Running NPCs as a long-term party/team member

[Wolf1066]

Excellent comments with great examples abound - thanks folks.

I fully agree with kigmatzomat's concern about a character becoming a GMPC and I fully agree with not letting the character steal the players' thunder.

Hence the character needs to be run on skill rolls and the players make the decisions as to how the group proceeds.

I had great plans for what I would throw at the team if the character was being run by a player that I cannot use now (like one of the components in their vehicle overheating - something that would be easy to detect using thermographic vision long before it failed completely and left them stranded... if the player thought to check the vehicle with thermograph on) but there are still some areas where they may well need someone with decent technical skills in order to modify something to suit their needs or to fix anything that breaks (I'll be doing random rolls to see if their gear/cyberware breaks down).

Similarly, the character is the only one in the team with decent skills in Interview and Persuasion/Fast Talk and, unless the players decide to be totally obnoxious and attempt to intimidate everyone into submission (and I don't see them doing that) they will need those skills to enlist the aid of, or gain information from, various NPCs (the existing players' skill levels in each would actually make it highly unlikely they get anywhere rolling for either, forcing me to adjust various NPC stats/skills just to give them a fighting chance... and the players would not trust info/help so easily won.)

It's a useful character - reasonable in a fight (but by no means the best shot or strongest fighter - those honours go to the team's only female PC) and has usable "people skills" for when there's no technical work to be done (otherwise the player would have gotten bored wandering around with the team, doing nothing useful and hoping for something to break down so he could strut his stuff) and it had some interesting backgrounds, strengths and failings - it would have been nice to see it played properly and to throw some curve balls at it out of its past. The intended player was an experienced gamer and also a real-life technician, so I think it could have been played well.

Still, you can't always predict what life throws at you and the player's no longer available, nor are any of the other people I've approached.

The good thing is that all the characters are "foreign" to the area and the players have gotten a head start - I'd intended for all four to head off at once but when the 4th player had to pull out I temporised and had the three remaining players head off with their employment broker promising to send their 4th team member when he found someone suitable - to give me time to find another player and still keep the plot open to being able to introduce him/her later.

However, the stories that are going on around them are marching on and events will occur soon such as to make it pretty much impossible to introduce that particular character (and I want to avoid illusionism in the form of giving them an "opportunity to choose a companion" that amounts to the exact same set of skills in different wrappings) and I still have no replacement player.

As the players will know more about the area than the NPC by the time he "arrives in town", he will be more "ignorant" of what's going on than the players, giving scope for situations such as kigmatzomat describes and firmly establishing him as the "Junior member" of the team, always several paces behind everyone else.

Shouldn't be too hard to realistically portray him as just tagging along, doing his job and deferring to the others as more "up with the play" than himself.

He'll want his wages and his share of any bonuses, natch, but it'll be down to the players to grab the glory, gain the bigger reps and drive the group. Leave him for responding to such things as "crap, the AV's broken down, how long will it take you to fix it?" or "we really need a radio transmitter, can you cobble one together from these old stereos?" or "we haven't got enough money to get across on the ferry, can you go over to that bloke, bat your eyes winsomely or whatever it is you do, and convince him to give us a lift in his boat for less than 50 euro? The more 'less' the better, if you don't mind."

Bedrockgames, this character thankfully is more of the "friendly persuasion" nature (and if it weren't, I'd have modified it before running it). High EMP and ATTR, pleasing voice (Ocelot's Advantages/Disadvantages) and good people skills. Not a coward - not likely to turn tail and run from a fight (rats, on the other hand...) - but not a gung-ho glory seeker. Backstory (to explain combat skills) is that he joined the Air Force Engineering Corps to get his technical training and certification paid for. So he's had basic military weapons training and he's had to use his skills once or twice to protect himself. He's seen duty - mostly fixing Air Force vehicles in various countries - so he's used to being under fire. But he's not a "Military Sort" by any stretch of the imagination, he's a Techie, first and foremost, who decided to get paid to learn rather than paying to learn. Once he got his certs he left the Air Force to get a civilian job.

I'm pretty sure he can be plausibly played low key - prepared to leave the "Thrillin' Heroics" to others but still able to be relied upon no matter what happens - an "I've got your back" sort of guy rather than a "once more into the breach..." type.

thecasualoblivion, I can understand your #4. It would be nice having that one character who's always there and whose motives/aims for helping the team are not tinged with "what's his game?" on the parts of the players. Sure, they will develop friendships with some of the other NPCs and grow to trust them, but they may only see them at the pub or wherever. Whether or not they decide to like this character, or he them, they will have to work with him as he is part of the team and they will at least know that he's doing things for the same reasons they are: get paid and live long enough to spend it...

 

[Mark]

Running NPCs as a long-term party/team member

Any GMs out there do this or do you avoid it like the plague?

Any NPC that is going to spend significant time with the PCs is given to the players to run.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Hooray for Hirelings! Don't turn them into your pet characters, but go ahead and use them to add flavor and depth to the world, and to fill in gaps in party knowledge or skill.

The big thing to avoid is having them eat up too much play time. In 4e this can be a bit of a problem, but you can use the advice in the DMG2 to make it a little easier, or just give them a monster's stat block. If they've got a full range of character abilities, that can mean it takes a while to play them.

But yeah, as long as you make them passive (you're not playing the game, your players are!), use 'em. I think they can be fun, and I like cycling through "guest characters" to add some interesting dimension to the adventure. It's much cooler to fight alongside the great Goliath Warrior of the Mountain Tribe than it is to fight for them.

 

[Gilladian]

In my 3.5 game, there are 5 players, but they still want/need an npc. For their first 4 levels, this was a cleric. She was "foisted" on them by a particular temple, who owed them a major favor, but they were never sure her goals and theirs really aligned.

Just recently, one player swapped out his rogue (who was just a bit too vicious and dishonest for this party) for a cleric. Now they're "rogueless" if you don't count their technodelver, who is a great trap disarmer, but doesn't have much in the way of spot or listen type skills.

So I just sold the fighter of the party a "pet dragon" pseudodragon. It will turn out to have some really good spot/listen type skills, but also has a little bit of "mental damage" from his long captivity by a bad man. So it won't always be entirely reliable...

 

[Wolf1066]

NPCs becoming pet characters is a problem that must be avoided whether or not they're running along with the team or just a recurring outsider that you've spent time and effort into building up.

Frankly, I'm more likely to be guilty of protecting the player characters in the interests of them carrying on to complete the game. Especially in Cyberpunk where they can't be brought back to life with a resurrection spell with all memories/skills/personality intact. Hell, even a serious wounding can put them out of action for a while (I use FNFF2013, not the hollywoodised "heal-one-point-a-day" 2020 rules - you break a leg, expect to be adventuring on crutches or from an arm chair well away from the action for the next six weeks, weakened for a week after that...)

Once the players build up a network of friends in their adoptive town, it could be possible to cycle through a variety of NPCs accompanying the group - there's a couple of locals who have not yet won the team's trust who would be just as good at persuasion as the Techie and fulfil that part of his role admirably - they'd just have to wait for a tow truck if something happened to the van.

Eating up play time should not be an issue - the occasional quick skill roll when needed and me saying the result should not take any more time than if a player character tried it. Probably less, as the player would probably want to role-play a bit or have to take time explaining to me what (s)he's attempting to do.

Van breaks down, players want it fixed, I do the techie's rolls and say "the techie locates the problem and improvises a solution that should see you as far as the next town, this took three hours, but you're on your way again."

Contrasted with normal game play - [roll] Me: "you've located the problem, the whatnot's burned out" PC: "Do we have a spare in the back?" [roll] Me: "no." PC: "can I rig something to work?" [roll] Me: "you've managed to determine that you could cannibalise the frimfram and make the whosit fit where the whatnot should be" PC: "Cool, how long will that last?" Me: "should get you to the next town" PC: "how long did it take?" Me: "about 3 hours"...

Of course, different games have different mechanics behind skill resolution.

In each case, the vehicle broke down and repairs delayed the team by 3 hours (and possibly more when they get to the next town and have to fix it properly before continuing, no skill rolls needed but time will pass in game), but they play out quite a bit differently.

As to "pets":

If the team comes under fire, I'll roll a D4 and that'll determine who's being targeted, be it player or NPC. NPC will of course behave intelligently - attempting to evade, seek cover etc, just as the players should be - and, if targeted, his defense roll will reflect that. However, if the attackers roll higher than the team, team members are likely to get hit - players and NPC alike - with damage locations and amount rolled accordingly.

If the NPC dies, it dies. Hopefully, enough interaction with the player characters will have occurred by then that they will miss it.

It's just fighting the temptation to fudge the dice if the players are targeted that'll be hard...

 

[KidSnide]

I love having NPCs in the party. It's a good for plot hooks and giving the GM a venue to roleplay with the group when they're making an intra-party decision.

Of course, you have to make sure that your party NPCs aren't driving the decision making, but you can usually do that by making the NPC unusually focused on a small concern (e.g. getting drunk, maximizing excitement, relating things to an old war story). That way you can roleplay and the players can tell that you're just playing the character, not telling them what to do. As an added bonus, you can have that NPC remind the PCs about the obvious thing that they should be remembering which would make the game more fun -- I've never had a player complain when an NPC did that.

As an added bonus, NPCs that adventure with you become more important to the group. As a GM, I can inflict a defeat on the PCs by killing a well-liked and useful NPC without forcing a player to make up a new character. Anything that increases risk without increasing the chance of PC death is a big plus.

As others have noted, you need to control the complexity of GM-run characters. Back in 2e/3e, I always used fighters (or some other simple melee character) for party NPCs. Now, I use the excellent companion rules from DMG2. Either way, it's nice to hand combat control off to a player, but that's just one more reason you need simple mechanics.

-KS

 

[Lanefan]

NPC party members (full members, as opposed to henches and hirelings) are a near-constant in my games - sometimes as plot hooks, sometimes as spies or agents, sometimes to fill a hole in their lineup (usually a Rent-a-Cleric, Rent-a-Thief or Rent-a-Ranger), and sometimes just for the hell of it. And sometimes they come in as a rescuee or are foisted on the party by the adventure and end up sticking around afterwards.

If an NPC looks like s/he's getting too high up the seniority list I'll try to retire it, but if said NPC has become a player favourite that's not always easy.

I roll up the stats for these NPCs and then in-game let the players roll the dice, track the h.p., etc.; they can usually determine the NPCs' actions as well but I retain a veto if needed.

They function just like any other party member when it comes to interactions, ExP, treasure, getting clobbered, etc. If the players decide they want the NPC to do the talking in an interaction I still make the players put the words in its mouth, but this is rare.

Lan-"PC and NPC all in one"-efan

 

[CharlesRyan]

In a typical high-fantasy D&D campaign, I avoid it like the plague. I have no problem with recurring NPCs (in fact I like them for campaign continuity reasons), and I like to give them some development, but they are distinctly part of the background. I've never included one in a regular adventuring party. I think it would just be a distraction from what the game is about.

On the other hand, my current campaign is Ars Magica derived (henchmen thus expected) and set in a reasonably true-to-life medieval Europe. The party of 4 PCs is currently on the road with a total entourage of perhaps 15 people and a dozen horses (this is more than normal for them, but there is always some sort of entourage). Squires and pages, ladies in waiting, servants, mounts (for the knights, more than one each), pack animals, and hounds. People to cook, clean armour, care for the horses, guard the camp at night, carry all that crap around, and make the PCs look important.

Here's how I make it all work:

• Most of the NPCs are dependents, not combatants
• Those that are combatants are capable, but significantly less so than the PCs
• There's a tacit understanding among the players and myself that the PCs are the heroes
• Based on the above, the combatant NPCs are generally given tasks--like guarding the camp or defending the noncombatants--that free up the PCs for the heavy lifting (that's the players' mandate, not mine)
• All that said, the recurring NPCs tend to have something they're good at--something they can add to the party. One is particularly good at gathering information, another has a very keen tactical sense. This gives them a touch of individuality and makes them a resource of value to the players, but the narrowness of their capabilities, even when they rival the PCs, prevents them from ever competing in overall heroicness.
• Finally, many of them have personality quirks that can balance out their value. Not enough to make them annoying or a liability (usually), but enough so that they aren't simply a freebie to the party.

It goes without saying that they all have names and at least a broad-brush description and personality. Even the horses, for the most part.

 

[Wolf1066]

One thing I've thought about doing if a new player decides they want to join in the game is: introduce the character as an NPC, first.

We've probably all been in a situation where the game is in progress, the players are up to their necks in the adventure and a new player comes along.

Generally - well, at least in all the games I've played or GM'ed to date where this situation has arisen, YMMV, of course - the new player fronts up for gaming night armed with brand spanking new character sheet and sits down and the GM then usually indulges in some shameless railroading to get the player characters into the right place/situation to meet the new character and then they role-play meeting and then the players decide that the new character can join them on their adventure.

The trouble is: the players already know that the newcomer is a player character. They are practically honour-bound to trust and accept the newcomer (an extension of each being honour-bound to accept and trust the other players who meet in that tavern at the beginning of the adventure ) and let them join the group. There is no suspense - can this person be trusted, what are his/her motives - and no reason at all to examine whether party/team and newcomer have reasonable grounds for joining forces - if any grounds are given at all... "Where're you going?" "I'm off to get lots of treasure." "Really? So are we." "Cool, can I join your team?" "Sure." "Thanks."

I do know of someone who deconstructed this trope horribly - he was playing cyberpunk (not with me as GM) and his character joined an existing party. They were driving along through the desert in their truck and saw his character walking through the desert, alone, with a bloody-great laser rifle slung over his shoulder. They picked him up, took him with them, stopped to camp for the night and assigned him a guard detail by himself in the middle of the night.

The player passed a note to the GM who read it, nodded and then let the player tell the team how he'd shot every single one of them through the head as they slept and had made off with their truck - after all, perhaps they should have questioned why he was alone out in the desert in the first place and not been so trusting of a random stranger armed with a silent assassin's weapon that they put him on guard without someone watching him.

But anyway, I digress - it's a character flaw: get used to it, I have.

But it does rather illustrate the point that players tend to trust characters they know are also player characters - and therefore their characters trust, also.

So, I think that the next time a new player elects to join, I'll go through the character's back story and work out what current game plot points best fit it and how to tie in that character's goals with the goals of the team - perhaps they are currently hunting down a particular Big Bad and the new character has "parents murdered" as a background. So, I make an executive decision that the character - who has been hunting for his parents' murderer for years - has finally found proof that it's the same villain the team is after.

We also discuss personality traits, views and outlooks and how the player's going to play this character.

Then, next game session, the existing team and I sit down to play and I do whatever railroading is required to get the team to come in contact with the new character and role play the meeting - of course there will be some plausible reason why (s)he has tracked down the team specifically, which the team will be made aware of.

Then we see if the "NPC" can convince the team to let him/her tag along - presumably the character will have skills and/or information that would benefit the team and the price of this help is to be in at the kill. Then they set off together to locate the Big Bad - which they do not succeed at that session.

The following session, the new player turns up and takes over the character - after the team have had their moments of suspicion and carefully checked out the character's story, done Human Perception checks (or whatever spells are appropriate) and grudgingly admitted it might be a good idea to join forces.

"Critical success" is determined by the players coming to the conclusion that they would work best together and suggesting that to the character.

Of course, having a history of running various NPCs with the team for varying periods of time - just long enough to get that goal sorted out or several months until the NPC found something else it had to do etc - would ward off any suspicion that something is out of the ordinary. With any luck the players would just think its another short term NPC camp follower with useful skills and a reason to be interested in the same goal - right up to the moment you address the new player by the character's name...

Then, of course, team and new player character continue on the quest to find the Big Bad. Then after that story is resolved, one presumes that the benefits of having successfully together convince the team and new player that they should stay together in the interests of finding more money/treasure.

And, for those who were wondering: that bloke who slaughtered an entire team within the first session he played joined our Cyberpunk game and played two pretty colourful characters ... the second of which was murdered by another player character who decided that he wanted to kill off most of the team. His reaction to that bit of irony was to be awestruck at the innovative and stylish manner in which his character was despatched - a true gamer!

Honestly, if he weren't currently living in England, he'd be playing in the current campaign.

 

[Dark Mistress]

I have done it fairly often, but it varies. It all started because the guys I played with back then use to try and get all the supplies, gear they could possible need. Sometimes they would hire people, but often times they would find someone that had the right views, make them friends and talk them into coming. At first I use to resist that but then I realized it would make sense some would go. The PC's treated them like equals in all ways. How I do it is give the DMPC motivations, why are they adventurers? Most that survive long enough eventually leave and settle down. Maybe buying that inn they always dreamed of or what have you. Then the PC's sometimes go see their old friends. The players tend to love doing that. Not to mention it gives them a chance to create much more in depth relationships with NPC's they travel and risk life and limb with than normal.

Regardless they would always keep trying to recruit more. So i just went with it and it worked out for us. To me the big keys is, make sure you know what only the NPC in question would know. Have a well done personality and why are they adventures, what are their goals ect and lastly don't let them steal the lime light. Sure a time or two here and their, it is nice to see Watson save Sherlock Holmes but 95% of the time Homles is the main hero as it should be.

So there is nothing wrong with it, it is just a bit hard to do well and a bit of a balancing act. But I think worth the effort if done well. So in short treat them like any other NPC, just one roughly on par powerwise with the PC's and a NPC that just happens to always be around.