I'm trying to decide if I should make a DMPC.
The party is made up of a tengu oracle of the winds, a tiefling ranger/rogue/shadowdancer, and a drow warlock (my own conversion).
The last few fights have lead to at least 2 PCs going down to below zero hit points. They don't have a tank who can just sit there and absorb hits. They have pretty consistent damage, enough healing, a wide variety of skills (face, traps/scout, knowledges), but whenever combat happens, they get whaled on hard. I've tried adjusting the CRs of the opponents down a bit, but I don't want to make them too easy, either.
Should I make a DMPC tank? They're kind of a CN party, so a paladin is out. Maybe a defense focused fighter or barbarian or cavalier? They're kind of an infiltration party, VERY stealthy with plenty of self-invisiblity powers.
Sounds like they need noncombat encounters more than a DMPC. They make characters that are interested in sneaking and intrigue, that should perhaps tell you something? And if you still want to put them through combat encounters, maybe lowering the strength of the opposition is a better idea?
I would scale the CR of the encounters. If they are a level X party then their APL should be treated as X-1 for the purpose of determining CR's. It seems they are playing what they want to play instead of trying to cover any weakness. You may have to build to what they have availible. That warlock would probably have been more useful as a wizard or sorcerer as an example.
What is their AC and what level are they? They might not be optimizing and/or they may be under equipped. It may also be the type of encounters, and not just CR's.
They are 9th level. Their ACs are in the low to mid 20s. The warlock player is a bit low-rules-knowledged, so we made her a warlock because it's easy to play and it has magic tricks.
The androsphinx/manticore hybrid was a pretty diverse opponent. It could tank, shoot artillery with its tail spikes, and had the spellcasting ability of a 6th level oracle. It could also fly, so it was capable of threatening the flying warlock artillery. Also, its frightening 1st roar ability gave it time to buff a little bit while the PCs fled then charged.
I am planning for the rest of the encounters to be more caper-esque and less hack and slash.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Confessions of a repentant DMPC running DM.
Hi, I have been DMing since around 1975 or so. And, like many of you, I used to run DMPCs. Funny, most of the time, when other DM’s did it, I didn’t much care for it, or even actively hated it. But I never said anything about it to my DM. I did complain to my fellow players and once I even stopped showing up for the games.
Then, I got into a conversation with one of my players, and we’d both been playing in another DM’s game, where he ran a DMPC. The other player & I were complaining about this. Then, I thought smugly to myself- “But of course, everyone likes it when *I* run a DMPC…” …then it hit me. No, they didn’t. It was just that I wasn’t obnoxious about it like the guy most of us walked out on.
Then I thought, well, maybe sometimes the party needs another PC (Usually a healer)- then I thought about seeing others introduce a NPC, which was roleplayed by the DM during the introduction, then handed over to the players to run- with the DM stepping in if the players got silly or stupid.
I then thought back about the ONE DM I had where we all loved her DMPCs- then realized her DMPCs never did anything- well maybe healed us after battle or said things like “Hmm, I wonder what the Elvish word for “friend” is?”. Sure, she roleplayed, but the party was always her protector, not the other way around, and during combat or adventuring she did almost nothing. In fact many times we had no idea of what class she was- and of course, it didn’t matter. Her DMPC was just a Macguffin.
I then swore off the bad habit forever. Now, if the party needs another PC, I give them a real NPC- as above, one they run.
I've always been a fan of a good DMPC to join the party if it's needed. The last one I did was basically just a brainless meat-shield who didn't make any decisions for himself other than to run into battle headlong and soak up the hits for the party, he never stole the spotlight. That's the key, don't let the players use the DMPC as a crutch in all situations (i.e. spoon-feeding them information that they should find out themselves). The other thing you might want to do is allow one of the players to run two characters (if they are skilled enough). I ran a solo campaign many years ago for a friend of mine and he ran it with two characters (one was a meat-shield barbarian the other his "main" character and the brains of the operation) or the usage of the leadership feat is always available if you allow it to gain a cohort that is a tank for the party.
DMPCs are usually a bad idea. If there isn't a legitimate conflict of interest, there may be the appearance of one later.
Just a few tips:
1) Good planning and tactics can radically change the tide of the battle. Give players advance notice through perception checks or scouting ahead of an impending encounter. You said that you have stealthy people in your party. They should never need a tank! They should be using ambush, traps, and hit-and-run tactics.
2) There are more ways of defeating enemies than combat. What if they pose as entertainers to sneak into the bad guy's lair? Bluff, Stealth, Disguise, and Diplomacy can bypass many fights. They should get the same XP for alternative ways of getting by enemies.
3) If they really do need a tank for something, consider letting them hire an NPC. This would not be a DMPC, but a stock NPC hireling. He would be hired on for specific battles at a time, or at most, a single adventure.
4) One or more of the PCs can use the Leadership feat to attract a cohort. Remember, cohorts are still NPCs, just ones you don't have to pay like a hireling.
Don't run a DMPC/GMPC.
If need-be, add an NPC to the party, but making it a "DMPC" is putting it in the wrong mindset. Consider making it a cohort, tag-along or otherwise "lesser" character to the party, so it's not a show-stealer. If they need help in combat, they don't need someone to dominate combat.
The NPCs I've had travel with my players' party in the past have always been second-stringers, but still managed to be useful in their areas of expertise. They were NPCs, not DMPCs, and the distinction I make is in both their power level, and the GM's personal emotional investment in the character. Above all, you don't want to add a character you'll be playing that you'll care more about than the PCs themselves, or that character can too easily become a show-stealing Mary Sue.
If you want them to have something that would fulfill the defeder role in the party then maybe instead of DMPC you could consider giving them some sort of minion they could control? Like some sub-Golem or item they could use to summon defense-oriented servitor?
Or make the DMPC/GMPC a butt-monkey/joke character (big guy/girl who is the first to get shot at, "eat" cream pies, get punched, etc...).
I find DMPCs to be a little bit of a mixed bag. I think they work best in a "round robin" setting.
/ round robin - meaning that everyone at the table takes a turn DMing for the campaign.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
DMPC?
i wouldn't reccomend one but if you just had to build one.
here are some tips
a more supportive role and submissive personality helps.
don't spoonfeed too much of the plot to the party. takes away the fun of the plot.
don't steal spotlight but try not to have no spotlight at all
don't brag about your uber DMPC
make DMPC treasure upgrades a lower priority than PC ones.
a silent DMPC is better than a sociable one
don't degrade the DMPC excessively, even if they are the butt monkey, this takes player spotlight.
don't roleplay your fantasies through your DMPC.
don't do what i did and give elaborate descriptions of unneccessary details. players don't need to know what color your bard's bloomers are. unless they actively skirt peek said bard. if you can get away with a Pale, Slightly built, maiden with black hair and red eyes wearing a black fancy dress. (or similar lightly detailed description) than go with that.
I personally don't like having a DMPC. I once made an uber healer one for a party of 8 that only had bardic and druidic healing, but almost always made a player run her.
We also forgot the warlock had DR 4/cold iron, which is pretty significant since she got hit about 8 or 10 times. OOPS!!!
With her DR, Fiendish Resilience, and Eldritch Glaive, she would actually make a decent tank.
I run a DMPC in my PbP CotCT game, of course I took over the game when the last DM left, I really liked my character so I took over the game. Otherwise it would have gone to the PbP Graveyard. I make sure she doesn't have all the bright ideas, though I can interject ideas if the party is REALLY bogged down, but that's only happened once in a year and a half.
An option for under-powered 2-3 player parties is gestalt...
I agree that rotating in and out npc is a better choice then just a single DMPC. that way if they dont need help on a mission, they dont have Tankie McTankerson following them all the time
|
As a player, we've got an awesome DM who always played a DMPC. He knows it isn't something people usually recommend, but he takes more pleasure in his job when he can have a PC running around with us ; and we as players have no problem with him running one. We currently have, since level 1, a DMPC (the sixth one ever since, we're almot level 15 and this was a long and bloody campaign) and since level 3, an utilitary chirurgeon alchemist NPC because our party basically got no healer ever since level 1.
By analyzing how he used his DMPC, the secrets about how to do it right are :
- the DMPC must be fun to see, and contribute in something the party is lacking. Avoid too unusual builds, able to do flashy actions lots of times (like the monk or wizard). Support or gunslinger works well. This avoids overshining the real PCs.
- the DMPC must not take over the attention. Players should roleplay to get informations from him ; as he will always be the silent guy not talking much in the back and only talking/suggesting things according to his roleplay.
- he can give advice when needed, and is useful to guide the PCs through an unknown hostile territory ; but he can (and must from times to times) also lead to follow the wrong path, because even if he's the DM's PC, he's still technically faillible and his words should never be a metagame cheat code to success.
I think I'm going to tweak the campaign a bit. Add more traps and skill challenges, maybe lower combat CRs to party level-1 for a typical fight. Definitely make more encounters "sneak around-able."
I used to be a big supporter of DMPCs, but now I've kind of changed my mind. You can always tailor the game to a small party, so it's not like you need a DMPC to swell the ranks or anything like that.
If I signed up to run the game, then that's my job. I don't need a DMPC to be one more thing to keep track of. :)
/ that's not to say I've changed my mind in regards to DMPCs and Round Robin-type campaigns.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have never seen players enjoy DMPCs. I have seen them devote their entire energy, taking suicidal risks just to kill DMPCs. If I DM, and an NPC needs to follow the party for a while, that's fine... but the NPC remains an NPC, will be very wrong at times, may betray the heroes at times, and will probably die or go their own way pretty soon.
Paradoxically, in my experience the more of a personality-less cypher an NPC is, the more a party gets fond of him.
If your party is up for recruiting another member, I'd suggest tossing up three or four bland possibilities (Morgan Ironwolf, Black Dougal, Gutboy Barrelhouse) and allow them to pick and control the NPC of their choice.
When i was preparing for my current campaign i thought of doing this (luckily i have enough players now and didn't have to).
But my idea for the "GMPC" pretty much equated to what people are referring to as just an NPC.
He would have filled a needed role, with restrictions on what roles. I would have allowed: Tank, Healer, (limited) Skill Monkey, or low-mid DPS.
Low INT, no more than 10. I don't want him to figure things out, that should be the players.
Under powered and under leveled, stats averaging lower than the party and level at least 1-2 behind.
Possibly something "weird" about him that makes most other NPCs avoid/ignore him, or just low CHA so no one really wants to talk to him.
They shouldn't be able to carry the party, but might be able to drag one of their unconscious bodies to safety.
I also had the idea of having multiple ready to go, becoming allies or enemies depending on the players actions. Having them drop in and out of the game could also be good for introducing plot hooks.
Personally, what I dislike more than a GMPC is a PC ran by the GM because the player didn't show up. There's something that's just uncomfortable about doing that for me.
if you want to play a pc then step down as Dm. If you need another Pc then get a new player. Being a DMPC is almost never a good idea.
We only have 2 players (it's an emergency campaign for when our 3rd player can't make it) and one of the 2 is already running 2 PCs. The second player would be overwhelmed playing 2 PCs at the same time.
Anyways, I've already decided not to use a DMPC.
Soon, the Shadowdancer will have his pet shadow, and that should be helpful; at least he could get more flanking and sneak attacks.
Also, the warlock will soon have DR 5/cold iron, Fast Healing 3 with her Fiendish Reslience, and she gets 2 attacks with her Eldritch Glaive, plus AoOs, and maybe even some hastey goodness for another attack. So she can be a pretty effective tank.
... my idea for the "GMPC" pretty much equated to what people are referring to as just an NPC.
He would have filled a needed role, with restrictions on what roles. I would have allowed: Tank, Healer, (limited) Skill Monkey, or low-mid DPS.
Low INT, no more than 10. I don't want him to figure things out, that should be the players.
Under powered and under leveled, stats averaging lower than the party and level at least 1-2 behind.
Possibly something "weird" about him that makes most other NPCs avoid/ignore him, or just low CHA so no one really wants to talk to him.
They shouldn't be able to carry the party, but might be able to drag one of their unconscious bodies to safety...
If necessary, this is a decent way to handle it. Lower point buy than PC's, low mental stats (or at least lopsided so doesn't figure things out for them), lower level, less optimized, specialist, etc...
But personally, I think it usually works better if it is just avoided. Let the party hire someone or just figure out how to work around the problem themselves.
I would make a NPC and let the players take turns running it.
Man, that’s the worst time to use a DMPC. Sit the players down, talk to them about this. Then, let them wander about and do what they want to do. 100% sandbox if necessary (well, sure, you can have NPC’s hire them for quests and such, but nothing after they are sent off) . That will wean them much faster than just using a smaller spoon.
But I understand what you’re dealing with and sympathize.
Unfortunately they're about to go back into the spoon feeding environment shortly.
It's hard to be constructive when every few months or so all your work gets undone/undermined.
I also don't want to force them into sessions of thumb twiddling, since I'm an empathetic sort, I get sympathy pains for my players.
I still wouldn't use a DMPC. I would give the occasional OoC GM hint and consequences.
"Ok this is uses up 1 of the 4 god hints I am willing to give you tonight.You might try going and questioning the people involved.
OR
You've been sitting around in enemy territory arguing for 20 minutes now. Pretty soon the gnoll sentries are going to make a good perception check and discover you.
OR
Look at your character sheets does anybody have a knowledge skill that might be useful in this situation?"
As the primary GM for our group (a role which I have lately not had to perform, yay!), I have long been in the habit of having NPC's along with the party. In my current party, I have two, both of which are designed to be secondary in any decision making capacity. One is a character's husband, but with some curse-related mental problems, so he doesn't trust himself as a leader right now. The other is a direct military subordinate to another character. Neither of them outshines any party member in combat (except when their buttons are specifically pushed), but they do contribute.
The big advantage I have with running NPC's is the ability to have an in-character conversation with the party. It gives me a voice to find out what they're thinking or planning, and to point out basic background details or remind them of facts they may have briefly forgotten. It also just adds basic RP opportunities.
|
Paradoxically, in my experience the more of a personality-less cypher an NPC is, the more a party gets fond of him.
If your party is up for recruiting another member, I'd suggest tossing up three or four bland possibilities (Morgan Ironwolf, Black Dougal, Gutboy Barrelhouse) and allow them to pick and control the NPC of their choice.
Weren't Gutboy and Dougal wearing Red shirts? ;-)
And, to second a bunch of the above, never had a DMPC work out well. The last game I was in last year the DM ran a Dhamphir DMPC, and got all pissy whenever the party cleric would channel.
You sound a lot like me.
Then I'd probably enjoy your games. ;)
our games have always been short of players so a dm/pc has always been essential. usually 1-2 players 80% of the time. maybe a 3rd player for two weeks tops.
the issue is our player base is far too radical, one player is far too into a roleplay aspect and would be perfectly content to sit in a bar and drink in a tavern, ignore or attack "quest giving npc/ adventure related important npc" as roleplay. the other player rushes through the game and throws "adventure theme" to the wind, roleplay is all but ignored. "fat lootz and big kills for teh xp" is the focus. also of note, both players gaming style offend eachother. a dm/pc serves the purpose of "middle man" to work the game in any progressive manner.
many of the horror stories i hear relating to dm/pc as a bad idea, have never occured in my games.
infact if i task the players to take more then one player i get grief as the dm, and they expect me as the gm to take two characters for a party of 4. (party of 4 is mandatory in our games, i flat out refuse to dm for any less pcs. long story.)
i hate to say it but as long as the dm is worth his gaming books, a dm/pc is only as strong as the dm who controls him/her.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unrepentant DMPC* running DM here. Ask your players what they want and abide by it. Introduce NPCs that could fill the gaps and let them ask for assistance. As long as your players are fine with it, anything said here means nothing.