Good way to deal with a hero character is have it that they are currently in a situation that is out of their league. Like you could have a heroic barbarian dude who could protect his vilalge from native goblins and mosnters on his own. But then you have something come in that has united the mosnters against him and he is totally on the backstep and losing ground.
What is boundary between an NPC and an enemy dm pc. Because I have a charchter equivalent to a level 80, only a level 60 and up can harm him since he is a literal god. He does not hurt the players because he is a messager to another god whose level 100 (it's not as broken as it sounds, it's a god campaign)
At 4:20 you have no idea how wrong you are playing an evil campaign is amazing it turns towns into dungeons and dungeons into towns the consequences slowly pile up and it has incredibly funny moments as well i really recommend giving it a shot! We scam with fake fortune tellings, get involved in political corruption, murder the elderly, and much worse in my campaign there has never been a dull moment. Whats important is the party has some real reason that keeps them together for us we are all outsiders that share an origin but some like minded motivation is most importan
I usually have a dmpc in my games, provided they are a small party (3 or less players) they provide assistance in combat but tend to stay in the background in support roles and don't take command in really any situation, the party makes the call and they speak up when they are asked. This way I can give my players a push in the right direction if they are unsure of where to go, or to say give them a healer on par for their party. And this goes wonderfully, the players get help if they need it but they aren't sidekicks, and they don't have a deus ex machina waiting to get them out of trouble because my dmpc's are usually a level or two below the party. The issue is when dm's make a character that is more powerful than the players and starts directing them. That's when it takes away from their adventure.
I've used one "DMPC" Loth Lalar the Horrid. A infamous necromancer lich who supposedly died thousands of years ago. The players found his detached skull after digging for a couple of days after noticing some necromancy magic with detect magic. He can't cast spells, fight or anything. Just talk. He is completely at the players mercy. He needs the PCs to get his body reassembled so he can keep on conquering the world. The only problem is that he is like suuuper bad at charisma stuff (-4 to both persuasion and deception) and like everyone knows he's a bad dude. The party used him as a pokedex for undead creatures and would toss the skull around corners to scout. I love that character. Every time he refused to do as they said, they threatened to bury him again. I usually add something like Loth Lalar to parties that are kinda struggling with getting roleplay going. Plus it's fun for me to roleplay the allmighty lich king who has had the ultimate fall from grace. Edit: Since people keep asking. Do feel free to steal this. You're all free to use it in any of your games. Edit 2: Since people keep commenting on this and I feel I didn't express it clearly at all, Loth Lalar is not a DMPC to begin with but can take that role if the party deliberately gives him the power to act more independently. The party essentially gets to decide how much this guy actually does in the game based on whether or not they let him get his bones back. And if they get most of them back he can serve as a great secondary antagonist when he's able to leave the party behind act on his own entirely. So the players are aware of how he works and it's up to them to decide what they want from the character
I wouldn't even say this fall's into the category of DMPC. The point of a DMPC is that they fill the role of another PC and draw attention away from the PCs. That just sounds like a really fun non player character 😄😄
Not really a DMPC, just an NPC/magic item. There's a fine line between an npc that follows the party and a PC the DM is playing, this is most certainly not one of them. Cool idea though, totally stealing it :P
My players actually always ask for me to make a campaigns where, quote: "if we die, the world goes on". It is quite challenging to make a storyline, but they really don't like playing "chosen one" campaigns.
My friends and I have a similar thing going. Our original three characters died, but we essentially made the NPC that I chose to pick up (a 10 year old Dragonborn child named Danny) into the hero of our story because our actions traumatized him. Now my friend plays as an edgy traumatized version of Danny, and my other friend and I play our new characters. We have to deal with the consequences of our previous party because their responsibilities bled onto us with Danny.
It could be a nice turnaround if things actually start going for the worse because of something the party does, so their presence is "chosen one" style but nothing would have happened if they were not there to begin with
The trick is having multiple threat levels. War is a really good way of handling that. If there is war in a setting, its most powerful individuals will be tied up in politics and conflict. They'll have their own missions and goals and concerns. In the mean time, the players uncover a threat that will shake things up in the world. If the players don't deal with it, maybe a village will be wiped out. They are the heroes of that village - and maybe that's all they care about, because that's the scale of THEIR story. In the background, however, empires rise and fall. Eventually, the players grow stronger and uncover greater threats. Now, the bandits attacking towns and the cool NPC that helped you track them are small potatoes. Now you're dealing with an undead threat that has been plaguing several villages. As you continue to chase up and deal with these little threats, maybe it all leads up to a lich that has plans to usurp one of the kingdoms. That's when you start to involve them in the genuinely important stuff within the world, and after helping said kingdom, they may become important participants in the wars and shaping of the world. But at the end of the day, if they die fighting bandits - the world does just go on. If they die to the undead? Sure, the villages are toast, but the world goes on and that happens all the time. The lich isn't dealt with? A kingdom rises that is led by an immortal king, but the world goes on. It's only if the players genuinely earn the power to change the world that their death really alters the state of it. However, no matter when they die, their death is always important to something. Sure, they aren't the chosen ones that'll change the world forever - but if they die, then that little village with all those colourful characters dies with them. The world goes on, but not their worlds.
@@MewLillyPad that works, too, but I found my players actually suspected that when I first introduced the character. It really depends on your players, lol
Sounds like your players just want to make friends and focus on the Social Interaction part of the three pillars! Maybe ask them if their attempts to befriend NPCs are their way of trying to direct play towards the kind of experience they wanna have?
@@bislarke95 Yeah, they do like the social aspect of the game and we often have sessions that are purely RP which I really enjoy. Its not so much that they want to befriend people that's the issue, its moreso that they want to bring everyone they meet along for fights/dungeons to give them a boost in combat. Recently they've been on a ship with 6 fully fleshed out NPCs and they invariably try to persuade the captain to let as many people come with them as possible into a dungeon (despite the captain being adamant that only half the crew can leave at a time to protect the ship). They've even gone as far as to persuade the inhabitants of an island to help guard the ship so they can bring more NPCs into the dungeon. Similarly, if a king asks them to kill X monster, they'll ask for some guards/the captain to join them etc etc. Most of this is primarily to make the party stronger in combat rather than for RP purposes. I've started to phase out some of the NPCs now (death, new goals etc.) I don't mind the ingenuity, having more people is a smart idea but it slows combat down greatly and gives me far more to worry about.
@@Skare75 I've had that happen to me, and I'm sorry to hear it. But there's some ways to circumvent this issue if it's such a bad thing for you. 1. If they're asking the king for more guards, maybe the city has a plague or suffering constant conflict with a nearby tribe or a siege or something. That way, the king will say he needs every man he can afford. If they roll a natural 20, the king gives them a scroll of mordenkainen's sword which can summon a helmed horror or something. 2. The NPCs just outright refuse. Why the fuck would they join an adventuring party, lol. They're doing their jobs, earning their coin, drinking their mead and enjoying their time with their loved ones, friends and/or family. Why would they join. 3. Just outright tell your players you find it exhausting. Explain the situation to them. Ultimately, my friend, I think it's okay to give a NPC to help the players out but it should happen exclusively for good reason, like once or twice in the WHOLE CAMPAIGN, so there's narrative weight to it. If not, these NPCs just become another mechanic the players will always try to get a hold of. Because if they can, why shouldn't they? It increases their survival odds. If your players got used to it I'm sorry, my tip is don't like be cheap and kill off these NPCs just because you don't like this mechanic, because the players will feel like the DM is playing against them and that's a no-no. It's not your fault either for letting this happen but now you've gotten more experience to understand that it's a terrible thing and you'll avoid it in the future. My final tip is: always talk to the players if there's something you're not liking about the experience and you'd like to change. If they're dicks about it, don't waste your time playing just to exhaust yourself. The earlier you make this realization, the earlier you'll learn to enjoy this game a lot more, with the right people and the right circumstances.
My DMPC is an ancient wizard who accidentally true polymorphed himself into a piece of bread. He can only cast mage hand to lift himself up. He is paired with the most insane member of the party
This isn't a DMPC, though. The character has a very limited scope of things it can do, so it falls more into the "ally" category than the "PC" category. A DMPC, as Jacob is describing them, is a fully fleshed out character, with all the skills and abilities of a regular character that participates in the story and combat just as much as the other PCs. Jacob's complaint is really centered around the idea of someone taking on an active player role while also being the DM. If you have a character that can't/won't fight but can provide useful information to the party or a similar passive role, then that's fine. Likewise, a character that helps in combat but doesn't get involved in any other aspect of the game unless the PCs specifically ask them to do so (e.g. "hey {combat helper}, do you know anything about {historical subject}?"). The passive character allows the DM to get involved in roleplay while the party is adventuring and there are no NPCs around and can help keep the story moving if the players get stuck. The combat character helps by filling a role the party is lacking, such as a healer or tank, without stepping on the heroics of the PCs themselves.
One thing I’ve always enjoyed doing is having what I call the “alternate party” which is just another group of adventurers that the PCs bump into from time to time. They stay away from being DM PCs because they’re never doing the same quests as the players and mostly they just interact with each other in towns, at bars or at tournaments and stuff. They keep pace with the PCs as far as level and wealth go so that they remain their peers and all, so far all my players have really enjoyed it. Clearly the “alternate party” is a group of fully built characters but the point of them is to make the world feel bigger, like theirs this other group of adventurers who’re going to investigate those Orc raids while the party has decided to try and root out the local thieves guild. So ideally they’re really more like allies than DM PCs because they’ve clearly got their own thing going on and are off on their own unrelated adventures all the time. One of the best things to come out of all of this was when, fairly early on in a campaign, one of my players decided to drag the head of a crocodile (at this point the biggest thing they’d killed) into a bar to show off to the alt party, this of course prompted a trophy competition where ever time the two groups ran into each other they always had a new dismembered monster part to show off. My players literally made skill checks to try and carve off the most impressive trophies and then cast gentle repose and took them to taxidermists just because they wanted to make sure that Minotaur head (or whatever) still looked awesome for when they ran into the alt party again. It was great.
Yeah I did this to spice up the Dragon of Icespire Peak adventure, which truth be told is at worst broken and at best a little bland. My players loved that group and when they finally went to kill the dragon, I had that group's members frozen on the way like a breadcrumb trail. There was one character in that party my group particularly loved so I knew I didn't want to kill her off but it created a ton of suspense my group was like "oh fuck not maple let's look for her" and they found her alive, cold and scared but alive. She was a halfling and our group's halfling had a thing for her. When they killed the dragon, my brother sent his character off with her to live happily ever after with Maple and he rolled a new character for arc 2 and it felt so wholesome.
Yeah, having other groups around doesn't take away from the player's experience it adds to it. Do the players try to work with this other group, do they backstab them, do they passively make the player's life harder or easier, do they add to the lore surrounding the players and if they defeat the big bad are your players going to let them take the glory or are they going to get into a fight. Making the world revolve around the player is always weak writing.
I like the idea of having the players make another group. Most of my players have 2 or 3 characters, and they're all in the game. We have the Failed Players, PC's that some of the players didn't get along with so well and they made new ones, we have Bravo Team, hired guns sent on a side quest after one of the main PC's got stuck in extraplanar prison, and Fingon of Clan Beren, a gnome necromancer who turned on the party to become a lich. He'll turn up again I'm sure
consider: a good dmpc is one that grows organically from a normal npc to someone the players like so much they want to bring them along and is useful without stealing the spotlight yes this is about essek thelyss
It's true though. While it is finnicky to pull off it can work, and I think especially the forever DMs are sometimes happy to get to play their OC for once too.
@@LiMe251 you could use sidekicks from Tasha to give to players! It's classes that are just much easier so you could give each of players lil guy to support main PC and you would have like 3,6 - 4 characters of power without taking half of party under your direct control
We have one NPC in our main campaign that is like that. He was actually as assistant of the BBEG of the story, but we kidnapped him and he... kinda grew on us? So we stopped treating him as an enemy and he actually started helping! Cool stuff!
Especially when you're the DM of a game with literal children who don't know any better and are bound to do things that will get them into loads of trouble. ( My little cousins of 7 and 9.)
this happened in a game I'm a player in after 2 players also dropped she became me and the new player who joined's favorite other pc in the party mostly because she helped us out and didn't compete for the spot light or resources and saved peoples lives (mainly the other 2 players) she was a life domain cleric named Jaden and we all cried when her father became King of the main kingdom in our game and she had too go do her princess duties.
Having a similar problem where our previous game crashed and I decided to take up the dm mantle to still steer things towards a satisfying conclusion. Problem is we have a level 15 and a level 5 party, and my characters were the only healers/supporters in both groups. The entire composition would fall apart if I had them not tag along.
Support allies are different from dmpcs. The big difference is that support characters don't steal the thunder from the pcs. Probably why players don't play support roles unless you give the support roles their own time to shine.
Dave W Similar thing happened in a one-shot we were doing though it wasn’t fully the same. It was a level 1 (level up to 2) two-shot. Our original PC’s were a Druid and a sorcerer so we didn’t have a tank or full on fighter so we added BOB the fighter soldier with a medic background! He was the MVP and saved our asses multiple times.
@@maddoxWolfe It's nice to use them as enemies because they are way more flexible and have more options, in and out of combat, making them complex and inherently hard to beat, possibly even harder than their CR suggests. This is also what makes Designed Difficulty, contrary to Artificial Difficulty.
Would let's say using player controlled NPCs as a back up to a party who's either A weak B smaller and 3 all one class with no healer because I have that for one of my campaigns. They're generally only used as backup for combat, but also for an emergency roll in case the party just rolls ones (I would do rerolls for ones but they didnt want that...they're all new as well and they got the npcs by persuasion rolls)
I think the most important thing is the motivations for "Hero" type NPCs like the video suggests. It is vital to keep in mind when creating this type of character, that they should need the PCs equally or even more than they need him. Otherwise, why doesn't this character just go out and fix all the problems that the PCs have been solving? This can range from character flaws like pride, where they underestimate whatever threat the PCs are up against, leading to them acting recklessly or intervening too late to stop the threat. Apathy is another one, where they simply just don't care about the threat. Or maybe they lack a specific skill set or knowledge that only the PCs have access to due to the adventures they have been on.
@@eclipsegu2rdian591 my group had no healer and had just finished taking some guy hostage, a sort of take us to your leader situation. To make my job easyer I just made the hostage a cleric and it was great. He ended up being the butt of every joke in the party. One time a party member had a random magical effects potion that triggered on skin contact, he slipped some of it onto my DM NPC and he turned blue and didn't notice until later. He did earn a modicum of the party's respect and they were sad to see him go when he had lead them to his boss' hideout but I was tired of having to play him and all the monsters in combat. He will be a fun recurring npc though.
Seems like the majority of comments agree that there is no issue with a "DMPC", so long as they have their own purpose and arent a shamelessly overpowered, unavoidable self insert. Most NPCs are probably fine if a DM is self aware.
It's the DM equivalent of "metagaming". It's technically not always bad, but there are lines that you should never cross - for players it's cheating and for the DM it's making the game all about yourself.
Agreed. All NPCs and Allies are technically DMPCs. "DMPC" has basically just become conflated with the "Mary Sue/Gary Stu" trope. Just don't play your DMPCs like tools, and they won't be seen as tools. Easy enough.
Teal i don’t get what’s wrong with a regular NPC tho. A DMPC implies som particular attachment to one character. In a game where you are literally every character, I don’t see why you need one to be a full time party member.
@@charlieb8735 when i mean backseat role i mean it can be okay for like 1 adventure preferably someone encountered half way in or further, while also making sure you let the party handle the cool shit. Then you write them out, they gotta rebuild the now destroyed city etc etc, and maybe have them be a reoccurring in the future with more of a npc role. if you have them being a full time party member then yea i agree that's absolute garbage
I have what I guess is a dmpc. A paladin who’s only there to help the party with getting into towns. For the time being, the goals of both the party and the kabal of paladins the crimson paladin is leading are the same. After his arc he has made a few appearances every once in awhile because my players like to tease him when they can. Edit: btw all he really did was make travel time shorter because he had a wagon. At most he took care of one problem, that being he captured a enemy the players wanted to question. Was that a dmpc moment or just dm panic?
Teal What you describe is just an ally. A DMPC is the DM becomming the hero in his own story. Yes, an NPC can be important and he can even be the focus of the current part of the story. I.e. the PCs could help king Arthur to acquire Excalibur in a story. BUT an NPC always takes the backseat in the end. An NPC is there to make the PCs adventure more interesting, while a DMPC is there to steal the PCs thunder. An NPC may die or be left behind or leave the story in some other fashion, while a DMPC is that obnoxious character the PCs can’t get rid of no matter how much they hate him. A DMPC makes decisions for the PCs, wins their fights and solves their problems. An NPC may help the players, but also creates new problems to solve. He may slay a monster, but he needs the PCs to do the heavy lifting. He may like to go east, but will follow the PCs to the west. It’s not that difficult to spot the DMPC, mainly because he takes the lead ... all the f....ing time.
Actually happened to me, although I was a player; I was reluctant but I can’t force the rest of the party to do things my way Luckily the dm gave the npc a good reason not to come
Sometimes the players want the dm to be a player with them too, and that's perfecrly okay as long as the DMPC acts like a party member and not a hero. So... #notalldmpc ????
This is exactly how it works and is a sign imo that you're a good DM. It's a freaking paradox! The worst DMs create DMNPCs and use them to micromanage and overshadow their players. The best DMs avoid DMNPCs, but their games and NPCs are cool/fun enough that the party ends up enjoying them and wanting them around
@@archeenemy6653 That's kinda what happened with a Cleric NPC that I only had around for a little bit. He was supposed to be there for one boat trip for a quest, but my party really liked him, so I decided to gear the party more toward his Deity, and have him watch over the heroes he started giving quests to. This is the first NPC I've ever actually made, and it felt really good
My players know that I don’t really have good excuses as to why the military can’t do things so they often end up getting a big squad and sending them in to combat rather than actually fighting, but usually I just have them distract minions so the players can fight the big boys.
Yeah I’m doing that for a campaign with my cousin cause she’s a barbarian and I don’t want her to ya know DIE but gave the DMPC some opposing goals so it’s not so boring for her
Exactly where I was getting at in my own comment. Also to have a babysitter for teaching new players lol. I was tossed into the world of ttrpgs with a mean dm that was kinda out to get the players lol. I mean in all fairness it was my own fault I got my first character killed on his first session lmao, however he purposely kept me multiple levels behind the rest of the party, I was invited in after they started. He also did not take the time to help me learn, threw books at me, and told me be done in an hour. Thankfully some of my friends did take up the mantle and helped me make my first character. But ever since then I have personally chosen to give "tutorial" adventures for new players, no matter where the rest are in the campaign. A tutorial game is necessary I feel. If its a bunch of newbies... thats where the dmnpc babysitter comes along lol. Never really have them take charge, more so just follow the group, and keep them safe from any... unforeseen challenges lol.
I do the same when im playing with my gf. A nice thing you can shake it up a little. Give the NPCs special attacks, heals, buffs which the player can use like legendary actions. Like once or twice a fight, or biggers once/day.
I have experience in the same situation, though not so much for plot hooks as to provide someone that is around on a consistent basis for the (admittedly inexperienced) player to interact with, bouncing ideas off of, to allow encounters to be a little more dangerous (we're only level 2 so far) by being someone else for the creatures to beat up and to be able to save the players' a$$ if necessary. Here's what I've learned: -You don't want to have more than one DM NPC in the party, because when the times inevitably come that they have to interact it becomes weird that you have to have a conversation with "yourself". It's not quite as bad when your DM NPC is just talking to other NPCs, and less so if you're doing it all text-based like us. -Combat can be kind of awkward, as during an encounter you can't help but plan ahead what the creatures are going to do in a given round, but you have to play your DM NPC as if they don't have that knowledge. You can't even just play your creatures optimally by doing the thing that makes sense 100% of the time just so that you can resolve the DM NPC knowing what they're going to do, or you'd have them all beating up the first person that drops to unconsciousness. -While you don't want the DM NPC to take the spotlight off the player by being a lot more powerful than them, I found making the DM NPC underpowered wasn't fun for the player either if they had to constantly rescue DM NPC with healing potions and other resources. At its worst, an encounter the player could have survived could become fatal because they had to waste their time healing your DM NPC. Obviously you don't want the DM NPC to be the "party" face either. -Also concerning balance: just make them as you would if you were going to be player in your own campaign (that's essentially what you're doing anyway after all, isn't it?) but with the previous concerns in mind, and try to make them with similar or slightly less power to the player. It's pretty easy to avoid the "DM NPC is just joining the player because they are a good guy" thing if you do this right and make it obvious that the DM NPC couldn't do this on their own, or has other motives (such as someone funding them). -Don't be pushy for the player to accept your DM NPC into the party, and likewise don't have your character explicitly show interest in adventuring with the player. But do tell the player upfront that some NPCs can become their companion on the adventure temporarily or permanently, if it makes sense for them to do so. But what about that the other NPCs don't have character sheets? That's okay, you can make things happen in a way that it doesn't become relevant for that session, and create one for the NPC after the fact. You'd be losing work too, but it's better than taking agency away from the player. Again of course, this only applies to a one-player one-DM campaign as you originally said.
My DM just let me play the adopted party members, and it's been great. I've completely taken one over now as a 2nd PC and she gets to be DM without trying to also be part of the party
Have the party at lvl 3 encounter a world ending threat that they have no hope of defeating. Send them on a quest to resurrect an ancient army, they also must collect powerful components to perform this resurrection. The party finds the ancient tomb of this army. With the great evil on their heels there is no time to waste, they must wake the dead here or die trying. But the ancient resurrection spell scroll/artifact is not quite right and they only resurrect the general of the army. A tall regal and imposing ally but one ally none the less. The world ending evil breaks through the last barrier they have as they believe all is lost when one plucky adventurer turns to the newly awakened hero and says, "We needed an army not one rotting corpse in shining armour" The old hero ignoring the adventurer looks at the insurmountable power of the enemy before him then looking at the party says "We will be enough." Idk might be fun to run a campaign like this.
I used to DM for only 2 players early on, and I would DMPC a usually super low INT/CHA Fighter or Healer depending on how the two other player built the character and what kind of build they thought would be most useful. Basically this ment that I didn’t interact at all in the roleplay side of things with regards to other NPCs, but it was easier to have a more balanced and more fun combat encounters.
I've used one DMPC ever. His name was Erevan Dawnbringer, and he existed because I didn't want any of my new players to feel obliged to play a Cleric on their first game. He didn't do very much other than say "come friends!" Or "worry not, I shall heal you" for the whole campaign, and everyone loved him.
“DMPCs are unfun for your players.” Meanwhile, my party adopted a bard orphan from an orphanage, recruited a random goblin they caught and interrogated, allied with an artificer arsonist who was a villain from a sidequest (that I fully expected them to kill), and are now trying to simultaneously recruit the head warlock of a cult and a monk from the city chapel.
If your players want more of them, they're probably not stealing their spotlight. Again, I think XP here differentiates between "Ally" and "Hero" NPC using the quantifier of "DM wants to be cool so adds a hero that always does the cool thing, thus stealing the PCs' thunder." If your allies that you introduce to your game don't steal the dramatic thunder of your PCs, they're complementary allies and they make it more fun. Good job!
Yeah, it just comes down to what the party want. If they try to convince someone to join, it works much better than someone pushing themselves on the party
Yeah I get what he’s saying, I’m more making a joke about how unusual my players are than disagreeing with XP. I have some very stringent rules about running party members as a DM to avoid the common complaints players have about DMPCs, and I think they make a big difference.
In my group the DM always creates a PC to play with the party, but it's something that we talk about ahead of time, and allows them to participate in the party antics as a player. It's honestly always been super fun, and they always make sure that their character doesn't overshadow anyone else's. Also allows us to rotate DM's and still use the same party!
I feel like if I was gonna do a DM PC type of character, I'd make him similar to Gandalf. He'd follow the party around, letting them do most things by themselves, and never really letting on to how powerful he really is, but still offering some helpful advice from time to time and participating in combat, just not to his full ability. I may even include a sort of balrog moment if I was reasonably confident the party would think it was cool.
I have a few DM PCs in my current game, and this is essentially their role. That fact is what makes the campaign continue to be entertaining despite their presence. Edit: Also, yes, we did have a balrog sort of moment, and yes, it was cool as hell.
i play with a DM who uses a DMPC and it's actually really great, gave our group focus in times where we not working together like we needed, and it never feels like the DM uses the DMPC to take moments away from us or otherwise remove our fun or choices. Even if we ask "Well, what does Redmond think?" the DM never just gives us the right answer through the DMPC, he just gives us that character's opinion. Also, it's an extra pair of hands during combat, and that helps us on the action economy. I get that these "thing is stupid" videos are meant to be really one-sided by their nature, but this is one where i really think a bit of nuance can be helpful for new DMs. You can do DMPCs in a way that doesn't detract from your PCs' fun.
I agree. I have a smaller group and we rotate DMing campaigns, but it is almost always necessary to add DMPCs so we can have more epic battles. It's much more fun to have another helping hand when you only have 3 or 4 players. We always make it so the DMPC never engages in critical roleplay unless requested, so the players always have rp freedom.
I ran dm npcs for my group for a short while because the party was essentially 2 fragile casters and a monk, no healer. So I offered them a few dm npcs but never more than one at a time. The reason I offered them multiple choices was because I like to give my players choice on their help where each dm npc is a type of role, tank, healer, assassin, etc. They were there purely to fill a void in combat and I let them know that. They never contributed to the story plot or helped them in social or puzzle complications. When the party grew by one and they got a tank role I withdrew the option of the dm npc's and turned them into allies they can recruit for side quests that they do off scene to gain the party favor/reward. I even wrote in their backstory/personality a reason why they are reluctant to help outright with anything besides combat. One just may not care, another is too snobby, another has no emotion, or they may have their own issues to deal with. Now the dm npcs stand by as those allies off screen under command of the party yet if a pc is sick and their character is not around they have a choice of a dm npc to join them for the session so the encounters are more balanced with the same rules. No story plot contribution past combat. Leaves when you guys are all set with what you need.
I usually make an "optional" DMPC, who's always there, like the "Housecarl" on the tavern, the battle droid on the ship, and i make their personalities as funny as i can. So, if the players decide to bring him/her/it to the adventure, i roleplay it as my own character, and do my best to help the party without getting much spotlight, normally making the npc play in a missing role, where no one else would be able to do. As an example is the Droid i mentioned. The party had no Pilot, so i decided to make one. He pilots ships to the party, uses snipers to eventually save some of them, and is the most intelligent of all of them. BUT, now that the party have 5 players, one of them being a Pilot, who uses inteligence and strikes with snipers, the Droid will stop following the party, and other "followers" will be availiable for them in the future, if they want. That's the way i balance it, and that technique normally works.
I dig this idea. I basically just make characters that can help with the quest or fill a niche for a little while, but they never influence the plot or decision-making (aside from making an occasional history check that may or may not succeed, and only when prompted by the situation that the party has created all on their own).
When we played curse of strahd, we had a new person joining the group and so he talked with the dm and ended up playing Esmeralda. Had no idea she was actually part of the campaign lol
Blue Phoniex I’ve seen this executed before it the Vampire the masquerade twitch show La By Night. The storyteller had several npcs become secondary pcs over the course of a bunch of sessions it was really cool
I go a step further in my games. Rather than have a player whose character isn't present for a scene just sit out, I give them an npc to play. Especially if it's a character with goals that aren't aligned with the party. Gives that player something to do and can result in situations I never would've thought of on my own.
One story that does oppose this is a story I read on reddit where there was a Knight that helped the party in thick and thin, but at the end, regained his memory and became the final boss The players unknowingly gathered objects that the regained memory bbeg used to be more powerful. And the players remembered that.
yeah but... /why/ did he follow them around? To just be a villain at the end? His purpose doesn't make much sense. I think it would hit a LOT harder for the party if they had convinced him to join them on their quest and the twist at the end would have been their of their own volition.
@@XPtoLevel3 In that particular instance it was much more patron. The players had amnesia and were trying to defeat the evil king. The knight saved them when they were level 1 and went on to help them in various bits throughout the story. When the players got to the evil king at the end, they found out it was the good knight-he had been possessed by a demon and forced to do evil things, when he had control of himself he assembled a group of heroes to defeat him. Ultimately, I think that reddit story was a rather strong example and probably not quite a DMPC. I poked around and couldn't find the exact reddit article, unfortunately, I saw it on one of the reddit post DnD videos.
@@XPtoLevel3 The story is basically that the villain had been taken over by a demon, or something of the sort. He, due to a magic of some sort, was able to change back to his humane form for a short while, and in that time recruited the party with amnesia. He didn't do outstanding damage, only sat on the sidedlines for most fights and healed them out of battle. OP here didn't really recount it correctly, and he was really just an integral plot point that didn't follow the party constantly, only popping up as a returning side character that the players liked to see. The final dungeon was crawling their way through hordes of monsters, the BBEG in diguise healing them after each fight until they reached the final chamber. No-one was there except the party. The BBEG stepped out from their formation, shed his diguise, and spoke with a sad smile "You're all ready to face me. Good luck,", before succumbing to his evil half. The party then recalled their lost memories. I *also* didn't recount it very well, but it's a really good twist villain, and the BBEG isn't a "HERO" like you described in the video, more of an ally/patron turned bad.
The current campaign I'm playing in has a giant talking crab in our party that the DM controls and he is the most precious thing ever. I would die for this crustacean.
I'm two years late but we also played the same/similar campaign! We named our crab Poseidon. He was so popular that our dm made him a character in his original world where we started playing instead of the premade campagns.
In one campaign im playing in the dm has a character who was initially meant to be a tutorial for the gimmick of the campaign but we loved him so much that we got him to join the party, he basically serves as a way to help us stay in character while also allowing us to do the things we want with a friend, for example my character wanted to go to the forest from their backstory, nobody accompanied him except the dmpc so my character would have someone to talk to while this was going on Which is why i think hes a good dmpc, he dosent get in the way of the players but hes still likeable and plays a good support
Only time I used a DMPC was for our first 1-20 campaign. I had never played or run a level 1-20 campaign before, and I wanted to be a part of the group for the adventure, so I added my character as a member. He was a socially awkward wizard and didn’t talk with other NPC’s, and more or less functioned as the party’s walking encyclopedia for the world.
What if the answer to “how would the world be without your party?” Is totally screwed... but would probably still be in a better position due to player incompetence? My players quickly devolve any campaign into Monty python.
@@KilakNelek1864 Once a narrated a campaign based on a village in conflict with a mad mage. He's just a fool, a crazy, insane mage with split personallity. His name was Edgard. His other personality always said he was Edgard brother's, EdVard. And then it started, my players started calling him EdWard and it started to be a Gag in the campaign. Every time they mentioned EdWard, a NPC'd always asks: Who's Edward? - And then they corrected themselves. In the end, there's not a single battle, they finish it in a pacifist way and even got a party to celebrate the union between Edgard, the crazy mage, and the village. It ended with everybody drunk and asking "Who's Edward?". It was great. The funniest campaign we've ever had. And it wasn't meant to be a joke campaign. (Sorry for my broken english)
@@SimoLInk1698 Thanks, mate. We have fond memories of this campaign. On the other hand, they hated the Dark Cleric's Asylum using a Paladin as a vessel to cast haunting and dangerous hallucinations. Obviously inspired by Silent Hill but none of them are fans or know it well so they're all like "WTF is going on??? WHAT THE FUCK IS FUCKING GOING FUCKING ON???". They hated it but they said it was a good quest. By the way, it was GURPS Dungeon Fantasy.
@@feedbacking6306 In the D&D Essentials Kit, there are Sidekick cards, which are characters with backstories that level up with the party. They're great for small groups.
My DM did a PC. Our adventures consisted of finding who had captured this Drow Bard and who had beaten him today. One adventure was us rescuing from a pitiful bandit crew. This Bard made our level 4 party miserable, telling us his personal problems and his family issues. DM kept getting pissed off with us as we constantly tried to escape him, not meet up with him when he wanted us to. I missed one session, I came back the next week and everyone had a new character. The party had enough and tried to kill him, turns out he was a Level 20 Bard, with the DM rolling in secret and there was a TPK. ''What the fuck, was he doing being beaten up by a couple of bandits? Why did he need us to get him that relic from those Goblins? Why is he hung up on what his brother thinks? Why is his brother a High Elf, when he 's a Drow?'' ''He's adopted. Maybe he had a plan for your party'' ''Yeah, that worked out well for him then''.
@@Lord_Numpty it had been ages since I had played. Last time I played was 3rd edition. So a good introduction. Although we started to play CoS, but she couldn't 'handle' the module. Playing DiA online (small fee), much better group, professional DM who runs three games a week with about 15 players. Probably collects £600 a month for 12 hours work + prep. For me it's worth having a top quality game for £10 per month.
DMPC are bad if the DM is bad. Your example is a way of how not to use them. We always use DMPC as the healer from day one in our campaign, unless we have a good healer and that person is okay with doing healer/support job instead of heavily leaning in other roles.
I’m running a campaign with two players and one of them has a sidekick, sort of a DMPC if you will. His name is Kevin and he’s a kenku rogue, he’s lvl 4 and the rest of the party is lvl 6. It’s great to have him around to help with the action economy and to just do things like pick locks or scout. It’s also no sweat to roleplay him cause all he says is “Kevin.” The fact he only says Kevin and has an 8 in his INT helps separate him from me, the DM.
I'm just gonna be DM and Play-Pet. I've been a Wooloo before. Yes, the Pokemon. I fought Voldemort and everyone had fun. Being a character but a weak one was exactly right.
Good example my friend did when he ran a game: We had a sci-fi setting and I, as the designated technophile engineer, was super excited to be constantly tinkering with the systems, making patchwork repairs and optimising efficiency etc. The session after we get the ship, the DM introduces an onboard AI that is able to shapeshift the interior, mapped our courses to new planets and locations and was entirely self-sufficient. Of course, this sucked out a LOT of the enthusiasm I had initially had for the game, where I was looking forward to crawling through ducts to fix critical damages in some intense firefight and the like. Of course, the DM adored this AI, and was sincerely having fun without realising what he'd taken away from his players, so we let him have it. But by campaign's end, the rest of the party were sort of leaning towards my way of thinking, and were glad to be done with it.
Jacob, It's me Jacob again, I meant what I said on your other video about wiping out all of the other Jacobs in the world, but I've decided to take pity on you because of this video. Good luck in future Jacob related endeavors.
I run games because I want to play, so I play my own character. I'm all too well aware of the many ways this can go wrong, and new players are often skeptical at first. But after a few sessions I always win them over. Follow these rules. 1) Roleplay. Make connections with the players' characters. A good DMPC is a foil for other players to explore their character's personalities. He can have his own story and persona too, but they're secondary to providing emotional support to PCs. This leads into my second rule. 2) Step back. When PCs are talking, the DMPC listens. He's not the leader, he's not a domineering personality. He's a type-B, supporting personality. He'll have his own opinions and insights to offer when asked, but he'll go along with other people's decisions rather than cause a fuss. 3) Complement the Party. What does the party need? In a group full of rogues and spellcasters, you're the front line tank. Do they lack a dedicated healer? You're it! If you're an experienced player you can come up with a variety of interesting, creative, and effective builds to suit any role they need. And if you're not, you're not ready to play a DMPC. In the past, I've done a light cleric that was acting as the party 'mom' and the players picked her to lead them because none of their characters were up to leading at that point in their character arcs. I nipped that in the bud by adding an experienced player with the express instruction that he was supposed to come up with a party leader character. I've also done a mute barbarian/rogue hybrid that could only speak to the rogue who knew sign language and the wizard whenever he bothered to cast message on her. She doted on a few of the PCs and treated them like her surrogate family. She'd helped them deal with the emotional fallout from curses, betrayals, and alcoholism. Their reaction to her eventual death in combat was one of the most moving moments I've ever had in a game of D&D. Currently I'm doing a druid who has taken a lost PC under his wing who otherwise has no reason to stay with the party. The PCs think he's a coward (he's anxious around strangers, crowds, and enclosed spaces) and they praised him for joining in on a duel against two frost giants that one of the other PCs decided to avoid. (They were all level 3...and they won, cheeky buggers). Still early in that game, but so far my players report having a grand time.
I can see how this wouldn't work for a lot of people. In my groups, the DMs always have characters, but they never decide what to do or where to go. A lot of the times they're just tanks and healers and are just involved in role playing and battle
This. Most times, the reason i include a "dmpc", its just because i also want to participate. I'm the "forever dm", not because I particularly _want_ to be, but because group A consists of my family who really aren't familiar with 90% of the mechanics of the game and wouldn't know how to run it, and group B, who are my friends who just never have the time or energy to do it. I love dnd, i never get to PLAY dnd, unless i do this. I run CoS, I decided to toss in a Warforged Rogue allegedly crafted by Gond (as far as he believes,) to basically transform into a seal to lock down Strahd in the event of his defeat (because the canon ending sucks to me, so i wanted a possible alternative one to be achieved. This ending does sacrifice himself tho, so the evil side of me wants the players to like him. I think it's working so far. ). That warforged made big time miscalculations during his run in with Strahd and at "level 20", got beat down and yeeted across ravenloft so hard that when he crashed, he survived, but lost so much functionality that he's found at the players starting level, (He would not be the first person to get worfed for the sake of strahd build up) acknowledges failure on his part, but isn't willing to surrender. He also recognizes, he doesn't know what to do to win next time, so he asks to join the party and follows their lead and does his best to protect them and help them achieve their own goals. Every once in a while, his skills come in handy, and when the group struggles, sometimes I'll have him offer suggestions on possible courses of actions, but i don't let his suggestions be the final ones, or entirely good ones. If he had all the answers, he wouldn't be in the state he was in. I guess my counter to hating dmpc's is, maybe they wouldn't be a problem if someone else took the dm torch once in a while. Maybe the dm just wants to play the game and struggles to find a balance between the want of a player and the role of the dm.
I myself only ever supply a DMPC/Babysitter npc when dealing with either a very small or very inexperienced player group.....my current players being both
Yea I add one for my "adult timeframes are hard and we are all first timers" group. Hes got general knowledge of the world to answer simple questions and fill who ever cant show ups combat role, but doesnt make any decisions or save them from super stupid issues
I throw helpful NPCs that join the party into my game. But they're usually the "Hey, there's no way I can handle this thing, could you guys help me?" type of NPC. They help in combat, they might have a few creative solutions, but the majority of the roleplay and the puzzle solving is up to the players. They're very useful to guide the players to different plot hooks that they are free to ignore, without it feeling railroady.
Mizerable Git In my most recent campaign that’s the exact reason I have one as well. One player has played in a single session before, and the other revolving crew of 3 people have never played before. I plan to find a way to kill him off once after they’ve become attached to him, to help show that nothing is infinite in dnd
This is fine. What's really great is when they come to rely on this mentor character, count on his help, love him. And then, once they have everything figured out and can stand on their own, BAM! Big Bad kills him. And now you just gave them a very personal reason to hate your villain.
Anders Hoffman .....you just precisely described the prologue arc of my DM’s home brew campaign. DMPC was a mentor and mother figure to several PCs, including mine. We spent four sessions thinking she had sacrificed herself for us. We all snapped and rampaged and took out the BBEG, and at the end while we were nursing our wounds the DMPC shows up and says “ I knew you guys were ready. You rely too much on me. Take care, and I’ll be watching from the sidelines BYYYYYYE!”
Im a dm at my schools D&D club, even though i wanted to be a player. But saddley i quickly rose to be the most popular dm and now i can't play character. But i did find satisfaction in putting my character as a very important NPC
I often do the same in my games. In my first ever campaign all of the players were new, so I had a DM PC to help guide them and the players loved it. In another I had a reoccurring integral character who would give the player missions and quests throughout the adventure and would often join them in combat. It's only dumb if you don't do it right.
One of your "Out of the Box" Encounters actually killed one of my player´s PCs today. The one with the Scarecrows and the Ravens to be exact. It was fun. He got to play a dramatic death scene- which he did. And now... his old character is gonna return as the soul of said character infused into a warforged... Interesting how death can sometimes be... inspiring.
That’s why I love warforged and other construct races, you can have unique story moments. When other races die there’s nothing you can really do, but when a construct dies you can have them be a talking head till they are repaired and other such moments.
In my games, I typically include a few characters that exist to fill out the party's roster as needed. They function a bit like Fallout companions: they don't interact with the "story" unless spoken to, and the spotlight isn't on them, unless it's a quest that is specifically about that character. Those NPCs are also typically my players favorites, and they give a good way to increase tension without killing players first. If the party goes in against a monster that is way beyond their capabilities, the monster targets the NPCs first, so the players get some idea of how dangerous it is.
Same way I run things. DM PCs are NPCs that run with the group until killed, they never get the spot light on them. They just fill out the party and I use them to spout some lines once in awhile that have no bearing on things
Probably only my take on this, but please don't. If your players made bad choices with their characters (i dunno, 2 melee rogues and a shadow monk) - your job is to make campaign that will be tailored around it. In my example above for instance - it's "greatest heist to save the world" as a possible campaign idea, or "prison break", or "scout group, FOR KING AND COUNTRY" - limitless pool. But do not cover for missing roles. If players fucked it up, did not discuss it or went for it even when they undestood that they have terrible coverage - let them do it. Do not steal the experience from them. You have the tools to make even the worst combinations work. Unless it's a 5 cleric party. Probably your players hate you in the first place :D
@@TrickyTrickyFox That's a shit ton of work and expectations on a DM simply because the party has a bad composition for a campaign... It's one thing to adjust a one shot to flow more easy with a particular party, but there's only so much you can do without making it a full time job to both make it a challenge but not too easy to TPK let alone the full thematic examples that you make of adjusting the focus of the entire story to it. That's where you introduce the temporary NPC's to just help fill in the gaps when needed but still leave plenty of room for downsides. That pair of NPC's that your party has been travelling with could be great at combat, but also looking to steal your bag of holding at first opportunity for example. It takes enough work just to DM a campaign at all, but you can't just homebrew a new series of quests to tailor to a mismatched party every single time it happens. Your job as a DM is simply to give your players the tools to succeed if they can figure it out and then letting player decisions + the dice take it from there.
@@ShaggyRogers1 depends. If the players decided they want to create a vietnam skirmish pack and run around assassin creed style - you will have plenty of ways to play around it
@@ShaggyRogers1 though this is something that might have come with experience and i am just looking at it from experienced DM perspective and view it more of a creative challenge for DM, not as a chore or a full time job to build encounters around it. And your party will find ways to be moronic stupid even if you tailor stuff around party, dont worry about TPKs
My first session had a dmpc who actually was a good example of what to do. He was a dude from the village we were helping, and he was looking for warriors to help him clear out the goblin camps, because he couldn’t do it alone. He was there for combat, but he didn’t call the shots. He also just dipped to “search for information” during RP bits. He was basically there as a fourth party member during combat and for the dm to communicate world information, rather than be a character that is one of these “heroes.”
Yeah, I often hear people complain about this stuff, and I don't get that. It's all just to make it more satisfying when you finally get him. Yeah, let the players get the upper hand and make groud, but it's also good to have them face defeat or setback at the hands of a cunning, dangerous villain.
Or a powerful lich who hasn't evolved into conquering the outer planes. I had a special boss who was only an avatar for a lich. Imagine the Pc's surprise when they found out that god-like vampire overlord they managed to defeat was just a puppet.
I think it's actually a solid to make a villian seem like a hero that makes the players seem likes fools. Like for example in long campaings you're going through all that trouble to get rid of this one thing at the end. It's kinda like "oh you're not ready yet" or "not strong enough yet" kinda thing. So when you finally do reach end game you're almost on par with the BBEG rather than lil squshiy marshmellow go BAP!
I've used 1 dmpc and that was because I , at the time, only had 2 players, and they didn't interact much at all, so I put them in there to spice things up
Not every “hero” character is a bad thing One time we were playing Star Wars age of rebellion and the party was like a pilot, engineer (I don’t remember what sub class), and a commando (I think) Regardless the dm realized that the team should probably have a droid of some sort and made a enhanced medical droid/hacker and they were the best because they just fallow the players around, open doors, and heal the players,
@@notquiteanonymous9365 It's a happy one, because Gandalf was done well. He didn't do Aragorn/Frodo's jobs for them and didn't deny anyone the opportunity to shine in their own way. What he added to the story was completely unique to his character, which is what I hope was the point of this video.
@@leitmotif6854 plus, in the sense of the hobbit, you could say he showed up to help the PCs when they failed every saving throw and were going to get killed long before the campaign is even close to over. By the end he takes a back seat because this isnt his story, its theirs.
The only time I'll use DMPCs is when I'm DMing a group consisting entirely of new players. The DMPC helps them in the journey as the players learn the ropes and when the players get a good grasp on things (usually by 3rd level ) I kill off the DMPC. It's really effective in inspiring the party to step up and incites, one time this led to the party having a full on funeral that actually brought me to tears.
I really hate seeing this stereotype being thrown around, I don't think a DM should be discouraged to include a personal character into the party, so long as they're following the *exact* *same* *rules* *as* *the* *players* i.e. same level as the rest of the party and nothing that isn't in the rulebooks. I have a DM running an ongoing pirate campaign who runs a Tortle tempest cleric, he plays them just as if it was simply another member in the party if a little slow on the uptake since he made him behave with his head in the clouds the party sometimes having to stop to get his attention even during party conversations (and I just now got that stupid joke he slipped into the character design, goddamnit that cheesy bastard), but the character is not an over-powered gross personal power fantasy meme npc. Point is, this isn't a problem unless the DM stops following the rules and deliberately abuses their seat of power for their own personal fun at the expense of the other players. Now I don't recommend doing this for any DM, as juggling a fully fleshed-out character along with hoards of npcs, story plot lines, and keeping track of rules is not an easy task. But if you can handle the extra workload go for it, just remember, follow the established rules of the table and don't be a dick, it's a golden rule for *any* game regardless if you're a player or a game master.
TheRauzKindred thanks got worried for a second it’s my first time playing dnd with with some friends and I some how got the dm role and didn’t wanna just kinda alt delete my character
I've done the same with my first campaign because we didn't have a lot of players, so I suggested adding an npc member. He doesn't really do much unless I'm going into his backstory or the party includes him in stuff. He's not really a central or overpowered character, he's just another person that exists in the world for his own reasons, he was just stuck with the party
I agree! My group was all new to D&D apart from our DM, who had only ever played before. She felt a little sad she couldn't play a character to participate in our role-playing, and we all agreed that introducing a DM PC would be really fun. Said PC is a human warlock who is interesting, complex and has really great dynamics with the rest of the party. It's certainly not for every party or DM - and it, of course, requires a lot of trust in the DM not to cheat - but it works really well for us!
I honestly don't agree, for one simple reason. Meta gaming, human beings by default can not force themselves not to take into account all the information they know about a situation when making a decision. This is why I personally don't think jury's should be given the information till all the evidence has been approved or disapproved as striking evidence from record does not strike it from the jury's mind
I have my DMPC as an helper from a friendly faction, She's pretty useful in combat (mainly because I'm running a 6+player module with 2 people) but is pretty much always stuck in her book somewhere in the back when the party is solving a puzzle, She also has a crippeling gambling addiction, My point is DMPCs can be good if the DM knows when is and when isn't the time to use them. also as a side note she is completely killable if my players ever try, I even planned a boss battle against her in the future
I'd love to see a subversion of this where a DMPC joins the party and is designed to be annoying and eventually be defeated or abandoned by the players.
There is a character in an adventure Keep on the Borderlands I believe named Biff who is designed for that purpose and to teach the party hey be careful who you invite because they might not all be useful. He is a bard who is vain, never gets involved in fights, makes everyone else carry his gear, and is loud at often the worst times. All around a useless party member. However, he became very endearing and ended up becoming a main party member for many future adventures despite his worthlessness.
So almost Merry and Pippin because the rest of the company (bar the other two hobbits and Gimli) are min/maxed (yes I am referencing that one video but hush)
When we played 3.5 at school my teacher had a DMPC, a dwarven cleric who wash a veteran adventurer who showed our unexperienced heroes the ropes, he was our only healer also as none of us wanted to be healers. It was a clearer meta aspect that helped us get into the game and give occasional advise in a non 4th wall breaking way. He would still never stop us doing something if we really wanted to, and he didn't stop us from dying. Three years of campaigning and we all loved the DMPC, when I joined another group I was honestly supprised at the lack of DMPCs because of how much the other one improved our game.
I got introduced midway into a game, and a few minutes in when I encounter the other players and we are going to have a tense dialog to convince each other to go toguether an anoying magic dude instantly teleports behind me and commands the other players to take me with them. It was really clear that the DM was playing as himself, or if something he was roleplaying as his anxiety, turns out that character was a king that was pretty much a god, loved by everyone important in the world, rich, handsome and charismatic (on paper) that for some reason was guiding the party even when it's really clear that he could do anything we could, he even gave each a magic stone that allowed him to see everything we saw and contact us/ teleport to us at will. As soon as he fucked off I proposed the other players to throw the stupid stones off a nearby cliff, before they could answer he teleported back and said nono. Never have I wanted a character so desperately Poochied into his homeplanet.
I didn't realise DMs were capable of turning railroading into physical NPCs. At that point you might as well say "Sure, you might want to do this, but my story says you're doing this"
As a Forever DM who uses DMPCs, I can say that person is a horrible DM, who's just in it to feel powerful, not to actually help the players, when they get stuck (like I do, and even then, I roll for the attempt,) or to help in combat just a bit.
We had one "DMPC" in a campaign with only two players that needed some balance. But the GM did a really good job. She was a young alchemist girl who was one level below us, and her main purpose in the game was to make us consumables to help out. In combat she barely used a sling once in a while and she never levelled up. If anything, she made the game more challenging as we had to protect her. And she eventually realized the adventure was getting too dangerous for her on her quest for knowledge and decided to stay back in town.
I remember I was running a Changeling The Lost campaign and had a favorite ally NPC. He wasn't a DMPC and almost never actually joined the party on adventures. He was more the creepy guy that the players reluctantly would have to go to for information or favors. One time the NPC actually had cause to go and help the players in combat. The dice went south for him and I ended up killing my favorite NPC. It was a sad day.
I have to applaud my older brother, who is my current DM. When the adventure initially started i wasnt ready to join yet so he created a DMPC so that my other brother, who hasnt played D&D before, wouldnt be by himself. Cue me joining. The DMPC who is a cleric named Lubomir that worships Ilmater. He doesnt steamroll questlines or story progression. Isnt all powerful and doesnt constantly have the right tool for the job. He just heals, tanks hits, and keeps the rest of the party from killing each other. Ill also add that as of 2 weeks ago my brother has went full dm and gave control of Lubomir to another guy in the group. Who does a damn good job of keeping the spirit of the character going as well as running his personal PC who is a halfling rouge and a polar opposite of old Lub.
it really does depend. one of my dms has a “dmpc” but they are just there cause they are a god bound in mortal form, and the party is what did this to him. if you integrate a dmpc properly, and it enhances the story, then it works. if they just join to join, and make the rest of the party worthless, then they are terrible for the game
Rinings Well.. you do realize, that “dmpc” you mentioned falls under the category of “ally npc” from how this vid describes npcs. But, that outshining the players bit you described as bad, THATS what’s being called a dmpc..
My fav DMV recently added an old character of his that he had like an Easter egg and he's gonna hang out with us for a while and it's actually really awesome
This is a good point, I mainly add mine in to prevent full party wipes. I hate it when I add in a monster the party is gonna get slaughtered to. So I added in a literal divine soul sorcerer as a descended of the platinum dragon himself. This fits well with the world since I'm a dragon fanatic and love using their world influencing abilities to shape the world. This can also help with events, as the god of the world I can host 1 shot games or tournaments in the very same world as a battle for favor of the dragons! I'll typically do this for someone's birthday or if it's a reason to celebrate.
This kid at the dnd club at my school ( our school had one) had a DMPC who was a literal cat,not a taxabi, a literal cat. He has 23 health and 21 armor class without any armor and he was almost impossible to kill and it was infuriating
I put a hero NPC in my adventure, but I made him super weak (firbolg scientist, scientists being a homebrew class I made that are basically wizards with experiments and not magic) so the guy could only provide a measly fire bolt, the occasional good spell replication, and exposition on everything he should know. He was meant to be a sidekick and mostly for the purposes of getting to the fight, not in combat.
I was running a premade dungeon, that had an ancient language engraved in places. None of the players could read the language (I think the intent by the creator was that one of the casters would use magic to read the text, however none of my players had the spells that could do that). So I gave them an NPC that could read the language, but was incredibly lazy and didnt want to do anything at all.
One of my favorite stories related to this was one of my first games. At the time, we didn't know who would be DM, so we all made characters. When we decided I would DM, I agreed that me having a character would be sketchy so I cranked up his power level and turned him into the BBEG who later literally dragged the world into a hellworld covered in a never ending war until reality ceased to exist after the party fucked up and died to some mooks before he even attacked. He didn't even get to finish his monologue and do something cool before the generic minions formed from the twisted flesh of innocent people overran and killed the party.
The problem with the video is that it puts most DMPC in a category except for the one that is bad. Then it uses that example as 'DMPC' and every other kind of DMPC is 'not really a DMPC'...
I'm just gonna be DM and Play-Pet. I've been a Wooloo before. Yes, the Pokemon. I fought Voldemort and everyone had fun. Being a character but a weak one was exactly right.
Whenever a campaign ends, and I'm DMing a new one, all of my characters become NPCs. This adds a healthy amount of respect (fear) for all NPCs. For example, the level 5 party once decided to try and rob a local bar. The barkeeper then pulled the 2 +3 battleaxes from above the mantle (a failed perception check had them believing they were decor) and proceeded to beat the ever living hell out of them, as any respectable level 20 mountain dwarf barbarian would. (He was leveled post-mortem. He died, but after his brother, a high level forge cleric went back to give him a proper burial, was able to resurrect him, and they both retired together.)
In my very first ever game of dnd the dm used a dmpc, but I think he played him very well in that the character was 1: the same level as us and could legit die like the rest of us and 2: was very uninvolved in the plot and quiet. He was the barbarian that was shy and nice and we liked him fine. This is more like an ally that was just with us the whole time. I dm now and one kind of npc I put into games are the driver character. The npc that has a cool vehicle like an airship, lightning rail or boat that the players travel with. The npc can do cool shit, but is more of a way of allowing the players to travel in style. Usually I also add sidekick characters (not the UA kind) like a deep gnome or someone very likeable that's kinda helpless. This gives the party a friend that they usually want to protect. Spoilers for Critical Role: Take what Matt is doing with Pumat Sol. Pumat is now with the party, but will probably only be with them temporarily and wasn't traveling with them for like 10 whole levels. Pumat has the power of an equal or more powerful party member, but I know he won't stick around.
That’s a good dmpc I had a dmpc once in my first ever campaign (in Dnd3) who was the exact opposite; a mute golem with tank purposes In my defense; the party was composed of a wizard, a thief and sorcerer and they would have still died
the npc party members section in the 5e dungeon master's guide (pg. 92) has some pretty useful guidelines; they have character sheets built using the standard rules but their level should be that of the lowest level adventurer in the party, pick simple class options (i.e. life clerif, champion fighter, thief rogue, evocation wizard), and the dm should track their loyalty using the loyalty rules on the same page. the main problem with dm controlled characters is some dms use them as a vessel to do cool high level stuff outside of the party's current skill level, which is fun for the dm but not for the players. that's why the allied character should always be at the players' level and they should be treated -they're there to enrich the party, not overshadow them.
My party killed a bunch of bandits and decided to spare the life of the last one and let him join our party as a fighter because we needed muscle, but instead of our DM playing him, each of us takes a turn running his character on top of our own and we have shipped him with the rogue and it's great.
Look, a lot of people have bad experiences with DMPCs, because a lot of bad DMs tend to use them, but they're honestly a very useful tool if you know how to use them. They're good to nudge the party in the right direction if they're totally lost, fill out useful combat rules in smaller groups, and fill roleplaying niches. There are just a few little caveats and rules to abide by when using them, in order to make them work. 1. The DMPC is definitively a sidekick. Their main goal is to help out the heroes because they're friends or they have similar goals. Mine are quite often a childhood friend, sibling, retainer or otherwise linked to one or more members of the group and act as an accessory to their character, emphasizing their persona in some way. I will often have them specifically connected to a player that isn't the strongest roleplayer, in order to have someone around that can consistently engage them in RP and encourage them to engage with other characters and story elements. 2. Their actions in combat are controlled by the players. My DMPC is basically treated like a party member in an RPG. While I role-play them, when battle begins I leave their combat actions entirely up to the players (unless the players try to make them do something suicidal or completely out of character.) The same goes for their advancement. I ask the group, "How do you want *Insert GMPC name* to progress here? What feat/spell/whatever should they get?" 3. They are not the focus of the plot. They may have a stake in things and a vested interest in the party's goals, but never to the same degree as the heroes. The story could easily progress without them and so if the party decides to ditch them, it's not really an issue. I feel like a lot of the issues you're bringing up, don't really make sense. They're not inherent issues with the concept, they're very obvious examples of a tool being misused. The fact that I can beat a man to death with a hammer is not a flaw in the hammer. The idea that a GMPC makes the hero's accomplishments meaningless, or that the heroes don't need to exist, is only true if the DMPC is significantly stronger than the rest of the party and there is no reason that has to be the case. I have used many DMPCs to great effect, and my players adore them. I have been told it's my best quality as a DM, that my NPCs are lovable and interesting. At the end of a recent session one I ran, one of my players announced to the room as the DMPC was dropped to 0 HP, "If anything happens to her, I will kill everyone in this room and then myself!" They love that character and consider her a valued member of the team. And the same goes for many other DMPCs I've implemented over the years. It's all about execution. It's weird to me to see people always complain about DMPCs, because in the groups I played with when I was a kid (like 15 years ago now), they were just expected. We would often alternate DMs, and so whoever the DM's regular PC was, was still in the party. We just had certain rules of etiquette in play and yeah, we had one asshole in the group that would abuse his position as DM to reward his character. But we just figured it was that guy being a dick, not an inherent issue with DMPCs, because the other four guys in our group did just fine when it was their turn.
If you're talking 5e D&D, then perhaps the "sidekicks" from Essentials Kit could be of help? Basically a secondary character for each player to play, having simpler and more straightforward handling. Meant precisely for low playercount sessions.
This is how I made an interesting DMPC in my game: I used the *compendium of a soulforged artifacts* document as a template to make a sentient weapon NPC, with stats, health and everything. So this DMPC, who’s soul is trapped in a weapon, can only act when he is wielded by a party member. On top of that, he is using the party to achieve his own goals. I have him function as patron of sorts, as he entered into a contract with the party in exchange for saving the life for one of the PCs. He has a system where he grants them “a favor” whenever they need his help, and when he racks in 3 favors, he gets to ask a favor of the heroes in return. Honesty I have been having a blast roleplaying this DMPC/Patron character, and I think this was a clever way to make the party work in a module balanced for more players than I had at the time xD
Something that I always like to do with allies to keep them from undermining the party is make them perform a specific role in combat instead of just fighting like a player. Maybe the party is being chased and get cut off in an alley and has to fight some guys off to move forward, and the NPC holds off the enemies chasing from behind to buy them time for combat. Maybe the fire lizard that the party befriended earlier in the dungeon will belch flames onto a random party member’s weapon every turn, giving them a temporary fire buff. That sorta thing. I’ve found it helps make my players feel like they have helpful allies backing them up in combat without taking away their spotlight
"Allies" are probably my biggest strength as a DM. I use them to add a bit more depth to combat (I make their attacks very simple so they don't take up time), allow further character development by having interactions with other encountered NPCs, and most of all, I get to make the players feel bad when they die. "Allies" are so great because you get to stick these characters in brutally dangerous situations, rewarding the players for saving them, immersing the players for losing them, inflicting a sense of fear in your players, yet also providing a bit of a meat shield for your players so they can face tougher enemies without dying.
I really like the idea of allies. If the local lord has tasked the party with some dangerous task why wouldn’t they have help from a few of his men at arms or a local mercenary group. The lord wants the job done and if it’s tough enough to require outside help he would want to send at least a bit of assistance.
IDK man, I think you're attaching alot of baggage to a neutral entity in a DM's toolkit. What's important is that your DM PC doesn't undermine your players' actions or overshadow their accomplishments! There are plenty of scenarios where knowing that there are other successful groups of heroes (some of whom might be competing with the players) is great! It can make your world feel more lived in and intense and in some cases, provide an interesting bedrock for future player characters! Overall I agree with the sentiment that the DM shouldn't try to have their cake and eat it too, but I think condemning the idea of DM PC is throwing the baby out with the Bathwater. They're tools, just like everything else!
One of my favorite times, running a campaign, was in having an NPC join the group who seemed only minimally useful, encouraging everyone not to worry about things that ended up being important. A friend of mine was playing a PC that argued with him all the time, and the NPC declared to everyone that nobody should trust my friend. The NPC was eventually killed in a trap, and everyone went about their business, but in the end, my friend was actually RPing the brother of the crime boss they were hunting, and he obviously betrayed them, using his brother's minions and magic daggers in the end fight. He died with my friend giggling out his dramatic last words, and the party looking on in excited frustration. We talked a few times about just having my friend betray them earlier, because he had other things come up a few weekends in a row, but it all turned out fun.
Title: "Why dungeon master player characters are dumb" WoW roleplay DMs: *heavy sweating* I get there's a different context between that and DnD DMPCs, but that's what I thought about when reading the title.
I'm really glad you chose to take the time to delineate the different things one might define as a DM PC. Basically, you hate DM ego boost characters. I love having an ally in the party because it balances the sense of doom and aid from the GM. It really keeps players on their toes with you, fearing and loving you by association of your enemy npcs and the allies you give them
Isn't a DMPC just an NPC who adventures with the party? Sure it's a problem when the DM favours their PC more than the party (Or as much as the party, it's often good to give them less attention or be slightly lower levelled). I've never personally played in a game with a DMPC or played one myself, but JoyRide Entertainment's D&D Campaign JoyQuest DMed by Freddie Heinz (Who I consider one of the greatest DMs of all time), frequently uses DM PCs to great success. Plus the legendary Matt Mercer often has a beloved NPC or two help out in important fights.
The DMPC is a specific kind of NPC who is regularly/always in the party, of equal or greater level and has an active part in deciding the story (Ie: taking choices out of the players hands) A good NPC may be one of the first two but when you get a character with a combination of these traits it comes across as the DM playing another PC at the table with the party.
@@davidleonardflanagan DMPC just means a DM player character. In some variations, NPC means Narrator Player Character. There is no specification that they have to be a higher level character or more important than the party, that's just what sadly often comes about.
pbtenchi I do think it can be good, I have a DMPC who is kind of a meat shield for the party. I also told players he when he says something to not take it as though the DM said it as some kind of hint just an npc who may actually have bad ideas for the players. It’s like the difference between an author’s self insert for a main character in a book vs writing a character.
@@pbtenchi most d&d players will call any characters controlled by the DM an NPC, the discussion at hand refers to a specific kind of character otherwise we wouldn't be saying no to DMPCs. Unless you want to run a post apocalyptic adventure with no other people in the world.
My DMPCs usually take a backseat to the players' actions and usually have a goal similar to the players as if they were just another adventurer in the party. They're almost always a Healer fill-role, because I usually PC as a healer, but nobody else in the group may want to. To not die so easily (3.5e, usually), I add the Healer DMPC to the party to alleviate the role-stress. Usually I keep their personality simple, workable with the party, and don't force them to start encounters or whatever & keep them not-very-curious. This has always resulted in a pretty positive reception and everyone typically likes the character enough to keep them around and can enjoy the campaign without having to rework characters to heal or whatever. (Also if it's a new game system, I keep a reserved stronger-combat-y DMPC in case a combat encounter goes tits-up for balance. Never had to really use his full kit and said character had always rolled like shit, lol.)
I have DMPCs in a good amount of the games that I run. I only have them to shore up weaknesses in the party. They pretty much don't get involved in the party unless they're needed, most of them are Clerics who don't even roll initiative and just materialize when people need to not die
@@venom66656 I suggest taking a look at how you're building encounters or situations if they keep dying. Yes, the players might be doing stupid things, but you should adapt your style a little to theirs if it frequently results in death. Or give them more opportunities to buy healing potions, like having them do a quest for an alchemist guild and then be able to go back there to purchase stuff. Or, if they keep dying, let them die and make up a new character. Don't let them cheat death constantly cause the game becomes less immersive then. This is just my advice though. I run a game of 7 players and they have no Cleric or anything. The only person with healing spells is a Druid and they're level 5.
@@d.riddle2965 Not a single person has died. They've gone down many times and it's been very tense but no deaths. No one has brought to my attention the issue of their immersion and when asked, they always say that it's not a problem. So thanks for the advice I guess, but it doesn't really apply
@@venom66656 I know you didn't mean dying, my bad, I misspoke. I meant falling unconscious. You run your game however you like, it's completely up to you, obviously. I'm just saying it's not the greatest idea to have a DMPC whose purpose is just to heal them, Deus Ex style, with no initiative, when they need it, cause it lowers the stakes. Personally, it seems immersion-breaking and might make take away some of the weight of their decision making if they have a constant out, which is one of the best aspects of D&D. And I will note from my experience that players rarely voice out against things that are to their advantage, such as an OP weapon or a DMPC healer. Again, I'm not trying to criticize the way you run your game. I'm merely saying that it might take away some of the risk, which is really fun in D&D. I suppose it also depends on your players.
When I played with my DM both my characters and theirs equally brought about both Heroics and Destruction. I did more saving and hurting than the Ally NPC's with me. I had a character with high charisma that was able to convince most of the NPC's to come with. The others joined because of other characters. Ended up with an Army. My characters were never devalued. It was fun regardless and it was just me and the DM anyway. No harm no foul. One monster we fought was Fenrir. It was my witch, my berserker, and I had a slime. Neither of my own characters could even hit the fast wolf creature. So we were meat shields. The slime did all the fighting, but she was weak to the magic Fenrir had. So technically if it wasn't for us taking the hits Fenrir would have not been able to be defeated and he would have started the End of the World Scenario. Ironically during an already post-apocalypse campaign.
Droga! Eu cometeria exatamente esse erro hoje a noite. Muito obrigado, TH-cam, pela recomendação. E muito obrigado cara, por um vídeo, que expandiu minha mente. Você é demais!!!
There are no bad DMPCs only bad DMs. If a DMPC detracts from the experience of the players then that's an indicator that the DM is lacking in his fundamentals of how to run NPCS and didn't stop to question why they are adding one in the first place, not that DMPCs are just inherently bad. That's like hitting someone with the flat side of a sword and saying swords suck because it didn't kill your opponent.
Easy solution if you play than like they are in the books but then it is no DMPC because you dont mske own decisions (you know they cant have own ideas) But make a introvert DMPC and there is no problem because if he only reacts if he is asked or in combat he can not steal spotlight
My campaign started with four (4) players. A Paladin, a Wizard, a Bard, and a Sorcerer. With a Paladin and a Bard I wasn’t concerned for healing, I only worried they all might struggle more if I added too many melee combatants. Then the Bard and the Sorcerer left the campaign, at the same time. There was now only two (2) players, a Paladin and a Wizard; with only a couple sessions under their belts and were both only second (2nd) level. Hence the now DMPC (as they can be referred as, which I do since they’ve been in the party since then) who joined them. They are an Artificer, that way the Paladin can prioritize smites over healing and doesn’t have to be the only person between the enemy and the Wizard. Eventually we gained another player, he was a Rogue back ended up getting mauled to death by some drakes, he currently plays a Bard. I thought to myself “They have enough healing and they took in a temporary NPC that’s good in combat for this area” (A Monk that was trapped in the caverns they are making their way through). I decided I was going to see if the players were fine with the DMPC leaving. I gave her her reasons and had her tell the party, but they didn’t want her gone. A DMPC is certainly a thing of many DM horror stories, that’s very common that those DMPCs are the main issue as well (overpowered and the DMs main interest instead of the players). But they are not always terrible, as long as they stay more akin to an NPC and don’t hog any spotlights. I’ll be honest and admit I have the bad habit of saying the NPCs miss so as to give the players that line that’s always met with excitement: “How do you wanna do this?”. I used a DMPC to help with the party’s balance early game so as to not cause too much struggle before leveling up, but my players have grown attached to them. I can easily kill the DMPC off, I would be lying if I said it wouldn’t hurt a little, but I always prioritize my players first and it’s more impactful on the game if the DMPC dies because of how attached my players are to them. A DMPC can’t be like how you run actual players in your campaign; I always give my players second chances and I have given a player a chance to save their character from death before, but I would never do that for the DMPC. A DMPC is a topic very close to rules lawyers, obviously not as hotly debated but still along those same lines. A DMPC can very easily be a black eye on a campaign, but done properly can create some very powerful and emotional ties and tension in a campaign. I’ve had players risk their own characters lives for this DMPC and I’ve made sure that their connection with them is reflected through that. I may have made the DMPC, but it’s the players who really did shape them. I honestly never thought that the DMPC I made would be any important and I had full intentions to remove her once she was no longer needed, but my players refuse to let her go. It really is about how you run them and how you use them. Anyway, that’s just my two cents :p
I am currently playing mad mage as a Player and we just encountered Rex the hammer. Your examples fit perfectly to him but He also takes all our loot 😥 looooot
@@rasin9391 if you're LG (then prolly a Paladin or a Cleric) do it because their existence interferes with the universe or something like that, convince the party AND maybe the DM, and plan an ambush
@@lau_taro0037 Im Rasin Dawns DM and the Point is first of all that they are only two players in a four player campaing and the second point is that hes LG but he isn't a cleric or paladin which in my opinion are classes that would counter him .... hes an artificer ....
OUT OF THE BOX ENCOUNTERS: bit.ly/OotBEPledgeManager
hey I started watching the episode 1 of sunder and I noticed you and tim have close to the last name are you guys brothers?
Good way to deal with a hero character is have it that they are currently in a situation that is out of their league.
Like you could have a heroic barbarian dude who could protect his vilalge from native goblins and mosnters on his own. But then you have something come in that has united the mosnters against him and he is totally on the backstep and losing ground.
What is boundary between an NPC and an enemy dm pc. Because I have a charchter equivalent to a level 80, only a level 60 and up can harm him since he is a literal god. He does not hurt the players because he is a messager to another god whose level 100 (it's not as broken as it sounds, it's a god campaign)
At 4:20 you have no idea how wrong you are playing an evil campaign is amazing it turns towns into dungeons and dungeons into towns the consequences slowly pile up and it has incredibly funny moments as well i really recommend giving it a shot! We scam with fake fortune tellings, get involved in political corruption, murder the elderly, and much worse in my campaign there has never been a dull moment. Whats important is the party has some real reason that keeps them together for us we are all outsiders that share an origin but some like minded motivation is most importan
I usually have a dmpc in my games, provided they are a small party (3 or less players) they provide assistance in combat but tend to stay in the background in support roles and don't take command in really any situation, the party makes the call and they speak up when they are asked. This way I can give my players a push in the right direction if they are unsure of where to go, or to say give them a healer on par for their party. And this goes wonderfully, the players get help if they need it but they aren't sidekicks, and they don't have a deus ex machina waiting to get them out of trouble because my dmpc's are usually a level or two below the party. The issue is when dm's make a character that is more powerful than the players and starts directing them. That's when it takes away from their adventure.
POV: standing up while interrogating sick Jacob about DM PCs
somebody get jacob some lemon tea
Alternative POV: You're checking in on Jacob and he wakes up in a cold sweat all of a sudden to start sick ranting about DMPCs.
I don't like where this is going.
You get advantage because he's prone
"I don't use DM PCs! I swear to God-"
"SWEAR TO ME!"
I've used one "DMPC"
Loth Lalar the Horrid. A infamous necromancer lich who supposedly died thousands of years ago. The players found his detached skull after digging for a couple of days after noticing some necromancy magic with detect magic.
He can't cast spells, fight or anything. Just talk. He is completely at the players mercy. He needs the PCs to get his body reassembled so he can keep on conquering the world.
The only problem is that he is like suuuper bad at charisma stuff (-4 to both persuasion and deception) and like everyone knows he's a bad dude.
The party used him as a pokedex for undead creatures and would toss the skull around corners to scout.
I love that character. Every time he refused to do as they said, they threatened to bury him again.
I usually add something like Loth Lalar to parties that are kinda struggling with getting roleplay going. Plus it's fun for me to roleplay the allmighty lich king who has had the ultimate fall from grace.
Edit: Since people keep asking.
Do feel free to steal this. You're all free to use it in any of your games.
Edit 2: Since people keep commenting on this and I feel I didn't express it clearly at all, Loth Lalar is not a DMPC to begin with but can take that role if the party deliberately gives him the power to act more independently. The party essentially gets to decide how much this guy actually does in the game based on whether or not they let him get his bones back. And if they get most of them back he can serve as a great secondary antagonist when he's able to leave the party behind act on his own entirely. So the players are aware of how he works and it's up to them to decide what they want from the character
Haha, this sounds like absolute gold! Would it be alright if I borrowed the idea for one of my games?
I wouldn't even say this fall's into the category of DMPC. The point of a DMPC is that they fill the role of another PC and draw attention away from the PCs. That just sounds like a really fun non player character 😄😄
@@r_kayne feel free to steal ^-^
Sounds wonderful! Doesn't sound like a DMPC though, just a quirky ally.
Not really a DMPC, just an NPC/magic item. There's a fine line between an npc that follows the party and a PC the DM is playing, this is most certainly not one of them.
Cool idea though, totally stealing it :P
My players actually always ask for me to make a campaigns where, quote: "if we die, the world goes on". It is quite challenging to make a storyline, but they really don't like playing "chosen one" campaigns.
'Chosen one' are not always ideal and can be bad in some cases. It may even become a railroad if there is always a time limitation.
My friends and I have a similar thing going. Our original three characters died, but we essentially made the NPC that I chose to pick up (a 10 year old Dragonborn child named Danny) into the hero of our story because our actions traumatized him. Now my friend plays as an edgy traumatized version of Danny, and my other friend and I play our new characters. We have to deal with the consequences of our previous party because their responsibilities bled onto us with Danny.
It could be a nice turnaround if things actually start going for the worse because of something the party does, so their presence is "chosen one" style but nothing would have happened if they were not there to begin with
I've always found "chosen one" campaigns to be very boring.
The trick is having multiple threat levels. War is a really good way of handling that. If there is war in a setting, its most powerful individuals will be tied up in politics and conflict. They'll have their own missions and goals and concerns. In the mean time, the players uncover a threat that will shake things up in the world. If the players don't deal with it, maybe a village will be wiped out. They are the heroes of that village - and maybe that's all they care about, because that's the scale of THEIR story. In the background, however, empires rise and fall.
Eventually, the players grow stronger and uncover greater threats. Now, the bandits attacking towns and the cool NPC that helped you track them are small potatoes. Now you're dealing with an undead threat that has been plaguing several villages. As you continue to chase up and deal with these little threats, maybe it all leads up to a lich that has plans to usurp one of the kingdoms.
That's when you start to involve them in the genuinely important stuff within the world, and after helping said kingdom, they may become important participants in the wars and shaping of the world. But at the end of the day, if they die fighting bandits - the world does just go on. If they die to the undead? Sure, the villages are toast, but the world goes on and that happens all the time. The lich isn't dealt with? A kingdom rises that is led by an immortal king, but the world goes on. It's only if the players genuinely earn the power to change the world that their death really alters the state of it. However, no matter when they die, their death is always important to something. Sure, they aren't the chosen ones that'll change the world forever - but if they die, then that little village with all those colourful characters dies with them. The world goes on, but not their worlds.
I only have a "DM PC" for one reason, so they get attached to him and gets sad and motivated when the final boss kills him.
brutal move, i respect that
Oooooooo, I like that
Outstanding move.
*So they can get attached and gets sad when they have to kill them because they're actually the BBEG
@@MewLillyPad that works, too, but I found my players actually suspected that when I first introduced the character. It really depends on your players, lol
My players literally ask every damn npc with a sword to join the party and spend far too long trying to convince them to do so.
Sounds like your players just want to make friends and focus on the Social Interaction part of the three pillars! Maybe ask them if their attempts to befriend NPCs are their way of trying to direct play towards the kind of experience they wanna have?
@@bislarke95 Yeah, they do like the social aspect of the game and we often have sessions that are purely RP which I really enjoy. Its not so much that they want to befriend people that's the issue, its moreso that they want to bring everyone they meet along for fights/dungeons to give them a boost in combat.
Recently they've been on a ship with 6 fully fleshed out NPCs and they invariably try to persuade the captain to let as many people come with them as possible into a dungeon (despite the captain being adamant that only half the crew can leave at a time to protect the ship). They've even gone as far as to persuade the inhabitants of an island to help guard the ship so they can bring more NPCs into the dungeon.
Similarly, if a king asks them to kill X monster, they'll ask for some guards/the captain to join them etc etc. Most of this is primarily to make the party stronger in combat rather than for RP purposes. I've started to phase out some of the NPCs now (death, new goals etc.) I don't mind the ingenuity, having more people is a smart idea but it slows combat down greatly and gives me far more to worry about.
@@Skare75 I've had that happen to me, and I'm sorry to hear it. But there's some ways to circumvent this issue if it's such a bad thing for you.
1. If they're asking the king for more guards, maybe the city has a plague or suffering constant conflict with a nearby tribe or a siege or something. That way, the king will say he needs every man he can afford. If they roll a natural 20, the king gives them a scroll of mordenkainen's sword which can summon a helmed horror or something.
2. The NPCs just outright refuse. Why the fuck would they join an adventuring party, lol. They're doing their jobs, earning their coin, drinking their mead and enjoying their time with their loved ones, friends and/or family. Why would they join.
3. Just outright tell your players you find it exhausting. Explain the situation to them.
Ultimately, my friend, I think it's okay to give a NPC to help the players out but it should happen exclusively for good reason, like once or twice in the WHOLE CAMPAIGN, so there's narrative weight to it. If not, these NPCs just become another mechanic the players will always try to get a hold of. Because if they can, why shouldn't they? It increases their survival odds.
If your players got used to it I'm sorry, my tip is don't like be cheap and kill off these NPCs just because you don't like this mechanic, because the players will feel like the DM is playing against them and that's a no-no. It's not your fault either for letting this happen but now you've gotten more experience to understand that it's a terrible thing and you'll avoid it in the future.
My final tip is: always talk to the players if there's something you're not liking about the experience and you'd like to change. If they're dicks about it, don't waste your time playing just to exhaust yourself. The earlier you make this realization, the earlier you'll learn to enjoy this game a lot more, with the right people and the right circumstances.
So? Make them feed and share loot with their army.
In that case, you might actually /want/ to run a DMPC, since they seem to want it.
"Imagine you are a DM, and players do not exist in your world."
Perfection. And they said it was unattainable
that is just a book
Maybe then my plots will actually go the way I envisioned them.
@@pinstripe5487 Untill your roll and get nat 1s
@@ayf449 or 20s
You might as well be written a novel.
My DMPC is an ancient wizard who accidentally true polymorphed himself into a piece of bread. He can only cast mage hand to lift himself up. He is paired with the most insane member of the party
“So you’re sure the talking slice of bread is real?”
This isn't a DMPC, though. The character has a very limited scope of things it can do, so it falls more into the "ally" category than the "PC" category. A DMPC, as Jacob is describing them, is a fully fleshed out character, with all the skills and abilities of a regular character that participates in the story and combat just as much as the other PCs.
Jacob's complaint is really centered around the idea of someone taking on an active player role while also being the DM. If you have a character that can't/won't fight but can provide useful information to the party or a similar passive role, then that's fine. Likewise, a character that helps in combat but doesn't get involved in any other aspect of the game unless the PCs specifically ask them to do so (e.g. "hey {combat helper}, do you know anything about {historical subject}?"). The passive character allows the DM to get involved in roleplay while the party is adventuring and there are no NPCs around and can help keep the story moving if the players get stuck. The combat character helps by filling a role the party is lacking, such as a healer or tank, without stepping on the heroics of the PCs themselves.
Its more like a pet because it cant do much and is not even have near the abiletys a PC has
So he is bread? You know.. from.. I am Bread? Does he become unedible and die, when he touches the floor for too long?
We got an immortal bread npc if he dies he just for in to the closet piece of bread
One thing I’ve always enjoyed doing is having what I call the “alternate party” which is just another group of adventurers that the PCs bump into from time to time. They stay away from being DM PCs because they’re never doing the same quests as the players and mostly they just interact with each other in towns, at bars or at tournaments and stuff. They keep pace with the PCs as far as level and wealth go so that they remain their peers and all, so far all my players have really enjoyed it. Clearly the “alternate party” is a group of fully built characters but the point of them is to make the world feel bigger, like theirs this other group of adventurers who’re going to investigate those Orc raids while the party has decided to try and root out the local thieves guild. So ideally they’re really more like allies than DM PCs because they’ve clearly got their own thing going on and are off on their own unrelated adventures all the time. One of the best things to come out of all of this was when, fairly early on in a campaign, one of my players decided to drag the head of a crocodile (at this point the biggest thing they’d killed) into a bar to show off to the alt party, this of course prompted a trophy competition where ever time the two groups ran into each other they always had a new dismembered monster part to show off. My players literally made skill checks to try and carve off the most impressive trophies and then cast gentle repose and took them to taxidermists just because they wanted to make sure that Minotaur head (or whatever) still looked awesome for when they ran into the alt party again. It was great.
Yeah I did this to spice up the Dragon of Icespire Peak adventure, which truth be told is at worst broken and at best a little bland. My players loved that group and when they finally went to kill the dragon, I had that group's members frozen on the way like a breadcrumb trail. There was one character in that party my group particularly loved so I knew I didn't want to kill her off but it created a ton of suspense my group was like "oh fuck not maple let's look for her" and they found her alive, cold and scared but alive. She was a halfling and our group's halfling had a thing for her. When they killed the dragon, my brother sent his character off with her to live happily ever after with Maple and he rolled a new character for arc 2 and it felt so wholesome.
"There's no way you can beat this, check it out, Minotaur head!"
"it doesn't have a body, I'm calling bull."
Yeah, having other groups around doesn't take away from the player's experience it adds to it. Do the players try to work with this other group, do they backstab them, do they passively make the player's life harder or easier, do they add to the lore surrounding the players and if they defeat the big bad are your players going to let them take the glory or are they going to get into a fight.
Making the world revolve around the player is always weak writing.
I like the idea of having the players make another group. Most of my players have 2 or 3 characters, and they're all in the game. We have the Failed Players, PC's that some of the players didn't get along with so well and they made new ones, we have Bravo Team, hired guns sent on a side quest after one of the main PC's got stuck in extraplanar prison, and Fingon of Clan Beren, a gnome necromancer who turned on the party to become a lich. He'll turn up again I'm sure
Note to self: I've found a purpose for all the damn characters I've been creating that will likely not see a campaign of their own.
consider: a good dmpc is one that grows organically from a normal npc to someone the players like so much they want to bring them along and is useful without stealing the spotlight
yes this is about essek thelyss
It's true though. While it is finnicky to pull off it can work, and I think especially the forever DMs are sometimes happy to get to play their OC for once too.
I like DMPCs because I can usually only get up to 2 people to join me and I don't plan on having a tpk every session
@@LiMe251 you could use sidekicks from Tasha to give to players! It's classes that are just much easier so you could give each of players lil guy to support main PC and you would have like 3,6 - 4 characters of power without taking half of party under your direct control
We have one NPC in our main campaign that is like that. He was actually as assistant of the BBEG of the story, but we kidnapped him and he... kinda grew on us? So we stopped treating him as an enemy and he actually started helping! Cool stuff!
DM: So, no one is playing a healer? Fine. You have an NPC coming with you.
Especially when you're the DM of a game with literal children who don't know any better and are bound to do things that will get them into loads of trouble. ( My little cousins of 7 and 9.)
this happened in a game I'm a player in after 2 players also dropped she became me and the new player who joined's favorite other pc in the party mostly because she helped us out and didn't compete for the spot light or resources and saved peoples lives (mainly the other 2 players) she was a life domain cleric named Jaden and we all cried when her father became King of the main kingdom in our game and she had too go do her princess duties.
Having a similar problem where our previous game crashed and I decided to take up the dm mantle to still steer things towards a satisfying conclusion. Problem is we have a level 15 and a level 5 party, and my characters were the only healers/supporters in both groups. The entire composition would fall apart if I had them not tag along.
Support allies are different from dmpcs. The big difference is that support characters don't steal the thunder from the pcs. Probably why players don't play support roles unless you give the support roles their own time to shine.
Dave W Similar thing happened in a one-shot we were doing though it wasn’t fully the same. It was a level 1 (level up to 2) two-shot. Our original PC’s were a Druid and a sorcerer so we didn’t have a tank or full on fighter so we added BOB the fighter soldier with a medic background! He was the MVP and saved our asses multiple times.
Like all DnD taboos, they can be done well. They're just also really easy to do poorly.
They are pretty good for single campaign and can be used really well for enemy’s
@@maddoxWolfe
It's nice to use them as enemies because they are way more flexible and have more options, in and out of combat, making them complex and inherently hard to beat, possibly even harder than their CR suggests.
This is also what makes Designed Difficulty, contrary to Artificial Difficulty.
Would let's say using player controlled NPCs as a back up to a party who's either A weak B smaller and 3 all one class with no healer because I have that for one of my campaigns. They're generally only used as backup for combat, but also for an emergency roll in case the party just rolls ones (I would do rerolls for ones but they didnt want that...they're all new as well and they got the npcs by persuasion rolls)
I think the most important thing is the motivations for "Hero" type NPCs like the video suggests. It is vital to keep in mind when creating this type of character, that they should need the PCs equally or even more than they need him. Otherwise, why doesn't this character just go out and fix all the problems that the PCs have been solving? This can range from character flaws like pride, where they underestimate whatever threat the PCs are up against, leading to them acting recklessly or intervening too late to stop the threat. Apathy is another one, where they simply just don't care about the threat. Or maybe they lack a specific skill set or knowledge that only the PCs have access to due to the adventures they have been on.
@@eclipsegu2rdian591 my group had no healer and had just finished taking some guy hostage, a sort of take us to your leader situation. To make my job easyer I just made the hostage a cleric and it was great. He ended up being the butt of every joke in the party. One time a party member had a random magical effects potion that triggered on skin contact, he slipped some of it onto my DM NPC and he turned blue and didn't notice until later.
He did earn a modicum of the party's respect and they were sad to see him go when he had lead them to his boss' hideout but I was tired of having to play him and all the monsters in combat. He will be a fun recurring npc though.
Seems like the majority of comments agree that there is no issue with a "DMPC", so long as they have their own purpose and arent a shamelessly overpowered, unavoidable self insert. Most NPCs are probably fine if a DM is self aware.
It's the DM equivalent of "metagaming". It's technically not always bad, but there are lines that you should never cross - for players it's cheating and for the DM it's making the game all about yourself.
Agreed. All NPCs and Allies are technically DMPCs. "DMPC" has basically just become conflated with the "Mary Sue/Gary Stu" trope. Just don't play your DMPCs like tools, and they won't be seen as tools. Easy enough.
They work well as just being a cleric to be support
they can be fine, but the DM needs to give them a super backseat role
Teal i don’t get what’s wrong with a regular NPC tho. A DMPC implies som particular attachment to one character. In a game where you are literally every character, I don’t see why you need one to be a full time party member.
@@charlieb8735 when i mean backseat role i mean it can be okay for like 1 adventure preferably someone encountered half way in or further, while also making sure you let the party handle the cool shit. Then you write them out, they gotta rebuild the now destroyed city etc etc, and maybe have them be a reoccurring in the future with more of a npc role. if you have them being a full time party member then yea i agree that's absolute garbage
I have what I guess is a dmpc. A paladin who’s only there to help the party with getting into towns. For the time being, the goals of both the party and the kabal of paladins the crimson paladin is leading are the same. After his arc he has made a few appearances every once in awhile because my players like to tease him when they can.
Edit: btw all he really did was make travel time shorter because he had a wagon. At most he took care of one problem, that being he captured a enemy the players wanted to question. Was that a dmpc moment or just dm panic?
Teal What you describe is just an ally. A DMPC is the DM becomming the hero in his own story. Yes, an NPC can be important and he can even be the focus of the current part of the story. I.e. the PCs could help king Arthur to acquire Excalibur in a story. BUT an NPC always takes the backseat in the end. An NPC is there to make the PCs adventure more interesting, while a DMPC is there to steal the PCs thunder. An NPC may die or be left behind or leave the story in some other fashion, while a DMPC is that obnoxious character the PCs can’t get rid of no matter how much they hate him. A DMPC makes decisions for the PCs, wins their fights and solves their problems. An NPC may help the players, but also creates new problems to solve. He may slay a monster, but he needs the PCs to do the heavy lifting. He may like to go east, but will follow the PCs to the west. It’s not that difficult to spot the DMPC, mainly because he takes the lead ... all the f....ing time.
Which would make them more of an Ally or Sidekick rather than a DM PC
Me: Got you no DMPCs
The party: Lets go to the tavern and see if we can hire an adventurer NPC to join us!
Actually happened to me, although I was a player; I was reluctant but I can’t force the rest of the party to do things my way
Luckily the dm gave the npc a good reason not to come
Sometimes the players want the dm to be a player with them too, and that's perfecrly okay as long as the DMPC acts like a party member and not a hero. So... #notalldmpc ????
This is exactly how it works and is a sign imo that you're a good DM. It's a freaking paradox!
The worst DMs create DMNPCs and use them to micromanage and overshadow their players.
The best DMs avoid DMNPCs, but their games and NPCs are cool/fun enough that the party ends up enjoying them and wanting them around
@@archeenemy6653 That's kinda what happened with a Cleric NPC that I only had around for a little bit. He was supposed to be there for one boat trip for a quest, but my party really liked him, so I decided to gear the party more toward his Deity, and have him watch over the heroes he started giving quests to.
This is the first NPC I've ever actually made, and it felt really good
My players know that I don’t really have good excuses as to why the military can’t do things so they often end up getting a big squad and sending them in to combat rather than actually fighting, but usually I just have them distract minions so the players can fight the big boys.
I personally feel like it's justified to make a DMNPC for a one-player, one-DM campaign, if only to provide support and plot hooks.
Yeah I’m doing that for a campaign with my cousin cause she’s a barbarian and I don’t want her to ya know DIE but gave the DMPC some opposing goals so it’s not so boring for her
Exactly where I was getting at in my own comment. Also to have a babysitter for teaching new players lol. I was tossed into the world of ttrpgs with a mean dm that was kinda out to get the players lol. I mean in all fairness it was my own fault I got my first character killed on his first session lmao, however he purposely kept me multiple levels behind the rest of the party, I was invited in after they started. He also did not take the time to help me learn, threw books at me, and told me be done in an hour. Thankfully some of my friends did take up the mantle and helped me make my first character. But ever since then I have personally chosen to give "tutorial" adventures for new players, no matter where the rest are in the campaign. A tutorial game is necessary I feel. If its a bunch of newbies... thats where the dmnpc babysitter comes along lol. Never really have them take charge, more so just follow the group, and keep them safe from any... unforeseen challenges lol.
I do the same when im playing with my gf.
A nice thing you can shake it up a little.
Give the NPCs special attacks, heals, buffs which the player can use like legendary actions.
Like once or twice a fight, or biggers once/day.
I have experience in the same situation, though not so much for plot hooks as to provide someone that is around on a consistent basis for the (admittedly inexperienced) player to interact with, bouncing ideas off of, to allow encounters to be a little more dangerous (we're only level 2 so far) by being someone else for the creatures to beat up and to be able to save the players' a$$ if necessary. Here's what I've learned:
-You don't want to have more than one DM NPC in the party, because when the times inevitably come that they have to interact it becomes weird that you have to have a conversation with "yourself". It's not quite as bad when your DM NPC is just talking to other NPCs, and less so if you're doing it all text-based like us.
-Combat can be kind of awkward, as during an encounter you can't help but plan ahead what the creatures are going to do in a given round, but you have to play your DM NPC as if they don't have that knowledge. You can't even just play your creatures optimally by doing the thing that makes sense 100% of the time just so that you can resolve the DM NPC knowing what they're going to do, or you'd have them all beating up the first person that drops to unconsciousness.
-While you don't want the DM NPC to take the spotlight off the player by being a lot more powerful than them, I found making the DM NPC underpowered wasn't fun for the player either if they had to constantly rescue DM NPC with healing potions and other resources. At its worst, an encounter the player could have survived could become fatal because they had to waste their time healing your DM NPC. Obviously you don't want the DM NPC to be the "party" face either.
-Also concerning balance: just make them as you would if you were going to be player in your own campaign (that's essentially what you're doing anyway after all, isn't it?) but with the previous concerns in mind, and try to make them with similar or slightly less power to the player. It's pretty easy to avoid the "DM NPC is just joining the player because they are a good guy" thing if you do this right and make it obvious that the DM NPC couldn't do this on their own, or has other motives (such as someone funding them).
-Don't be pushy for the player to accept your DM NPC into the party, and likewise don't have your character explicitly show interest in adventuring with the player. But do tell the player upfront that some NPCs can become their companion on the adventure temporarily or permanently, if it makes sense for them to do so. But what about that the other NPCs don't have character sheets? That's okay, you can make things happen in a way that it doesn't become relevant for that session, and create one for the NPC after the fact. You'd be losing work too, but it's better than taking agency away from the player.
Again of course, this only applies to a one-player one-DM campaign as you originally said.
My DM just let me play the adopted party members, and it's been great. I've completely taken one over now as a 2nd PC and she gets to be DM without trying to also be part of the party
Jacob, who gets to be a player: DMPC's are dumb.
Me, forever DM: I wanna feel like a cool guy too sometimes...
You a dm you can already be cool without fucking railroading.
Hoovy or you could just run a CR 30 creature only one-shot. That would be.... interesting.
Have the party at lvl 3 encounter a world ending threat that they have no hope of defeating. Send them on a quest to resurrect an ancient army, they also must collect powerful components to perform this resurrection.
The party finds the ancient tomb of this army. With the great evil on their heels there is no time to waste, they must wake the dead here or die trying. But the ancient resurrection spell scroll/artifact is not quite right and they only resurrect the general of the army. A tall regal and imposing ally but one ally none the less.
The world ending evil breaks through the last barrier they have as they believe all is lost when one plucky adventurer turns to the newly awakened hero and says, "We needed an army not one rotting corpse in shining armour"
The old hero ignoring the adventurer looks at the insurmountable power of the enemy before him then looking at the party says "We will be enough."
Idk might be fun to run a campaign like this.
@@hoovy8081 You can be a DMPC without railroading
I used to DM for only 2 players early on, and I would DMPC a usually super low INT/CHA Fighter or Healer depending on how the two other player built the character and what kind of build they thought would be most useful. Basically this ment that I didn’t interact at all in the roleplay side of things with regards to other NPCs, but it was easier to have a more balanced and more fun combat encounters.
never before have i been more offended by something i completely agree with.
But it's not the first time you where offended by something you agree with right?
Sgt Wolf I mean, if someone calls you stupid when you do something stupid, it’s offensive, but totally warranted. Right stupid? ;P
@@googlepoodle5814 "It is easier to fool people than to convince people that they've been fooled." -- Mark Twain
Alan Smith-Emerson true. However, you’re playing a 6 int ogre.
Alan Smith-Emerson not you specifically! It’s just fun
I've used one DMPC ever. His name was Erevan Dawnbringer, and he existed because I didn't want any of my new players to feel obliged to play a Cleric on their first game. He didn't do very much other than say "come friends!" Or "worry not, I shall heal you" for the whole campaign, and everyone loved him.
*healing word intensifies*
“DMPCs are unfun for your players.”
Meanwhile, my party adopted a bard orphan from an orphanage, recruited a random goblin they caught and interrogated, allied with an artificer arsonist who was a villain from a sidequest (that I fully expected them to kill), and are now trying to simultaneously recruit the head warlock of a cult and a monk from the city chapel.
If your players want more of them, they're probably not stealing their spotlight. Again, I think XP here differentiates between "Ally" and "Hero" NPC using the quantifier of "DM wants to be cool so adds a hero that always does the cool thing, thus stealing the PCs' thunder." If your allies that you introduce to your game don't steal the dramatic thunder of your PCs, they're complementary allies and they make it more fun. Good job!
Yeah, it just comes down to what the party want. If they try to convince someone to join, it works much better than someone pushing themselves on the party
Yeah I get what he’s saying, I’m more making a joke about how unusual my players are than disagreeing with XP.
I have some very stringent rules about running party members as a DM to avoid the common complaints players have about DMPCs, and I think they make a big difference.
CrazyLikeUhFox oh right! That totally flew over my head then. Sorry! Glad your players are having a good ol’ silly time :)
Benny Jones
No it’s not silly, my wording definitely sounds like snark directed at XP so I get the misunderstanding completely.
My dm had a dmc who’s whole purpose was too mislead the party. It’s great
DMs: *WRITE THAT DOWN! WRITE THAT DOWN!*
In my group the DM always creates a PC to play with the party, but it's something that we talk about ahead of time, and allows them to participate in the party antics as a player. It's honestly always been super fun, and they always make sure that their character doesn't overshadow anyone else's. Also allows us to rotate DM's and still use the same party!
I feel like if I was gonna do a DM PC type of character, I'd make him similar to Gandalf. He'd follow the party around, letting them do most things by themselves, and never really letting on to how powerful he really is, but still offering some helpful advice from time to time and participating in combat, just not to his full ability. I may even include a sort of balrog moment if I was reasonably confident the party would think it was cool.
I have a few DM PCs in my current game, and this is essentially their role. That fact is what makes the campaign continue to be entertaining despite their presence.
Edit: Also, yes, we did have a balrog sort of moment, and yes, it was cool as hell.
i play with a DM who uses a DMPC and it's actually really great, gave our group focus in times where we not working together like we needed, and it never feels like the DM uses the DMPC to take moments away from us or otherwise remove our fun or choices. Even if we ask "Well, what does Redmond think?" the DM never just gives us the right answer through the DMPC, he just gives us that character's opinion. Also, it's an extra pair of hands during combat, and that helps us on the action economy.
I get that these "thing is stupid" videos are meant to be really one-sided by their nature, but this is one where i really think a bit of nuance can be helpful for new DMs. You can do DMPCs in a way that doesn't detract from your PCs' fun.
I agree. I have a smaller group and we rotate DMing campaigns, but it is almost always necessary to add DMPCs so we can have more epic battles. It's much more fun to have another helping hand when you only have 3 or 4 players. We always make it so the DMPC never engages in critical roleplay unless requested, so the players always have rp freedom.
@@Powerracer251 "critical roleplay"... was that a pun?
@@cry1459 It can be
The DMPC should never outshine the PCs.
I ran dm npcs for my group for a short while because the party was essentially 2 fragile casters and a monk, no healer. So I offered them a few dm npcs but never more than one at a time. The reason I offered them multiple choices was because I like to give my players choice on their help where each dm npc is a type of role, tank, healer, assassin, etc. They were there purely to fill a void in combat and I let them know that. They never contributed to the story plot or helped them in social or puzzle complications. When the party grew by one and they got a tank role I withdrew the option of the dm npc's and turned them into allies they can recruit for side quests that they do off scene to gain the party favor/reward. I even wrote in their backstory/personality a reason why they are reluctant to help outright with anything besides combat. One just may not care, another is too snobby, another has no emotion, or they may have their own issues to deal with. Now the dm npcs stand by as those allies off screen under command of the party yet if a pc is sick and their character is not around they have a choice of a dm npc to join them for the session so the encounters are more balanced with the same rules. No story plot contribution past combat. Leaves when you guys are all set with what you need.
I usually make an "optional" DMPC, who's always there, like the "Housecarl" on the tavern, the battle droid on the ship, and i make their personalities as funny as i can. So, if the players decide to bring him/her/it to the adventure, i roleplay it as my own character, and do my best to help the party without getting much spotlight, normally making the npc play in a missing role, where no one else would be able to do. As an example is the Droid i mentioned. The party had no Pilot, so i decided to make one. He pilots ships to the party, uses snipers to eventually save some of them, and is the most intelligent of all of them.
BUT, now that the party have 5 players, one of them being a Pilot, who uses inteligence and strikes with snipers, the Droid will stop following the party, and other "followers" will be availiable for them in the future, if they want.
That's the way i balance it, and that technique normally works.
I dig this idea. I basically just make characters that can help with the quest or fill a niche for a little while, but they never influence the plot or decision-making (aside from making an occasional history check that may or may not succeed, and only when prompted by the situation that the party has created all on their own).
When we played curse of strahd, we had a new person joining the group and so he talked with the dm and ended up playing Esmeralda. Had no idea she was actually part of the campaign lol
That's... Very fucking interesting actually to have a player play a Npc to pc character
Blue Phoniex I’ve seen this executed before it the Vampire the masquerade twitch show La By Night. The storyteller had several npcs become secondary pcs over the course of a bunch of sessions it was really cool
I go a step further in my games. Rather than have a player whose character isn't present for a scene just sit out, I give them an npc to play. Especially if it's a character with goals that aren't aligned with the party. Gives that player something to do and can result in situations I never would've thought of on my own.
Anders Hoffman yeah, my friend died by getting pelted by boulders lol. I felt bad so I gave him a death knight to play.
One story that does oppose this is a story I read on reddit where there was a Knight that helped the party in thick and thin, but at the end, regained his memory and became the final boss
The players unknowingly gathered objects that the regained memory bbeg used to be more powerful. And the players remembered that.
yeah but... /why/ did he follow them around? To just be a villain at the end? His purpose doesn't make much sense. I think it would hit a LOT harder for the party if they had convinced him to join them on their quest and the twist at the end would have been their of their own volition.
@@XPtoLevel3 In that particular instance it was much more patron. The players had amnesia and were trying to defeat the evil king. The knight saved them when they were level 1 and went on to help them in various bits throughout the story. When the players got to the evil king at the end, they found out it was the good knight-he had been possessed by a demon and forced to do evil things, when he had control of himself he assembled a group of heroes to defeat him. Ultimately, I think that reddit story was a rather strong example and probably not quite a DMPC.
I poked around and couldn't find the exact reddit article, unfortunately, I saw it on one of the reddit post DnD videos.
@@XPtoLevel3 The story is basically that the villain had been taken over by a demon, or something of the sort. He, due to a magic of some sort, was able to change back to his humane form for a short while, and in that time recruited the party with amnesia. He didn't do outstanding damage, only sat on the sidedlines for most fights and healed them out of battle.
OP here didn't really recount it correctly, and he was really just an integral plot point that didn't follow the party constantly, only popping up as a returning side character that the players liked to see. The final dungeon was crawling their way through hordes of monsters, the BBEG in diguise healing them after each fight until they reached the final chamber. No-one was there except the party. The BBEG stepped out from their formation, shed his diguise, and spoke with a sad smile "You're all ready to face me. Good luck,", before succumbing to his evil half. The party then recalled their lost memories.
I *also* didn't recount it very well, but it's a really good twist villain, and the BBEG isn't a "HERO" like you described in the video, more of an ally/patron turned bad.
Kinda reminds me at Lapp from Dark Souls 3 Ringed City
I remember that one, it was amazing! :D
The current campaign I'm playing in has a giant talking crab in our party that the DM controls and he is the most precious thing ever. I would die for this crustacean.
I'm two years late but we also played the same/similar campaign! We named our crab Poseidon. He was so popular that our dm made him a character in his original world where we started playing instead of the premade campagns.
In one campaign im playing in the dm has a character who was initially meant to be a tutorial for the gimmick of the campaign but we loved him so much that we got him to join the party, he basically serves as a way to help us stay in character while also allowing us to do the things we want with a friend, for example my character wanted to go to the forest from their backstory, nobody accompanied him except the dmpc so my character would have someone to talk to while this was going on
Which is why i think hes a good dmpc, he dosent get in the way of the players but hes still likeable and plays a good support
I'm just gonna be DM and Play-Pet.
I've been a Wooloo before. Yes, the Pokemon.
Being a character but a weak one was exactly right.
Hi. May who ever reads this have good D&D sessions in all of 2020.
no u
Reverse card
@@nanners6548 uh?
Thank you my good man
@@michaellewis1545 it means you get to have what you said in the comment
Only time I used a DMPC was for our first 1-20 campaign. I had never played or run a level 1-20 campaign before, and I wanted to be a part of the group for the adventure, so I added my character as a member. He was a socially awkward wizard and didn’t talk with other NPC’s, and more or less functioned as the party’s walking encyclopedia for the world.
That's what my Dwarf, Brandr, does. He sucks at fighting, only knows a few spells, but he knows the lore of the kingdom like the back of his hand.
What if the answer to “how would the world be without your party?” Is totally screwed... but would probably still be in a better position due to player incompetence? My players quickly devolve any campaign into Monty python.
Damn, I laughed by my players do the same.
Especially with the "Run away, run away!" scene.
Cymo NET oh yeah, if they can’t seduce a boss then the next step is always that😂.
@@KilakNelek1864 Once a narrated a campaign based on a village in conflict with a mad mage. He's just a fool, a crazy, insane mage with split personallity. His name was Edgard. His other personality always said he was Edgard brother's, EdVard.
And then it started, my players started calling him EdWard and it started to be a Gag in the campaign. Every time they mentioned EdWard, a NPC'd always asks: Who's Edward? - And then they corrected themselves.
In the end, there's not a single battle, they finish it in a pacifist way and even got a party to celebrate the union between Edgard, the crazy mage, and the village. It ended with everybody drunk and asking "Who's Edward?". It was great. The funniest campaign we've ever had. And it wasn't meant to be a joke campaign. (Sorry for my broken english)
Sounds like an amazing campaign honestly
@@SimoLInk1698 Thanks, mate. We have fond memories of this campaign.
On the other hand, they hated the Dark Cleric's Asylum using a Paladin as a vessel to cast haunting and dangerous hallucinations. Obviously inspired by Silent Hill but none of them are fans or know it well so they're all like "WTF is going on??? WHAT THE FUCK IS FUCKING GOING FUCKING ON???".
They hated it but they said it was a good quest.
By the way, it was GURPS Dungeon Fantasy.
The "Sidekicks" rule in Essentials is your friend.
?
@@feedbacking6306 In the D&D Essentials Kit, there are Sidekick cards, which are characters with backstories that level up with the party. They're great for small groups.
"I'm sick and I don't wanna lie on the floor."
Mood.
My DM did a PC. Our adventures consisted of finding who had captured this Drow Bard and who had beaten him today. One adventure was us rescuing from a pitiful bandit crew. This Bard made our level 4 party miserable, telling us his personal problems and his family issues. DM kept getting pissed off with us as we constantly tried to escape him, not meet up with him when he wanted us to.
I missed one session, I came back the next week and everyone had a new character. The party had enough and tried to kill him, turns out he was a Level 20 Bard, with the DM rolling in secret and there was a TPK.
''What the fuck, was he doing being beaten up by a couple of bandits? Why did he need us to get him that relic from those Goblins? Why is he hung up on what his brother thinks? Why is his brother a High Elf, when he 's a Drow?''
''He's adopted. Maybe he had a plan for your party''
''Yeah, that worked out well for him then''.
Your party needs a new DM.
@@Lord_Numpty it had been ages since I had played. Last time I played was 3rd edition. So a good introduction. Although we started to play CoS, but she couldn't 'handle' the module. Playing DiA online (small fee), much better group, professional DM who runs three games a week with about 15 players. Probably collects £600 a month for 12 hours work + prep. For me it's worth having a top quality game for £10 per month.
DMPC are bad if the DM is bad. Your example is a way of how not to use them. We always use DMPC as the healer from day one in our campaign, unless we have a good healer and that person is okay with doing healer/support job instead of heavily leaning in other roles.
this is some crit crab material...
I’m running a campaign with two players and one of them has a sidekick, sort of a DMPC if you will. His name is Kevin and he’s a kenku rogue, he’s lvl 4 and the rest of the party is lvl 6. It’s great to have him around to help with the action economy and to just do things like pick locks or scout. It’s also no sweat to roleplay him cause all he says is “Kevin.”
The fact he only says Kevin and has an 8 in his INT helps separate him from me, the DM.
I'm just gonna be DM and Play-Pet.
I've been a Wooloo before. Yes, the Pokemon.
I fought Voldemort and everyone had fun.
Being a character but a weak one was exactly right.
Good example my friend did when he ran a game:
We had a sci-fi setting and I, as the designated technophile engineer, was super excited to be constantly tinkering with the systems, making patchwork repairs and optimising efficiency etc.
The session after we get the ship, the DM introduces an onboard AI that is able to shapeshift the interior, mapped our courses to new planets and locations and was entirely self-sufficient. Of course, this sucked out a LOT of the enthusiasm I had initially had for the game, where I was looking forward to crawling through ducts to fix critical damages in some intense firefight and the like.
Of course, the DM adored this AI, and was sincerely having fun without realising what he'd taken away from his players, so we let him have it. But by campaign's end, the rest of the party were sort of leaning towards my way of thinking, and were glad to be done with it.
Jacob, It's me Jacob again, I meant what I said on your other video about wiping out all of the other Jacobs in the world, but I've decided to take pity on you because of this video. Good luck in future Jacob related endeavors.
You have quite a great username
Hmm...begun, The Jacob Wars Have!
*holds Greataxe
Roll for initiative...
My defenses are strong, we'll see which Jacob survives...
@@XPtoLevel3 I will erase the name Jacob from existence if I must.
I run games because I want to play, so I play my own character. I'm all too well aware of the many ways this can go wrong, and new players are often skeptical at first. But after a few sessions I always win them over. Follow these rules.
1) Roleplay. Make connections with the players' characters. A good DMPC is a foil for other players to explore their character's personalities. He can have his own story and persona too, but they're secondary to providing emotional support to PCs. This leads into my second rule.
2) Step back. When PCs are talking, the DMPC listens. He's not the leader, he's not a domineering personality. He's a type-B, supporting personality. He'll have his own opinions and insights to offer when asked, but he'll go along with other people's decisions rather than cause a fuss.
3) Complement the Party. What does the party need? In a group full of rogues and spellcasters, you're the front line tank. Do they lack a dedicated healer? You're it! If you're an experienced player you can come up with a variety of interesting, creative, and effective builds to suit any role they need. And if you're not, you're not ready to play a DMPC.
In the past, I've done a light cleric that was acting as the party 'mom' and the players picked her to lead them because none of their characters were up to leading at that point in their character arcs. I nipped that in the bud by adding an experienced player with the express instruction that he was supposed to come up with a party leader character.
I've also done a mute barbarian/rogue hybrid that could only speak to the rogue who knew sign language and the wizard whenever he bothered to cast message on her. She doted on a few of the PCs and treated them like her surrogate family. She'd helped them deal with the emotional fallout from curses, betrayals, and alcoholism. Their reaction to her eventual death in combat was one of the most moving moments I've ever had in a game of D&D.
Currently I'm doing a druid who has taken a lost PC under his wing who otherwise has no reason to stay with the party. The PCs think he's a coward (he's anxious around strangers, crowds, and enclosed spaces) and they praised him for joining in on a duel against two frost giants that one of the other PCs decided to avoid. (They were all level 3...and they won, cheeky buggers). Still early in that game, but so far my players report having a grand time.
I can see how this wouldn't work for a lot of people. In my groups, the DMs always have characters, but they never decide what to do or where to go. A lot of the times they're just tanks and healers and are just involved in role playing and battle
This. Most times, the reason i include a "dmpc", its just because i also want to participate. I'm the "forever dm", not because I particularly _want_ to be, but because group A consists of my family who really aren't familiar with 90% of the mechanics of the game and wouldn't know how to run it, and group B, who are my friends who just never have the time or energy to do it. I love dnd, i never get to PLAY dnd, unless i do this.
I run CoS, I decided to toss in a Warforged Rogue allegedly crafted by Gond (as far as he believes,) to basically transform into a seal to lock down Strahd in the event of his defeat (because the canon ending sucks to me, so i wanted a possible alternative one to be achieved. This ending does sacrifice himself tho, so the evil side of me wants the players to like him. I think it's working so far. ). That warforged made big time miscalculations during his run in with Strahd and at "level 20", got beat down and yeeted across ravenloft so hard that when he crashed, he survived, but lost so much functionality that he's found at the players starting level, (He would not be the first person to get worfed for the sake of strahd build up) acknowledges failure on his part, but isn't willing to surrender. He also recognizes, he doesn't know what to do to win next time, so he asks to join the party and follows their lead and does his best to protect them and help them achieve their own goals. Every once in a while, his skills come in handy, and when the group struggles, sometimes I'll have him offer suggestions on possible courses of actions, but i don't let his suggestions be the final ones, or entirely good ones. If he had all the answers, he wouldn't be in the state he was in.
I guess my counter to hating dmpc's is, maybe they wouldn't be a problem if someone else took the dm torch once in a while. Maybe the dm just wants to play the game and struggles to find a balance between the want of a player and the role of the dm.
I myself only ever supply a DMPC/Babysitter npc when dealing with either a very small or very inexperienced player group.....my current players being both
Yea I add one for my "adult timeframes are hard and we are all first timers" group. Hes got general knowledge of the world to answer simple questions and fill who ever cant show ups combat role, but doesnt make any decisions or save them from super stupid issues
I throw helpful NPCs that join the party into my game. But they're usually the "Hey, there's no way I can handle this thing, could you guys help me?" type of NPC. They help in combat, they might have a few creative solutions, but the majority of the roleplay and the puzzle solving is up to the players. They're very useful to guide the players to different plot hooks that they are free to ignore, without it feeling railroady.
Mizerable Git In my most recent campaign that’s the exact reason I have one as well. One player has played in a single session before, and the other revolving crew of 3 people have never played before. I plan to find a way to kill him off once after they’ve become attached to him, to help show that nothing is infinite in dnd
This is fine. What's really great is when they come to rely on this mentor character, count on his help, love him. And then, once they have everything figured out and can stand on their own, BAM! Big Bad kills him. And now you just gave them a very personal reason to hate your villain.
Anders Hoffman .....you just precisely described the prologue arc of my DM’s home brew campaign. DMPC was a mentor and mother figure to several PCs, including mine. We spent four sessions thinking she had sacrificed herself for us. We all snapped and rampaged and took out the BBEG, and at the end while we were nursing our wounds the DMPC shows up and says “ I knew you guys were ready. You rely too much on me. Take care, and I’ll be watching from the sidelines BYYYYYYE!”
Im a dm at my schools D&D club, even though i wanted to be a player. But saddley i quickly rose to be the most popular dm and now i can't play character. But i did find satisfaction in putting my character as a very important NPC
I often do the same in my games. In my first ever campaign all of the players were new, so I had a DM PC to help guide them and the players loved it. In another I had a reoccurring integral character who would give the player missions and quests throughout the adventure and would often join them in combat. It's only dumb if you don't do it right.
Yeah, but do your players find the game fun?
@@bobhihih yeah
@@bobhihih he just said he is is the most popular dm at the club
That must probably mean his games are fun, isn't it?
Stephanie?
One of your "Out of the Box" Encounters actually killed one of my player´s PCs today. The one with the Scarecrows and the Ravens to be exact.
It was fun. He got to play a dramatic death scene- which he did. And now... his old character is gonna return as the soul of said character infused into a warforged...
Interesting how death can sometimes be... inspiring.
That’s why I love warforged and other construct races, you can have unique story moments. When other races die there’s nothing you can really do, but when a construct dies you can have them be a talking head till they are repaired and other such moments.
In my games, I typically include a few characters that exist to fill out the party's roster as needed. They function a bit like Fallout companions: they don't interact with the "story" unless spoken to, and the spotlight isn't on them, unless it's a quest that is specifically about that character. Those NPCs are also typically my players favorites, and they give a good way to increase tension without killing players first. If the party goes in against a monster that is way beyond their capabilities, the monster targets the NPCs first, so the players get some idea of how dangerous it is.
Same way I run things. DM PCs are NPCs that run with the group until killed, they never get the spot light on them. They just fill out the party and I use them to spout some lines once in awhile that have no bearing on things
Probably only my take on this, but please don't. If your players made bad choices with their characters (i dunno, 2 melee rogues and a shadow monk) - your job is to make campaign that will be tailored around it. In my example above for instance - it's "greatest heist to save the world" as a possible campaign idea, or "prison break", or "scout group, FOR KING AND COUNTRY" - limitless pool. But do not cover for missing roles. If players fucked it up, did not discuss it or went for it even when they undestood that they have terrible coverage - let them do it. Do not steal the experience from them. You have the tools to make even the worst combinations work.
Unless it's a 5 cleric party. Probably your players hate you in the first place :D
@@TrickyTrickyFox That's a shit ton of work and expectations on a DM simply because the party has a bad composition for a campaign... It's one thing to adjust a one shot to flow more easy with a particular party, but there's only so much you can do without making it a full time job to both make it a challenge but not too easy to TPK let alone the full thematic examples that you make of adjusting the focus of the entire story to it. That's where you introduce the temporary NPC's to just help fill in the gaps when needed but still leave plenty of room for downsides. That pair of NPC's that your party has been travelling with could be great at combat, but also looking to steal your bag of holding at first opportunity for example. It takes enough work just to DM a campaign at all, but you can't just homebrew a new series of quests to tailor to a mismatched party every single time it happens. Your job as a DM is simply to give your players the tools to succeed if they can figure it out and then letting player decisions + the dice take it from there.
@@ShaggyRogers1 depends. If the players decided they want to create a vietnam skirmish pack and run around assassin creed style - you will have plenty of ways to play around it
@@ShaggyRogers1 though this is something that might have come with experience and i am just looking at it from experienced DM perspective and view it more of a creative challenge for DM, not as a chore or a full time job to build encounters around it. And your party will find ways to be moronic stupid even if you tailor stuff around party, dont worry about TPKs
My first session had a dmpc who actually was a good example of what to do. He was a dude from the village we were helping, and he was looking for warriors to help him clear out the goblin camps, because he couldn’t do it alone. He was there for combat, but he didn’t call the shots. He also just dipped to “search for information” during RP bits. He was basically there as a fourth party member during combat and for the dm to communicate world information, rather than be a character that is one of these “heroes.”
My DM cannot comprehend a campaign without a Wizard and he is thinking about putting a wizard npc for us.
Jacob: the only youtuber who can record a quality video while being COMFY AS FUCC
You should have used a semicolon, just sayin'
But Jacooob, my players are chaotic stupid.
Yeah, this is just an early comment. Please bury it.
I refuse! I will upvote this so that it remains for all eternity!
YOU SHALL NOT FALL
Sorry guys I can't upvote the numbers too powerful.
Irok 121 NEVER
But it's true tho lol
When I hear a villain that makes heroes look like fools and never dies I just think of a dm using an illithid correctly lol.
Yeah, I often hear people complain about this stuff, and I don't get that. It's all just to make it more satisfying when you finally get him. Yeah, let the players get the upper hand and make groud, but it's also good to have them face defeat or setback at the hands of a cunning, dangerous villain.
Or a powerful lich who hasn't evolved into conquering the outer planes. I had a special boss who was only an avatar for a lich. Imagine the Pc's surprise when they found out that god-like vampire overlord they managed to defeat was just a puppet.
@@paladin181 uuu, the anime villain escalation, classic :D
Depends on the villain.
I think it's actually a solid to make a villian seem like a hero that makes the players seem likes fools. Like for example in long campaings you're going through all that trouble to get rid of this one thing at the end. It's kinda like "oh you're not ready yet" or "not strong enough yet" kinda thing. So when you finally do reach end game you're almost on par with the BBEG rather than lil squshiy marshmellow go BAP!
I've used 1 dmpc and that was because I , at the time, only had 2 players, and they didn't interact much at all, so I put them in there to spice things up
Not every “hero” character is a bad thing
One time we were playing Star Wars age of rebellion and the party was like a pilot, engineer (I don’t remember what sub class), and a commando (I think)
Regardless the dm realized that the team should probably have a droid of some sort and made a enhanced medical droid/hacker and they were the best because they just fallow the players around, open doors, and heal the players,
"Congratulations, you are being rescued. Please do not resist."
That is not a DM PC. That's an ally. DM PCs have their own backstories, their own full character sheets, and overshadow the actual players.
@@Galaxy613 they did have a character sheet but didn’t overshadow the other characters
my dm's pc has a gun, he's an assassin with boots of haste, and a gun. ugh.
4:15 I think the example you were looking for here is DM of the rings, where frodo and Sam are the DM PCs, and the party is everyone else.
Post your face when you realize Gandalf was literally a DMPC
@@notquiteanonymous9365 It's a happy one, because Gandalf was done well. He didn't do Aragorn/Frodo's jobs for them and didn't deny anyone the opportunity to shine in their own way. What he added to the story was completely unique to his character, which is what I hope was the point of this video.
@@leitmotif6854 plus, in the sense of the hobbit, you could say he showed up to help the PCs when they failed every saving throw and were going to get killed long before the campaign is even close to over. By the end he takes a back seat because this isnt his story, its theirs.
The only time I'll use DMPCs is when I'm DMing a group consisting entirely of new players. The DMPC helps them in the journey as the players learn the ropes and when the players get a good grasp on things (usually by 3rd level ) I kill off the DMPC. It's really effective in inspiring the party to step up and incites, one time this led to the party having a full on funeral that actually brought me to tears.
I really hate seeing this stereotype being thrown around, I don't think a DM should be discouraged to include a personal character into the party, so long as they're following the *exact* *same* *rules* *as* *the* *players* i.e. same level as the rest of the party and nothing that isn't in the rulebooks. I have a DM running an ongoing pirate campaign who runs a Tortle tempest cleric, he plays them just as if it was simply another member in the party if a little slow on the uptake since he made him behave with his head in the clouds the party sometimes having to stop to get his attention even during party conversations (and I just now got that stupid joke he slipped into the character design, goddamnit that cheesy bastard), but the character is not an over-powered gross personal power fantasy meme npc.
Point is, this isn't a problem unless the DM stops following the rules and deliberately abuses their seat of power for their own personal fun at the expense of the other players. Now I don't recommend doing this for any DM, as juggling a fully fleshed-out character along with hoards of npcs, story plot lines, and keeping track of rules is not an easy task. But if you can handle the extra workload go for it, just remember, follow the established rules of the table and don't be a dick, it's a golden rule for *any* game regardless if you're a player or a game master.
TheRauzKindred thanks got worried for a second it’s my first time playing dnd with with some friends and I some how got the dm role and didn’t wanna just kinda alt delete my character
I've done the same with my first campaign because we didn't have a lot of players, so I suggested adding an npc member. He doesn't really do much unless I'm going into his backstory or the party includes him in stuff. He's not really a central or overpowered character, he's just another person that exists in the world for his own reasons, he was just stuck with the party
I agree! My group was all new to D&D apart from our DM, who had only ever played before. She felt a little sad she couldn't play a character to participate in our role-playing, and we all agreed that introducing a DM PC would be really fun. Said PC is a human warlock who is interesting, complex and has really great dynamics with the rest of the party. It's certainly not for every party or DM - and it, of course, requires a lot of trust in the DM not to cheat - but it works really well for us!
I think it's better if they're slightly or significantly lower level than the party and take on more of a backseat supportive role.
I honestly don't agree, for one simple reason. Meta gaming, human beings by default can not force themselves not to take into account all the information they know about a situation when making a decision.
This is why I personally don't think jury's should be given the information till all the evidence has been approved or disapproved as striking evidence from record does not strike it from the jury's mind
I have my DMPC as an helper from a friendly faction, She's pretty useful in combat (mainly because I'm running a 6+player module with 2 people) but is pretty much always stuck in her book somewhere in the back when the party is solving a puzzle, She also has a crippeling gambling addiction, My point is DMPCs can be good if the DM knows when is and when isn't the time to use them. also as a side note she is completely killable if my players ever try, I even planned a boss battle against her in the future
Sounds pretty cool
My entire party wanted to play attack classes so I made a DMPC that is a support but has little to no damage output
I'd love to see a subversion of this where a DMPC joins the party and is designed to be annoying and eventually be defeated or abandoned by the players.
There is a character in an adventure Keep on the Borderlands I believe named Biff who is designed for that purpose and to teach the party hey be careful who you invite because they might not all be useful. He is a bard who is vain, never gets involved in fights, makes everyone else carry his gear, and is loud at often the worst times. All around a useless party member. However, he became very endearing and ended up becoming a main party member for many future adventures despite his worthlessness.
So almost Merry and Pippin because the rest of the company (bar the other two hobbits and Gimli) are min/maxed (yes I am referencing that one video but hush)
When we played 3.5 at school my teacher had a DMPC, a dwarven cleric who wash a veteran adventurer who showed our unexperienced heroes the ropes, he was our only healer also as none of us wanted to be healers.
It was a clearer meta aspect that helped us get into the game and give occasional advise in a non 4th wall breaking way. He would still never stop us doing something if we really wanted to, and he didn't stop us from dying. Three years of campaigning and we all loved the DMPC, when I joined another group I was honestly supprised at the lack of DMPCs because of how much the other one improved our game.
I got introduced midway into a game, and a few minutes in when I encounter the other players and we are going to have a tense dialog to convince each other to go toguether an anoying magic dude instantly teleports behind me and commands the other players to take me with them.
It was really clear that the DM was playing as himself, or if something he was roleplaying as his anxiety, turns out that character was a king that was pretty much a god, loved by everyone important in the world, rich, handsome and charismatic (on paper) that for some reason was guiding the party even when it's really clear that he could do anything we could, he even gave each a magic stone that allowed him to see everything we saw and contact us/ teleport to us at will.
As soon as he fucked off I proposed the other players to throw the stupid stones off a nearby cliff, before they could answer he teleported back and said nono.
Never have I wanted a character so desperately Poochied into his homeplanet.
I didn't realise DMs were capable of turning railroading into physical NPCs. At that point you might as well say "Sure, you might want to do this, but my story says you're doing this"
As a Forever DM who uses DMPCs, I can say that person is a horrible DM, who's just in it to feel powerful, not to actually help the players, when they get stuck (like I do, and even then, I roll for the attempt,) or to help in combat just a bit.
We had one "DMPC" in a campaign with only two players that needed some balance.
But the GM did a really good job. She was a young alchemist girl who was one level below us, and her main purpose in the game was to make us consumables to help out. In combat she barely used a sling once in a while and she never levelled up.
If anything, she made the game more challenging as we had to protect her. And she eventually realized the adventure was getting too dangerous for her on her quest for knowledge and decided to stay back in town.
A bedside chat with XP to Level 3.
Now we need a fireside chat with XP to Level 3
@@quotetherobot749
Just hope we never see a shower side chat with Jacob.
@@quotetherobot749 Followed by a burn-unit chat with XP to Level 3.
I remember I was running a Changeling The Lost campaign and had a favorite ally NPC. He wasn't a DMPC and almost never actually joined the party on adventures. He was more the creepy guy that the players reluctantly would have to go to for information or favors. One time the NPC actually had cause to go and help the players in combat. The dice went south for him and I ended up killing my favorite NPC. It was a sad day.
I have to applaud my older brother, who is my current DM. When the adventure initially started i wasnt ready to join yet so he created a DMPC so that my other brother, who hasnt played D&D before, wouldnt be by himself. Cue me joining. The DMPC who is a cleric named Lubomir that worships Ilmater. He doesnt steamroll questlines or story progression. Isnt all powerful and doesnt constantly have the right tool for the job. He just heals, tanks hits, and keeps the rest of the party from killing each other. Ill also add that as of 2 weeks ago my brother has went full dm and gave control of Lubomir to another guy in the group. Who does a damn good job of keeping the spirit of the character going as well as running his personal PC who is a halfling rouge and a polar opposite of old Lub.
That's nice to hear
it really does depend. one of my dms has a “dmpc” but they are just there cause they are a god bound in mortal form, and the party is what did this to him. if you integrate a dmpc properly, and it enhances the story, then it works. if they just join to join, and make the rest of the party worthless, then they are terrible for the game
Rinings
Well.. you do realize, that “dmpc” you mentioned falls under the category of “ally npc” from how this vid describes npcs. But, that outshining the players bit you described as bad, THATS what’s being called a dmpc..
My fav DMV recently added an old character of his that he had like an Easter egg and he's gonna hang out with us for a while and it's actually really awesome
This is a good point, I mainly add mine in to prevent full party wipes. I hate it when I add in a monster the party is gonna get slaughtered to. So I added in a literal divine soul sorcerer as a descended of the platinum dragon himself. This fits well with the world since I'm a dragon fanatic and love using their world influencing abilities to shape the world. This can also help with events, as the god of the world I can host 1 shot games or tournaments in the very same world as a battle for favor of the dragons! I'll typically do this for someone's birthday or if it's a reason to celebrate.
Might also be a good idea to have them be a lower level then the rest of the party to make it less likely for them to outshine the party
This kid at the dnd club at my school ( our school had one) had a DMPC who was a literal cat,not a taxabi, a literal cat. He has 23 health and 21 armor class without any armor and he was almost impossible to kill and it was infuriating
i mean he's a cat of course he has a high AC, he's gonna be nimble
@@koncentra5767 32 dexterity worth of nimble?
I put a hero NPC in my adventure, but I made him super weak (firbolg scientist, scientists being a homebrew class I made that are basically wizards with experiments and not magic) so the guy could only provide a measly fire bolt, the occasional good spell replication, and exposition on everything he should know. He was meant to be a sidekick and mostly for the purposes of getting to the fight, not in combat.
I prefer a useless NPC, ala escort quest. The absolute opposite of a DMPC.
I love doing that they’re especially fun to role play
I was running a premade dungeon, that had an ancient language engraved in places. None of the players could read the language (I think the intent by the creator was that one of the casters would use magic to read the text, however none of my players had the spells that could do that). So I gave them an NPC that could read the language, but was incredibly lazy and didnt want to do anything at all.
Me too! Or an NPC that does like 1 thing really good, and is pretty bad at another thing.
Ah yes, the dreaded escort mission. feared by everyone and everything with more than 2 braincells
@@krispydunts1665 good thing my players top out at 1.5 brain cells then lmao
Just told my dnd party you uploaded and we all dropped what we were doing to watch lol
I bless your party, may thee roll twenties and slay plenties.
That might be awkward if you had a dm pc in that game :P
One of my favorite stories related to this was one of my first games. At the time, we didn't know who would be DM, so we all made characters. When we decided I would DM, I agreed that me having a character would be sketchy so I cranked up his power level and turned him into the BBEG who later literally dragged the world into a hellworld covered in a never ending war until reality ceased to exist after the party fucked up and died to some mooks before he even attacked. He didn't even get to finish his monologue and do something cool before the generic minions formed from the twisted flesh of innocent people overran and killed the party.
i only have one dmpc and i didnt even want it, the party just decided to adopt a stray kobold.
Somebody: they can be good. Gives example
Jacob: ThEn iT's moRE LikE a SidEKiCk or PAtrOn!
The problem with the video is that it puts most DMPC in a category except for the one that is bad. Then it uses that example as 'DMPC' and every other kind of DMPC is 'not really a DMPC'...
I'm just gonna be DM and Play-Pet.
I've been a Wooloo before. Yes, the Pokemon.
I fought Voldemort and everyone had fun.
Being a character but a weak one was exactly right.
Like any storytelling rule, it’s one you shouldn’t try to break without good reason.
Whenever a campaign ends, and I'm DMing a new one, all of my characters become NPCs.
This adds a healthy amount of respect (fear) for all NPCs.
For example, the level 5 party once decided to try and rob a local bar.
The barkeeper then pulled the 2 +3 battleaxes from above the mantle (a failed perception check had them believing they were decor) and proceeded to beat the ever living hell out of them, as any respectable level 20 mountain dwarf barbarian would. (He was leveled post-mortem. He died, but after his brother, a high level forge cleric went back to give him a proper burial, was able to resurrect him, and they both retired together.)
In my very first ever game of dnd the dm used a dmpc, but I think he played him very well in that the character was 1: the same level as us and could legit die like the rest of us and 2: was very uninvolved in the plot and quiet. He was the barbarian that was shy and nice and we liked him fine. This is more like an ally that was just with us the whole time.
I dm now and one kind of npc I put into games are the driver character. The npc that has a cool vehicle like an airship, lightning rail or boat that the players travel with. The npc can do cool shit, but is more of a way of allowing the players to travel in style. Usually I also add sidekick characters (not the UA kind) like a deep gnome or someone very likeable that's kinda helpless. This gives the party a friend that they usually want to protect.
Spoilers for Critical Role:
Take what Matt is doing with Pumat Sol. Pumat is now with the party, but will probably only be with them temporarily and wasn't traveling with them for like 10 whole levels. Pumat has the power of an equal or more powerful party member, but I know he won't stick around.
My DM character is just a talking, severed head for role play purposes.
That’s a good dmpc
I had a dmpc once in my first ever campaign (in Dnd3) who was the exact opposite; a mute golem with tank purposes
In my defense; the party was composed of a wizard, a thief and sorcerer and they would have still died
the npc party members section in the 5e dungeon master's guide (pg. 92) has some pretty useful guidelines; they have character sheets built using the standard rules but their level should be that of the lowest level adventurer in the party, pick simple class options (i.e. life clerif, champion fighter, thief rogue, evocation wizard), and the dm should track their loyalty using the loyalty rules on the same page. the main problem with dm controlled characters is some dms use them as a vessel to do cool high level stuff outside of the party's current skill level, which is fun for the dm but not for the players. that's why the allied character should always be at the players' level and they should be treated -they're there to enrich the party, not overshadow them.
My party killed a bunch of bandits and decided to spare the life of the last one and let him join our party as a fighter because we needed muscle, but instead of our DM playing him, each of us takes a turn running his character on top of our own and we have shipped him with the rogue and it's great.
Look, a lot of people have bad experiences with DMPCs, because a lot of bad DMs tend to use them, but they're honestly a very useful tool if you know how to use them. They're good to nudge the party in the right direction if they're totally lost, fill out useful combat rules in smaller groups, and fill roleplaying niches. There are just a few little caveats and rules to abide by when using them, in order to make them work.
1. The DMPC is definitively a sidekick. Their main goal is to help out the heroes because they're friends or they have similar goals. Mine are quite often a childhood friend, sibling, retainer or otherwise linked to one or more members of the group and act as an accessory to their character, emphasizing their persona in some way. I will often have them specifically connected to a player that isn't the strongest roleplayer, in order to have someone around that can consistently engage them in RP and encourage them to engage with other characters and story elements.
2. Their actions in combat are controlled by the players. My DMPC is basically treated like a party member in an RPG. While I role-play them, when battle begins I leave their combat actions entirely up to the players (unless the players try to make them do something suicidal or completely out of character.) The same goes for their advancement. I ask the group, "How do you want *Insert GMPC name* to progress here? What feat/spell/whatever should they get?"
3. They are not the focus of the plot. They may have a stake in things and a vested interest in the party's goals, but never to the same degree as the heroes. The story could easily progress without them and so if the party decides to ditch them, it's not really an issue.
I feel like a lot of the issues you're bringing up, don't really make sense. They're not inherent issues with the concept, they're very obvious examples of a tool being misused. The fact that I can beat a man to death with a hammer is not a flaw in the hammer. The idea that a GMPC makes the hero's accomplishments meaningless, or that the heroes don't need to exist, is only true if the DMPC is significantly stronger than the rest of the party and there is no reason that has to be the case. I have used many DMPCs to great effect, and my players adore them. I have been told it's my best quality as a DM, that my NPCs are lovable and interesting. At the end of a recent session one I ran, one of my players announced to the room as the DMPC was dropped to 0 HP, "If anything happens to her, I will kill everyone in this room and then myself!" They love that character and consider her a valued member of the team. And the same goes for many other DMPCs I've implemented over the years. It's all about execution.
It's weird to me to see people always complain about DMPCs, because in the groups I played with when I was a kid (like 15 years ago now), they were just expected. We would often alternate DMs, and so whoever the DM's regular PC was, was still in the party. We just had certain rules of etiquette in play and yeah, we had one asshole in the group that would abuse his position as DM to reward his character. But we just figured it was that guy being a dick, not an inherent issue with DMPCs, because the other four guys in our group did just fine when it was their turn.
I need to have dm PCs because I only have two players in my game
same
Have you tried making the game work for two players?
If you're talking 5e D&D, then perhaps the "sidekicks" from Essentials Kit could be of help? Basically a secondary character for each player to play, having simpler and more straightforward handling. Meant precisely for low playercount sessions.
KubinWielki ok thanks
Bennard Ebanks Jr. No, I just figured adding two more players would be easier for the loot tables and monsters
This is how I made an interesting DMPC in my game:
I used the *compendium of a soulforged artifacts* document as a template to make a sentient weapon NPC, with stats, health and everything. So this DMPC, who’s soul is trapped in a weapon, can only act when he is wielded by a party member. On top of that, he is using the party to achieve his own goals.
I have him function as patron of sorts, as he entered into a contract with the party in exchange for saving the life for one of the PCs. He has a system where he grants them “a favor” whenever they need his help, and when he racks in 3 favors, he gets to ask a favor of the heroes in return.
Honesty I have been having a blast roleplaying this DMPC/Patron character, and I think this was a clever way to make the party work in a module balanced for more players than I had at the time xD
Something that I always like to do with allies to keep them from undermining the party is make them perform a specific role in combat instead of just fighting like a player. Maybe the party is being chased and get cut off in an alley and has to fight some guys off to move forward, and the NPC holds off the enemies chasing from behind to buy them time for combat. Maybe the fire lizard that the party befriended earlier in the dungeon will belch flames onto a random party member’s weapon every turn, giving them a temporary fire buff. That sorta thing. I’ve found it helps make my players feel like they have helpful allies backing them up in combat without taking away their spotlight
"Allies" are probably my biggest strength as a DM. I use them to add a bit more depth to combat (I make their attacks very simple so they don't take up time), allow further character development by having interactions with other encountered NPCs, and most of all, I get to make the players feel bad when they die. "Allies" are so great because you get to stick these characters in brutally dangerous situations, rewarding the players for saving them, immersing the players for losing them, inflicting a sense of fear in your players, yet also providing a bit of a meat shield for your players so they can face tougher enemies without dying.
I really like the idea of allies.
If the local lord has tasked the party with some dangerous task why wouldn’t they have help from a few of his men at arms or a local mercenary group. The lord wants the job done and if it’s tough enough to require outside help he would want to send at least a bit of assistance.
IDK man, I think you're attaching alot of baggage to a neutral entity in a DM's toolkit. What's important is that your DM PC doesn't undermine your players' actions or overshadow their accomplishments!
There are plenty of scenarios where knowing that there are other successful groups of heroes (some of whom might be competing with the players) is great! It can make your world feel more lived in and intense and in some cases, provide an interesting bedrock for future player characters!
Overall I agree with the sentiment that the DM shouldn't try to have their cake and eat it too, but I think condemning the idea of DM PC is throwing the baby out with the Bathwater. They're tools, just like everything else!
One of my favorite times, running a campaign, was in having an NPC join the group who seemed only minimally useful, encouraging everyone not to worry about things that ended up being important. A friend of mine was playing a PC that argued with him all the time, and the NPC declared to everyone that nobody should trust my friend. The NPC was eventually killed in a trap, and everyone went about their business, but in the end, my friend was actually RPing the brother of the crime boss they were hunting, and he obviously betrayed them, using his brother's minions and magic daggers in the end fight. He died with my friend giggling out his dramatic last words, and the party looking on in excited frustration.
We talked a few times about just having my friend betray them earlier, because he had other things come up a few weekends in a row, but it all turned out fun.
Title: "Why dungeon master player characters are dumb"
WoW roleplay DMs: *heavy sweating*
I get there's a different context between that and DnD DMPCs, but that's what I thought about when reading the title.
A lot of my DM PCs are my older characters from over the last 20 or so years.
I'm really glad you chose to take the time to delineate the different things one might define as a DM PC. Basically, you hate DM ego boost characters. I love having an ally in the party because it balances the sense of doom and aid from the GM. It really keeps players on their toes with you, fearing and loving you by association of your enemy npcs and the allies you give them
Isn't a DMPC just an NPC who adventures with the party? Sure it's a problem when the DM favours their PC more than the party (Or as much as the party, it's often good to give them less attention or be slightly lower levelled). I've never personally played in a game with a DMPC or played one myself, but JoyRide Entertainment's D&D Campaign JoyQuest DMed by Freddie Heinz (Who I consider one of the greatest DMs of all time), frequently uses DM PCs to great success. Plus the legendary Matt Mercer often has a beloved NPC or two help out in important fights.
The DMPC is a specific kind of NPC who is regularly/always in the party, of equal or greater level and has an active part in deciding the story (Ie: taking choices out of the players hands) A good NPC may be one of the first two but when you get a character with a combination of these traits it comes across as the DM playing another PC at the table with the party.
@@davidleonardflanagan DMPC just means a DM player character. In some variations, NPC means Narrator Player Character. There is no specification that they have to be a higher level character or more important than the party, that's just what sadly often comes about.
pbtenchi I do think it can be good, I have a DMPC who is kind of a meat shield for the party. I also told players he when he says something to not take it as though the DM said it as some kind of hint just an npc who may actually have bad ideas for the players. It’s like the difference between an author’s self insert for a main character in a book vs writing a character.
@@pbtenchi most d&d players will call any characters controlled by the DM an NPC, the discussion at hand refers to a specific kind of character otherwise we wouldn't be saying no to DMPCs. Unless you want to run a post apocalyptic adventure with no other people in the world.
My DMPCs usually take a backseat to the players' actions and usually have a goal similar to the players as if they were just another adventurer in the party.
They're almost always a Healer fill-role, because I usually PC as a healer, but nobody else in the group may want to. To not die so easily (3.5e, usually), I add the Healer DMPC to the party to alleviate the role-stress.
Usually I keep their personality simple, workable with the party, and don't force them to start encounters or whatever & keep them not-very-curious.
This has always resulted in a pretty positive reception and everyone typically likes the character enough to keep them around and can enjoy the campaign without having to rework characters to heal or whatever.
(Also if it's a new game system, I keep a reserved stronger-combat-y DMPC in case a combat encounter goes tits-up for balance. Never had to really use his full kit and said character had always rolled like shit, lol.)
My DM mostly just has a guide with us, he uses a torch an points things out to us if we're stuck an can't move the plot along
I was once in a one year long campaign, where most of the NPCs were DMPCs. He had character sheets for nearly every npc
I have DMPCs in a good amount of the games that I run. I only have them to shore up weaknesses in the party. They pretty much don't get involved in the party unless they're needed, most of them are Clerics who don't even roll initiative and just materialize when people need to not die
That's both pretty game breaking and immersion breaking. Nobody needs to not die, it's supposed to be dangerous to be an adventurer.
@@MrDavidKord and it is dangerous for them. They nearly almost die constantly. There's 6 other people in the party and they're the single Cleric.
@@venom66656 I suggest taking a look at how you're building encounters or situations if they keep dying. Yes, the players might be doing stupid things, but you should adapt your style a little to theirs if it frequently results in death. Or give them more opportunities to buy healing potions, like having them do a quest for an alchemist guild and then be able to go back there to purchase stuff. Or, if they keep dying, let them die and make up a new character. Don't let them cheat death constantly cause the game becomes less immersive then. This is just my advice though. I run a game of 7 players and they have no Cleric or anything. The only person with healing spells is a Druid and they're level 5.
@@d.riddle2965 Not a single person has died. They've gone down many times and it's been very tense but no deaths. No one has brought to my attention the issue of their immersion and when asked, they always say that it's not a problem. So thanks for the advice I guess, but it doesn't really apply
@@venom66656 I know you didn't mean dying, my bad, I misspoke. I meant falling unconscious. You run your game however you like, it's completely up to you, obviously. I'm just saying it's not the greatest idea to have a DMPC whose purpose is just to heal them, Deus Ex style, with no initiative, when they need it, cause it lowers the stakes. Personally, it seems immersion-breaking and might make take away some of the weight of their decision making if they have a constant out, which is one of the best aspects of D&D. And I will note from my experience that players rarely voice out against things that are to their advantage, such as an OP weapon or a DMPC healer. Again, I'm not trying to criticize the way you run your game. I'm merely saying that it might take away some of the risk, which is really fun in D&D. I suppose it also depends on your players.
When I played with my DM both my characters and theirs equally brought about both Heroics and Destruction. I did more saving and hurting than the Ally NPC's with me. I had a character with high charisma that was able to convince most of the NPC's to come with. The others joined because of other characters. Ended up with an Army. My characters were never devalued. It was fun regardless and it was just me and the DM anyway. No harm no foul. One monster we fought was Fenrir. It was my witch, my berserker, and I had a slime. Neither of my own characters could even hit the fast wolf creature. So we were meat shields. The slime did all the fighting, but she was weak to the magic Fenrir had. So technically if it wasn't for us taking the hits Fenrir would have not been able to be defeated and he would have started the End of the World Scenario. Ironically during an already post-apocalypse campaign.
I wish you warned about curse of strahd spoilers, I'm currently playing through it.
True that, a little spoiler alert would be nice ^^"
Droga! Eu cometeria exatamente esse erro hoje a noite. Muito obrigado, TH-cam, pela recomendação. E muito obrigado cara, por um vídeo, que expandiu minha mente. Você é demais!!!
There are no bad DMPCs only bad DMs. If a DMPC detracts from the experience of the players then that's an indicator that the DM is lacking in his fundamentals of how to run NPCS and didn't stop to question why they are adding one in the first place, not that DMPCs are just inherently bad. That's like hitting someone with the flat side of a sword and saying swords suck because it didn't kill your opponent.
Solution: make them that crow person species
Easy solution if you play than like they are in the books but then it is no DMPC because you dont mske own decisions (you know they cant have own ideas)
But make a introvert DMPC and there is no problem because if he only reacts if he is asked or in combat he can not steal spotlight
This is a VERY SPECIFIC concept you're talking about.
My campaign started with four (4) players. A Paladin, a Wizard, a Bard, and a Sorcerer. With a Paladin and a Bard I wasn’t concerned for healing, I only worried they all might struggle more if I added too many melee combatants.
Then the Bard and the Sorcerer left the campaign, at the same time.
There was now only two (2) players, a Paladin and a Wizard; with only a couple sessions under their belts and were both only second (2nd) level.
Hence the now DMPC (as they can be referred as, which I do since they’ve been in the party since then) who joined them. They are an Artificer, that way the Paladin can prioritize smites over healing and doesn’t have to be the only person between the enemy and the Wizard.
Eventually we gained another player, he was a Rogue back ended up getting mauled to death by some drakes, he currently plays a Bard.
I thought to myself “They have enough healing and they took in a temporary NPC that’s good in combat for this area” (A Monk that was trapped in the caverns they are making their way through). I decided I was going to see if the players were fine with the DMPC leaving. I gave her her reasons and had her tell the party, but they didn’t want her gone.
A DMPC is certainly a thing of many DM horror stories, that’s very common that those DMPCs are the main issue as well (overpowered and the DMs main interest instead of the players).
But they are not always terrible, as long as they stay more akin to an NPC and don’t hog any spotlights.
I’ll be honest and admit I have the bad habit of saying the NPCs miss so as to give the players that line that’s always met with excitement: “How do you wanna do this?”.
I used a DMPC to help with the party’s balance early game so as to not cause too much struggle before leveling up, but my players have grown attached to them. I can easily kill the DMPC off, I would be lying if I said it wouldn’t hurt a little, but I always prioritize my players first and it’s more impactful on the game if the DMPC dies because of how attached my players are to them. A DMPC can’t be like how you run actual players in your campaign; I always give my players second chances and I have given a player a chance to save their character from death before, but I would never do that for the DMPC.
A DMPC is a topic very close to rules lawyers, obviously not as hotly debated but still along those same lines. A DMPC can very easily be a black eye on a campaign, but done properly can create some very powerful and emotional ties and tension in a campaign. I’ve had players risk their own characters lives for this DMPC and I’ve made sure that their connection with them is reflected through that. I may have made the DMPC, but it’s the players who really did shape them. I honestly never thought that the DMPC I made would be any important and I had full intentions to remove her once she was no longer needed, but my players refuse to let her go. It really is about how you run them and how you use them.
Anyway, that’s just my two cents :p
I am currently playing mad mage as a Player and we just encountered Rex the hammer. Your examples fit perfectly to him but He also takes all our loot 😥 looooot
Rasin Dawn sounds like its murder time
@@witchBoi_Connor but He is Stronger than all of us Players combined and I am LG :(
@@rasin9391 if you're LG (then prolly a Paladin or a Cleric) do it because their existence interferes with the universe or something like that, convince the party AND maybe the DM, and plan an ambush
@@lau_taro0037 Im Rasin Dawns DM and the Point is first of all that they are only two players in a four player campaing and the second point is that hes LG but he isn't a cleric or paladin which in my opinion are classes that would counter him .... hes an artificer ....
@@itz_hunt_time5293 WTF IS MY DM DOING HERE