Post/Author/DateTime	Post
David_Roben2 02-16-07, 02:56 PM	I hope that I'm not biting off more than I can chew, but here we go... I have taken a great interest in the DMPC vs. NPC thread that has been doing a great job of discribing the differences between a DMPC and a NPC. I would like to start a discussion (and hopefully not a flame war) on advice for a DM that insists on having a DMPC. Please understand that this discussion is not to be about if it should happen or not. This discussion is to assume that the DM has already made the decision to run a DMPC. I don't want to discuss if this is a good thing or not. What I want to talk about is the possible pitfalls that a DM can fall into, and how best to avoid them (short of not having the DMPC, so no suggesting that they don't). I personally feel that a DMPC can be a good tool for a DM if it is run properly. For example: 1) It can fill a hole in the party structure. If no one wants to be the party bandaid, a DMPC could tag along to help out. 2) It can be used for a plot hook or twist. As mentioned in other DMPC threads, the tag-along can be a great way to introduce a plot without making major changes to a player's character history. There are a multitude of traps that a DM may fall into with a DMPC. 1) Becoming too attached to the DMPC. While complete disattachment is probably too much to ask, becoming too attached will lead to problems. If there is a TPK and the DMPC somehow mysteriously survives, the rest of the party is going to be a little perturbed. Also, having treasure that is specialized for that person will make the party upset if they don't receive the same treatment. 2) Running the DMPC as a PC. While this comment may raise some debate, I think that there is a distinct delineation between the two. All PC's should receive some time in the spotlight. Having a DMPC highlighted takes away from the time available to the players. This ties back to #1 in that you are attached to a PC almost by definition. 3) The dreaded Deus Ex Machina. Having a DMPC save the day immediately shows the party that they are not as "good" as the DMPC. Expect grumbling from this. How about some good guidelines? 1) Make sure that your DMPC is not overlapping any of the PC's abilities. The party rogue picks locks, the party cleric heals people, and the party mage casts the important spells. Not the DMPC. 2) For new DM's, have your DMPC at least 2 levels lower than the party. They can support where they are needed, but the PC's are the powerhouses. By this same token, don't give your DMPC any classes with special abilities if at all possible. Paladins, druids, and other spellcasters don't usually make good DMPC's. The same is true for templates and non-standard races. By the time he catches up in level, you will probably have the general idea of how your party feels about having him along and how to make him fit in best. 3) Be ready to let your DMPC die. If your party decides to sacrifice your DMPC, no divine intervention. Stay in character and have him pitch a fit about it, but no crazy happenstance should save him. 4) Choose a lighthearted personality for your DMPC. The dark, brooding character is just begging for attention. Use the DMPC as comic relief, or simply a subdued follower, like a servant. What other pitfalls might a DM find themselves in after deciding to include a DMPC? What suggestions would help to make the game enjoyable? Thanks in advance to everyone! (Please, PLEASE, keep your negative comments to yourself. I want this to be a resource for DM's that have already chosen to run it this way. Please start another thread if you simply want to talk everyone out of running a DMPC. And to all you WizO's out there, don't even bother with warnings here. Just close the thread if things even hint at going the wrong direction.)
Solian 02-16-07, 03:13 PM	Some of these points i agree with, some i don't, but it's good nonetheless. I usually DMPC, and i believe that i'm quite good, usually filling in big party gaps with him or her. But hen again, my opinions of myslef are proborbally biased, as most peoples are :p Having a DMPC 2 levels lowert han the party can be a HUGE hinderance to the party themselves, especially if the PC's form a close bond and keep having to bail him/her out of situatuions, i usaually like to keep mine about the same level as the others, leveling them when the last party member levels, even if they gain more experiance. Just my opinion though
arjomanes 02-16-07, 03:34 PM	I think the very best way is for the other players to help you create the DMPC. Let them know that while they are making their characters, you would like to have a character that goes along, and find out from them what kind of support character they could use. A bard or marshall would be the most ideal -- if no one is playing one of these characters. That way you avoid stepping on toes and you don't play a cool class that outshines the PC's. Make sure the DMPC has lower ability scores than the weakest PC. The DMPC is there to move the story along as an NPC, but more as a companion of the group and fellow adventurer than many other NPC's. There will be some attachment to this character by the DM but it's important that he is weaker and less capable than the PCs or he'll take away from the other players' fun. If you use 28 point buy, make the DMPC at 25 point buy, for example. Make sure you don't railroad the players along, regardless of whether you play a DMPC or not. Get input from your players and welcome comments from them. This way if they have an issue with something you'll hear about it before it gets out of hand. Those are some pointers. I've never played a DMPC though, so I'm no expert.
David_Roben2 02-16-07, 03:45 PM	That is an interesting point. I can see how the lower level could be a hinderance, but I feel that it will help to restrain DM's that don't have the experience to hold back on their own. I still think that even experienced DM's should have the DMPC atleast a level lower, not only to help them hold the DMPC back out of the spotlight, but also to help the rest of the party to be comfortable with it along. Not only that, but it offers plenty of RP opportunities for the party when they need to save the straggler. ;)
Vaalingrade Ashland 02-16-07, 03:47 PM	My Advice for running a DMPC is thus: 1) Follow your rules. The rules you set for the players that is. If they can't use Complete Divine, then neither can your PC. If they can't take 10 on certain checks, neither can the PC. This goes both ways too. Don't try to gimp your PC for brownie points from the boards. 2) Play the character. Don't stick them in the back, don't fade them out. Play them as that character was designed to be played. Interact with the other PCs, interact with the world. Whatever other PCs do in your game, you do it too if that's in character for them. This is the tool's main strength and robbing it of that makes it worthless. 3) Make a character that can get along with the party. This *should* be a rule for everyone, but this goes double for you. Don't run a character you know is going to cause unwanted conflict or one that tries to push the other characters around. Again, everyone should be doing this, but alas... 4) Realise that a character is a character. There's a LOT of talk about people getting a little... squicked about thier characters. Please, for the love of god, realise that your character is just an imaginary construct -- a character that you are portraying. Sean Connery doesn't whine when his character dies in a movie or isn't the best at everything. Neither should you. (This goes for EVERYONE, but again...) 5) Seriously don't metagame. It's not that hard. Some people cannot control the urge to bust out with the torch when a green, warty humanoid shows up, or to stick close to the wall when they've been through this module before with a different character. Don't be that guy. Go back to number 2 and take a swig of tobasco sauce everytime you feel yourself slipping. Eventually you will learn... or lose the use of your taste buds. 6) Make it optional. A lot of people think all PCs are permenant fixtures in the game. But they shouldn't have to be. Just like any other character, if the group doesn't like that character... GNC. If more people did this, PKing wouldn't be the vile disease on gaming's underbelly that it is. Edit: The lower level thing doesn't work. Even if you manage not to be a huge albatross around their neck, the XP system will eventually catch them up to proper levels unless you break the rules.
David_Roben2 02-16-07, 03:48 PM	While allowing your party to create the DMPC is good for morale, it limits your options on the mystery and also prevents the party from growing to understand and like the DMPC over time. I think that the idea of creating the DMPC around your party is very good though.
David_Roben2 02-16-07, 03:54 PM	5) Seriously don't metagame. It's not that hard. Some people cannot control the urge to bust out with the torch when a green, warty humanoid shows up, or to stick close to the wall when they've been through this module before with a different character. Don't be that guy. Go back to number 2 and take a swig of tobasco sauce everytime you feel yourself slipping. Eventually you will learn... or lose the use of your taste buds. Excellent. This should be posted on every gametable in the world! :D
Vaalingrade Ashland 02-16-07, 04:26 PM	"Don't be that guy" is my all purpose mantra
Ongorth 02-16-07, 05:09 PM	If you are running a DMPC you are very literally taking the player's most valuable resource away from them: sway. Having another player in the group always takes away from sway, but the DM already has loads of a different resource: design control. If you are going to be taking sway from the players, that's cool. But remember to give them some of your design control. That way everyone can have plenty to do and a purpose in the game. And if they don't want any design control? Back off their turf. Or else your just hogging all of the stuff and that's not cool.
pres_man 02-16-07, 06:00 PM	I agreed with a lot of what you said, but this one I definitely have a problem with: 3) Be ready to let your DMPC die. If your party decides to sacrifice your DMPC, no divine intervention. Of course no divine intervention, but if the party wants to sacrifice a character, the character should be fine with that? What? That is crazy, if the character isn't played without some degree of self-preservation, then it is a not a very well done example of roleplaying. Maybe instead when the party says he should hold off the entire orc army alone he tells them, "Screw you guys, I'm going home."
David_Roben2 02-16-07, 07:54 PM	Thanks for pointing that out. I definitely meant, no manipulating the environment, no fudging rolls, no winged albino apes flying in and rescuing him. If in character he wouldn't want to be sacrificed, by all means have him fight it! But fight it straight. If the party decides to leave him behind when they are fleeing the angry dragon, no having him show up in the next town. But, stay in character.
Tytalus 02-16-07, 08:05 PM	2) Have your DMPC at least 2 levels lower than the party. That's just too arbitrary. It doesn't have to be 2+ level below the party, what really matters is that you don't (consistently) overshadow them. Paladins, druids, and other spellcasters don't usually make good DMPC's. The same is true for templates and non-standard races. Spellcasters can make good DMPCs if the party is lacking a primary arcane or divine caster. I also don't follow you argument for non-standard races. In our recent campaign, for example, we had a very memorable kobold DMPC on a mission to prove himself. 4) Choose a lighthearted personality for your DMPC. The dark, brooding character is just begging for attention. Use the DMPC as comic relief, or simply a subdued follower, like a servant. I have to disagree here. A DMPC with his own agenda can provide for some interesting role-playing opportunities. If the DMPC is uncooperative, that the PCs should just leave him behind. And if it's just a "subdued follower" or even a servant, then it should simply be a hireling or NPC.
Always-Late 02-16-07, 08:12 PM	Don't have the plot revolve around the DMPC. Don't make very powerful characters (Twinked druid, looking at you. TwinkedcCleric too. They're fine, though, if you don't build them to their max potential.)
Sim_antix 02-17-07, 01:02 AM	Dont... topic over.
CaptainPicard 02-17-07, 01:47 AM	I don't know, if the plot doesn't involve the DMPC, they probably wouldn't be there. The current DMPC in my group is the Lizardfolk Fighter who asked the PCs to rescue his people from a tyrannical Warblade overlord who has enslaved them. I don't know if that counts as a DMPC in this context, though.
Keiichi_m 02-17-07, 02:13 AM	Dont... topic over. way to add nothing, thank you for filling space. I understand why people don't like DMPC's and the issues they can cause. I personally use them ocasionally. I run a DMPC in one in every 3ish games I run (I create characters on a daily basis, it's hard to have them all just sitting there with no one to DM them so I break them out in my campaigns) I've killed several of them. I usually try to play a back seat character after my first DMing car wreck, I played a very charismatic knight and was better at RPing then our Scorcerer, I got to talk to the NPC's cause I was best at it... I spent a lot of time talking to myself. He got blasted by a fireball cause I knew he had to die or the PC's would get board. So now I play more support characters if I play a DMPC: an assasin who has a scar on his throat that makes it painful to talk, so he only does sometimes if asked an opinion, A quite brooding type who probablly has a hidden agenda but does what he's told, a mute, that sort of thing so I know I'll never take the spot light and only lend a helping hand. Also if they need to go they're quiet and can slip away, they'll be missed in the party, but they're never required in the first place, so the party never cares too much. My only rule I have for DMPCs is: Don't plan on talking too much; the more you talk, the less the PCs have a chance to.
David_Roben2 02-17-07, 09:56 AM	Dont... topic over. Sim dang it! I know that you have strong feelings on this subject, but I specifically asked everyone to refrain from these types of posts. Your more than welcome to add pertanent info, but otherwise I'd appreciate it if you could keep these opinions out of this thread.
kelvinaw273 02-17-07, 10:44 AM	Some extremely good advice here, from everyone, with well presented arguments and justifications. I hate and loathe the term DMPC, because of what it implies. So I don't run DMPCs. I will occasionally use hirelings or NPC-allies (even when they are at equal level to the party that's what I call them) but never anything I would call a DMPC. But that's just me ...
pres_man 02-17-07, 12:19 PM	I think probably you need to start with some discussion as to how to run a PC. If a DMPC is suppose to be a pseudo-PC (NPC ally that travels with the party getting equal shares of xp and gp), it would help know what are some good ideas of how to play a PC. 1. Don't make a character that is not party friendly. The loner might seem interesting for a story but for a social game it just doesn't work well. 2. Don't be a pain-the-rear. Don't attempt to justify obnoxious actions by your character (e.g. stealing from the party, killing other party members) as you just "Playing your character". You decide how your character acts, therefore you are the one deciding if they are going to be a pain-the-rear. Remember this is a group GAME, keep that kind of behaviour out it, you are not trying to win an Oscar. Decide not to be a butthead and then roleplaying a reason why your character is not being one. 3. Don't steal each other's thunder. There is nothing wrong with playing a similiar character to someone else, but try not to out shadow them or prove how you can do it better. If they are playing a sneaky rogue, maybe you play a social rogue. Complement each other, don't try to out do each other. Even if your skills overlap some, determine who is better and then the other aid them. Remember you are a team. 4. Help to move the spotlight to all of the players. If you notice someone is shy and doesn't like to be the first to speak, make an effort to ask their character's opinion on things. If they don't speak up for their part in the great deeds of the party, speak up for them. If you share the spotlight, nobody loses out on time. 5. Remember to think win-win not lose-win. By being a team player you actually make the game more fun for everyone, yourself included. Thinking in terms of losing spotlight time for yourself if someone else gets some is thinking lose-win. A DM can help with this type of thing by making sure xp, for example, is even split even if someone's character might not have been on stage at that exact moment. Then players don't feel like they are losing out on opportunities when other players are performing. Individual success becomes group success.
Keiichi_m 02-17-07, 01:40 PM	I think probably you need to start with some discussion as to how to run a PC. If a DMPC is suppose to be a pseudo-PC (NPC ally that travels with the party getting equal shares of xp and gp), it would help know what are some good ideas of how to play a PC. 1. Don't make a character that is not party friendly. The loner might seem interesting for a story but for a social game it just doesn't work well. 2. Don't be a pain-the-rear. Don't attempt to justify obnoxious actions by your character (e.g. stealing from the party, killing other party members) as you just "Playing your character". You decide how your character acts, therefore you are the one deciding if they are going to be a pain-the-rear. Remember this is a group GAME, keep that kind of behaviour out it, you are not trying to win an Oscar. Decide not to be a butthead and then roleplaying a reason why your character is not being one. 3. Don't steal each other's thunder. There is nothing wrong with playing a similiar character to someone else, but try not to out shadow them or prove how you can do it better. If they are playing a sneaky rogue, maybe you play a social rogue. Complement each other, don't try to out do each other. Even if your skills overlap some, determine who is better and then the other aid them. Remember you are a team. 4. Help to move the spotlight to all of the players. If you notice someone is shy and doesn't like to be the first to speak, make an effort to ask their character's opinion on things. If they don't speak up for their part in the great deeds of the party, speak up for them. If you share the spotlight, nobody loses out on time. 5. Remember to think win-win not lose-win. By being a team player you actually make the game more fun for everyone, yourself included. Thinking in terms of losing spotlight time for yourself if someone else gets some is thinking lose-win. A DM can help with this type of thing by making sure xp, for example, is even split even if someone's character might not have been on stage at that exact moment. Then players don't feel like they are losing out on opportunities when other players are performing. Individual success becomes group success. I'm copying that into a word doc and printing it to put it at my gaming table.
danielinthewolvesden 02-17-07, 02:23 PM	Well, since I can not just say "don't" :P , I have three suggestions: 1.Talk it over with your Players. Explain that you know many players resent the DM running a DMPC but that you really want to , so how can you do so to minimize any possible resentment? 2. If there is a "gap" in a small game, and you want to run a DMPC to fill the niche (often a healer) consider letting the Players run it as a cohort or hireling. 3. If you have a possible romantic interest in one of the other players, do not run a DMPC and if you do whatever you do do not let your DMPC flirt ot become romatically involved with that other players PC. It's cheesy and immature.
Vaalingrade Ashland 02-17-07, 02:28 PM	1.Talk it over with your Players. Explain that you know many players resent the DM running a DMPC but that you really want to , so how can you do so to minimize any possible resentment? I don't think one should go on and on about some people's belief that they suck as a DM. It undermines thier position. 2. If there is a "gap" in a small game, and you want to run a DMPC to fill the niche (often a healer) consider letting the Players run it as a cohort or hireling. This is just a badly disguised 'don't'.
danielinthewolvesden 02-17-07, 02:47 PM	I don't think one should go on and on about some people's belief that they suck as a DM. It undermines thier position. This is just a badly disguised 'don't'. 1:confused: 2. No, it goes to motive. Is your motive that you want to run a DMPC or are you just trying to justify it by claiming you "have to"? If you want to run a DMPC, just say so.
johnkretzer 02-17-07, 02:57 PM	I have a DM who insists on running a DMPC. While I think everybody would like it if he doesn't we just accept the fact that he will. He says that he finds the game boring if he didn't have a DMPC to play with. But here is list of things he does that I like and dislike with it. Likes: 1) He does not hog the spotlight in combat intentionaly...hey it can happen just due to dice rolls. 2)He doesn't fudge things to save his DMPC. 3) His DMPCs are usualy interesting characters to have around. Dislikes: 1) He revolves huge amounts of plot around his DMPC in campaigns that have a stated goal...I.E. one of his characters was the daughter of a powerful NPC that was integral to the campaign. Without opening that spot to a PC first. 2)If he runs a plot around his character it is hit or miss. In my opinion if a DM runs a plot around his DMPC it should include other PCs in it some how he doesn't always do so. 3) Sometimes to 'prove' he is being fair he will have his DMPC set off a trap or something like that hurts his character. This is annoying because it so metagaming... 4) He sometimes get so caught up with his DMPCs it is like he forgets the rest of us are there. Just some thoughts and experience on this.
(Psi)SeveredHead 02-17-07, 08:33 PM	A weird take on a GMPC problem. One time the PCs of my old d20 Modern campaign asked a recurring NPC doctor to travel with them on an adventure. Only a few players could show up that day, so he wouldn't pad the group too much. The doctor was a level lower and an Ordinary (basically a DnD Expert) so his CR was 2 points lower. He had 25 point buy to their 28. He had lots of Heal and Survival, which are support abilities - they designed the character because I told them to do so. They gave him Sense Motive, which he didn't get to use; good thing too, as that's sort of a scene-stealing thing. D20 Modern doesn't have worthwhile loot (no magical stuff, at least not in my campaign; there's no balanced rules for that either and magical loot is not required) and I didn't say anything about XP because quite frankly I couldn't care less and none of them mentioned it. As a result, the PCs didn't feel like they were losing out on loot or XP. I let them control him during combat. They told him not to fight (he wasn't any good at it anyway) so none of the bad guys attacked him. However, during one battle, which took place in a secret entrance to a mountain lair owned by bandits, one PC (an archer) and the doctor hid behind pillars, getting good cover. Unfortunately, above them was a flaming log trap. The bandits set off the trap, injuring them both. Both PCs had to move out of cover, too, for fear of getting roasted :D Later in the day one PC opened a trapped room, and the doctor ended up in the worst place. One PC literally jumped in front of the doctor to save his life (they only needed to stop the trap for one round, but still). I don't know how realistically/fairly I could have adjudicated the flaming log trap if I had been controlling the doctor. I just found it easier to let the players control him instead. GMs might not think they can fairly metagame this thing, made worse if players second-guess them (even if the GM really is being fair). The players didn't feel too bad in my campaign as they (accidentally) put him in danger.
Sim_antix 02-17-07, 11:05 PM	1:confused: 2. No, it goes to motive. Is your motive that you want to run a DMPC or are you just trying to justify it by claiming you "have to"? If you want to run a DMPC, just say so. Agreed all around. First I have no idea what Vaal is talking about in that response to your first statement and secondly your second statement and explanation here are absolutely perfect in hitting the nail on the head. Dont claim that you "have" to run a DMPC when clearly there is almost always other "better" options.
Hakar_Kerarmor 02-18-07, 12:24 AM	Rule 1 (of 1): Don't be a jerk about it.
David_Roben2 02-19-07, 12:12 PM	Rule 1 (of 1): Don't be a jerk about it. This does sum up just about everything above. The problem is that some DM's, usually new ones (but certainly not always), don't realize that the actions they are taking are causing issues. Hence the defining of good vs. bad DMPC running. (lets not get hung up on the terms good and bad either. I know some thing that all DMPCs are bad. Not what I'm looking for.) Example: I have a very good DM for as new as he is. He insists on bringing a DMPC. (I think it is because it makes him feel like he is playing as well as DMing.) The first was absolutely fine. It was a monk that had sworn his life to one of the new players. This allowed the player to step into a leadership role and helped him grow. The monk tended to run away a lot, so he didn't outshine anyone. He was also great comic relief. He ended up getting arrested and hung and the whole thing opened up some great RP opportunities. Then a new DMPC showed up. He is an afflicted wererat with some rogue levels. We are all at level 5, so this guy is now ahead of us on the power curve. His DR and other abilities pick him out in combat and his surly, quiet, brooding attitude has been drawing attention. Lastly, we had come across a locked chest and our PC rogue was unable to pick it. The DMPC came around and not only picked it handily, he also went around and opened up everything else as well. The PC rogue was new and not happy with the fact that he is lagging behind in combat, and now the DMPC is better at his niche than he is. This last DMPC is causing problems. I am going to talk to him about this, but I am NOT going to suggest going without a DMPC. He has obviously decided that he wants one and if it gives him any more enjoyment, that is great. But, he needs to know some of the stuff we have discussed here.
pres_man 02-19-07, 01:08 PM	I can understand what Vaal is kind of getting at above. There is some feelings on these boards if an NPC ally is run poorly it should be labeled a "DMPC" and if it is run well it should be labeled an NPC ally (or PNPC or whatever). I think probably it is better not to bring up even a classification for the character, just describe it without some kind of NPC "Classification". He is Maxwell, priest of Pelor, and he will aid you on your missions. Let the players decide if he is a poorly run character or not, based on how it is done and without any preconcieved ideas if it will be bad or not.
kelvinaw273 02-19-07, 01:38 PM	Agreed all around. First I have no idea what Vaal is talking about in that response to your first statement and secondly your second statement and explanation here are absolutely perfect in hitting the nail on the head. Dont claim that you "have" to run a DMPC when clearly there is almost always other "better" options. I agree. There are some inconsistent arguments with regard to DMPC that always come down to semantics: Is the DMPC a full PC or not? If they are just another NPC then there is not an issue. It only becomes an issue when the DM wants to be a player in his own game. Think of it like a sports game. The players are Team A. The DM is running Team B. Ah, but he is also running the crowd and the comentators and the referee (who is supposed to be impartial). It does not stop there - he is running the coach of Team A as well. Everything, in fact, but the players of Team A themselves. Well that's OK, it works. After all the DM is NOT there just to try to whip Team A with Team B. But then he suddenly decides that on top of all of that he is going to run a player in Team A as well. It is at this point many people feel they have to say "Too Much! How can you be impartial with this many different things going on, and this many conflicts of interest? And anyway, how much fun can running a player in Team A be when you have this much other stuff to worry about or else know about?"
Vaalingrade Ashland 02-19-07, 01:42 PM	I can understand what Vaal is kind of getting at above. There is some feelings on these boards if an NPC ally is run poorly it should be labeled a "DMPC" and if it is run well it should be labeled an NPC ally (or PNPC or whatever). I think probably it is better not to bring up even a classification for the character, just describe it without some kind of NPC "Classification". He is Maxwell, priest of Pelor, and he will aid you on your missions. Let the players decide if he is a poorly run character or not, based on how it is done and without any preconcieved ideas if it will be bad or not. Exactly. Doing what dan suggests is akin to going "Here, try this soup -- but before you do, some people say that all soup tastes like crap". It really has no bearing on that particular *kind* of soup and just poisons the taster against the idea of tasting the soup or givng the soup a fair chance. Better to say "Would you like to taste this soup? And please be honest what you think." But then again, this is coming from a cook who doesn't hate soup.
Ongorth 02-19-07, 01:48 PM	Exactly. Doing what dan suggests is akin to going "Here, try this soup -- but before you do, some people say that all soup tastes like crap". It really has no bearing on that particular *kind* of soup and just poisons the taster against the idea of tasting the soup or givng the soup a fair chance. Better to say "Would you like to taste this soup? And please be honest what you think." But then again, this is coming from a cook who doesn't hate soup. Well, there is a "it depends" hidden there and this "it depends" comes from a knowledge of your group. I think a major issue here (for me at least) is the appearence of universiality. This problem is why I don't really like the actual formation of the question in this thread very much. Do you believe that the DMPC is a technique that is of universal usefulness, to the point which the actual make up of the group is a mariginal concern to the decision to impliment it?
pres_man 02-19-07, 02:01 PM	Do you believe that the DMPC is a technique that is of universal usefulness, to the point which the actual make up of the group is a mariginal concern to the decision to impliment it? Well, I think one of the views some hold is it is a tool. A tool is never going to be useful in all situations. So I don't think anyone is claiming that a DMPC should be used in all groups. But you don't blame the hammer because somebody tries to put screws in with it, do you? Why blame a character when a DM falls into using bad structure? What this thread is suppose to be is not a debate as to whether it is a good idea or not to use a DMPC. But what is the best way to use one given that the decision has already been to include one for whatever reason. The reason it is included is not what is being discussed the best way to run it is.
Vaalingrade Ashland 02-19-07, 02:03 PM	There is always the possibility for pre-existing prejudice, or conflicting ideology, but you can say the same for anything you do in DnD. Some groups don't like magic, so nothing is universal.
Ongorth 02-19-07, 02:05 PM	What this thread is suppose to be is not a debate as to whether it is a good idea or not to use a DMPC. But what is the best way to use one given that the decision has already been to include one for whatever reason. The reason it is included is not what is being discussed the best way to run it is. To follow the tool analogy, the reason I see a lot of people having a lot of friction is (to them) the question is "How can I use a saw to nail down flooring?" "You don't" would seem to be the only good answer.
pres_man 02-19-07, 02:13 PM	I am going to run a party where some of the PCs are going to be evil and there will be a PC that will be a paladin. Without trying to convince me why this is a bad idea, please discuss the best way to handle this. And please just don't say, "Don't do it." See it can be other things besides just DMPCs that cause problems. To follow the tool analogy, the reason I see a lot of people having a lot of friction is (to them) the question is "How can I use a saw to nail down flooring?" I thought your issues was preference, not functionality? A better analogy would be asking is it better to use an electric drill over a hand crank one. As they get the job done, but some might like one over the other.
Ongorth 02-19-07, 02:39 PM	I thought your issues was preference, not functionality? A better analogy would be asking is it better to use an electric drill over a hand crank one. As they get the job done, but some might like one over the other. Oh, I don't question it at all. To follow the tool analogy, the reason I see a lot of people having a lot of friction is (to them) the question is "How can I use a saw to nail down flooring?" I'm just commenting on why this question (other then the issue of contreversy) is very difficult to ask and get a good answer.
pres_man 02-19-07, 02:46 PM	I'm just commenting on why this question (other then the issue of contreversy) is very difficult to ask and get a good answer. Well your tool comment seemed to be more about using a tool wrongly, not having a preference over two valid tools. You seemed to be falling back into the bad structure issues that only prove that the DM is doing a bad job and not the preference issues. That is why I thought your analogy was a poor one (and off topic).
Ongorth 02-19-07, 02:57 PM	Well your tool comment seemed to be more about using a tool wrongly, not having a preference over two valid tools. You seemed to be falling back into the bad structure issues that only prove that the DM is doing a bad job and not the preference issues. That is why I thought your analogy was a poor one (and off topic). But that is how people actually feel about it. It is the entire problem about structuring a question in this manner. It is extremely on topic because it may help the OP reformulate his question so that he can get the types of answers he is seeking. Relying on the kindness of strangers and all. Plus, it'd be pretty hard to "fall back" into a position I never held.
pres_man 02-19-07, 03:05 PM	Plus, it'd be pretty hard to "fall back" into a position I never held. Right, I meant you seemed to be moving away from your position and more towards the position that is widely discussed, that being DMPCs are bad because some DMs use Bad Structure.
Sim_antix 02-19-07, 03:09 PM	Right, I meant you seemed to be moving away from your position and more towards the position that is widely discussed, that being DMPCs are bad because some DMs use Bad Structure. DMPCs are bad because DMs are supposed to be DMing and not playing PCs.
pres_man 02-19-07, 03:16 PM	DMPCs are bad because DMs are supposed to be DMing and not playing PCs. DMing includes playing characters? Some of those characters may have PC class levels and be of approximately same level as the PCs? Some of those characters may adventure with the PCs, getting xp and gp just like a PC would? So how exactly does putting a new title on the type of character suddenly make the DM stop DMing?
Sim_antix 02-19-07, 03:28 PM	DMing includes playing characters? Some of those characters may have PC class levels and be of approximately same level as the PCs? Some of those characters may adventure with the PCs, getting xp and gp just like a PC would? So how exactly does putting a new title on the type of character suddenly make the DM stop DMing? Because the title might make him start thinking of the NPC as "his PC" It would be like if you got a promotion to district manager but decided that you would just prefer to call it King of all I see.
Vaalingrade Ashland 02-19-07, 03:30 PM	Aaaaand the thread has been derailed. Thanks a lot. guys. :(
Sim_antix 02-19-07, 03:34 PM	Aaaaand the thread has been derailed. Thanks a lot. guys. :( It hasnt been derailed. We were asked to discuss "How to run a DMPC" and our answer was Dont. Now we are defending that position so I fail to see how the thread was derailed.
pres_man 02-19-07, 03:38 PM	Aaaaand the thread has been derailed. Thanks a lot. guys. :( You are right. Sorry for my part contributing to that. Then a new DMPC showed up. He is an afflicted wererat with some rogue levels. We are all at level 5, so this guy is now ahead of us on the power curve. His DR and other abilities pick him out in combat and his surly, quiet, brooding attitude has been drawing attention. Lastly, we had come across a locked chest and our PC rogue was unable to pick it. The DMPC came around and not only picked it handily, he also went around and opened up everything else as well. The PC rogue was new and not happy with the fact that he is lagging behind in combat, and now the DMPC is better at his niche than he is. Right, here is where the DM is actually not playing a DMPC, because the character has moved away from being a PC. Point the DM to pages 45 and 46 on Bad Structure. Specifically this DM might be falling into PCs as Spectators. This last DMPC is causing problems. I am going to talk to him about this, but I am NOT going to suggest going without a DMPC. He has obviously decided that he wants one and if it gives him any more enjoyment, that is great. But, he needs to know some of the stuff we have discussed here. I might also point out, that it sounds like the first one was not only about giving himself enjoyment, but it sounds like the group enjoyed it as well. Suggest to him to move more towards that type again (I wouldn't give up hope with the new character, he just needs to do more aiding the other rogue and such, and stopping getting xp until everyone catches up).
David_Roben2 02-19-07, 06:50 PM	Thanks to all for a (mostly) productive discussion. I knew coming into this that the semantics angle would come into view. I think that a few miss the point that it doesn't matter what it is called. A DMPC vs. a tag-along NPC discussion is beside the point simply because they are accomplishing the same thing. The reasons why a DM runs this extra party member is beside the point as well. It's the DM's game to run, and if he wants a character to get in on the action, so be it. The idea behind this thread was to help point these DM's in the right direction of how to run this NPC/DMPC and not hinder the enjoyment of the rest of the party as much as possible. In my example, the first DMPC was enjoyable. The second was not. What were the differences? How can this be translated into advice? Why he chose to include them in the game is something I will discuss with my DM and doesn't have any bearing on the advice to give to DM's who will do this in the future. I would love some further discussion on some guidelines for how to run a DMPC/tag-along NPC as good as can be. Any please, Please, no more "don't do it" comments. I'm begging you.
starfire311 02-19-07, 07:24 PM	My Advice for running a DMPC is thus: 1) Follow your rules. The rules you set for the players that is. If they can't use Complete Divine, then neither can your PC. If they can't take 10 on certain checks, neither can the PC. This goes both ways too. Don't try to gimp your PC for brownie points from the boards. 2) Play the character. Don't stick them in the back, don't fade them out. Play them as that character was designed to be played. Interact with the other PCs, interact with the world. Whatever other PCs do in your game, you do it too if that's in character for them. This is the tool's main strength and robbing it of that makes it worthless. 3) Make a character that can get along with the party. This *should* be a rule for everyone, but this goes double for you. Don't run a character you know is going to cause unwanted conflict or one that tries to push the other characters around. Again, everyone should be doing this, but alas... 4) Realise that a character is a character. There's a LOT of talk about people getting a little... squicked about thier characters. Please, for the love of god, realise that your character is just an imaginary construct -- a character that you are portraying. Sean Connery doesn't whine when his character dies in a movie or isn't the best at everything. Neither should you. (This goes for EVERYONE, but again...) 5) Seriously don't metagame. It's not that hard. Some people cannot control the urge to bust out with the torch when a green, warty humanoid shows up, or to stick close to the wall when they've been through this module before with a different character. Don't be that guy. Go back to number 2 and take a swig of tobasco sauce everytime you feel yourself slipping. Eventually you will learn... or lose the use of your taste buds. 6) Make it optional. A lot of people think all PCs are permenant fixtures in the game. But they shouldn't have to be. Just like any other character, if the group doesn't like that character... GNC. If more people did this, PKing wouldn't be the vile disease on gaming's underbelly that it is. Edit: The lower level thing doesn't work. Even if you manage not to be a huge albatross around their neck, the XP system will eventually catch them up to proper levels unless you break the rules. I would just like to say, It is interesting to see how much an opinion changes in 4 years time. The following was posted back in july of 2003 There's been a lot of talk about DMs running a PC over the past month or so. Many people had problems with the practice stemming from poor playing of the PC, to metagame thinking with the PC, to Deus ex Machina. But the DMPC is a useful and if correctly played, exciting tool for DMs to use either to round out a party or create adventure hooks. So, In the intrest of ensuring that all DMPCs are well done and do not hinder the game, I give you the Rules for running a DMPC: 1) The DMPC is never more powerful than the party if he is to get into combat situations 2) The DMPC takes treasure last. 3) The DMPC is metagamed to the extent that he never provokes conflict withing the group. 4) The DMPC never solos any monster. 5) The DMPC must have a plot hook attached, but never should be the focus of the entire campaign. 6) If the DMPC gets into a combat with a party member, he takes a fall, retreats or conceeds. 7) The DMPC rolls in the open. 8) the DMPC is not a party leader and does not make big decisions. Questions, comments? yes, I do realize that some ideas are not in direct opposition of each other, but it does seem like your thoughts are presented much better these days vaal. And no Vaal, I am not stalking you
Vaalingrade Ashland 02-19-07, 07:37 PM	I've refined my technique in the past half decade. I can do Bankai now. It turns out the players would rather I just shut up and play the character rather than put a soft touch on the character. They'd rather I not fabricate things to keep inline with artifical restrictions.
KJW 02-20-07, 07:56 AM	The only rule that one needs is to not use the term and for the DM to realize that he is running a NPC and not a PC. This is the summation of everyone's conditions and comments about how to properly use a DMPC. DMPC implies a favoritism a sense of ownership that for the most part everyone is arguing shouldn't exist. So if you, as the DM, want to run a character with the party start by calling it a NPC, NPC ally if you want to be specific. Players run PC and DMs run NPCs. Now if we had a thread that wanted to discuss how to run NPCs with the party that would be interesting and probably useful, so dump the term DMPC and use NPC. That said the main rule for NPCs with the party is that the PCs control the party they should be able to determine what NPCs travel with them and while the NPCs contribute and interact with the party it should be the PCs that have ultimate control. As I have always said I run lots of NPC allies with my parties and my players like them and go out of their way to recruit NPCs. NPCs make or break campaigns and you need them for great campaigns, but first you have to keep in mind that they are NPCs and nothing more.
Vaalingrade Ashland 02-20-07, 07:58 AM	Again, not what David was asking.
KJW 02-20-07, 09:54 AM	Again, not what David was asking. Actually, exactly what he was asking. How do you run a DMPC effectively? Call them NPCs and go from there. This is the best launching point to have an effective mindset. The term DMPC reflects a poor mindset for running a NPC ally.
Hakar_Kerarmor 02-20-07, 10:12 AM	So I can have a NPC Ally, and all will be fine and dandy, but if I so much change the term I use to DMPC all hell breaks loose?
Arganis 02-20-07, 10:15 AM	Great advice from Vaal. "Don't be that guy" is my all purpose mantra God I know! I hate that guy!
Boraxe 02-20-07, 10:26 AM	Q: What's the best way to run a DMPC? A: Don't.
Zoycitenega 02-20-07, 10:34 AM	So I can have a NPC Ally, and all will be fine and dandy, but if I so much change the term I use to DMPC all hell breaks loose? I've always seen NPC Allies as much less show than a DMPC. DMPCs have more personality, more spotlight, more everything. DMPCs are what NPC Allies become when the DM really, really likes them. Provided that you're a really good DM, DMPCs make the game more fun, and garuntee that players don't have to 'fill in' what's missing(like cleric).
Hakar_Kerarmor 02-20-07, 10:36 AM	I've always seen NPC Allies as much less show than a DMPC. DMPCs have more personality, more spotlight, more everything. DMPCs are what NPC Allies become when the DM really, really likes them. Provided that you're a really good DM, DMPCs make the game more fun, and garuatee that players don't have to 'fill in' what's missing(like cleric). I know, but some people seem to act as if, all else being equal, what you call the character means the difference between the best game ever and a total disaster.
Zoycitenega 02-20-07, 10:45 AM	:rolleyes: Sounds like when I called one of my villains Bobert. They expected him to be a pansy. He wasn't. They'll get over it if you play it right. On a side note, it might be a good idea to clear it with the PCs. Get their input and such on what they do and do not want.
Hakar_Kerarmor 02-20-07, 10:51 AM	On a side note, it might be a good idea to clear it with the PCs. Get their input and such on what they do and do not want. Well off course, I think most things should be discussed, though I prefer discussing them with the players instead of their characters. ;)
David_Roben2 02-20-07, 11:00 AM	Q: What's the best way to run a DMPC? A: Don't. I don't regret this thread. There is some good stuff here. I don't think I'm being subtle about this. But just to make sure.... PLEASE NO MORE COMMENTS ABOUT NOT RUNNING THE DMPC AS THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE IT.
evilviper77 02-20-07, 11:27 AM	I've refined my technique in the past half decade. I can do Bankai now. It turns out the players would rather I just shut up and play the character rather than put a soft touch on the character. They'd rather I not fabricate things to keep inline with artifical restrictions. :rofl: I just had to chime in and say this left me laughing for a bit. Anyways, more on topic so i can't be said to have derailed the thread; In my experience being in a campaign and running a campaign with a DMPC our 4-5 man group has never had a problem with it. NEVER. Maybe it's because we are all good friends, maybe we are mature enough to handle it, maybe we just aren't as strict with the rules, maybe it's all just a matter of opinion. Well i'm certain being good friends helps smooth everything over ,and I'm not naive enough to think all groups consist of a circle of good friends, but what this thread seems to be boiling down now to is this: "Me know better than you! Let me prove, I prove now!" With people still trying to prove themselves right about not allowing a DMPC/Allowing a DMPC. The topic of the thread was... "This discussion is to assume that the DM has already made the decision to run a DMPC. I don't want to discuss if this is a good thing or not. What I want to talk about is the possible pitfalls that a DM can fall into, and how best to avoid them (short of not having the DMPC, so no suggesting that they don't)." Let me kinda expand on this further... "This discussion is to assume that the DM has already made the decision to run a DMPC. I don't want to discuss if this is a good thing or not. What I want to talk[not prove each other's opinion wrong] about is the possible pitfalls that a DM can fall into, and how best to avoid them (short of not having the DMPC, so no suggesting that they don't). Of course please keep in mind all information since the start of this thread has been purely opinion based and thus the rules of opinions should apply: No one can be right or wrong, get over it." And just so i can point it out before someone else does, this also is purely a matter of opinion but stated more towards the area of fact, so i suppose that makes me the pot.
TwistedPuppy 02-20-07, 11:39 AM	When running NPC allies (my prefered term) bear in mind they have their own agendas that may not be congruent with that of the PCs. At some point their paths might diverge. Maybe they'll meet up again, maybe not. IMC, there were situations where the ally was not with the party for multiple sessions. In one case the ally was a prisoner, in another the party got sent to another plane. On at least one occassion the party didn't want to tell the ally what they were doing, on at least one other occassion the ally had other matters to attend. Now, the particular ally was supposed to be as much a puzzle for the group as anything else. I'd planned to have it move on after the puzzle was solved, but one of my players derailed that idea. Btw, I did give appropriate XP to the PCs for solving the puzzle.
Zoycitenega 02-20-07, 11:40 AM	Oh right, there was a point to this thread.:embarrass Sorry, must have missed it. Let all your players do what they want to do, then deal with your character. Also try to keep him in the background(make him shy or something).
Boraxe 02-20-07, 11:48 AM	I don't regret this thread. There is some good stuff here. I don't think I'm being subtle about this. But just to make sure.... PLEASE NO MORE COMMENTS ABOUT NOT RUNNING THE DMPC AS THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE IT. That's kinda like saying "No more comments about not dousing my house in gasoline and throwing lit matches at it as the best way to avoid burning it down." Like it or lump it, it really is the best solution.
Boraxe 02-20-07, 11:57 AM	but what this thread seems to be boiling down now to is this: "Me know better than you! Let me prove, I prove now!" With people still trying to prove themselves right about not allowing a DMPC/Allowing a DMPC. Really? Cos I see it boiling down to, as it invariably does when this topic comes up, the pro-DMPC front suggesting - or even stating outright - that those who oppose DMPCs are not as mature. Personally, I think that is a load of horse****.
Hakar_Kerarmor 02-20-07, 11:59 AM	Really? Cos I see it boiling down to, as it invariably does when this topic comes up, the pro-DMPC front suggesting - or even stating outright - that those who oppose DMPCs are not as mature. Personally, I think that is a load of horse****. As opposed to the anti-DMPC front suggesting the pro-DMPC front is a bunch of self-served powertripping liars?
Arganis 02-20-07, 12:16 PM	Q: What's the best way to run a DMPC? A: Don't. Ok Bor, you were first to the joke, now it's time to step back and let the OP have his thread, not push the same tired issue further.
Vaalingrade Ashland 02-20-07, 01:41 PM	I don't regret this thread. There is some good stuff here. I don't think I'm being subtle about this. But just to make sure.... PLEASE NO MORE COMMENTS ABOUT NOT RUNNING THE DMPC AS THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE IT. Begging only makes it last longer :(
Boraxe 02-20-07, 01:53 PM	Ok Bor, you were first to the joke, now it's time to step back and let the OP have his thread, not push the same tired issue further. The problem is that the issue itself is tired and almost invariably leads to flaming. There are good points made on both sides* but this horse ain't running, no matter how much we beat it. What we really need is a single stickied thread that has links to every other existing DMPC thread. Anyone who has anything to ask about the topic can then simple jump to those existing threads and find the answer, probably several times over. * Yes, I am able admit that points are good even if I don't agree with them. I am anti-DMPC, myself, but that doesn't stop me from recognizing that other posters - Vaal is a prime example - have well reasoned and considered arguments. To ignore of revile them just cos they do not coincide with mine would be absurd. What I do object to is hyperbole and veiled slights (such as the "maturity" one I mentioned above) regardless what side of the disucssion one supports.
Vaalingrade Ashland 02-20-07, 02:00 PM	The problem is that the issue itself is tired and almost invariably leads to flaming. There are good points made on both sides* but this horse ain't running, no matter how much we beat it. This thread wouldn't have led to flames if people hadn't purposefully run it off topic. Yes, I am able admit that points are good even if I don't agree with them. I am anti-DMPC, myself, but that doesn't stop me from recognizing that other posters - Vaal is a prime example - have well reasoned and considered arguments. To ignore of revile them just cos they do not coincide with mine would be absurd.[QUOTE] You are one of a rare breed then. Ignoring and reviling is like the highest form if internet argumetn these days. [QUOTE]What I do object to is hyperbole and veiled slights (such as the "maturity" one I mentioned above) regardless what side of the disucssion one supports. And on this side we have 'lol, u must not N-joy DMing'. So its a delicate balance between facts and what we all really came for -- hardcore slander (libel?).
David_Roben2 02-20-07, 02:12 PM	The problem is that the issue itself is tired and almost invariably leads to flaming. There are good points made on both sides* but this horse ain't running, no matter how much we beat it. You do make a point on the fact that this topic has been talked to death, but I was hoping that this thread would not be about if it should happen or not. That is dead beyond dead. Everyone has their opinion and, being opinion, none of them is wrong. What I wanted was some usable advice on how to do it without ruining a game. "Don't do it" is not helpful in this context. "Good points on both sides" indicates an argument in process about if it should happen or not. I was making a deliberate point that this thread was not to be about that issue. This thread was opened to discuss or even argue about the mistakes said DM could make while running a DMPC. This could be advice available to DM's who do choose to run the game in that manner. If the decision to douse your house in gasoline and throw matches at it has already been irrevokably made, then saying it was a bad idea doesn't help. Saying that a fire hose might help, would.
Arganis 02-20-07, 02:28 PM	but I was hoping that this thread would not be about if it should happen or not. Were you now? Oops! ;)
Boraxe 02-20-07, 02:50 PM	You do make a point on the fact that this topic has been talked to death, but I was hoping that this thread would not be about if it should happen or not. That is dead beyond dead. Everyone has their opinion and, being opinion, none of them is wrong. What I wanted was some usable advice on how to do it without ruining a game. "Don't do it" is not helpful in this context. I believe that advice stands, though I was being tongue-in-cheek about it. To expand on it: don't play a DMPC, play an NPC. I know some people get their back up about it but there really is a distinction between them which is not mere semantics. It is as clear a distinction as between "Jew" and "kike." No one will tell you that the difference between those two terms is meaningless, just mere semantics. The term DMPC commotes a specific mindset and attitude towards the NPC as being "different" than other NPCs. This should not be the case. All NPCs are simply tools the DM uses to enhance the game. Like all tools, NPCs should be used where appropriate and discarded when no longer needed to perform their task. By designating an NPC as a "DMPC" you are essentially saying that these rules do not apply. If this is not the case then the "DMPC" is indeed jsut another NPC and so there is no value in calling him anything else. So again I reiterate my point: the best way to play a DMPC is not to play a DMPC. Just run an NPC as you would any other and carry in with the game.
Arganis 02-20-07, 03:18 PM	So again I reiterate my point: the best way to play a DMPC is not to play a DMPC. Just run an NPC as you would any other and carry in with the game. Your point is far better stated this time, sir, in my humble opinion. Now that you have explained it, I believe your particular view (which is the one I hold to personally) is not off-topic at all.
LordHell 02-20-07, 03:32 PM	My Advice for running a DMPC is thus: 1) Follow your rules. The rules you set for the players that is. If they can't use Complete Divine, then neither can your PC. If they can't take 10 on certain checks, neither can the PC. This goes both ways too. Don't try to gimp your PC for brownie points from the boards. 2) Play the character. Don't stick them in the back, don't fade them out. Play them as that character was designed to be played. Interact with the other PCs, interact with the world. Whatever other PCs do in your game, you do it too if that's in character for them. This is the tool's main strength and robbing it of that makes it worthless. 3) Make a character that can get along with the party. This *should* be a rule for everyone, but this goes double for you. Don't run a character you know is going to cause unwanted conflict or one that tries to push the other characters around. Again, everyone should be doing this, but alas... 4) Realise that a character is a character. There's a LOT of talk about people getting a little... squicked about thier characters. Please, for the love of god, realise that your character is just an imaginary construct -- a character that you are portraying. Sean Connery doesn't whine when his character dies in a movie or isn't the best at everything. Neither should you. (This goes for EVERYONE, but again...) 5) Seriously don't metagame. It's not that hard. Some people cannot control the urge to bust out with the torch when a green, warty humanoid shows up, or to stick close to the wall when they've been through this module before with a different character. Don't be that guy. Go back to number 2 and take a swig of tobasco sauce everytime you feel yourself slipping. Eventually you will learn... or lose the use of your taste buds. 6) Make it optional. A lot of people think all PCs are permenant fixtures in the game. But they shouldn't have to be. Just like any other character, if the group doesn't like that character... GNC. If more people did this, PKing wouldn't be the vile disease on gaming's underbelly that it is. Edit: The lower level thing doesn't work. Even if you manage not to be a huge albatross around their neck, the XP system will eventually catch them up to proper levels unless you break the rules. Totally agree with this advice. I think the most important thing however is: 0. Dont play a DMPC just because you want to play. They should only be used to fill a role in the party if that role is missing and/or needed.
Poupadis5 02-20-07, 03:45 PM	Totally agree with this advice. I think the most important thing however is: 0. Dont play a DMPC just because you want to play. They should only be used to fill a role in the party if that role is missing and/or needed. I think we've got it. I view DMPCing (which I've done sparingly) as a pain, because it's just another thing to keep track of. DMPCs have served two good functions in my experience. 1) As a very temporary character with a clear point in the storyline OR 2) An extra PC in a small group, which other players can control as needed, or even as a quick character if someone wants to hop in and join the game. I don't see a problem with having players control DMPCs in a dungeon-type environment. Treat them like cohorts, though- when the "plot" calls for them to do something, they do it. If you want to play a DMPC because you want to play, switch off being the DM with the other players in various sessions.
Vaalingrade Ashland 02-20-07, 04:36 PM	What exactly is the point of randomly switching off control of a character in and out of combat? It just seems like saying you're not to be trusted with anything but RP.
Nidair 02-20-07, 05:01 PM	I always wonder: why do you even want to play a DMPC? If your group consists of 4 or more people, you will just slow down combat, and when you play with 2 or 3 players, you are better off using gestalt rules. Also, you are fighting against yourself. What is the fun of that?
pres_man 02-20-07, 05:36 PM	The term DMPC commotes a specific mindset and attitude towards the NPC as being "different" than other NPCs. This should not be the case. All NPCs are simply tools the DM uses to enhance the game. Like all tools, NPCs should be used where appropriate and discarded when no longer needed to perform their task. By designating an NPC as a "DMPC" you are essentially saying that these rules do not apply. If this is not the case then the "DMPC" is indeed jsut another NPC and so there is no value in calling him anything else. So again I reiterate my point: the best way to play a DMPC is not to play a DMPC. Just run an NPC as you would any other and carry in with the game. Could explain this more. Why is it bad to think of the character as a "PC"? What are the inherent bad qualities of a PC or a person who runs a PC? How does this relate to the list I posted on the first page (post #19) about how to play a PC (I am not asking to accept them, merely are they appropriate for running a PC and are they also appropriate for running a character by a DM)? If it is an issue of possible favortism, how does it stack up to say, the PC of a significant other for example?
Poupadis5 02-20-07, 05:39 PM	What exactly is the point of randomly switching off control of a character in and out of combat? It just seems like saying you're not to be trusted with anything but RP. I only say this because I don't **want** to have to run a PC in combat. If the adventure is good, there should already be enough for me to be thinking about- the enemies, the next room, etc. I get to control not just one character, but EVERY enemy character! Ah, perhaps I should rephrase myself. What I mean by switching off, I treat the DMPCs like cohorts. With cohorts, the player generally gets to control them. However, that's not true all of the time- Joey the Kid might not charge a beholder just because you want him to.
Poupadis5 02-20-07, 05:44 PM	Could explain this more. Why is it bad to think of the character as a "PC"? What are the inherent bad qualities of a PC or a person who runs a PC? How does this relate to the list I posted on the first page (post #19) about how to play a PC (I am not asking to accept them, merely are they appropriate for running a PC and are they also appropriate for running a character by a DM)? If it is an issue of possible favortism, how does it stack up to say, the PC of a significant other for example? As a DM, i try to give every player (and their PC) as close to equal attention as possible. The implication of a DMPC is that you give that character as much attention as any other one. Which isn't fun... If you *don't* give them as much attention, they're not really a DMPC in the way we're talking about. Also, as a DMPC, they can't participate in puzzle or thinking sections (well, I guess they *could*) but since you already know the dungeon... it's not fun to hold back as a player(DMPC), but it's not fun to everyone else if DMPC Bobbit just happens to guess at the correct solutions each time.
Whisper_Swiftblade 02-20-07, 05:49 PM	I have a few ways I try to limit myself when I am useing a DMPC to help out the party, that somewhat pertane. 1) try to build a support charictor. Everyboddy likes when a healer helps out, but it is annoying when someone elce is doing all the tanking and you are playing a tank. 2) try to avoid becomeing the party face at all costs, otherwise you end up talking to yourself and that's just silly. 3) give him flaws, this goes for any pc, but seems even more important with a dmpc, as the urge to marry-sue can become strong in those with the power to do so. 4) never mettagame, once again this should go for everyone but is even more important for the dmpc, as while the average player may know something his pc does not, you know everything about everything in game, and have the power to bend it to your will.
pres_man 02-20-07, 06:03 PM	These comments weren't totally about my questions posed, I was asking about what it means to play a PC and how thinking about a character being that would be bad. As a DM, i try to give every player (and their PC) as close to equal attention as possible. The implication of a DMPC is that you give that character as much attention as any other one. Which isn't fun... If you *don't* give them as much attention, they're not really a DMPC in the way we're talking about. What if one player asked you the DM not to do that. That they just wanted to play more of a support character, they didn't want to do alot of stuff centered on their character. Would you the DM abide by their wishes, or would you then force the focus on their character even when the player didn't want it? Also, attention can be focus on a character and that character can use it to focus it on others. When I play PCs, I rarely get into the leader position, I prefer to be Mr. Spock to someone else's Cptn. Kirk. Also, as a DMPC, they can't participate in puzzle or thinking sections (well, I guess they *could*) but since you already know the dungeon... it's not fun to hold back as a player(DMPC), but it's not fun to everyone else if DMPC Bobbit just happens to guess at the correct solutions each time. First off, let us realize that puzzles are about the absolutely worse thing to include into a game from a roleplaying standpoint. Puzzles challenge the players, not the characters. Thus, yes, it is impossible for the DM to "solve" a puzzle, he already knows the solution. All he could do is reveal the solution, but that is no different then Trebek reading from a card ("This guy reads from a card!"). So yes, that might be something added to how to play a DMPC: How to play a DMPC: Don't be delusional and believe that you the player (DM) are solving a riddle in a game when you already know the solution. Instead use Int/Wis/Luck whaterver checks to give hints to the party if they are struggling. By the way, if you are a non-DM player and know the solution (because you saw/heard it before), don't be a jack-hole and shout it out and ruin it for the rest of the people that haven't seen it before. If they are struggling, give some hints (perhaps based on an Int/Wis/Luck roll). Give a man a fire, you keep him warm for a day. Light the man on fire, keep him warm the rest of his life.
starfire311 02-20-07, 06:52 PM	What if one player asked you the DM not to do that. That they just wanted to play more of a support character, they didn't want to do alot of stuff centered on their character. Would you the DM abide by their wishes, or would you then force the focus on their character even when the player didn't want it? Also, attention can be focus on a character and that character can use it to focus it on others. When I play PCs, I rarely get into the leader position, I prefer to be Mr. Spock to someone else's Cptn. Kirk. Ah, but you see, Mr. Spock, or Samwise Gamgee or whatever support character you may be thinking, still has big roles, and is essential to the story, so it is quite possible to play a support character, and still be in the spotlight.