I was wondering how many DM's use an NPC as a party member when they run games. I often will do it to fill out an empty spot, like if nobody plays a cleric and I know one will be needed. I also find it handy to dispense information that the players need but can't seem to figure out.
But I have also played in games where the DM's NPC was the main character in the party and stole the limelight all the time.
And for those DM's who use an NPC does your NPC get an equal share of the XP and loot or do you run them similar to hirelings or cohorts?
I run two NPCs in my current campaign. One is a Mage, because the party didn't have a mage from the start. The other is an elf fighter. I use both characters pretty effectively, but I'm careful not to let them outshine the PCs. They occasionally might tip the PCs off to something, but only if they make the right knowledge roles or it's something they've learned through the campaign.
"What's the name of that Wizard encountered in White Plume Mountain?"
Mage scratches her head and looks in her notebook "Keraptis wasn't it?" (She was with the party for that adventure)
"Oh yeah, that's right!"
I DM. And sometimes I use NPCs. Sometimes it's an adventurer that the players hired for extra muscle, or just to carry around torches and backpacks. Sometimes it's an NPC that's part of the story, like the time my group escorted a dignitary and his bodyguard. And sometimes it's just to fill a void (as you mentioned).
And yes, the NPCs get their share of Xp and treasure just like a PC if they participated in the fight.
But never, and I mean NEVER, has an NPC robbed the players of their spotlight. Not in my game. And I wouldn't tolerate it if I played in someone elses either. I'd tell the DM to just write a book if he wants to play by himself.
Ultradan
My bi-weekly Saturday game features a dwarf NPC cleric who swore and oath to help the party for one calendar year after the party freed his clan from slavery. The way I handle him illustrates how I handle party NPCs.
He casts healing and restoration spells as necessary. If I know that he has an appropriate combat spell that might help the party during a combat, he will cast it only when:
1--The party remembers to ask for it
2--He makes a DC15 INT check (he has an INT of 10)
Otherwise he just shoots his crossbow at the bad guys and hangs out in the rear. He will try to extract downed party members from combat to heal them.
He doesn't talk to NPC's and pretty much just talks when spoken to. I keep him one level below the PC's average level and I don't keep track of his XP. He's not a cohort or henchman, as he serves willingly. The party has been very generous to him and they give him full shares of treasure found and magic items and have even spent their own cash to have him raised from the dead.
Needless to say, once his year of obligation is fulfilled, the party will have a life-long ally.
I sometimes have NPC's in the party (like now in the AoW AP), but for the most part I let the players run them. I'll throw in things once in a while when I think the players have forgotten something the NPC would know, but overall they run them. This is for semi-permanent party NPCs. I found that they get more out of the NPC when they run them, because I will often forget to have the NPC do something during hectic times like fights (I got enought monsters/NPCs to deal with). I think I paint a pretty clear picture of the NPC's personality when they are introduced so that the players don't have it do anything that is too out of character and if they do try something way out of character I then gentlly step in.
Full shares of XP and treasure. No time in the limelight except for providing information the NPC might actually know.
If the NPC has joined the party because it needs to fill a niche, I usually water the NPC down by multi-classing him/her so as not to be too strong in any one area. This is kind of a built in safety mechanism to keep him from outshining the player characters, so I don't have to actually make a conscious effort to keep him from being better than the PCs. It also makes the NPC just a little bit more useful since it gives it a broader range of abilities and skills and thus more welcome in the party.
Emphatic "Nay."
I have three huge reasons against an NPC being a member of the party.
1. Competition. In most groups there is not enough time to give everyone a full share as it is of RP time, or to make sure they are all addressed. Why add someone else to take that time?
2. Makes it too easy for PCs. Most of the time DMs end up using their NPC as a method by which they lead their PCs around. The PCs should not be lead, they should play and do what they will. I should not provide a safety mechanism for PCs who will not or cannto keep track of what's going on.
3. NPCs are frequently either overplayed or ignored. The NPC the DM brings along is either the center of attention because the DM wants him to be kewl, or he is totally forgotten until combat, or when needed. Neither helps the game.
I can understand an NPC accompanying a group for a short period for story reasons, or a non-combat NPC, like a sage or a noble, being escorted by the group. Most of the time it is not feasible to include the NPC beyond that.
In my experience, DM NPCs who are part of the party are usually there because either a) the DM wasts to play, but never gets a chance, or b) the DM is a munchkin who wants to show off his uber character. It is not acceptable in either situation.
If I, as a DM, really want to play, then I need to find a game to play in or take a break, not shoehorn in a guy I like to tan existing game. Personally, as a DM, I have too much work to do making a challenging, well-plotted adventure, to figure out what to do with another character.
I am a little troubled that everyone said that "I try not ot outshine the characters." Wouldn't it be simpler to just nto include someone who could potentially do so? I'd rather not take the chance, in case my PCs didnt want to tell me I was outshining them.
A cohort or hireling is a different story, but I try not to allow that too often. I can't conceive of some peasant torch-bearer or mule-leader following a group into tombs and dungeons. Most people brave enough to adventure are adventurers.
Also an emphatic nay. For all the reasons listed above. Plus, I like making up cool characters and making them ENEMIES of the players, not allies.
Nay is easy to say, but I try not to make that an absolute. The abovementioned dwarf cleric joined the party only because the party had rendered great service to his clan, the clan did not have sufficient funds to reward the party to satisfy their dwarven honor and they asked the party if they needed something. The party replied that they didn't have a cleric in their group and could use a few healing potions. Their modesty and courage inspired the dwarves to give up one of their own for a year.
So, even though it's better not to have NPC's in the party, if there is a good role-playing reason...why not--as long as you're careful to keep the NPC in the background.
A really well conceived and well run NPC is going to have moments he/she shines and moments of being in the background. Just like any other member of the party. Most of my NPCs have been well-liked by my players because they were fun to role play with, were interesting, had great things to contribute, but never upstaged the players. In fact, every long running NPC in my games that bit it, were genuinely missed by the players. Not all of them were your favorite uncle types, but they were cool characters that the players liked. Maybe they had odd quirks that made the players laugh. Maybe they were like mentors. Perhaps they were just there to back the players up and could always be depended on.
Point to this is, why would you not provide that type of thing for your players when they enjoy it so much? Granted, not all DMs can pull it off. And by the same token, not all players feel that way. But to just say Nope, no NPCs in the party EVER, EVER, EVER is pretty closed minded for this type of game.
I guess it all comes down to your experiences in the game. If you've had bad ones with running NPCs in the party I guess you're going to respond that way.
'Yes!'
To go against what some have said - I don't put in NPC's for competition. I only use NPC's if the party needs one or if there is a gap in the group where skills may be needed (not everyone has a 'full' table of players). As for stealing RP time, I dont see it that way. My player's like the interaction!
As for making it easier for the PCs - not in my campaign! In fact, I usually make it harder - and I never (to the best of my ability) lead them with an NPC. Where they go is up to them!
As for NPC's being a DM's chance to play - that is just silly. I play by just being the DM! I only put in NPC's with the party when/if needed, period! And I never put in so-called 'power' NPC's. I role up NPC's just like I would a PC - will good and bad points.
As for cohorts and hirelings being different - how so. They are NPC's aren't they. So NPC's are bad but a cohort isn't. They are the same to me!!!
|
A definite yes:
1) It gives a player who's just lost a character someone to
play that he is already familiar with. Several times in our
campaign the DM-NPCs have gone on to become cherished PCs.
2) They can be a big help in advancing the plot line; generaly
I use clerics
with obtuse motives whose home temples are far away to keep
them from becoming crutches.
A really well conceived and well run NPC is going to have moments he/she shines and moments of being in the background. Just like any other member of the party. Most of my NPCs have been well-liked by my players because they were fun to role play with, were interesting, had great things to contribute, but never upstaged the players. In fact, every long running NPC in my games that bit it, were genuinely missed by the players. Not all of them were your favorite uncle types, but they were cool characters that the players liked. Maybe they had odd quirks that made the players laugh. Maybe they were like mentors. Perhaps they were just there to back the players up and could always be depended on.
Point to this is, why would you not provide that type of thing for your players when they enjoy it so much? Granted, not all DMs can pull it off. And by the same token, not all players feel that way. But to just say Nope, no NPCs in the party EVER, EVER, EVER is pretty closed minded for this type of game.
I guess it all comes down to your experiences in the game. If you've had bad ones with running NPCs in the party I guess you're going to respond that way.
Ditto. I find NPCs very useful to help facilitate role-play in very small groups (2-3 players). This is particularly true for new players or those who enjoy role-playing, but are not themselves particulary good at coming up with in-character things to say or do around the campfire. Role-playing like any skill takes some practice and DMs are usually the most practiced. I also find them useful as back up player characters should something unfortunate happen to a PC five minutes into the game. In fact some of the NPCs I've created went on to become someone else's full-time character, which is perfect for story continuity.
GGG
Hail! NPCs are a MAJOR factor in my campaign, but to each his/her own...
NPCs are what make-up my ArchVillians, my lesser Villians, my Kings, Queens, and Princes and Princesses. They are the people that make the party's weapons, armors, tools and food. They're everywhere, and they each have a story.
I have a seperate binder; one for the Players, and one for my NPCs. (So far, the players are still outnumbered. lol) You see, I always saw the world (As Drake, Elven Ranger of Luna) as a world of history (though I hated the idea of becoming a Wizard. that's what Magus was for...^.^). I feel that some of my players are always curious, and will eventually ask questions. Where do yuo think they go when asking for directions? or what the latest news is? They ask NPCs all the time!
What I think you're asking about, is having an NPC as a fellow character, am I right? This is fine, but so long as you play your character as they should be played.
*(Ex. Magus was always a strong Wizard. In fact, he was the top of his class! Unfortunately, he was cursed to have bad-luck.)
Magus would always be in back, because he is physically weak, but an able spellcaster! (No worries on taking the spotlight here...)
**(Ex. Drake excelled in many arts, especially at wielding two weapons. His ability to find tracks and other clues aided his friends very well, though some believed too well...)
Drake (my main NPC helper) was always the center of attention, but with good reason! He owns a tavern (Dark Drake Inn), is in good terms with the local High Priestess, the King, and his wife, the Queen, and always was ready for anything. ("Chalk? Who needs chalk?!?" Magus stared down at his half-brother, drawing on the floor like a human child. "Can you honestly tell me that you know this labyrinth by heart?")
Though Drake excelled in many things, he still gave much credit to the rest of his party, never showing a sliver of ego. {Perhaps why the party is so jelous of him...hm....}
You see, it's all on how you present your NPCs. Give credit where you think credit is due, and try to give sound reasons for their actions.
"Why does Drake seem to know what's going to happen?!?"
"Because he's a Ranger, and he knows these lands better than you own car!"
I use a NPC Cleric in my campaign. He was the one that started off the story line: The old slavers campaign, the PCs were caught at the start and clerics of Trithereon freed them. The older priest died, and the younger one pushed the characters into avenging his superior and putting an end to the slavers activities. So this NPC is an integral part of the story, but he does not get much spotlight. I put him into the story because the PCs didn´t include a cleric (I´ve got a druid, a monk, a half-elven sorcerer and a half-orc barbarian/bard (orcish wardrummer :-))), but made sure he was not just an addition purely for game balance reasons. He has the same level as the party and gets normal xp.
Looking forward to start (modified) A3 next monday...
Stefan
Again, I must reiterate something: everyone thinks that some of us are saying no to any NPCs, or to cohorts, or to occasional NPCs.
I was speaking to the NPC as a member of the party phenomenon. I know how to run a game, and how to run NPCs. It seems some people think I was implying that you should never use an NPC. Not so! I was specifically talking about NPC as permanent, ongoing, party member ran by the DM.
Again, I'll say: why take a chance to overshadow your PCs, or limit what they can do. Some people are saying that their NPC party members NEVER overshadow the players and that they are ALWAYS careful to not. Alot of people are also saying that they always have a rationale for why their NPCs do something.
Super. But why not let the PCs do it themselves? Why introduce some way for them to always have a hint machine? If you need a guide through a forest, use an NPC ranger for a few games, by all means. However, why have a Ranger with them all the time to bail them out?
While I will agree you can make memorable NPCs the group will never forget, you can do that without them being permanent party members. I know in my experience, there have been some DMs who could run an NPC as a party member. However, it was incredibly rare that they never stepped on anyone's toes.
Several folks on here are saying, "It can be dangerous, but I always pull it off perfectly," Again, to that, I'll say that there is a chance your PCs won't say anything to you if they feel overshadowed, or maybe they have but you ignore it so you can run your kewl character. It is a stubborn sort of pride that would make a person say they never make a mistake in the presentation of these characters. DMs always make mistakes, at some point, and again, in my experience, this area is where they happen very often.
I do believe some people have also advocated not only including the NPC, but not counting him for XP. That's ridiculous! You're adding a whole new party member to help, and that should be reflected in the XP. You are effectively reducing the challenge of an encounter and awarding the same xp. That is mechanically not sound. Would you allow another PC to come in, assist, and still give everyone else the same xp? Probably not. Then why do it for your guy?
Finally, I have to say again, and agree with an earlier poster, that it is better to use your cool NPCs against the group. Why plan and execture advnetures that must include your NPC, when you can use him as the antagonist? Or as a sponsor? Or a mysterious force?
I guess most of my resistance is because it is mostly unnnecessary, often poorly done, and not often a logical thing to do for a group. I personally have seen that many people have a cool character, who they want to play, to exhibit his coolness to others, and they use their authority and power as a DM to put him into the party, and prove that coolness through actions. I'd rather not take the chance, or just wait until I can run him as PC in someone esles game.
...why take a chance to overshadow your PCs, or limit what they can do... Alot of people are also saying that they always have a rationale for why their NPCs do something... But why not let the PCs do it themselves? ...
Because sometimes the PCs can't do it by themselves. In my case, we have a small group of players that isn't motivated to look for new additions. You can't have a well-rounded group with three players.
It's an imperfect solution, but it is a solution.
Jack
Fair enough.
How about an intelligent sword, or item, though? The intelligence and personality of an extra guy, but limited to being used by the PCs.
Edit: I'm sure someone will say that that does not deal with the lack of certain classes. I think that sometimes we assume a party is not a party without certain classes, or that you HAVE to have a cleric or a rogue. Not so. Sometimes you can use non-member NPCs, like alchemists or artificers, to help the PCs fill thsoe gaps, if neccessary, with items or advice.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
My group is 3-4 players plus DM and I've run several games with just 2 players. I don't have a lot of time to change adventures before play and I'm a by-the-book DM who doesn't like to make changes on the fly. After destroying 3-4 parties before they reached 3rd level, I became a believer in NPC canon fodder.
I run my NPC's bascially the same way I run animal companions, summoned creatures, and co-horts. The party members control the crunchy combat/skill pieces and I control the fluffy motive/roleplaying pieces. The NPC receives a share of xp and treasure. I've been playing around with breaking up NPC duties lately, with one party member controlling the character in combat and another controlling him out of combat. That way no one gets stuck with running the NPC (or runs away with having two characters).
Things can get interesting. In our Age of Worms campaign, a player dropped out of our group and his paladin became an NPC. The last adventure involved a number of discussions between the paladin (controlled by me) and the party over the tactics they chose. It was a tough situation because I don't want to crimp the party's style, but at the same time, a paladin does have a code to uphold. They resolved the issue for now, but there's a good chance the paladin will leave the group if something like this happens again.
Sebastian
Fair enough.
How about an intelligent sword, or item, though? The intelligence and personality of an extra guy, but limited to being used by the PCs.
Edit: I'm sure someone will say that that does not deal with the lack of certain classes. I think that sometimes we assume a party is not a party without certain classes, or that you HAVE to have a cleric or a rogue. Not so. Sometimes you can use non-member NPCs, like alchemists or artificers, to help the PCs fill thsoe gaps, if neccessary, with items or advice.
To back you up from your earlier post, this is not about having NPCs in your game, it's about NPCs as party members. How could you possibly play D&D without NPCs?! Not the issue here. We all agree that NPCs are an important part of the game.
Now... about intelligent items as NPCs. Very fun! We happen to have an intelligent longsword IMC that relishes combat, but it can only communicate through empathy. It's catchall phrase is Mmpph! As in the goofy game a la SNL from years ago. Every time the party gets into combat I have to turn to the player with sword and go Mmphh! Somehow he understands that means Let's go get some!!! or Charge!!! If I happen to overlook the sword there's always a player going Mmphh! to me across the table.
Thrall looked to the skies as he knelt to the ground.
"Oh Toner-Lord, what should we do?"
Cain leaned against a tree, and watched the purplexed faces of their new companions, Derian and Seifert.
A cool breeze blew, as everyone awaited an answer from his "god". Just then, a paper smacked Thrall in the face. It read:
Tamblin's Gamblin' Mansion! Established in 2009CY.
"Praise to the Toner-Lord!!!"
This is usually how my games run, when I have no NPCs nearby to help. It's a bit comical, and usually the Toner-Lord drops 3x5 cards with beautiful writing on it with corney phrases (ie "Home is where the Heart is" Meaning, something is going to happen at someone's home.).
NPCs are good as permanent players when the group is small, but not when there's +6 players (Due to monsters and other baddies).
...NPCs are good as permanent players when the group is small, but not when there's +6 players (Due to monsters and other baddies).
I agree 100%. I use party NPCs if there's no other reasonable choice. I have enough to do without roleplaying them too.
DMs should have better things to do.
Jack
Hey guys,
Great thread and some interesting points all around. I'm not going to rehash what's been said but i just have to say i'm with LUKE on this one. I have been guilty of using party NPCS (for a very short amount of time) when i absolutely had to, but i don't like it.
Having said that I am about to start a very small group of players in the Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil module. There are only 3 players (but they begged for THAT module), and i'm a worried that that's not enough (without giving any spoilers away...anyone who's played it will know what i'm talking about). I have already upped their starting level and given them better gear, but i was wondering what else anyone would advise (without making 3 more NPC characters in the party)!
Hey guys,
Great thread and some interesting points all around. I'm not going to rehash what's been said but i just have to say i'm with LUKE on this one. I have been guilty of using party NPCS (for a very short amount of time) when i absolutely had to, but i don't like it.
Having said that I am about to start a very small group of players in the Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil module. There are only 3 players (but they begged for THAT module), and i'm a worried that that's not enough (without giving any spoilers away...anyone who's played it will know what i'm talking about). I have already upped their starting level and given them better gear, but i was wondering what else anyone would advise (without making 3 more NPC characters in the party)!
Ack sorry i just realized what i did:
No one reply to this please..i just hijacked the thread...sorry all!starting a new thread for this...sorry again!
I was wondering how many DM's use an NPC as a party member when they run games. I often will do it to fill out an empty spot, like if nobody plays a cleric and I know one will be needed. I also find it handy to dispense information that the players need but can't seem to figure out.
But I have also played in games where the DM's NPC was the main character in the party and stole the limelight all the time.
And for those DM's who use an NPC does your NPC get an equal share of the XP and loot or do you run them similar to hirelings or cohorts?
Matt_the_DM from underdark Advanture II ? or Dungeon Adventures ? Hello then if it's you. (Playing Nerdulla Serthalyss) ^^
To your question :
Yes when I DM I will often add an NOC where the party is lacking. A ranger for a pursuit into the mountains, a Mage or a Strong Fighter are the usual for my campaign as no one amonst my players like playing fighters.
I consider the extra NPC as a full pledged member of the team, as a player would, and Roleplay it accordingly... S/he will want loot, get jealous if we hog his/her glory, will defenately take his/her part of the XP... ect.
Cohorts are for players with leadership feat or that earned them thru some other means. When I add an "NPC" it's the reall thing. ^^
See you around.
My son can't seem to decide what character he wants to play, he has a new idea every month! He likes to use NPCs in the party when he DMs because it gives him a variety of characters to play. He usually finds a reason after a few gaminig sessions for the character to depart the party so there is no long term commitment to the party. When we start an evening we never know which NPC might tag along with the party. (We also never know if the NPC is on our side or against us!) He sometimes longs to play that uber character that outshines the rest but usually the NPC he creates is so specialized that he could never be able to consistently over-shadow the party even if his conscience would allow him to do so. So, you have at least 1 DM that uses NPCs as a party member.
As for your question regarding XP, the NPC should not recieve as much XP as the rest of the party. There is the great amount player knowledge that over-shadows the game in this situation and it would be impossible to make every player believe that the DM could perfectly seperate player knowledge from character knowledge. So, it would be socially polite for the DM to restrict the XP if only for this reason.
Have to agree with most of what has been said. I generally leave which NPCs wind up traveling with the characters in the hands of the PCs. I try my best to present my NPCs as fully and richly as possible and then let the PCs choose how and who they will associate with. If they want to haul a NPC along with them, fine. If they want to turn my NPC into their nemissis, so be it. If they want to ignore the NPC, thats OK to. I guess the point is, in my games I try to let the players choose who they will associate with and to what degree that association will go.
|
When we decided to play with a bunch of frirends who had not played in years, there were only 3 PCs at first.
One player took a wizard (1/2 drow), and the two others took a rogue (1 human & 1 halfling).
There was a crucial lack of muscle and healing.
I created a 1st level fighter and gave it to one of my players (his PC and the NPC were friends during their teenage years), and I created an easy-to-play healer : a favored soul.
I still play my favored soul, and I outshined my players only once, but it was coherent with the character (as a LG PC, she didn't want that someone who had tried to kill them was killed in cold blood : she argued 'til everybody agreed to deliver that NPC to justice, but then, tried to act as a kind of prosecutor with charges and evidences for a long-term detention).
Also, I was so eager to play, and I've only been able to DM (or almost) the past 12 years..., I was beginning to feel frustrated not been able to play.
I sometimes have NPC's in the party (like now in the AoW AP), but for the most part I let the players run them. I'll throw in things once in a while when I think the players have forgotten something the NPC would know, but overall they run them. This is for semi-permanent party NPCs. I found that they get more out of the NPC when they run them, because I will often forget to have the NPC do something during hectic times like fights (I got enought monsters/NPCs to deal with). I think I paint a pretty clear picture of the NPC's personality when they are introduced so that the players don't have it do anything that is too out of character and if they do try something way out of character I then gentlly step in.
Bang on how I handle them as well.
I usually have to play an NPC or two because our group is kinda small, never more than three other players. But they are never the focal point and usually not involoved in much of the puzzle solving and what not(unless my players are stumped).
Nay.
I'm still shamed by my very first attempt to DM, many years ago (okay so about 4 years ago). We had just played through The Forge of Fury, and the DM wanted a break so I carried on for him, running The Speaker In Dreams, but made the cardinal error of bringing in and playing my PC from the previous game. All in all it was a big mistake, and one that I have definately learnt from.
Saying that, if the PCs rescue an NPC (and the NPC doesn't die within ten minutes), I will run the NPC for a little while so the players know what they can/cannot do, and their angle on things and then will hand over the NPC to the players (usually those with spell-less PCs), until they get to the first civilised place, wherein the NPC gets dropped off with some gold and a weapon.