When if ever is it ok to have a npc party member?
Sometimes you dont have enough players, or the story would benefit from a npc party member, but in my experience there are a host of problems that go along with including one. From the players perspective it is easy to see a these npcs in several ways.
1. The party police who's job it is to control what th pcs can do.
2. The baby-sitter who's job it is to point where the party needs to go and save their bums.
3. The marysue, because the DM ( am I allowed to say that?) wants to run and play at the same time.
As for the gm it is too easy to use npcs as a goto crutch for gming. And making marysue is easy to do without noticing . I think it's never ok to make a npc that is more awesome than the pcs. An advanced and self aware gm would be able to avoid these, and there are instances where an npc party member would be apropriate.
Do you have any advice or stories about successful, or unsuccessful npc party members?
In general I would prefer to have an experienced player play two characters before putting a GM controlled NPC into the party. There are several reasons for this, not the least of which is that it's a no-win for the GM. If the NPC excels, then the GM is hogging all the glory. If the NPC is less effective, the GM is bagging the party.
When I have an NPC actually IN the party for any length of time, I try to have them be non-effective PCs who don't participate in combat, who don't solve mysteries and who don't run interference for diplomacy, bluff or other social interactions. Generally it would be a very low level cleric who can use a party purchased CLW wand but that's about it. When they have served their purpose, they are sent on their way. But for the most part, I try to avoid it as much as I can.
I've never viewed having NPCs in the party as a no-win situation. However, I would agree that having them run under a GM that sees them that way is probably asking for problems.
LOL, well, good luck having your players compete with your GM controlled NPC for time and loot.
The best party-member NPC is Gamuch, the Gullible And Mute Cleric of Healing.
This was more necessary in olden days when being a healer came with the "boring" trait.
Two popular NPCs spring to mind, from a campaign I ran a few years back.
Firstly, the party had no dedicated healer. So the local Duke, who was giving them their best jobs, assigned a low-level cleric to them. This cleric was a young guy, kind of innocent, kind of green, with some knowledge of the region. I played him low-key, but likable. On rare occasions, he helped out with a little info, based on his knowledge of the area, but mostly he just healed them. They took to looking out for him, and often saved him from danger. He added just a bit of challenge, but never any real screw-ups, and never anything that put the whole party in danger, except when it was story-related. As we played, he got wiser and more seasoned, and the party developed a really good relationship with him.
The other guy was this same Duke's nephew, and was in line to inherit his uncle's titles and estate. He was a hot-headed, spoiled brat. I brought him in because some of the players were less reliable, and not always capable of coming. So we needed a backup fighter. The character was well-trained, but totally inexperienced in the field. Being pretty full of himself, he sometimes took stupid chances, and the party had to keep a lid on him. However, they had permission from the Duke to spank the kid when necessary. Man, they had a lot of fun with that. They mostly tried to show respect out of their friendship with the Duke, but sometimes they had to knock the kid out, tie him up, etc. Sometimes they had to rescue him. They seemed to enjoy dealing with the little dick, and eventually he began to realize how valuable the PCs were, and to take orders from them. Everybody had a good time roleplaying all of this.
I think the trick to interesting NPCs that they players can like, is to give them a lot of character. They can be good builds, as long as you don't let them outshine the PCs. But if they are memorable, if they are interesting, fleshed-out characters, the players tend to actually like having them along. The trick is to keep the NPC's attention focused on the PCs, whether bumping heads with them, or following along with them. Don't focus the story on the NPC; but do use him as a means to keep the drama and story on the PCs, and they will be more likely to be accepting of him.
To put it in a very simple example: imagine the party's fighter was brought to near-death. The NPC healer brings him back up to strength, then reminds the fighter that he's the only one strong enough to bring the big baddie down and that the village is counting on him and all of his friends, but he knows they can do it. They're going to like having that NPC around.
@Bruunwald, so when it came time to divvy up loot, how much did the Duke's brat receive?
The guide from my example was given a bonus over and above his agreed upon payment. The bodies of the deceased corsairs (well, the two that were recovered) were returned to their ship and their gear was returned with them. Additionally, the captain of their vessel was given a full share of the loot. Not sure why you see this as a problem. My players certainly didn't have a problem with it.I've never viewed having NPCs in the party as a no-win situation. However, I would agree that having them run under a GM that sees them that way is probably asking for problems.LOL, well, good luck having your players compete with your GM controlled NPC for time and loot.
Did you also split the XP among the NPCs so that the players received less XP than otherwise?
There are some groups where this can work out. There are some where it doesn't. In my experience, even in good groups where the players are excellent role players, if this goes on for any significant length of time and the NPCs are getting a "fair share" of the loot, that means the +3 sword of keenness could easily end up in an NPCs hands. It is a rare group where someone doesn't eventually start asking why the NPCs are getting the "good stuff."
Maybe yours is that rare group, if so I applaud you and them. It sounds like you resolved the NPC situation pretty quickly, so perhaps avoided the long-term issue of NPCs.
Even if the party is completely fine with it, a GM can start to feel like things are not working out to the party's favor. The last time I had an NPC in the party, "necessary" because we had only three players, after awhile of "fairly splitting the loot and XP" I, as the GM, started to feel like I was cheating the party by having the NPC getting his "fair share." I wanted the sessions and XP to move faster, and sometimes when the party made a loot distribution decision my NPC ended up with something that really was intended for another party member.
I don't claim to be the best GM in the world, and I admit that I really struggle with metagame issues. When I am playing an NPC in the party, that really starts to wear on me, and I end up constantly asking myself, "wait, how much was I able to truly keep my metagame knowledge out of that party interaction...."
I think it's a difficult burden to add to an already difficult job. Or at least it has been for me.
NPC's if traveling with the party should contribute minimally. Some general guidelines that work well for my group.
-They shouldn't be doing much, but 'nothing' isn't acceptable either, build some support NPC's lower level bards or clerics tend to work well.
-NPC's will generally care less than the PC's unless the PC's are working for the NPC. "I am just along for the ride" or "This looks interesting, I would like to see how it plays out." are good mindsets for an NPC to have.
-Don't bother with exp for them, or treasure unless you want to add some extra for the NPC to take as well.
-I often use an NPC as a referee of sorts, if the party is working for the military, he is their CO. If they are working for the church, he is there to make sure the PC's stay on the right path, etc.
-If the party is traveling and fighting with an NPC, you have to make them care about that character and what happens to them. Give the NPC a unique personality, two or three quirks or one-liners can do wonders for a personality. Just avoid the cliches... well at least avoid the dumb ones.
NPC's if traveling with the party should contribute minimally.I disagree. NPCs should contribute proportionally to their capability. An NPC equivalent in capability to a PC added to a party of 4 PCs should be pulling about 20% of the load. In order to keep things in the target zone for xp and treasire, increase the opposition's numbers by roughly 25% in such a case. Work out the math for other combinations. Giving the illusion that the situation is greater while still keeping the demands on the PCs in the target zone is the key.
It depends on the role the NPC is taking. If the NPC is a fully equivalent party member to the other party members, then yes. But that situation has its own issues that can arise. Many GMs (myself included) prefer to avoid the issues created by treating an NPC as another PC by having NPCs be deliberately non-game impacting party members. In some cases (my own included) that's because of experiences we've had with groups who for whatever reason, tend not to like sharing the glory, loot, XP and spotlight with a GM run player since the GM already has half of the spotlight by design.
YMMV
In the last adventure with 4th level PCs, I had four NPC party members. One was Maphis (Commoner 2/Expert 2) that was hired as a local guide. I also had a trio of corsairs (all Rogue 3 with the swashbuckler archetype) from Andoran that the party had befriended. Maphis survived the adventure, but the three corsairs all met their ends (one to a random encounter with monitor lizards attacking in tall grass, the other two dies at the hands of a very tough advanced large mud elemental). These characters never seemed like a crutch to us.
I'm glad that things worked out for you. I don't think that npcs have to be a crutch, but I've had bad experiences with them in the past.
In my last 3.5 campaign the party traveled with a smarmy elf girl named Elronda. She was aloof, claiming to pal around with the party because it amused her. She was a sorcerer with a ridiculous charisma so that + attitude meant wherever they went in civilizatio she got mobbed by folks.
The first time I did this I sensed the party didn't like it. Then they came to a village to help out and the party's cleric rolled 2 natural 20's in the course of the adventure on Diplomacy, eventually motivating the ENTIRE VILLAGE to take up pitchforks and torches and storm into the haunted woods to cleanse a ruined temple so they could use its powers to cure a disease. It was epic!
After that the cleric got a reputation. He became the diplomacy master and maxed it out every level. From that point forward the NPC softened - she'd been mollified by them referring to them as "her little pups, all grown up and ready to run free". The party also grudgingly accepted Elronda for the very practical reason that they needed magical support.
In upper levels by random rolls she found a lot of stuff that had to do with ice - an Icy Spear, scroll of Ice Storm and a modified Grease spell effect using ice (that one was thrown in on purpose early in the game to add flavor). So I had her take a prestige class to make herself an expert at cold spells and turn herself into an ice elemental. The party really enjoyed the roleplaying of their NPC becoming an "Ice Queen" but she always kept a soft spot for the party.
Overall the party developed a relationship with her and she with them. They liked her for practical reasons but also for comic relief. They enjoyed showing up her snootiness. But all this came AFTER she faded into the background.
As for leveling and rewards and such - she was really a member of the party and I only ever had 3 players, so I just leveled her like a party member. I always threw enough into the hoards to split up pretty well 4 ways, but sometimes she'd take less just based on the fact that "They don't charge me to live at their inn; it's a gift to have me there and they obviously value my patronage" or other such cost savings she received.
I think players enjoy interesting and engaging NPC's. Whether it's short term or long term always pepper in at least one or two to your games. The rules for adding them or keeping them I use are: 1) are they useful to the party, and 2) do the players connect with them in some way.
The current game has a naive kid who was an expert armorer in game 1 that they saved. In game 3 he came along as a guide, knowing something of the area. In game 7 after the party had left town, gotten lost, and spent a week slogging through the swamps and having adventures they returned to find their former patron - a mid level cleric slain by a zombie hoard but the kid having taken a level in cleric in order to carry on (he had previously explained how near and dear the old priest was to him...)
Now in the most recent adventures he's traveled with the party as a helper cleric. Since the party's cleric is evil and slightly jaded this young, driven kid offers a nice foil to her. Of course the evil cleric has private designs to corrupt him but the rest of the party likes caring for and protecting this fledgling adventurer in their midst.
Is he useful? Yes - he is a healbot freeing up the evil party cleric to control monsters and buff the party. As well he has taken ranks in Knowledge skills and has a decent Int so he's a nice walking encyclopedia when the situation presents itself; he never offers the info outright but if anyone thinks to ask the kid he readily spouts off the deets. Is he engaging to the party? Yes - in the evil cleric's mission to corrupt him she's constantly tempting him to torture victims, deal with one evil to play against a greater evil, etc and the rest of the party likes saving him from these situations.
The time's coming though when young Baden of Mistwatch will have to make a choice...
I play a one GM, one PC game. Every adventure has a cast of NPC party members who can be recruited during the adventure ... numbers vary from just a single ally to five in the current adventure. My player has control of the NPCs during combat situations (with occasional DM intervention if he wants them to do something suicidal or out of character). Otherwise they're controlled by the GM, and I try and limit their impact. They're there to provide some extra wrinkles, particularly roleplaying wise. As most are only involved in the campaign for one adventure, they don't usually have time to overshadow the main PC. Thus far it seems to work well, and my player enjoys the added combat dimension they offer.
The answer to the original question is simple -- NPCs who are with the party for a good reason are fine. It is GM controlled PCs that create problems. If you introduce an NPC to the party, you should already have worked out what would motivate them to join the party, what might motivate the party to accept their company, and their ultimate goal that would cause them to leave the party if all goes well. Try to give the NPCs personalities that are distinct from yours, and definitely don't get any more attached to them than you would to the villains that you know the party will eventually slaughter.
Whenever I'm in this position as a DM (and with few players, I usually am), I find it works fine as long as my NPC doesn't outshine the PCs.
A few key points:
If you're using point buy, start the NPC with less points than the PCs. This will help the PCs be superior in play.
Don't "optimize". Make the NPC a viable but imperfect representative of his/her class.
An NPC NEVER finishes off a major opponent.
If possible, have the NPC fill a support role, such as casting buffs for the PCs.
Tailor your encounters for the abilities of your PCs, so they can shine. Try to avoid situations where your NPC would be better than the PCs for extended periods of time, especially in combat.
My current GM often feels the need to include an NPC in the group. I think he does this as an 'insurance policy' to avoid a TPK or to nudge the party in the correct direction.
It's ok, most of the time. But it kinda gets irksome when dividing XP and treasure if the NPC didreally contribute all that much.
The other thing he does is build them wierd. The current 1 is a primary caster 2 levels higher than us. I was afraid it would be 'stealing our thunder' but the AC and HP are so crappy that has to spend most of it's effort staying out of harms way. The previous one was an expert/noble with all gear and feats put toward a high AC (couldn't hit anything). You might think a decent tank, but he was noisy, slow, saves were crappy, and hit points weren't very high. So we could never put him in front anyway. Plus his personality was such that we didn't really trust him.
I guess I'm kinda undecided. The NPC isn't taking over or making us look bad, but I don't see that it is really necessary anyway.
Couple years ago I ran a fantasy highschool of the dead style campaign. 6 players, and 6 npc students survived at the start of the game. The campaign was based around an 8 party group, so the players could rotate in npc's as needed, based on what they thought was going on in the adventure. Also, if a player or two was sick or couldn't make it, they just had more npc's in the group that week.
It's a little suspension of disbelief, because while they all 'explore' together, whenever they got in combat, it was just the players and the chosen npcs while the rest essentially disappear until combat is over, but it worked out surprisingly well.
Also, npcs i build are never as great as a pc. I don't min/max them, i pick things for flavor, i give them odd attribute scores, etc.
But I found it handy for the party to have a npc pool to draw from so the encounters were always balanced the same.
My current GM often feels the need to include an NPC in the group. I think he does this as an 'insurance policy' to avoid a TPK or to nudge the party in the correct direction.
It's ok, most of the time. But it kinda gets irksome when dividing XP and treasure if the NPC didreally contribute all that much.The other thing he does is build them wierd. The current 1 is a primary caster 2 levels higher than us. I was afraid it would be 'stealing our thunder' but the AC and HP are so crappy that has to spend most of it's effort staying out of harms way. The previous one was an expert/noble with all gear and feats put toward a high AC (couldn't hit anything). You might think a decent tank, but he was noisy, slow, saves were crappy, and hit points weren't very high. So we could never put him in front anyway. Plus his personality was such that we didn't really trust him.
I guess I'm kinda undecided. The NPC isn't taking over or making us look bad, but I don't see that it is really necessary anyway.
It sounds like this is the classic case of a GM controlled PC. You would like to "fire" that NPC, but you are not sure how the GM will react -- doing so seems as unthinkable (or perhaps even more so) than ditching a fellow PC. You would not have that problem with a true NPC.
... It sounds like this is the classic case of a GM controlled PC. You would like to "fire" that NPC, but you are not sure how the GM will react -- doing so seems as unthinkable (or perhaps even more so) than ditching a fellow PC. You would not have that problem with a true NPC.
It's not quiet that bad. He doesn't react badly, it's just there is still a storyline tie to the NPC's.
We agreed to help the current one get setup in a new city and haven't had the time to do so yet. We could ditch her with just a little cash, but that doesn't seem very heroic. "Here's some coin, have a nice life."
The previous one was in charge of deciding if we had completed our job well enough to get paid so we couldn't just ditch him. Turns out his attitude was because he was partially possessed. By the time we had that taken care of we didn't like the guy.