Post/Author/DateTime	Post
rogue2257 01-23-07, 12:07 AM	Being a total nooblet to PnP d&d, I haven't the foggiest idea if this is allowed or not. Can the DM play a character, providing said character does not reveal any information that would be in any way unbalancing? This is of course because my group is pitifully small, and I don't know if I'll be able to get anyone else to play... Anyway, my brother is going to be DM-ing, and he says the group he plays with does this... but is this something I ought to argue about?
Meshakhad 01-23-07, 12:12 AM	It is allowed, but be careful. You will hear tell of horror stories that would make Lovecraft wet his pants regarding DMPCs, where the DMPC is overpowered, or forces the PCs to submit to his will, or where the DM actually breaks the rules to protect his precious DMPC. That said, I have seen DMPCs used effectively, both to round out a party, and to help move the plot along. Just don't play favorites. Make sure that your DMPC is at the same power level as the party.
DragonSamurai 01-23-07, 12:19 AM	This is fine and a good way to boost a lparty if the DM can seperate himself from the NPC and not turn it into the dreaded DMPC. I ussualy play the personalities of the NPC's when I DM and let the players run the NPC in combat ect.
JasonOrlandoHawk 01-23-07, 12:23 AM	Two quick pieces of advice: 1) I have generally found that it is more interesting and easier to simply allow Players to run more than one character, rather than have a DMPC. 2) On the "What's a DM to do?" threads, they've locked/banned DMPC threads for the time being. (This is a subject that apparently garners some particularly harsh responses.) You probably didn't realize that there was such a restriction, but you may wish to provide a link to this thread for Wiz_O Cat (or any other admin) so that if they decide to shut it down, they don't think that you were intentionally breaking the rules.
EyeontheMountain 01-23-07, 02:21 AM	Two quick pieces of advice: 1) I have generally found that it is more interesting and easier to simply allow Players to run more than one character, rather than have a DMPC. I like gestalt as another option in this case
Neutronium_Dragon 01-23-07, 03:11 AM	How small is small? D&D assumes four PCs, so if you've got four characters, you're good to go. If you have only three or two players, it's probably better to either scale back the adventure, use higher level characters than it is built for, or have someone play an extra character. Using Gestalt is also an option if there are three of you, but if you're new to the game then it might be more complicated than you'd want to deal with. In general, three 2nd-level PCs should be able to handle an adventure designed for four 1st level PCs, though.
Boshi 01-23-07, 03:21 AM	I would STRONGLY recommend not having a DMPC unless you let the other players completely overshadow the DMPC and mostly use it as a healbot/meatshield/whatever. If the DMPC EVER steals the show something is VERY wrong.
Yokomohoyo 01-23-07, 04:02 AM	Yeah I say the same... The DMPC should be like some Barbarian numbnut that cant do anything but swing a stick at the badguy and be only good for cannon fodder... The DMPC should never be the dominate character.
rogue2257 01-23-07, 07:56 AM	Alright, thanks everyone. I feel a lot better about this now. I knew something didn't sound quite right there. I'll insist that we discuss another way around the issue. Thanks!
Ace_of_Diamonds 01-23-07, 08:08 AM	I've pulled it off successfully before, but mostly it was when I would DM for a group of 3, no one wanted to play any kind of healer, and no one wanted to run more than one character. I made an NPC/DMPC/whatever cleric one level lower than the party, and essentially kept his/her vote/say/opinion out of any party decisions.
The_Ditto 01-23-07, 08:37 AM	Alright, thanks everyone. I feel a lot better about this now. I knew something didn't sound quite right there. I'll insist that we discuss another way around the issue. Thanks! It's ok .. but just be careful ... The other option is to encourage the Leadership feat ... Even if you only have a 2 man party ... if they both take leadership ... *BAM* you're up to a 4-man party ... :tiphat: Animal companions and such and really help swing it as well. If you want to a "DMPC" as the DM .. try to create one that's useful .. but not overshadowing .. The Healer class from Mini handbook is one thought ... (odds are you'll need the healing and it's unlikely he'll steal the show). The Marshall is another thought ... kind of a weaker fighter .. but with some nifty auras and such that can boost the other PCs .. If you take a wizard, try sticking to buffs (Bull's Strength, Haste, Fly, displacement, etc.) ... again, buff the real PCs and let them do the real grunt work ... :tiphat: Cheers!
Hroth 01-23-07, 10:56 AM	I've used DMPCs before. When my group started out there was just me, my cousin and a friend. The first party was just the two of them with premade characters in a starter set. After a TPK, we made characters for them and I tossed in another premade character and a rogue. Later, the premade character (Jozan the cleric) was replaced with a healer (from the minis handbook). When they managed to persuade another friend to join the group, I just handed him the rogue and kept the healer until we got a fourth player to join, then she rode off into the sunset. One bit of advice: If your DMPC is better at something than the PCs (and they know it), don't just let the PCs off the hook. If the DMPC has better ranks in Diplomacy and the PCs want to let her do the talking, turn the tables by having them voice the DMPC ("What do you want her to say?"). Just because they're covering a party weakness doesn't mean the party is off the hook in dealing with that weakness. Worse case scenario let the party as a whole control the DMPC, taking turns running that character.
MindLich 01-23-07, 01:29 PM	If you're the DM, you only have to treat the DMPC as an NPC that joined the party to help balance the encounters. He doesn't receive any favouritism, he gets attacked like everyone else, he is the first to die too, depending on his personality, he could escape, sacrifice himself, backstab the PCs (not recommended). He should have a personality, and act like he has goals and opinions but without taking the roleplaying spotlight off the PCs. It is very fun to have them along, and my players love them. But if you are not careful and don't know how to balance and roleplay you will have a bad time indeed. In other words, I recommend using one if the number of PCs is not complete. But you have to be careful, and it is a little bit more difficult for the DM.
strenoth 01-23-07, 01:52 PM	When I do wind up running a DMPC, it's usually a cleric cause no one else is playing a healer. :-P But I also happen to be very interested in being fair and balanced, and only DM because I want other people to have some fun playing (I preffer being a player myself anyway). It's a truicky thing to pull off, playing in character well while still doing your job as a DM
vagabonvoid 01-23-07, 02:13 PM	If you want to run a DMPC and avoid the problems (such as the PCs saying you are favoring the DMPC) don't build them and customize their equipment, instead just pick an appropriate NPC from the DMG (Starting Pg. 110). They already are equipped and get standard equipment as they level up...
Olskool 01-23-07, 02:15 PM	Good DMs can run NPCs in any capacity and not end up ruining the players' fun. If you don't feel like you're up to the task of doing that though, just reduce the difficulty of encounters so it's more appropriate for your players capabilities. Just call your NPCs NPCs and not DMPCs ( stupid term imo) and your players won't notice the difference.
Gr8tyrant 01-23-07, 02:33 PM	I run a DMPC every now and then for plot reasons or balance. My last DMPC who just cut out to take care of some of his own business was a heal bot druid. I did not allow him to shift into anything affective (turned into a direwolf along with his direwolf pet for style). He was fine, but I had to keep him in check because druids are so powerful. I may bring a Bard in next because they have met the NPC and are pushing for information he cannot just tell, he would have to show. If it doesnt follow the plot or isnt absolutely necessary for balance I would be less than pleased with it.
Runfer_Cover 01-23-07, 02:43 PM	In the group I play in now we had only 2 players and the DM. We both created two characters to round out the party. This is what I would recommend over having a DMPC. It gives the players a chance to have more personality with each character.
Olskool 01-23-07, 02:50 PM	. It gives the players a chance to have more personality with each character. Or it gives players a chance to have less personality for both characters because their attention is too divided. In my experience, letting a player run more than one character is a potentially game breaking mistake.
theotherdraxen 01-23-07, 03:00 PM	In the group I play in now we had only 2 players and the DM. We both created two characters to round out the party. This is what I would recommend over having a DMPC. It gives the players a chance to have more personality with each character. I've done this, and it was actually is more fun for the players. They each had a primary character and a 'goon', which was one level lower than the primary character. Or it gives players a chance to have less personality for both players because their atttention is too divided. That is a very real possibility. This is why I had them have a primary character: the other two, while they were connected and had backstories of their own, were there more to fill the role. They didn't speak up much, unless they got separated for some reason, and didn't do much interaction. In fact, I advise the OP to RP the goons, but let the players decide their personalities and actions in combat.
Arturius1 01-23-07, 03:22 PM	I run a DMPC in my game. I like to keep the party to 5 members so nobody is pressured to take up their previous position if their character dies. Currently the party is made up of a rogue, cleric, paladin, samurai and ranged fighter (<-Me). The only reason I'm playing one is because we're down a player. As soon as we bring in a new player, the DMPC would be retired. If you're concerned about the need for a DMPC, try bringing in another player instead.
rogue2257 01-23-07, 03:27 PM	I tried to talk to my brother about it, and he understands my point of view, but he said that he "didn't really want to just sit there and read to us the whole time." To which i wasn't entirely sure what to say... Thoughts?
starfire311 01-23-07, 03:51 PM	it seems obvious to me that your brother must be really new to DMing if all he thinks the DM does is sit there and read, the DM is responsible for so many more things than the players. I would also recommend he doesn't run one since IMO they take away from the enjoyment of a lot of players, they may not always come out and say it, but they still feel that way. Also, DMs running PCs seem to be notorious for showing favoritism, I can name a numerous DMs that have had PCs that have really hurt the game, usually by upstaging the PCs, yes not all DMs are like this, but IME I have never seen a DMPC run differently. Since you are playing in the game, and you think that a DMPC is bad for the group, and you don't want one in the group, then you can just ditch him 1st chance you get, the story is about you the players not his stupid DMPC. Now if you guys as a group decide to recruit some NPCs to help out, then that can be a good move, NPCs can really help the players fesh out their party.
Krusk 01-23-07, 04:25 PM	If he insists on a DMPC suggest he run a bard. He can give a very minor buff to combat, and he can do some emergency healing. Plus can use heal rods/scrolls. As long as he dosnt take any of the bards social skills at all. If he does he could easily become the party face, and thats not a good idea.
kelvinaw273 01-23-07, 04:27 PM	Being a total nooblet to PnP d&d, I haven't the foggiest idea if this is allowed or not. Can the DM play a character, providing said character does not reveal any information that would be in any way unbalancing? This is of course because my group is pitifully small, and I don't know if I'll be able to get anyone else to play... Anyway, my brother is going to be DM-ing, and he says the group he plays with does this... but is this something I ought to argue about? Oooh boy! This is one of the most controversial subjects on the boards, next to the Stormwind Fallacy. Strictly by the book, no. The DM runs everyone else in the world, other than the player characters. He runs everyone they interact with from the barmaid to the BBEG. That is a lot of work. If he wants to role-play, he can get plenty in that interaction with the party (as long as they are not only interested in killing things and grabbing their stuff) with these Non-Player Characters (NPCs). The PHB and DMG specifically state that the DM does NOT run a PC. Now a while ago somebody introduced a new term on the boards, DMPC. Many took this to mean a PC played by the DM, and as such it is a bad idea: Players lavish love and care on their characters, and when you are already in effect playing the part of the referee, the crowd and the opposing team, taking on the role of one of the other team as well is way too much of a conflict of interest. Some can do it, many more think they can but cannot (to judge from the complaints on the boards). What DMPC means is a character equivilent to a PC in terms of creation, developement and party membership that is run by the DM. The idea is that if the party lacks an essential role (which always happens if there are less than four players anyway) the DMPC can fill in. Some DMs use this as an excuse to introduce the character that they wish they were playing (if they were not DMing), and they end up sidelining the party to show how great they are, which is where it all goes wrong. In short, yes, your brother can place an NPC that he controls into the party, but don't be afraid to speak up if you feel he is abusing his authority to make things easier for 'his' character and stopping the rest of you having fun. Personally I advise against it, but it sounds like he has some experience at DMing so it may work out OK.
rogue2257 01-23-07, 05:00 PM	Even though he knows I don't like the idea, and says he'll be impartial to his character, I'm still terribly weary. I wonder if I can talk him into using NPCs as part of the party...that might sate his need for additional involvement in the game.
Runfer_Cover 01-24-07, 08:52 AM	Or it gives players a chance to have less personality for both characters because their attention is too divided. In my experience, letting a player run more than one character is a potentially game breaking mistake. You are absolutely right that does have the potential to happen. In the campaign I am in right now, we are all running two characters. All of us are experienced and we have been able to separate personalities and differences in the character. It does help when they are completely different types. I am playing a soulknife orphan who was kidnapped by a group and a halfling cleric that is being played like kender light. Also if one character falls, you are not left out of the game. The downside is if they are not the best role-players, the characters can become like minds (Like the borg) This did occur in other campaign I was in a few years ago. But I would rather see the players run two characters as oppose to the DM running some to balance out the party. It can be a different experience for the players and the DM is already busy enough.
starfire311 01-24-07, 09:15 AM	Or it gives players a chance to have less personality for both characters because their attention is too divided. In my experience, letting a player run more than one character is a potentially game breaking mistake. Ya know what, I used to agree with this train of thought, then it dawned on me, how many characters do I run as a DM, well too numerous to count, how many fully fleshed out characters do I run as a DM, that is a better question, I probably use 5-15 characters that are fully stated out with backgrounds and RPing quirks and flaws, during a gaming session, if I can pull off RPing 15 differenct characters during one session, why can't a player handle 2, it would get interesting watching them interect with themselves, but meh.
TwistedPuppy 01-24-07, 10:30 AM	Even though he knows I don't like the idea, and says he'll be impartial to his character, I'm still terribly weary. I wonder if I can talk him into using NPCs as part of the party...that might sate his need for additional involvement in the game. Any character the DM controls is, by definition, a NPC. Check out the NPC section in the DMG, and look at "ally." I think the most recently used term on the boards for what he's talking about is "snuggywug." Give the DM a chance, and if he's got some overpowered character that is reducing the others to spear-carriers, then you have a problem and need to make sure he knows it. Your options boil down to giving it a chance, not playing, or offering to DM yourself. There's nothing wrong with the DM having a character with the party, and it doesn't have to be an ignorant meatshield or a healbot that has no interaction with the group other than fighting for them or healing them. His ability to separate the knowledge of the NPC from his own knowledge will actually be a good measuring stick of how good a DM he is.
TwistedPuppy 01-24-07, 10:36 AM	Ya know what, I used to agree with this train of thought, then it dawned on me, how many characters do I run as a DM, well too numerous to count, how many fully fleshed out characters do I run as a DM, that is a better question, I probably use 5-15 characters that are fully stated out with backgrounds and RPing quirks and flaws, during a gaming session, if I can pull off RPing 15 differenct characters during one session, why can't a player handle 2, it would get interesting watching them interect with themselves, but meh. I can agree with just about everything starfire311 is saying. ;) It all boils down to the individual. Some players are perfectly capable of running two characters, some aren't. Just like some DMs are capable of running a fully fleshed out NPC with the PCs, and some shouldn't. Problem is, there's no way to be certain of who can or can't until you let them try.
Millennium 01-24-07, 10:43 AM	Technically, any character the DM runs is an NPC, even if that character travels with the party and earns a share of the XP. "DMPC" is an unofficial term for an NPC that does exactly this. This sort of thing is allowed by the rules. Some published modules even outright encourage it: Expedition to Castle Ravenloft has a fully-statted NPC that travels with the party after a certain point. However, players should see the appearance of a DMPC as a red flag. It's not a definite sign of trouble, but it is cause for concern. Far too many DMs use DMPCs to hog the spotlight, or metagame the crap out of everything. Many don't even know they're doing it. If you trust your DM to do things well then it's probably not something to worry about, but that's an awful lot of faith to put in a DM, and it doesn't sound like you have it. Otherwise, why would you be unsettled enough by this that you'd post here asking about it? The best I can tell you, unfortunately, is to wait and see how it goes. It might turn out all right.
Falln 01-24-07, 11:10 AM	DMPC's are often only needed for one adventure. They are NPC's that travel with the party. The worst thing that can happen is the DMPC stealing all the show and the PC's are the sidekicks. The best thing that can happen: The party needs NPC X to do something. As long as X is needed the party needs to keep him alive. X is only good at what he's needed for. Like the PC's hire a rogue in a trap heavy adventure. If the rogue steals the show during combat and duning non-combat then there's a problem. If the rogue stays behind in combat and only comes forward to check doors and rooms for traps, then I wouldn't worry that much. Other example: A young fighter is destined to become the next king. An Oracle has told this. Some bad guy wants to prevent this from happening so he hires some goons to kill the fighter. The PC's need to prevent this. In this case the fighter will probably very low level compared to the PC's. So he can't steal the show at all and he'll only act during some story based events.
Pippa 01-24-07, 11:30 AM	Being a total nooblet to PnP d&d, I haven't the foggiest idea if this is allowed or not. Can the DM play a character, providing said character does not reveal any information that would be in any way unbalancing? This is of course because my group is pitifully small, and I don't know if I'll be able to get anyone else to play... Anyway, my brother is going to be DM-ing, and he says the group he plays with does this... but is this something I ought to argue about? I believe the cool-down period for DMPC-threads is still up, but I believe you didn't know about your question concerning that beasty, plus no-one 's plunged this thread into an ever-repeating, metalinguistic flamefest-loophole of logic (applause ye fine posters!), so all's cool. Here 's KJW's DMPC-reference thread: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=703618 Ignore any posts made by people sinning against the thread's one-post-per-person policy, and all those not contributing to its goal (informing people not familiar with the term), and you 'll be just fine.
kelvinaw273 01-24-07, 03:22 PM	Even though he knows I don't like the idea, and says he'll be impartial to his character, I'm still terribly weary. I wonder if I can talk him into using NPCs as part of the party...that might sate his need for additional involvement in the game. Red Flag! He refers to it as 'his character' then definitely a bad omen. Tell him you would far rather he concentrate on making convincing NPCs than have a PC in the group. Point him at this thread, and the entire DMPC controvesy. Or you could agree to try it provided you have a right-of-veto if you feel it is going awry.
Hakar_Kerarmor 01-25-07, 12:44 AM	I think an actual DMPC is only a good idea when you rotate DM-duty, otherwise I'd say stick to more generic NPC's.
goldjas 01-25-07, 07:54 PM	Red Flag! He refers to it as 'his character' then definitely a bad omen. Tell him you would far rather he concentrate on making convincing NPCs than have a PC in the group. Point him at this thread, and the entire DMPC controvesy. Or you could agree to try it provided you have a right-of-veto if you feel it is going awry. I agree, the second a DM wants to play an NPC thats "his character" its already over. It doesn't matter if hes being impartial or not, if he considers this character a step above every other NPC in the game, its already very, very, bad news.
Elsydeon 01-25-07, 08:30 PM	I DMed a shadowrun game once... if you've never played it, they have hackers (It's cyberpunk. High technology and magic exist in Shadowrun) called Deckers. The rule system for a decker is many times more complex than that of any other character, and the character is essentially in the Matrix while doing his thing, so he can't really act in the outside world while serving a purpose. They're characters that get very little RP time relative to the others, serve a VITAL purpose of information gathering, lowering defenses, disabling surveillance, etc. and nobody new to the game should ever play one. Nobody in my group knew the rules. I ran a DMPC decker for them. It eliminated a party weakness that was crippling, and never was a problem for anyone. DMPCs are dangerous. But not the end of the world. Sometimes it's necessary. The first rule of DMPCs is don't make a character you would make as a PC. Give him a different personality, different stats, don't start out attached to him like he was your PC. Be completely willing to have him die. And don't auto-replace him if he does. Make the party fill it's own hole after that initial help. Even if it just means they look for a replacement DMPC. Give them lots of time without him before they find a new one, and even when he's alive make him unobtrusive. Don't use his "Advance Plot" spell like ability ever. Just my 2 cents.
Kardanok 01-25-07, 10:33 PM	My friends do this once in a while when we are lacking players. It usually doesn't work well though. The DM puts all his/her focus into actually running the game, and the DMPC becomes a character that doesn't talk or interact in most ways with characters. The DMPC basically becomes a mindless combat drone.
ZombieDragon 01-25-07, 11:49 PM	Does the Dm get miffed when a BBEG that he spent time stating out gets killed in 1-2 rounds ? If yes then DMPC is a very bad thing. If they refer to it as their character. It's a bad thing. DmPc's are just NPC's. When they get called PC's red flags should fly. Now my dad can run many DmPc's but he has always played that way and can somehow section off his mind. He started playing DnD with playing 2 PCs at once. He would spend an hour or so stating a NPC just to kill it off in seconds. I can't run a DmPc as I like my work and want them to flourish. We have a small group, usually we can only count on 2 Pc's. This is what gestalt was intended for. We have also gone the template route, feral is nice as it gives healing and Saint is sick but works wonders in a tiny group. Just be careful with EL as the smaller the group the survivability drops quickly. A nice guide is : http://www.d20srd.org/encounterCalculator.htm