real help when you have a small group (3 players or less), but for any group with 5 or more players, I would never put in a DMPC unless I have an assistant to run her.

Also, if your DMPC gets in a bad situation, let her die. No saving her or anything. Let her die, heroically if you must, but even better if it's fast, random and painful!

Worst DMPC I met: Skill monkey DMPC, stealing the spotlight and doing all the technical stuff (In starwars D6, had millions of dice in technical skills). Got on our nerves so much, she got "forgotten" in an airlock. GM did get "slightly annoyed".

One of the best DMPC I met: Paladin DMPC we had with us; Princess who ran away from the castle and wanted to help her people. Built up a backbone and a new vision of the world with the players and then returned to rule after her father was kidnapped. Not overpowering because she had to stay back to "avoid being recognised". But still had the spotlight at two appropriate moments including one scene at the end where she reveals how much she has grown with the characters, even citing what we had told her while campaigning (DM wrote down our uplifting comments and brought them out later, nice touch).

AslanCross
2007-08-19, 05:58 PM
The DMPC in my campaign is a special case. She actually belongs to a player who can't make it regularly anymore, and unfortunately her character was one of the two most developed in the 6-man party, RP-wise. She was a source of conflict for the rest of the players (She is a snarky, self-centered and arrogant noble brat), so I was loath to kill her character off. She made the RPing much more interesting.

As such I kept her around and continue to RP her. She's technically the official leader of the party but due to some personality issues (low WIS) she can't really make consistently good decisions and so she's doesn't lead the other PCs by the nose. Thankfully I'm able to RP her consistently enough with the original player's style, and although she's a Swashbuckler who gets to tear some rather gaping holes into enemies, she doesn't really take others out of the limelight.

EndgamerAzari
2007-08-19, 06:03 PM
My one real experience with a DMPC has been pretty good so far. The DMPC in question is a Drow pirate, who, despite my ingrained distaste for the Drow, I actually enjoy. The DM uses him to inform the party about the world, since only one of the PCs is native to the plane, and he comes in handy as an occasional backup, plot device, and romantic interest.

Matthew
2007-08-19, 08:16 PM
I highly recommend experienced DMs making use of NPC Adventurers who travel with the Player Characters, but then I like to use Henchmen and Hirelings as well, which not everyone likes to do.

DMPCs, in the sense of attempting to be both a Player Character and a Dungeon Master at the same time should be avoided, and as far as I am concerned it is impossible to really implement fairly (and kind of defeats the purpose of having a division between DM and PCs at all).

JackMage666
2007-08-19, 08:56 PM
Well, coming from a small group (there's only 3 of us that could play), we had to do 2 Players and 1 DM. In almost all situation, if we didn't do Gestalt, we were missing some roles - Commonly Rogue or Warrior, but ALWAYS divine healing. So, when it was my turn to DM, I helped the players out by throwing in a DMPC.

A Halfling Healer. Literally, the Healer class in Minatures handbook. It worked wonders. It got the benefits of a walking toolbox, but didn't seem fake because he could not even cast other kinds of spells. He was kinda a coward, not being able to wear much armor, and not being all that strong (6 Str, 14 Dex, 12 Con, don't remember the mentals, but good Wis/Cha). So, he did his best to stay out of combat, and behind the PCs, so didn't get hit by many traps (a few, though). He spent most of the time subserviant to the players, and ran from combats that scared him, if he could. Didn't take the spotlight at all. If he did something away from the PCs, I did it in my head, and decided what happened. Never took away from them, but gave them all the healing he could (which, in a dungeon campaign, is usefull, since they couldn't buy potions to help).

After a level of the dungeon, though, I thought he was providing a bit too much help for them (not in combat, but going into any other fight at full HP was taking away alot of the challenge). So, I had them leave him with a number of injured Kobolds (I made the players feel bad for attacking Kobolds ealier in the dungeon, especially when they charged into the Women/Children/Elderly/Injured room.) He gave them a number of potions he made, and a few Belts of Healing (Magic Item Comp.), as well as two weak fast healing amulets (Fast Healing 1, but only up to half HP), and offered himself if they needed potions.

Overall, I think it was useful, and not so much abused, but I didn't really like the work of planning out what another PC does while doing other things. If you can handle the extra paperwork, though, subpar classes make great DMPCs. Marshals, Bards, Healer, Warmages, great choices, as they support and fill roles, but not as nicely as an all out PC.

de-trick
2007-08-20, 01:01 AM
my DM has alot of NPC's that go with us lets see, human barbarian, elf ranger/sorcerer, and a halfing whisperknife, tey work fine for him

and theyask the party leader what to do, unless very stupid thing to do

Kiero
2007-08-20, 03:58 AM
The DMPC in my campaign is a special case. She actually belongs to a player who can't make it regularly anymore, and unfortunately her character was one of the two most developed in the 6-man party, RP-wise. She was a source of conflict for the rest of the players (She is a snarky, self-centered and arrogant noble brat), so I was loath to kill her character off. She made the RPing much more interesting.

Killing characters off isn't the only option when their player disappears. They can leave the party without having to die.


I highly recommend experienced DMs making use of NPC Adventurers who travel with the Player Characters, but then I like to use Henchmen and Hirelings as well, which not everyone likes to do.

DMPCs, in the sense of attempting to be both a Player Character and a Dungeon Master at the same time should be avoided, and as far as I am concerned it is impossible to really implement fairly (and kind of defeats the purpose of having a division between DM and PCs at all).

Exactly.


my DM has alot of NPC's that go with us lets see, human barbarian, elf ranger/sorcerer, and a halfing whisperknife, tey work fine for him

and theyask the party leader what to do, unless very stupid thing to do

NPCs and GMPCs aren't the same thing. Just because an NPC is a regular in the party, doesn't automatically mean they're a GMPC. What distinguishes them is where the GM is clearly playing them as "their" character as though they were also a PC.

Evil DM Mark3
2007-08-20, 04:09 AM
DMPCs can work, but they are more trouble than they are worth really. Here is a list of pointers however.

1. Beware that an experianced player is likely to shout "run for the hills he's got a loaded DMPC!" or similar. DMPCs are often used by poor or inexpericnaed DMs as Deux Ex Mechanica or Railroad devices.
2. Be either a melee meatshield or a Healbot. Fighter, Barbarian or Cleric only (from core, Marshal or Healer are also good choices for example).
3. Only fill another role if it is 100% vital. Be a ranger if the party is expected to be tracking and hasn't bothered to include a tracker for example.
4. NEVER if there are allready 5 or more PCs.
5. NEVER EVER play a paladin. If the party doesn't include one they probably don't want one. If they have one then you are not needed.
6. The plot shall never revolve around your PC.
7. If at all possible do your role and your role alone. Samurai is quite a good DMPC class as it is rubbish whilst still just about filling it's role.
8. Generate the DMPC last, you fit in with them, not the otehr way around.
9. The day the DMPC has to save the day, is the day you have failed as a DM.
10. Regardless of what you do for the PCs, never fudge a roll for a DMPC.

Idealy however it is better for the PCs to hire an NPC than to have a DMPC. That may seem like a name change only but is is important. Your character, if any, should be set dressing, not the protagonist.

So short answer, No with a but, long answer Yes with an if.

Orzel
2007-08-20, 04:27 AM
I seen 1 DMPC work. An stealth archer. Did nothing in battle but shoot arrows. No convo skills to make talking to self issues. Gave the rogue a scout buddy. Lower the amount of ambushed with perception. And most importantly, had the race and gender combo our stupid party leader forced us to keep in the group.

"Best archer ever. An elf too. He's where? At the tavern. Yes, the tavern."

Kiero
2007-08-20, 05:16 AM
And most importantly, had the race and gender combo our stupid party leader forced us to keep in the group.

Huh? Every member of the party was a male elf? :smallconfused:

AslanCross
2007-08-20, 08:09 AM
Killing characters off isn't the only option when their player disappears. They can leave the party without having to die.


That's true, but given this girl's personality it would be pretty lame for her to just walk away. She's something of an overachiever. The party's been together for too short a time (as in 1 adventure that was barely even overnight) for her to have changed into an introspective person. We talked about it and it was the only way we could fix the situation in a clean and seamless manner. (No new players are available at the moment and since we publish the stories in school, it wouldn't make sense story-wise for her to just walk away.)

SpikeFightwicky
2007-08-20, 08:20 AM
My experience with DMPCs:

Always negative. Whenever I was in a game and the DM had a DMPC (or GMPC), they typically outshined everyone else and tried to make sure we were always going to the right place (kind of like not-too-passive rail-roading).

Whenever I DM, I sometimes have NPCs in the party, but they're never there as part of adventuring group (like in the trite but true case of an escort quest involving a merchant/princess/prince/etc...). The one time I had to stat out an NPC was when the group came to the conclusion they needed a healer, and hired a cleric to tag along and heal as needed (typically stayed back in a fight, and never really gave any advice).

I had it worse in 2nd ed, where the rules regarding stuff like templates and LAs were non-existent. Seems like the majority of DMs I played with in that era all had DMPC spotlighters...

tainsouvra
2007-08-20, 01:30 PM
NPC's who join the party for a while, per the NPC's personal goals, and leave after an adventure or two, per the NPC's personal goals, are a great idea. It might feel like the DM has a PC of his own, but it's not "his" in the same sense as the player's characters are "theirs". I've done this recently, and it worked out well, especially given the alignment/demeanor of the NPC in question.

A true DM-PC is usually a bad idea. It's extra effort, as has been noted; it steals the spotlight, as has been noted; it's a conflict of interest, as has been noted. I have tried it before, and it worked well, however it was with an experienced group who specifically requested a DMPC and knew what that entailed--plus the character in question was not in the party for the entire campaign, just for a particular series of adventures.

There is an additional negative effect of a DMPC that I'd like to mention--the DM is already playing the roles of everything that isn't the party, and adding a DMPC increases the cast list by one. This causes a proportionate decrease in the screen time for other members of the cast, and can easily cause characters outside of the party to appear even more shallow or unimportant than usual, simply due to them not having the chance to do enough. I usually avoid DMPC's for this reason, rather than the other ones--if I'm DMing, I want to play up the storyteller role, not a character's role.

Kiero
2007-08-20, 01:43 PM
That's true, but given this girl's personality it would be pretty lame for her to just walk away. She's something of an overachiever. The party's been together for too short a time (as in 1 adventure that was barely even overnight) for her to have changed into an introspective person. We talked about it and it was the only way we could fix the situation in a clean and seamless manner. (No new players are available at the moment and since we publish the stories in school, it wouldn't make sense story-wise for her to just walk away.)

And there weren't bigger projects more worthy of this overachiever's attentions than a few scruffy ruffians?


I have tried it before, and it worked well, however it was with an experienced group who specifically requested a DMPC and knew what that entailed--plus the character in question was not in the party for the entire campaign, just for a particular series of adventures.

Indeed, that's a special case that makes it safely an exception to the usual warning against using them.


There is an additional negative effect of a DMPC that I'd like to mention--the DM is already playing the roles of everything that isn't the party, and adding a DMPC increases the cast list by one. This causes a proportionate decrease in the screen time for other members of the cast, and can easily cause characters outside of the party to appear even more shallow or unimportant than usual, simply due to them not having the chance to do enough. I usually avoid DMPC's for this reason, rather than the other ones--if I'm DMing, I want to play up the storyteller role, not a character's role.

Absolutely. The GM's job is to maximise the screen time the PCs, both collectively and individually get. Not be stealing some of it for themselves.

I wonder how much of it stems from frustrated GMs who'd rather play, but couldn't. Another "justification" I've seen is games with rotating GMs where they also have a character. Though there I'd say they should be fading into the background and becoming henchman fodder for the time their player is acting as GM.

Indon
2007-08-20, 01:51 PM
1. Beware that an experianced player is likely to shout "run for the hills he's got a loaded DMPC!" or similar. DMPCs are often used by poor or inexpericnaed DMs as Deux Ex Mechanica or Railroad devices.

I'd like to see you hold together a group of mixed Exalts without a Sidereal.

Which leads into my own DMPC experience, which is a Sidereal exalt in the party. I feel Sidereals happen to make very good DMPC's, because they are largely secretive and manipulative, allowing for plot railroading without neccessarily providing for _leadership_, and introducing some nice tension at the same time.

tainsouvra
2007-08-20, 01:55 PM
I wonder how much of it stems from frustrated GMs who'd rather play, but couldn't. That's pretty much the only time I've been tempted to make one, previous exception notwithstanding, so it sounds reasonable that would be a big factor.

Number 6
2007-08-20, 02:04 PM
I'm all for DMPCs with new or inexpereinces players. For examples, I was in a game here in San Antonio wherein there was a DMPC rogue. We didn't just hire him, we found an orphan in the street who was in trouble. The cleric hired him as a page, and later adopted him. The rest of the party stated training him and working to keep him out of trouble when he wanted to go back to his street gang. In short, it soon had a bunch of munchkins actually role playing for the first time. It was great!

I used a DMPC as an elderly advisor in several games. This advisor would not take part in combat or give orders in any ways, but he was useful for teaching advanced tactics to a group that was of the "Kick in the door and fireball everything" bent.

Indon
2007-08-20, 02:05 PM
More generally, I'd say that DMPC's are good if:

-There is a need,

-The DMPC can fulfill that need,

-and the DMPC does not do much else but fulfill that need.

Mike_Lemmer
2007-08-20, 03:04 PM
Enough generic info has been given out, so I'll just talk about my best DMPC and why I think it works.

In one game, my players were investigating unexplored lands when they stumbled across a ruined temple in the forests. They investigated, cleared out the evil squatters residing within it, and then met its guardian fey spirit when she possessed one of them. (She was nice enough to give up control to let him speak, so he could participate as well.)

She thanked them for clearing out her temple and asked if they could take her away from it to a "better, more active one". In exchange, she'd guide them around the area and help them however she could.

To do this, they needed to unbind her essence from the temple and to them. This had two effects:

1. It let her do amazing things in the temple (giving them a taste of what she'd be like on later levels), then provided a logical excuse for her sudden decline in power. ("Well, of course I can't do that now, you fleshy beings are much weaker spiritually than the blessed statue that originally hosted me. Whoops, I forgot to mention that?")

2. It emphasized that she relied on the party for her power. She could do things no one else could, but she had to channel it through the party. In some cases, the party had to provide her power by sacrificing spell slots or ability drain.

So why do I think she worked so well?

1. The DMPC brought new abilities to the PCs, but the PCs were the ones actually using them. She couldn't steal the spotlight without dragging PCs into it.

2. She provided a handy infodump on the area for the DM without giving away everything. ("It's been five centuries since I've heard about this place! Some things change!")

3. She was flighty, hard to please, lewd, and definitely had a bias to her opinion, so I felt free to toss out bad suggestions and the players felt free to ignore most of them. Of course, occasionally she tossed out a brilliant one, or at least one smart enough to get the PCs debating about it.

4. She needed the PCs. They found her, they rescued her, and they are nice enough to put up with her. And, if they wanted to, they could get rid of her in a heartbeat. She has been so helpful, though, despite her attitude and snarkiness, that they've kept her around. (Although they've wished for a spiritual smackdown sometimes to knock some sense into her.)

Indon
2007-08-20, 03:11 PM
They investigated, cleared out the evil squatters residing within it, and then met its guardian fey spirit...


...(Although they've wished for a spiritual smackdown sometimes to knock some sense into her.)

Reminds me of a fae I know in a certain video game... "Listen!"

LotharBot
2007-08-20, 03:42 PM
Let me warn you, DMPC's are usually a bad idea. But if you think you are a good enough DM to handle it, check out my guide to DMPC's (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40443)*. You can make it work, you just have to think very carefully about it.

1) Stay out of the spotlight! Nobody wants to sit around watching you play a game against yourself. Don't play a party face, primary trapfinder, batman wizard, CoDzilla, etc. Be a melee type or a healer/buffer/utility type caster.

2) In that same light, make a simple character to play. Don't take a lot of complex abilities or spells that require multiple die rolls. Have a simple personality ("I always hit the most dangerous seeming enemy with my axe"), or if you want a more complex personality, think about how you'll interact with each encounter when you're planning it.

3) Be useful but not overly powerful. You want the party to be glad you're along and glad you're doing damage / healing them / whatever. Don't be a liability; don't get the party into trouble, and don't put yourself in position where they have to save your butt yet again.

4) Show "anti-favoritism" to your character. If there's not enough loot to go around, you should be the one who gets the short straw.

5) Use your DMPC to provide both "good" advice and "bad" advice. Since you know what's going to happen, you can nudge your party closer to solutions... but you can ALSO give your party red herrings. Make it obvious that your character has a personality and that his ideas may or may not be any good.

6) Create a character who you can retire at any time. If it doesn't work out, you want to be able to get rid of your DMPC... a cleric can be called away by a temple, or any character can join a different but allied adventuring group "because they need the help".



*addendum to the article, for Raum's sake: when I said my wife was against the idea, that does not mean I pushed it on her. When I told her I was planning to play a DMPC, she said she thought it was a mistake, but she believes people should be allowed to make their own mistakes. I asked her to give me 3 sessions and then to speak up if she still thought it was a mistake. The campaign went for 38 sessions (http://rubblerousers.blogspot.com/) without a single complaint, and in the postmortem everyone in the group said my DMPC was cool and they were glad I played him.

AslanCross
2007-08-20, 04:46 PM
And there weren't bigger projects more worthy of this overachiever's attentions than a few scruffy ruffians?


Gaining land for herself apart from her family's property and potentially saving the kingdom against an invasion are pretty big projects compared to being another grunt in the army under her overbearing brother's supervision.

In any case this is a stopgap measure, because the player does take control of the character when she can make it and will only last until someone else can play. The group's composed entirely of beginners and while a couple can RP pretty well, this character's ability to draw out their RPing is unparalleled given the current situation. We're playing as part of our creative writing club's activities. This is primarily a writing exercise.

(I'd also like to note that I didn't want to do this. The PC belonged to a player who can't make it regularly anymore and there was no other solution that made sense, continuity wise. Everyone still enjoys and the character doesn't outshine anyone except in terms of RP.)

Person_Man
2007-08-20, 04:57 PM
I'm personally very anti DM PC. If you want to play a PC, wait until its your turn not to DM. If the party "needs" a certain role filled, give them magic items (such as a Wand of Cure Light Wounds), encourage them to play full casters, or let them play gestalt. There is no reason to play a DM PC, except to fulfill the DM's somewhat selfish needs. And if those needs aren't fulfilled by you DMing monsters and NPCs, then maybe you shouldn't take a turn behind the DM screen.

LotharBot
2007-08-20, 05:07 PM
There is no reason to play a DM PC, except to fulfill the DM's somewhat selfish needs.

Or any of the following:
- a way to introduce game mechanics and plot hooks and magic item ideas ("I'm gonna go buy some celestial armor!" or "I hate goblins so much I got a goblin bane sword!" or "oh no, I've been kidnapped!")
- a way to subtly bend the game world to the PCs benefit without using DM fiat ("you're 120 gp short? Garlen has a bit of extra... here you go" is a lot better than "the shop has a 120 gp discount on that exact item!")
- a way to avoid becoming too distant from the players. Being the DM/referee/enemy/godlike entity tends to create a disconnect, but running some part of the group draws you back in. I find this improves the chemistry around the table (though playing a DMPC the wrong way will tend to do the opposite, so be careful!)
- helps keep track of the party's overall power level. Since I built my DMPC and I keep his sheet maintained and up to date, I pretty quickly recognize if overall WBL is off. And since I know how the other characters compare to him, I can easily look at an encounter and say "this will be too hard, none of us can hit that AC reliably" or "this will be too easy, I could take it on my own."
- helps keep a party within the expectations for a pregen module. Maybe it's built for 5 players, and you have 3. Adding a player of your own is much easier than trying to rebalance the entire module.
- Toliudar's DMPCs (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2369262&postcount=4) give a way for the players, and more importantly the DM, to recognize when an encounter is too hard before the players start to take heavy losses.

Be careful with your generalizations. You may have had a bad experience; don't let that turn you hostile to those of us who've competently run DMPCs.

Indon
2007-08-20, 05:09 PM
Another good thing there seems to be about DMPC's is the ability to be removed from the party at short notice if need be. I certainly know that's a benefit of a Sidereal.

Raum
2007-08-20, 06:35 PM
Or any of the following:
- a way to introduce game mechanics and plot hooks and magic item ideas ("I'm gonna go buy some celestial armor!" or "I hate goblins so much I got a goblin bane sword!" or "oh no, I've been kidnapped!")
- a way to subtly bend the game world to the PCs benefit without using DM fiat ("you're 120 gp short? Garlen has a bit of extra... here you go" is a lot better than "the shop has a 120 gp discount on that exact item!")There are other methods of accomplishing those goals.


- a way to avoid becoming too distant from the players. Being the DM/referee/enemy/godlike entity tends to create a disconnect, but running some part of the group draws you back in. I find this improves the chemistry around the table (though playing a DMPC the wrong way will tend to do the opposite, so be careful!)If the DM thinks he's a "godlike entity" he has other problems. I'd also speculate that any DM with that type of attitude would tend to have the most abusive DMPCs.


- helps keep track of the party's overall power level. Since I built my DMPC and I keep his sheet maintained and up to date, I pretty quickly recognize if overall WBL is off. And since I know how the other characters compare to him, I can easily look at an encounter and say "this will be too hard, none of us can hit that AC reliably" or "this will be too easy, I could take it on my own."You don't have copies of the players' PCs?


- helps keep a party within the expectations for a pregen module. Maybe it's built for 5 players, and you have 3. Adding a player of your own is much easier than trying to rebalance the entire module.Why not give a few extras to the PCs instead? Max hit points, a hireling, pets, etc. There are many ways to accomplish this.


- Toliudar's DMPCs (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2369262&postcount=4) give a way for the players, and more importantly the DM, to recognize when an encounter is too hard before the players start to take heavy losses.That post seems to be about DMPC personalities rather than guaging encounter difficulty, am I missing something?


Be careful with your generalizations. You may have had a bad experience; don't let that turn you hostile to those of us who've competently run DMPCs.It's possible, but I've seen a lot of people claim to run DMPCs well and then state how they used them abusively as a proud example. Probably the most common use I've seen is railroading. Of course it's not "railroading" to the DM, it's simply guiding, inserting plot hooks, avoiding deus ex machina, or otherwise assisting.

LotharBot
2007-08-20, 07:08 PM
There are other methods of accomplishing those goals.

.... Why not give a few extras to the PCs instead? Max hit points, a hireling, pets, etc. There are many ways to accomplish this.

Others have suggested that the only reason to run a DMPC is if you're a horrible selfish jerk of a DM. The list I presented demonstrates there are other reasons one might choose to run a DMPC. Of course, in D&D there are often multiple ways to accomplish a single task. A DMPC is not the only solution, but it is a possible option which should be used with caution on the occasions when it is used.

Just as an example: if your concern is party power level, you can always play gestalt, give each of the PC's a free leadership feat, give the PC's max hitpoints, give out extra treasure, or provide easy access to hirelings. You can also use a well-constructed DMPC. Depending on the specifics of your campaign, any one of these solutions may be better than the others.


You don't have copies of the players' PCs?

I copy down a few of their key stats whenever they level, but I don't keep complete copies of their sheets. I don't find it necessary with my group. None of the other DMs I've played with have done it, either.


That post seems to be about DMPC personalities rather than guaging encounter difficulty, am I missing something?

The "canary in the mineshaft" analogy...


I've seen a lot of people claim to run DMPCs well and then state how they used them abusively as a proud example.

I haven't seen many people claim to run DMPCs at all, well or poorly. Can you point to an example where someone has spoken of their abusive use of a DMPC with pride?

Raum
2007-08-20, 08:45 PM
Others have suggested that the only reason to run a DMPC is if you're a horrible selfish jerk of a DM. Nah, it's probably not malicious. Remember Hanlon's Razor. :)


I haven't seen many people claim to run DMPCs at all, well or poorly. Can you point to an example where someone has spoken of their abusive use of a DMPC with pride?There are a few in this thread. Including your posts if you consider railroading a bad thing. Though that was phrased as advice rather than an anecdote.

Even when a DM is able to avoid every single pitfall of using DMPCs, I have to wonder...what would have been better if the DM had put that same work and energy into other parts of the game? Why not flesh out a couple NPCs a bit more instead of the DMPC? Make the NPCs memorable. If you already have, how about the terrain? Can it use some detail? Or even the items, make something truly unique! There are so many facets to the game to spend time on, why intrude in the players' domain?

F.H. Zebedee
2007-08-20, 11:00 PM
Well, I'm basically in a unique situation here: I've got maybe three or four potential players at most in the region, counting me. Of the group, there's:
-1 guy who's really creative, but not ambitious or structured enough to DM
-1 guy who's good with gaming but terribly uncreative.
-1 girl who also suffers from the creative but not a gamer syndrome.
-myself, the only one who really likes whipping up full fledged plots.

Since most of us aren't full fledged gamers, I need to give them a bit of a cushion. I use DMPCs to give them examples on how to build characters, tricks that they can do in combat, etc.

Not to mention that I usually build defensive builds best for distractions and such. I tend to be known around the table for regardless of system being an evade monkey. So a common strategy for when things get sour is "Okay, we retreat, and leave Zeb's character to distract them and possibly die."

Essentially, that's what I end up being for the party. A character with high enough evade that nothing bothers with him, and low enough attack that I never surpass the rest of the party. My duty is either helping the party limp away by distracting big and ugly, or if they all get taken out, sprinting for a Rezzfest. Yeah. Monk duty.

LotharBot
2007-08-21, 03:23 PM
There are a few in this thread. Including your posts if you consider railroading a bad thing.

Can you quote them?

Where exactly do you see "railroading" in my post (or in my session log)? I suggested you can use a DMPC to give advice, but I said explicitly that he should give both positive and negative advice. I also suggested that a DMPC can provide plot hooks, but I think you're being unreasonable in saying that "plot hooks" must really mean railroading just because a DMPC is involved.

I think your bias against DMPCs is coloring your interpretation of people's statements about their use.


I have to wonder...what would have been better if the DM had put that same work and energy into other parts of the game?

I'm unemployed. I put plenty of work and energy into my games. My DMPC was a small part of that, but IMO he was a very good use of my time. My players all appreciated the work I put into him.


why intrude in the players' domain?

I gave a list of reasons for playing a DMPC a couple posts ago, which you promptly disagreed with.

Have you read any of my session logs? Do you think it sounds like my DMPC was "intruding" on the players' domain? Do you think my players thought so? That's really what it's all about. No matter what some guy on the internet thinks or misinterprets from what I've said, my players enjoyed the game and still speak fondly of my DMPC.

Indon
2007-08-21, 03:36 PM
It's possible, but I've seen a lot of people claim to run DMPCs well and then state how they used them abusively as a proud example. Probably the most common use I've seen is railroading. Of course it's not "railroading" to the DM, it's simply guiding, inserting plot hooks, avoiding deus ex machina, or otherwise assisting.

I am intrigued as to what you understand to be 'railroading'. The DMPC I put forth in my example existed to keep the players (Dragon-Blooded, Lunar, and Solars) from initially killing each other before they could be acquainted. He also serves as a font of general (albeit not always accurate) information regarding places in Creation, which is something none of my players have experience with.

Being manipulated by an NPC isn't railroading, I feel, because the PC's can notice the manipulation and react accordingly.

SpikeFightwicky
2007-08-21, 04:04 PM
Reminds me of a fae I know in a certain video game... "Listen!"

Curse you Navi!


On the lighter side of things: I can't speak for anyone else, but as soon as a DMPC starts taking up resources or out of combat time, it irks me.


Being manipulated by an NPC isn't railroading, I feel, because the PC's can notice the manipulation and react accordingly.

But what kind of other interactions does this 'NPC' do? Does he always fight up front in combat, take a share of the loot and party XP, take up off-camera time doing 'PC' stuff?

Oeryn
2007-08-21, 05:47 PM
I don't dispute that there are many, many things that can go wrong when a DM plays a character alongside the party, and that the drawbacks often outweigh the benefits. But I think there are some arguments to be made FOR DMPCs, too.

I usually run games in homebrew settings, for a variety of reasons. I find that having a few "Natives" around gives the players a better feel for the world, especially at the beginning. I use their actions, of course, but also their vocabulary, dress and even speech patterns to give a feeling of "realism", so the world becomes a real place. Especially since no one but me knows anything about the world, I think it helps a lot, to get the PCs immersed from the beginning.

I also use them as "extras", so that I can make the action bigger. I'm a big fan of starting campaigns at first level, but I don't like the typical "kill the giant rats in the innkeeper's cellar" thing to level the party up. With some NPCs, I can have the players get a feel for the town, get to see how things work, and then have the whole town be attacked. Because the players aren't the only ones there, they don't have to take the brunt of the action. They can follow orders, fight with a few higher-level folks, or even run and hide, if they want. But the action can be bigger, because of the extra people.

Not only that, but you can kill 'em off when you need things to get scary, or the PCs get more able to handle what's comin' their way. There's tons of options, but you just need to think of them less as characters in their own right, and more part of your overall story. Done right, they can add immeasurably to a game. In the game I'm running, we just had a funeral for some NPCs that died recently. I've been playin' D&D for 20 years, and I've never been part of a RP session that was as emotional as that was.

Raum
2007-08-21, 07:17 PM
Can you quote them?See below.


Where exactly do you see "railroading" in my post (or in my session log)? I suggested you can use a DMPC to give advice, but I said explicitly that he should give both positive and negative advice. I also suggested that a DMPC can provide plot hooks, but I think you're being unreasonable in saying that "plot hooks" must really mean railroading just because a DMPC is involved.This is what I was referring to in your post:
- a way to introduce game mechanics and plot hooks and magic item ideas ("I'm gonna go buy some celestial armor!" or "I hate goblins so much I got a goblin bane sword!" or "oh no, I've been kidnapped!")Specifically the portion on kidnapping. Possibly it's a difference of opinion, but I tend to believe kidnapping a party member is railroading more often than not. Admittedly, we don't know enough about the situation to be certain of it...but signs are there.


I think your bias against DMPCs is coloring your interpretation of people's statements about their use.It certainly makes me look at them more critically. But unless you can convince me kidnapping a party member (DMPC or PC) is never, or at least seldom, railroading, I stand by my interpretation.


I'm unemployed. I put plenty of work and energy into my games. My DMPC was a small part of that, but IMO he was a very good use of my time. My players all appreciated the work I put into him.Sorry you're unemployed...unless it's by choice. The extra time may well allow you to plan around potential pitfalls of using DMPCs, I'll certainly agree it's possible to use them without being overtly disruptive. Personally I don't think it's desirable, there are too many other methods of accomplishing whatever positive results you get from a DMPC.


I gave a list of reasons for playing a DMPC a couple posts ago, which you promptly disagreed with.Err, you may wish to reread my response again. Most of my response consisted of "there are other methods of accomplishing these goals." I think the only one I outright disagree with is calling the DM a "godlike entity." Any DM who thinks that is setting himself up for an adversarial relationship with the players.


Have you read any of my session logs? Do you think it sounds like my DMPC was "intruding" on the players' domain? Do you think my players thought so? That's really what it's all about. No matter what some guy on the internet thinks or misinterprets from what I've said, my players enjoyed the game and still speak fondly of my DMPC.No I haven't, and I agree - fun is all that matters.

I suspect you took my disagreement as a personal attack, it wasn't intended as such. It was simply intended to point out there are simpler methods of accomplishing the same laudable goals for which you recommended using a DMPC. One of the OP's questions was "Is it worth the effort" after all.


Which leads into my own DMPC experience, which is a Sidereal exalt in the party. I feel Sidereals happen to make very good DMPC's, because they are largely secretive and manipulative, allowing for plot railroading without neccessarily providing for _leadership_, and introducing some nice tension at the same time.
I am intrigued as to what you understand to be 'railroading'. The DMPC I put forth in my example existed to keep the players (Dragon-Blooded, Lunar, and Solars) from initially killing each other before they could be acquainted. He also serves as a font of general (albeit not always accurate) information regarding places in Creation, which is something none of my players have experience with.

Being manipulated by an NPC isn't railroading, I feel, because the PC's can notice the manipulation and react accordingly.You point out using a DMPC to "allow plot railroading" (your words not mine) as a good thing. That shouldn't need my definitions, you've stated it is railroading.

Indon
2007-08-21, 07:23 PM
You point out using a DMPC to "allow plot railroading" (your words not mine) as a good thing. That shouldn't need my definitions, you've stated it is railroading.

That's by my definition, because in this particular campaign I'm gunning for an open-ended environment in which the characters drive themselves, which means that pretty much everything I do to get the party together qualifies as railroading.

My question is, what is railroading to you?

Raum
2007-08-21, 07:32 PM
My question is, what is railroading to you?Well, as simply as I can put it, railroading is "actively limiting or removing meaningful player options." As such, it's not necessarily bad. It's simply far easier to abuse than to do well. The term has bad connotations simply because it's used & abused all too often.

Probably need a new thread if you want to discuss railroading though.

LotharBot
2007-08-21, 07:56 PM
I tend to believe kidnapping a party member is railroading more often than not.

"more often than not" is not the same as "always". You're right that kidnapping a party member is something the DM should be careful with, and usually not do. But you're wrong to assume I'm advocating railroading because I suggested that as one among many possibilities for a DMPC. I'd prefer if you would ASK rather than ASSUME.


I don't think it's desirable, there are too many other methods of accomplishing whatever positive results you get from a DMPC.

...."there are other methods of accomplishing these goals."

....there are simpler methods of accomplishing the same laudable goals

There are other methods. They are not necessarily simpler. It depends a lot on the group dynamic you have in place, the specific world you're running, etc.

Again... a DMPC is a possible option. It's not always the best choice, but sometimes it is.

Milandros
2007-08-21, 07:57 PM
You will notice that some of the suggetsions you are getting here are contradictory. There is a reason behind this.

The term "DMPC" is not officially defined anywhere. PC is. DM is. NPC is. DMPC often means different things to different people, unfortunately. There is an argument which re-occurs on the WoTC boards regularly for just this reason.

Some people take the term "DMPC" to stand for "Dungeon Master's Player Character", with all that that entails - i.e. the DM has "his" character, and puts as much time and effort into it as the others do into their characters, and does his best to make "his" character succeed. This approach, while not necessarily certain to cause disaster, has several issues.

First of all is that few people can truly avoid favouritism at all. Can you write a scenario without thinking what "your" character will do? Can you pretend you don't know the answer to a puzzle. Can you compartmentalise your mind well enough to "forget" that the monster has a rend attack and move your PC into "will probably be ripped to shreds" range without blinking? Will you then have that moster kill "your" PC? Will you place treasure useless to "your" PC?

Secondly, despite what some DMs claim, the total amount of ability, time and concentration available to a DM is not infinite. Every hour spent trawling books looking for a really cool feat for next level is an hour not spent preparing the game for next session. If you have work or other commitments like school, then this is an issue. Also, I know that when I DM I feel stretched coping with simultaneously taking into account monster desires, abilities and tactics, NPC reactions, the reactions to noise etc of nearby NPCs/monsters, the ongoing timeline of what's happeneing, etc etc etc. There's a lot to do all at once. Even in combat, unless you just use the same couple of monsters, you have to be aware of exactly what the monster can do, is likely to do, is intelligent enough to do, won't do, what they will, won't and might fall for, and so on. If you're spending half the combat round thinking about "your" character's next move, you're not handling your monsters as well as you can.

And that, in the end, is my main reason for not advising using DMPCs. Even if you can brilliantly compartmentalise your mind so you as a player don't know what you as DM knows, avoid all forms of favouritism, resist the urge to push the other players where you want or expect them to go, and so on, you will still be running a worse game then if you concentrated on being a great DM only instead of both.

As a DM you control the game world, its history, the gods, all kings, nobles, merchants and peasants, all the evil plots, all the heroic organisations that fight them, every monster, every NPC. The only thing you don't control is the party. The one thing, the one point of control the others have in the game is the party itself. I'm very dubious about intruding into it.
NPCs are NON-Player Characters. They are "Dungeon Master Controlled Characters". "DMPC" parses as "Dungeon Master's Non-NPC" or "Dungeon Master's Non Dungeon Master Controlled Character".


Now, others claim "DMPC" stands for something competely different, like "Dungeon Master controlled long term nPC with a developed personality and history that accompanies the Party on their adventures" , or not even standing for anything at all. If you just use "DMPC" as a shorthand for NPC that's a regular memebr fo the party, then there's very little problem. It's just another NPC. Maybe you give it to one of the other players to run in combat (keeping a veto on its actions). You might not bother counting XP for it, just level it up occasionally to keep it in an appropriate level range compared to the rest of the party and have done. This NPC can be fully played with personality and depth - but it's just, mentally an NPC, one of many.

There are two other types of DMPC, both of which cause sever problems. One is the DMPC bad guy, the antagonist to the party the DM is regarding as his own avatar, setting up a situation of "DM vs. Players". The DM will likely cheat or overpower "his" Pc just so it doesn't lose to the other PCs. The other bad situation is the "Look at my mighty l33t PC! You are permitted to follow him around and worship him while he slays dragons and gods! He's my character from another campaign, honest! A 7685th level Wizard/Paladin/Assassin! With Armour of Total Invulnerability, a Ring of Protection from, Frankly, Anything, and the Sword of Slaying Anything in One Blow. +50. Worship him! More importantly, worship me, for I am so wonderful! Stop! Don't go! Play in my game, I am great!

A few groups do make DMPCs work. Many make long-term NPCs work. I'm not a big fan of the first, myself.

Ravyn
2007-08-21, 11:13 PM
"more often than not" is not the same as "always". You're right that kidnapping a party member is something the DM should be careful with, and usually not do. But you're wrong to assume I'm advocating railroading because I suggested that as one among many possibilities for a DMPC. I'd prefer if you would ASK rather than ASSUME.

And then every now and then you get situations where a PC or an NPC gets kidnapped by accident. I've had that happen twice. The first time--well, the BBEG really was trying to kidnap the NPC in question, but he wasn't supposed to have that much luck. I just underestimated the combination of the effect he was using and his target's Virtues, and it just seemed so much more dramatically appropriate. (The target in question had originally been planned as one of two game-shepherds, since the players didn't know the setting--then again, this is the group that katamaris up NPCs. At one point, there were more NPCs than PCs on the boat they were riding.)

The second.... well, I'd been running a month-long break, and asking the players what they were doing in the interim, and during one of the individual adventures the group's crafter tripped over one of my upcoming BBEGs, and because of their personalities, it made more sense for her to capture him than to kill him. Spent the next month rewriting my plot to accomodate it--fortunately, we were off for the summer anyway. Still looking forward to seeing how that turns out.

LotharBot
2007-08-22, 12:14 AM
I wanted to add a couple more comments:

1) Some people have expressed concern about a DMPC cutting into the party's treasure and experience. But, of course, the DM can always boost the amount of treasure and XP being handed out so that the players don't lose out. (If you run a DMPC, keep this in mind.)

2) Others expressed concern about a DMPC cutting into "face time" for the players. The DM normally will be running various NPC's, encounters, etc. A well-run DMPC is no different... with "well-run" being the key. As with any DM-run anything, make sure it's making things more fun for the players. If your guy occasionally spouts something witty, that's probably a good thing. If he goes into long monologues about his background even though it's not remotely interesting or relevant, that's a bad thing.


Every hour spent trawling books looking for a really cool feat for next level is an hour not spent preparing the game for next session.... simultaneously taking into account monster desires, abilities and tactics, NPC reactions, the reactions to noise etc of nearby NPCs/monsters....

I spend a lot of time trawling books and the internet looking for stuff of general use in my games. I usually had a fairly long list of possible future feats for my DMPC, as well as suggestions for several of my players. I also had plenty of feats I was using in monster and enemy NPC builds.

But your point is a good one, and it's why I advocate simple builds and simple or pre-planned DMPC tactics (along with simple or pre-planned monster tactics, etc.)


If you just use "DMPC" as a shorthand for NPC that's a regular memebr fo the party, then there's very little problem.

I think when an NPC spends that much time in the party, they're bound to be a little bit more than just another NPC. But they shouldn't be a lot more. There are a lot of things you expect of your PC's that you shouldn't do with a DMPC.

Orzel
2007-08-22, 12:39 AM
Huh? Every member of the party was a male elf? :smallconfused:

The king wanted a very good archer to go on the mission and was sexist. Instead of making a roll to convince him, he claimed we knew a male elf archer then silenced us.

AKA_Bait
2007-08-22, 12:26 PM
My two coppers:

DMPC's (as distinct from NPC's) are frequently a bad idea. Sometimes there is a need for an additional party member, not enough players and a key role unfulfilled. However, this problem seems better solved by including a NPC, whose interests are diffrent from the party but convergent for the moment, until an additional player can be found. This soloution also works for wanting to introduce new styles and combat ideas to the party. It doesn't need to be a party memeber who suggests these things, any old NPC will do.

DMPC means to me that this a character planned to be around as long as the PC's. That being the case, it seems close to impossible to avoid the character taking the spotlight from time to time, no matter how careful the DM is about it. I think that is never a good thing.

Regarding DMPC's being useful for 'railroading' or leading the PC's into adventures one way or another. NPC's serve this role just fine already. A few well established NPC's that the party likes and get's along with can provide a plot hook just as easily without making the DM's character a decision maker. It's a large diffrence in choice bettween one of the members of the party deciding that they 'need to go do x' and an NPC the party likes asking that they do something to help them. Also, making the DMPC part of a plot hook tends to shift that spotlight toward the DMPC again. If it's the DMPC's quest it is much much more difficult for them not to seem like the main character which the players always ought to be.

I prefer to stay out of the players hair as decision makers as much as possible. I hardly ever even send an NPC with them, even if the issue directly concerns the NPC's welfare. The only times I do so is if the party specifically asks them to come or looks to recruit them (which they have on occasion, but the NPC never sticks around thereafter).

Of course, like anything else, if your group likes having a DMPC around, go for it. It has just been my experience as a DM and a player that they are far more trouble than they are worth.

Raum
2007-08-22, 05:55 PM
"more often than not" is not the same as "always". You're right that kidnapping a party member is something the DM should be careful with, and usually not do. But you're wrong to assume I'm advocating railroading because I suggested that as one among many possibilities for a DMPC. I'd prefer if you would ASK rather than ASSUME. Sigh, ok. How were you planning on kidnapping your DMPC while avoiding a perception of railroading?


The term "DMPC" is not officially defined anywhere. PC is. DM is. NPC is. DMPC often means different things to different people, unfortunately. There is an argument which re-occurs on the WoTC boards regularly for just this reason.I agree. There's also a big difference in groups making what may be anathema in one just a fun interlude in another. The group's "social contract" makes a big difference. I also agree with most of your other comments, just snipped 'em to save space. This one is worth repeating though:
As a DM you control the game world, its history, the gods, all kings, nobles, merchants and peasants, all the evil plots, all the heroic organisations that fight them, every monster, every NPC. The only thing you don't control is the party. The one thing, the one point of control the others have in the game is the party itself. I'm very dubious about intruding into it. If control of the party is your goal, DMPCs are a very risky method of accomplishing it. For control in RPGs, the carrot is almost always better than the stick. In other words, rumors of something they want being located at point X is better than orders to go to point X. The exception of course is a military or other campaign where mission orders are the expectation.

Citizen Joe
2007-08-22, 06:13 PM
NPC's- Non-player characters are sort of the back drop of people
DMPC- Dungeon Master's Player character. Sometimes people rotate DM's and allow the current DM"s character stay in the party and participate. This can become a problem if the DM plays favorites with his own character.

Ssiauhll
2007-08-23, 11:36 AM
I have had a few NPCs which might be considered DMPCs but I would say that DMPCs are a dangerous thing as stated before. The problem lies in thinking of them as a PC that you control as a DM which is bad. You simply can't get attached, and you have to be willing to let them go, to have them die, etc.

I can think of two situations where I did recycle my old PCs. Once when I was young and I made many the common mistakes in on encounter. Fortunately I immediately realized my mistake and found a way to banish that character for good. The whole thing was one of those embarrassing games that you look back at an wonder 'what was I thinking'.

The other time I used existing PCs was a different matter entirely. They role that they appear was as important NPCs that were mostly off camera for most of the story. In fact it took the other players hours to recognize one of them from a game we had played before. The reason that I think they worked was the characters were treated as story elements, as an NPC, not as a chance for me to show off an old PC. Had the situation come up I would have been more than willing to kill off the old character, or have some other miss fortune happen.


I also think trying to fill in a party role is a mistake, and a big one. If the PC manage to recruit NPC allies that one thing, but trying to fill in a niche mutes all the difficulties that they might face. By having areas in which the party lacks expertise you can make challenges out of things that would normally be easy. For instance the I ran a game where no one in the party was a warrior of any sort (an old no ancient mystic theuge, an old inquisitor, and a young girl (soccer thief)). While they all had spell casting none of them would be able to do much of anything in a fight. Despite that seeming imbalance things worked out well.

DeathQuaker
2007-08-23, 11:46 AM
I once lost a player towards the end of a story arc (plus another player a little while before that), and introduced a couple DMPCs to fill in lost party roles. But I did this because

1. The two remaining players wanted to finish the arc, and knew they couldn't finish it on their own.

2. The players don't mind DMPCs/active NPCs. One of the players actually has a habit of "adopting" NPCs, wanting to take them along with the party even when I or the DM at the time doesn't want to play them! (In a different campaign, I actually had to kill off the NPC these same two players "adopted" because it was a 6 PC party and I couldn't run the adoptee AND the encounter monsters AND keep track of what the PCs were doing at the same time)

3. The game wasn't going to go on for much longer.

I'd probably not bring in a GMPC unless similar conditions were in effect.

I'll admit, I'm a player first before a GM, and for a long time, it was very tempting to want to bring in my own PCs and play them but I learned how easy it was to steal the party's thunder. These days I have a few favorite NPCs that recur -- because it's nice to have a person the party can recognize and know they can go to -- but always make sure they're "kept busy" so that they are not constantly in the PCs' faces. I like to do elderly advisors and officials/bookkeeper types -- people who are either too infirm to adventure or have too many responsibilities to spend excess time with the party, but who will be helpful and provide information if the party asks for it.

LotharBot
2007-08-24, 05:52 PM
Sigh, ok. How were you planning on kidnapping your DMPC while avoiding a perception of railroading?

I personally was not planning on kidnapping my DMPC. I listed it as a possibility, not as something I was actively considering within my game. As Ravyn mentioned, it's the sort of thing that can come up... but I haven't actively considered it.

You took my suggestion to "ask" far too specifically. My point is not that you didn't ask about kidnapping specifically, but that you've made a whole host of unwarranted assumptions and have therefore been very aggressive and insulting in your responses to me, when a simple question like "are you suggesting you should use a DMPC to railroad?" would've sufficed.

Raum
2007-08-24, 07:10 PM
If you took the comment regarding Hanlon's Razor as an insult, I apologize. It was not meant as one. I was attempting to debunk the idea that everyone arguing against the idea of DMPCs thinks "the only reason to run a DMPC is if you're a horrible selfish jerk of a DM." You'll note the same post admits the possibility of avoiding the pitfalls of using a DMPC. If I've said anything else you construed as insulting, please let me know.

Please remember, emoticons are inadequate, at best, in conveying tone. I have yet to find one which successfully conveys amused irony.

Vaynor
2007-08-24, 07:13 PM
No they don't. Players don't enjoy sharing loot or XP, and it can take away the players' glory a lot of the time. In my experience at least.

Buff the players, not the party.

I.E., give them a magic item rather than a ranger friend.

LotharBot
2007-08-25, 01:42 AM
If I've said anything else you construed as insulting, please let me know.

Eh... mostly I'm just annoyed at your taking a small part of my "list of possible reasons to play a DMPC" and construing it as DMPC abuse (via railroading) when that wasn't the intent. I'd hope by this point in the thread it'd be clear that I don't advocate DMPC abuse in any way, shape, or form...


Players don't enjoy sharing loot or XP

The DM can always boost loot and XP accordingly. It's one of the perks of being the guy who designs the world and encounters...

Of course, if your players don't see it that way, don't play a DMPC.

Matthew
2007-08-26, 11:51 AM
My Players don't mind sharing loot and experience, so long as they agreed to the terms in the first place. I can't really understand why they wouldn't.