Sword of Spirit
Legend
I acknowledge that many people have had problems with it, but I don't think it's inherently problematic at all. Here is our experience.
For the last several years, whether I was player or GM, there has been a DMPC more often than not in the group. This is a full party member, with a full personality, equal to everyone else, and it has been the DM's responsibility to make sure they don't throw off the game.
Sometimes we do this when there are rotating DMs. Sometimes you are just playing your character, other times you are also DMing.
Other times we do it because, quite frankly, sometimes you want to play this character in this type of campaign, and you know the only way that's ever going to happen is if you run the campaign yourself. So you can either accept that you just are never going to get that experience that you want to have, or you can put in the effort to make sure it happens in such a way that the rest of the group can appreciate.
In our current group of over a decade, my friend started doing this because the concept of a campaign (Castlevania) required a certain character (Simon Belmont), and no one wanted to play that character. One of our players has used that game as their example of the best use of a DMPC they've seen.
Since then, I've started up a campaign intended to go decades (currently on year 5), with occasional DM rotation, and potentially 100% DMPCs by virtue of the fact that anyone can DM an adventure if they want to. I'm the primary DM for this campaign (I designed the setup and know all the secrets, etc), so my character is the one normally in that boat.
It isn't uncommon for me to try to be too reserved with my character and for the players to tell me to just relax and play them.
So, why does it work for groups like mine? Let me give a few thoughts.
1) We're experienced players. When I first started playing 2e as a teenager with just me and one other person, yeah, my DMPC was probably overpowered and favored, even though I attempted to make it not so.
2) We play with friends, rather than random strangers.
3) The DMs in our group have a highly developed sense of fairness. It's rather hard for us to enjoy ourselves if the players aren't enjoying the game we're running.
4) We are aware of the sorts of issues people can have, so we can intentionally avoid them.
5) We are capable of partitioning our play so that we really are playing the character like a PC, rather than like an NPC. (Strangely, GMing is literally the only thing in life where I actually can multitask at all--and it seems like uncommonly well at that. It's weird.)
Here's a little more detail about the current campaign and why it works even though some of you would probably look at it as something setup for failure from the start.
I'm playing a version of my own personal iconic character--the same one I played poorly as a teenager, the one I use in video games, the one I've always wanted to run in a long D&D campaign encompassing certain elements. This is the closest thing to a personal avatar inserted into D&D. This campaign will include elements custom designed for my character to get to be awesome. In a campaign where every PC came from a different world, the "base" world for the campaign is the one my PC comes from. My PC has plenty of personality, sometimes serves as comic relief, and contributes mechanically on not just an equal basis, but in interesting ways, and by virtue of having a spell book (and being the only prepared caster) often ends up being the guy with the solution to something.
So why isn't this a trainwreck? How come my players think it's perfectly fine and enjoy my character's presence?
1) Before we started the campaign I told everyone that, if possible, they should play their own iconic character/D&D avatar/favorite type of character. A couple of players didn't really have one like that, and a couple did.
2) I told everyone this was going to be a party kind of like the Avengers, where everyone was a strong character who could be a solo protagonist in their own adventures.
3) Since I knew my character was going to have special cool stuff happen later, I told everyone that their character gets one special cool thing. One of them started (at 1st level) with an artifact for a weapon; it grows in power, as it chooses to reveal more of it's abilities, making sure to keep at least a step ahead of any other weapons we find. So they always have the most powerful weapon. Another is a descendant of a Greater Power, who is the source of his warlock pact, and communicate with him in dreams and otherwise is going to mess around with him and have important roles to play in the adventure. One of the others the player talked with me about some of the basics (which involve draining life energy from foes) and left the rest up to me to figure out in secret. The other hasn't yet decided exactly what they want it to be, but he took the option (offered to everyone) to design his own homeworld, and part of his story is going to involve divine ascension on that world. And my character's special stuff is still a secret to everyone (and hasn't come up yet). By the time it does, it won't seem like anything different than the sort of stuff everyone else is getting.
4) As part of their special thing, everyone will automatically get at least one adventure designed around their character (again, the Avengers example was used). There is also a metacurrency we use--basically when you already have Inspiration and would get Inspiration again it turns into a point in your pool of this--that has as one of it's usages buying another PC-centric adventure.
5) Treasure is random, except where specified in any published adventure I'm using. Random encounters are truly random, with treasure rolled right off the tables (I do half all treasure, since with the slower advancement it's going to be Monty Haul no matter what, and I want to reign that in somewhat). Even when I design my own adventure, unless a certain treasure element is a central part of the adventure, the treasure found is random. I might decide that I'm going to roll 2 or 3 times for an NPC and give them the treasure that makes the most sense for them, but I am not going to intentionally place treasure because it's a good fit for a character in the party (my own or anyone else's). Taking what we find and making the most of it is one of the elements of the campaign.
6) I don't use my character to dispense information. I make it clear to the players that when my character offers his opinion or even advocates for a course of action, that has nothing to do what I as the DM know, or what's a good or bad idea. On the rare occasion where I'm not sure if something I'm going to say is actually in character or me as DM trying to nudge something (generally trying to save the party's bacon), I set a chance and secretly roll a die to determine if my PC would have the thought that I'm having. This was actually one of my concerns--that I'd be using my character to provide important info, or that my character would have an idea that the party follows because they assume I am and it gets them all killed. But what's actually happened is that the group has done a great job working with this and treating my character's ideas as just another PC's ideas.
7) My character doesn't generally directly compete with other characters for mechanical role contribution. We have 2 other characters that are the best at damage dealing. Another who is third for damage but loaded with other awesome. We have a bard who does all the cool stuff a 5e bard does and is focused on Intelligence and knowledge skills so he knows all the things. My character can do several things--including fight well (generally 4th in the party, but can expend resources to jump up to 3rd in some situations), but about the only mechanically significant thing he is best at is being the guy with the spell book for when we need utility magic that neither the bard nor warlock has. That said, his use of green-flame blade is unique, and he has developed a bit of a focus on battlefield movement: both self and forced movement. Basically he fully pulls his own weight, contributes mechanically in unique ways, and has a distinct and interesting style, without overshadowing and stealing spotlight from anyone.
8) When someone else is DMing an adventure, I can play my character without having to hold back at all, being more of a leader, etc. When I'm the DM, I try to keep aware of not hogging the spotlight (and again, my players tend to think I'm too conservative in this), knowing that I'll get the opportunity to throw my full weight of puzzle-solving and initiative-taking desires into the campaign when a friend is the DM.
9) I know the rules. I don't accidentally err on the side of unconsciously ruling in favor of my character, because I tend to take whatever rulings I make as precedent for future rulings, and I examine them carefully in context of the whole campaign and world (including how this ruling would affect NPCs and society), not just what makes sense for PCs in the context of game balance.
My friend also does at least 5,6,7,8 and 9 (the ones that weren't specific to this campaign) when he's playing a DMPC.
There are probably other things we do that I wouldn't even think of bringing up, but those are the ones that seem most immediately relevant.
I would say this is probably an "advanced" or "expert" level of role-playing challenge, not something new players are likely to jump into and get right the first time. But I think the idea that it rarely works out shouldn't be taken as dissuasion from trying it, but rather as invitation to figure out what the variables are that can make it work or not work, and whether those variables are going to be represented in the right way in the campaign. If someone is just like, "Hey, thought I might play a DMPC for no particular reason", then I'd agree that it might be more likely to turn out poorly. But even then, it's a learning experience. But if you have a reason--such as rotating DMs, or simply because you know it's the only way you'll get to play this character you want to play in this type of game, then don't let anyone dissuade you from giving it a shot. Just make sure your player group isn't going to get all bent out of shape if it doesn't work and changes have to be made (such as removing the DMPC or scrapping/shelfing the campaign).
Just some extended experience and the results. I'd be happy to answer more specific questions if someone is considering trying it.
For the last several years, whether I was player or GM, there has been a DMPC more often than not in the group. This is a full party member, with a full personality, equal to everyone else, and it has been the DM's responsibility to make sure they don't throw off the game.
Sometimes we do this when there are rotating DMs. Sometimes you are just playing your character, other times you are also DMing.
Other times we do it because, quite frankly, sometimes you want to play this character in this type of campaign, and you know the only way that's ever going to happen is if you run the campaign yourself. So you can either accept that you just are never going to get that experience that you want to have, or you can put in the effort to make sure it happens in such a way that the rest of the group can appreciate.
In our current group of over a decade, my friend started doing this because the concept of a campaign (Castlevania) required a certain character (Simon Belmont), and no one wanted to play that character. One of our players has used that game as their example of the best use of a DMPC they've seen.
Since then, I've started up a campaign intended to go decades (currently on year 5), with occasional DM rotation, and potentially 100% DMPCs by virtue of the fact that anyone can DM an adventure if they want to. I'm the primary DM for this campaign (I designed the setup and know all the secrets, etc), so my character is the one normally in that boat.
It isn't uncommon for me to try to be too reserved with my character and for the players to tell me to just relax and play them.
So, why does it work for groups like mine? Let me give a few thoughts.
1) We're experienced players. When I first started playing 2e as a teenager with just me and one other person, yeah, my DMPC was probably overpowered and favored, even though I attempted to make it not so.
2) We play with friends, rather than random strangers.
3) The DMs in our group have a highly developed sense of fairness. It's rather hard for us to enjoy ourselves if the players aren't enjoying the game we're running.
4) We are aware of the sorts of issues people can have, so we can intentionally avoid them.
5) We are capable of partitioning our play so that we really are playing the character like a PC, rather than like an NPC. (Strangely, GMing is literally the only thing in life where I actually can multitask at all--and it seems like uncommonly well at that. It's weird.)
Here's a little more detail about the current campaign and why it works even though some of you would probably look at it as something setup for failure from the start.
I'm playing a version of my own personal iconic character--the same one I played poorly as a teenager, the one I use in video games, the one I've always wanted to run in a long D&D campaign encompassing certain elements. This is the closest thing to a personal avatar inserted into D&D. This campaign will include elements custom designed for my character to get to be awesome. In a campaign where every PC came from a different world, the "base" world for the campaign is the one my PC comes from. My PC has plenty of personality, sometimes serves as comic relief, and contributes mechanically on not just an equal basis, but in interesting ways, and by virtue of having a spell book (and being the only prepared caster) often ends up being the guy with the solution to something.
So why isn't this a trainwreck? How come my players think it's perfectly fine and enjoy my character's presence?
1) Before we started the campaign I told everyone that, if possible, they should play their own iconic character/D&D avatar/favorite type of character. A couple of players didn't really have one like that, and a couple did.
2) I told everyone this was going to be a party kind of like the Avengers, where everyone was a strong character who could be a solo protagonist in their own adventures.
3) Since I knew my character was going to have special cool stuff happen later, I told everyone that their character gets one special cool thing. One of them started (at 1st level) with an artifact for a weapon; it grows in power, as it chooses to reveal more of it's abilities, making sure to keep at least a step ahead of any other weapons we find. So they always have the most powerful weapon. Another is a descendant of a Greater Power, who is the source of his warlock pact, and communicate with him in dreams and otherwise is going to mess around with him and have important roles to play in the adventure. One of the others the player talked with me about some of the basics (which involve draining life energy from foes) and left the rest up to me to figure out in secret. The other hasn't yet decided exactly what they want it to be, but he took the option (offered to everyone) to design his own homeworld, and part of his story is going to involve divine ascension on that world. And my character's special stuff is still a secret to everyone (and hasn't come up yet). By the time it does, it won't seem like anything different than the sort of stuff everyone else is getting.
4) As part of their special thing, everyone will automatically get at least one adventure designed around their character (again, the Avengers example was used). There is also a metacurrency we use--basically when you already have Inspiration and would get Inspiration again it turns into a point in your pool of this--that has as one of it's usages buying another PC-centric adventure.
5) Treasure is random, except where specified in any published adventure I'm using. Random encounters are truly random, with treasure rolled right off the tables (I do half all treasure, since with the slower advancement it's going to be Monty Haul no matter what, and I want to reign that in somewhat). Even when I design my own adventure, unless a certain treasure element is a central part of the adventure, the treasure found is random. I might decide that I'm going to roll 2 or 3 times for an NPC and give them the treasure that makes the most sense for them, but I am not going to intentionally place treasure because it's a good fit for a character in the party (my own or anyone else's). Taking what we find and making the most of it is one of the elements of the campaign.
6) I don't use my character to dispense information. I make it clear to the players that when my character offers his opinion or even advocates for a course of action, that has nothing to do what I as the DM know, or what's a good or bad idea. On the rare occasion where I'm not sure if something I'm going to say is actually in character or me as DM trying to nudge something (generally trying to save the party's bacon), I set a chance and secretly roll a die to determine if my PC would have the thought that I'm having. This was actually one of my concerns--that I'd be using my character to provide important info, or that my character would have an idea that the party follows because they assume I am and it gets them all killed. But what's actually happened is that the group has done a great job working with this and treating my character's ideas as just another PC's ideas.
7) My character doesn't generally directly compete with other characters for mechanical role contribution. We have 2 other characters that are the best at damage dealing. Another who is third for damage but loaded with other awesome. We have a bard who does all the cool stuff a 5e bard does and is focused on Intelligence and knowledge skills so he knows all the things. My character can do several things--including fight well (generally 4th in the party, but can expend resources to jump up to 3rd in some situations), but about the only mechanically significant thing he is best at is being the guy with the spell book for when we need utility magic that neither the bard nor warlock has. That said, his use of green-flame blade is unique, and he has developed a bit of a focus on battlefield movement: both self and forced movement. Basically he fully pulls his own weight, contributes mechanically in unique ways, and has a distinct and interesting style, without overshadowing and stealing spotlight from anyone.
8) When someone else is DMing an adventure, I can play my character without having to hold back at all, being more of a leader, etc. When I'm the DM, I try to keep aware of not hogging the spotlight (and again, my players tend to think I'm too conservative in this), knowing that I'll get the opportunity to throw my full weight of puzzle-solving and initiative-taking desires into the campaign when a friend is the DM.
9) I know the rules. I don't accidentally err on the side of unconsciously ruling in favor of my character, because I tend to take whatever rulings I make as precedent for future rulings, and I examine them carefully in context of the whole campaign and world (including how this ruling would affect NPCs and society), not just what makes sense for PCs in the context of game balance.
My friend also does at least 5,6,7,8 and 9 (the ones that weren't specific to this campaign) when he's playing a DMPC.
There are probably other things we do that I wouldn't even think of bringing up, but those are the ones that seem most immediately relevant.
I would say this is probably an "advanced" or "expert" level of role-playing challenge, not something new players are likely to jump into and get right the first time. But I think the idea that it rarely works out shouldn't be taken as dissuasion from trying it, but rather as invitation to figure out what the variables are that can make it work or not work, and whether those variables are going to be represented in the right way in the campaign. If someone is just like, "Hey, thought I might play a DMPC for no particular reason", then I'd agree that it might be more likely to turn out poorly. But even then, it's a learning experience. But if you have a reason--such as rotating DMs, or simply because you know it's the only way you'll get to play this character you want to play in this type of game, then don't let anyone dissuade you from giving it a shot. Just make sure your player group isn't going to get all bent out of shape if it doesn't work and changes have to be made (such as removing the DMPC or scrapping/shelfing the campaign).
Just some extended experience and the results. I'd be happy to answer more specific questions if someone is considering trying it.
