Am I Making DMPCs? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Am I Making DMPCs? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Singer_of_the_Song
02-15-07, 09:50 PM In my campaigns, occasionally NPCs will join the PCs in certain battles or sections of adventures. These battles and sections are always designed specifically for the PCs + the NPCs, so the NPCs are doing their own thing and not stealing the PCs glory or just playing deus ex machina. These NPCs will often travel with the PCs if they go to a new geographical area so they can remain in the plot, but rarely for common, mundane travel.

I run these NPCs because I feel that they add to the story. I work hard on their personalities, and I feel that they enrich the role-playing and plot aspect of the campaign. They also allow for some interesting fights that the PCs would not normally be able to do, such as the PCs and a group of NPCs taking on (for example, in a recent campaign) several platoons of mezzoloths. These NPCs are always equal to the PCs in power, they do not receive any of the PCs loot, and they do not receive any special benefits because the DM is running them. They are subjected to exactly the same torments and hardships as any of the PCs.

My players seem to enjoy them. Am I making DMPCS? If so, am I making "bad" DMPCS?
chava
02-15-07, 10:03 PM I don't really think it matter what you call them - If your group doesn't like them, STOP; if your group does like them, then don't stop.
starfire311
02-15-07, 10:34 PM DMPC is such an awful term IMO... it is debated to no end even what it means, but IMO you are not running what I would define a DMPC, IMO DMPC is always bad kind of NPC that travels with the party and stealing the light, I equate DMPC essentially with DMs pet NPC... this is how I see it used more often than not, but then again, I see people like Vaal use it differently and then everything gets confused and before you know it the thread is like 30 pages long and we are still arguing the same thing as we did on the 1st page.
Manic Man
02-16-07, 01:58 AM Eh there's a difference between DMPCs and NPCs.

The simplest one "If the PCs killed/disregarded/told him or her to get lost, would you be angry at them personally and attempt revenge?"
danielinthewolvesden
02-16-07, 02:27 AM If they just "travel" with the PC's, you are OK. But it seems that yours adventure and fight alongside the PC's. This is bad.

Ask your players. And not "hey guys, you like my NPC's don't you?"

Tell them you know that many players resent DMPCs and that this resentment is often hidden. Explain that it's OK for them to be honest with you. Ask how you can run the DMPC's to make the game more fun for all.

I always ask one question- If the "NPC's" are so nessesary to the game, why do not the players get to to run them during combat at least?
bonethug0108
02-16-07, 02:34 AM Simply put, if you are involving them in most group decisions and having them fight side by side with them in every battle, that is a dmpc. Same if you give them xp or treasure that the pc's are supposed to get.

If you are having them do what you are currently having them do, they are npc's. They are there for story purposes, and not for the dm to be able to run a pc. If you just level them when you feel is appropriate to the story, that is an npc. If you give them items without actually taking from the treasure of the pc's(such as out of nowhere), that's an npc. An npc doesn't need to have reasons to have what they have, or level when they level. You give and do things to them based on the story and in a way that doesn't make them run like a pc.

What you are doing is totally okay, and your players are happy. Stick with it.

Even if you ran dmpc's, it would be okay if everyone is having fun. Just pull back if players start complaining, regardless of whether it is a dmpc or an npc.
bonethug0108
02-16-07, 02:38 AM If they just "travel" with the PC's, you are OK. But it seems that yours adventure and fight alongside the PC's. This is bad.

Ask your players. And not "hey guys, you like my NPC's don't you?"

Tell them you know that many players resent DMPCs and that this resentment is often hidden. Explain that it's OK for them to be honest with you. Ask how you can run the DMPC's to make the game more fun for all.

I always ask one question- If the "NPC's" are so nessesary to the game, why do not the players get to to run them during combat at least?

I disagree with you. Our dm ran an npc that fought alongside our pc's and we loved it. I don't think that is a bad thing at all.

If your players hate it, it is bad. It isn't bad by default. I would ask them if they like such and such and enjoy battling alongside them.

If they say they like them, but wish it was just the pc's fighting, then pull back the reins. If they are happy to have assistance and don't feel it as an intrusion, then you are doing a great job.
Ramses III
02-16-07, 04:37 AM If the NPCs get a share of party treasure and experience, they are DMPCs. If not, then they are not.

Defining what game term to use for the NPCs isn't the measure of whether or not you have a problem, however. Setting up a few battles here and there where the PCs are supported by NPCs and the battles are balanced accordingly is fine. If you do it all the time, however, then you run the risk of the game becoming monotonous. If every major battle is one of epic scale where there are a bunch of NPCs fighting alongside the PCs they might get bored of the format; make sure to switch it up here and there or even run battles where the NPCs are an impediment rather than an asset.
bonethug0108
02-16-07, 04:58 AM If the NPCs get a share of party treasure and experience, they are DMPCs. If not, then they are not.

Defining what game term to use for the NPCs isn't the measure of whether or not you have a problem, however. Setting up a few battles here and there where the PCs are supported by NPCs and the battles are balanced accordingly is fine. If you do it all the time, however, then you run the risk of the game becoming monotonous. If every major battle is one of epic scale where there are a bunch of NPCs fighting alongside the PCs they might get bored of the format; make sure to switch it up here and there or even run battles where the NPCs are an impediment rather than an asset.

Well put.
KJW
02-16-07, 09:08 AM Don't use the term DMPC it befuddles many people on these boards. Technically, the term can't exist, DMs run NPCs and players run PCs, just read the definitions in the PHB. A DMPC is most widely used on these boards as a term for a NPC that is poorly run by the DM by showing favoritism to that NPC. But it is a confusing term follow the link at the bottom of my signature to the DMPC Reference Thread for more on this confusion.

NPC allies, once again just read the DMG, are what some confuse as DMPCs. NPC allies may get equal experience (Personally, I give them 1/2 experience to more accurately reflect their role in the campaign). NPC allies may also get an equal share of the treasure, but realize this is a roleplaying issue determined by negotiations between the PCs and NPC. The DM controls experience, the party controls how treasure is divided. Of course, if the party balks at treating a NPC ally fairly then they should just walk away or maybe even get revenge depending upon the personality of the NPC.

The real litmus for whether a NPC ally is properly run or not is your view of the NPC as DM and the relationship of the NPC to the PCs. If you view the NPC as a tool for the story like any other NPC and are not too attached to it then you have the right mindset. If you consider the NPC your PC, have it control the party (i.e. the NPC is the story-arc), shield it from harm (either by fudging or extreme min-maxing), or similar then you have a problem. This is because players (and their PCs) will come to dislike this NPC. I also speak from experience that few players will express this dislike for fear of angering the DM, who is usually also a friend. Personally, I have as a player worked to dump these DMPCs from parties (DMs make difficult and vocal players :) ) and have been punished by DMs, so this is another reason many players will remain quiet.

Now that said most DMs run NPC allies with no problems. If the PCs can dismiss the NPC at any time and know this then they have control over the party. My PCs interview, hire, and fire NPC allies all the time, they know the party is theirs to control and thus they are actually more willing to have NPCs with the party and build relationships with the NPCs. Typically, my players like a group of 7-8 and if they are short PCs they recruit NPCs to round out the party. My NPCs are as detailed as PCs and I roleplay them by their personality and abilities, but they are still NPCs just ones with more stage time. They really enjoy my NPCs and as they keep recruiting NPCs it shows that they want them. I have no great emotional investment in these NPCs besides the fact that many of them are fun to play. If this describes you situation then you are doing everything right.

Remember NPCs are what make campaigns. Without NPCs the PCs are functioning in a vacuum and the world will feel very shallow. Yes, be wary of mishandling NPCs, but they make the game work so don't be wary of using them. NPCs with the party can work very well as long as the DM remembers they are NPCs and that he is not invested in these characters like the players are invested in their PCs.
Millennium
02-16-07, 09:11 AM I wouldn't call these DMPCs. They aren't permanent fixtures in the party, they don't take up party treasure (and they don't seem to act as XP-sinks), they're important to the plot but not to the degree that the PCs or the BBEG are, and you don't seem to be as attached to them as a typical player is to a PC.

They're just plain old NPC allies, although they're very well-done ones. I'm glad your players enjoy them.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Singer_of_the_Song 02-15-07, 09:50 PM	In my campaigns, occasionally NPCs will join the PCs in certain battles or sections of adventures. These battles and sections are always designed specifically for the PCs + the NPCs, so the NPCs are doing their own thing and not stealing the PCs glory or just playing deus ex machina. These NPCs will often travel with the PCs if they go to a new geographical area so they can remain in the plot, but rarely for common, mundane travel. I run these NPCs because I feel that they add to the story. I work hard on their personalities, and I feel that they enrich the role-playing and plot aspect of the campaign. They also allow for some interesting fights that the PCs would not normally be able to do, such as the PCs and a group of NPCs taking on (for example, in a recent campaign) several platoons of mezzoloths. These NPCs are always equal to the PCs in power, they do not receive any of the PCs loot, and they do not receive any special benefits because the DM is running them. They are subjected to exactly the same torments and hardships as any of the PCs. My players seem to enjoy them. Am I making DMPCS? If so, am I making "bad" DMPCS?
chava 02-15-07, 10:03 PM	I don't really think it matter what you call them - If your group doesn't like them, STOP; if your group does like them, then don't stop.
starfire311 02-15-07, 10:34 PM	DMPC is such an awful term IMO... it is debated to no end even what it means, but IMO you are not running what I would define a DMPC, IMO DMPC is always bad kind of NPC that travels with the party and stealing the light, I equate DMPC essentially with DMs pet NPC... this is how I see it used more often than not, but then again, I see people like Vaal use it differently and then everything gets confused and before you know it the thread is like 30 pages long and we are still arguing the same thing as we did on the 1st page.
Manic Man 02-16-07, 01:58 AM	Eh there's a difference between DMPCs and NPCs. The simplest one "If the PCs killed/disregarded/told him or her to get lost, would you be angry at them personally and attempt revenge?"
danielinthewolvesden 02-16-07, 02:27 AM	If they just "travel" with the PC's, you are OK. But it seems that yours adventure and fight alongside the PC's. This is bad. Ask your players. And not "hey guys, you like my NPC's don't you?" Tell them you know that many players resent DMPCs and that this resentment is often hidden. Explain that it's OK for them to be honest with you. Ask how you can run the DMPC's to make the game more fun for all. I always ask one question- If the "NPC's" are so nessesary to the game, why do not the players get to to run them during combat at least?
bonethug0108 02-16-07, 02:34 AM	Simply put, if you are involving them in most group decisions and having them fight side by side with them in every battle, that is a dmpc. Same if you give them xp or treasure that the pc's are supposed to get. If you are having them do what you are currently having them do, they are npc's. They are there for story purposes, and not for the dm to be able to run a pc. If you just level them when you feel is appropriate to the story, that is an npc. If you give them items without actually taking from the treasure of the pc's(such as out of nowhere), that's an npc. An npc doesn't need to have reasons to have what they have, or level when they level. You give and do things to them based on the story and in a way that doesn't make them run like a pc. What you are doing is totally okay, and your players are happy. Stick with it. Even if you ran dmpc's, it would be okay if everyone is having fun. Just pull back if players start complaining, regardless of whether it is a dmpc or an npc.
bonethug0108 02-16-07, 02:38 AM	If they just "travel" with the PC's, you are OK. But it seems that yours adventure and fight alongside the PC's. This is bad. Ask your players. And not "hey guys, you like my NPC's don't you?" Tell them you know that many players resent DMPCs and that this resentment is often hidden. Explain that it's OK for them to be honest with you. Ask how you can run the DMPC's to make the game more fun for all. I always ask one question- If the "NPC's" are so nessesary to the game, why do not the players get to to run them during combat at least? I disagree with you. Our dm ran an npc that fought alongside our pc's and we loved it. I don't think that is a bad thing at all. If your players hate it, it is bad. It isn't bad by default. I would ask them if they like such and such and enjoy battling alongside them. If they say they like them, but wish it was just the pc's fighting, then pull back the reins. If they are happy to have assistance and don't feel it as an intrusion, then you are doing a great job.
Ramses III 02-16-07, 04:37 AM	If the NPCs get a share of party treasure and experience, they are DMPCs. If not, then they are not. Defining what game term to use for the NPCs isn't the measure of whether or not you have a problem, however. Setting up a few battles here and there where the PCs are supported by NPCs and the battles are balanced accordingly is fine. If you do it all the time, however, then you run the risk of the game becoming monotonous. If every major battle is one of epic scale where there are a bunch of NPCs fighting alongside the PCs they might get bored of the format; make sure to switch it up here and there or even run battles where the NPCs are an impediment rather than an asset.
bonethug0108 02-16-07, 04:58 AM	If the NPCs get a share of party treasure and experience, they are DMPCs. If not, then they are not. Defining what game term to use for the NPCs isn't the measure of whether or not you have a problem, however. Setting up a few battles here and there where the PCs are supported by NPCs and the battles are balanced accordingly is fine. If you do it all the time, however, then you run the risk of the game becoming monotonous. If every major battle is one of epic scale where there are a bunch of NPCs fighting alongside the PCs they might get bored of the format; make sure to switch it up here and there or even run battles where the NPCs are an impediment rather than an asset. Well put.
KJW 02-16-07, 09:08 AM	Don't use the term DMPC it befuddles many people on these boards. Technically, the term can't exist, DMs run NPCs and players run PCs, just read the definitions in the PHB. A DMPC is most widely used on these boards as a term for a NPC that is poorly run by the DM by showing favoritism to that NPC. But it is a confusing term follow the link at the bottom of my signature to the DMPC Reference Thread for more on this confusion. NPC allies, once again just read the DMG, are what some confuse as DMPCs. NPC allies may get equal experience (Personally, I give them 1/2 experience to more accurately reflect their role in the campaign). NPC allies may also get an equal share of the treasure, but realize this is a roleplaying issue determined by negotiations between the PCs and NPC. The DM controls experience, the party controls how treasure is divided. Of course, if the party balks at treating a NPC ally fairly then they should just walk away or maybe even get revenge depending upon the personality of the NPC. The real litmus for whether a NPC ally is properly run or not is your view of the NPC as DM and the relationship of the NPC to the PCs. If you view the NPC as a tool for the story like any other NPC and are not too attached to it then you have the right mindset. If you consider the NPC your PC, have it control the party (i.e. the NPC is the story-arc), shield it from harm (either by fudging or extreme min-maxing), or similar then you have a problem. This is because players (and their PCs) will come to dislike this NPC. I also speak from experience that few players will express this dislike for fear of angering the DM, who is usually also a friend. Personally, I have as a player worked to dump these DMPCs from parties (DMs make difficult and vocal players :) ) and have been punished by DMs, so this is another reason many players will remain quiet. Now that said most DMs run NPC allies with no problems. If the PCs can dismiss the NPC at any time and know this then they have control over the party. My PCs interview, hire, and fire NPC allies all the time, they know the party is theirs to control and thus they are actually more willing to have NPCs with the party and build relationships with the NPCs. Typically, my players like a group of 7-8 and if they are short PCs they recruit NPCs to round out the party. My NPCs are as detailed as PCs and I roleplay them by their personality and abilities, but they are still NPCs just ones with more stage time. They really enjoy my NPCs and as they keep recruiting NPCs it shows that they want them. I have no great emotional investment in these NPCs besides the fact that many of them are fun to play. If this describes you situation then you are doing everything right. Remember NPCs are what make campaigns. Without NPCs the PCs are functioning in a vacuum and the world will feel very shallow. Yes, be wary of mishandling NPCs, but they make the game work so don't be wary of using them. NPCs with the party can work very well as long as the DM remembers they are NPCs and that he is not invested in these characters like the players are invested in their PCs.
Millennium 02-16-07, 09:11 AM	I wouldn't call these DMPCs. They aren't permanent fixtures in the party, they don't take up party treasure (and they don't seem to act as XP-sinks), they're important to the plot but not to the degree that the PCs or the BBEG are, and you don't seem to be as attached to them as a typical player is to a PC. They're just plain old NPC allies, although they're very well-done ones. I'm glad your players enjoy them.