D&D 5E If the DM plays his own PC is it ok for the party to kill him and take his stuff?

[Lakesidefantasy]

Yes.

 

[Jaeger]

Or adults can play without being asshats. We can. Can’t you?

honestly did not know we were so exceptionally good.

Yup, definitely over target...

 

[Umbran]

Holy F#@%! Someone online that recognizes hyperbole!

...

In all seriousness... Talk with your GM like a F#@%ing Adult.

Mod Note:
Interesting that you suggest folks people speak together like adults... while shouting obscenities. Bleeped or not, it isn't acceptable on this site. This is not the hallmark of thoughtful, considerate discussion. It is apt to make some folks wonder if, maybe, your point isn't actually all that strong.

It is past time for you to turn it down about seven notches.

 

[Lanefan]

Sidekick: Have another player play the sidekick to a PC as a second character.

No reason at all for a GM to play a sidekick for the group.


Henchmen/Hirelings: Let the players control them.

Give them to a player with some bullet point notes how to play them. (Their personality / goals.)

No real reason for the GM to take on the additional work load.

Agreed.

I disagree. Big difference.

This thread is full of examples of why the DMPC is a big raging red flag.

So how come it's worked so well for us, under about eight different DMs and some two dozen campaigns covering something like 5 different versions of the game (including a couple of non-D&D variants)?

If they have their own PC (DMPC) in the party that progresses, and levels up as just another party member?

That is what adventuring NPCs do, yes.

There's no difference in the setting between an adventuring NPC and an adventuring PC. They treat each other as equals, as they would were they in a real world. They adventure together, advance together, split their treasury evenly and fairly, sometimes die together, etc.

Then yes.

And you're welcome.

Clearly some of my sarcasm got lost along the line somewhere.

I rather suspect that if I were to flat-out tell you you'd been playing the game wrong ever since you started I'd get in trouble right quick.

 

[Lanefan]

In @Lanefan's defense, they play a modified version of 1e so a DMPC very well could be equivalent to an NPC in their games.

Meanwhile, in 5e, NPCs do not follow the rules of PCs.

So, yeah, it is edition specific. Given that this is a 5e thread, however, it is safe to say that DMPC =/= NPC. @Lanefan, you might avoid confusion by mentioning the edition you are playing when making your claims.

Were I running 5e (or any other edition) NPC adventurers would use the same build rules as PCs. I'd houserule this in without a second's thought.

 

[Plaguescarred]

Sidekick: Have another player play the sidekick to a PC as a second character.

No reason at all for a GM to play a sidekick for the group.

There can be many reasons. Imposing to a player to play multiple characters is not something i'd encourage DM. If one want fine otherwise a sidekick should be played by the DM. There's nothing wrong with that, it's even encouraged in the rules.

Henchmen/Hirelings: Let the players control them.

Give them to a player with some bullet point notes how to play them. (Their personality / goals.)

No real reason for the GM to take on the additional work load.

Forcing a player to play a character a certain way just so the DM doesn't have the additional work load is not a good reason to me. I generally prefer to offer it first, but it's the DM work to run NPCs the very reason they're called that way is because they are non-player DM controlled.

If they have their own PC (DMPC) in the party that progresses, and levels up as just another party member?

Then yes.

Sidekicks are characters that progress and that can be controlled by the DM. So saying other DMs have been doing it wrong when even the rules suggest it reveals a faulted logic. It's okay if it's not your thing, but it work fine in many campaigns.

Like i said, the problem is not the presence of DMPC or NPC in a party, but the way some DM manage them. The problem is when they're given too much spotlights or there's favoritism, which is DM to blame, not the tool itself. Having a DMPC, NPC, sidekick, hireling or companion tagging along is not problematic in itself for many DM's campaign.

 

[Umbran]

So how come it's worked so well for us, under about eight different DMs and some two dozen campaigns covering something like 5 different versions of the game (including a couple of non-D&D variants)?

Because this thread is not a statistically relevant random sample of examples! What we have here are some selected anecdotes from people who feel strongly enough to give their anecdotes.

The anecdotes in this thread are not data about the game overall, and should not be taken as such For folks who work with random numbers, we often forget how statistics work.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

Because this thread is not a statistically relevant random sample of examples! What we have here are some selected anecdotes from people who feel strongly enough to give their anecdotes.

The anecdotes in this thread are not data about the game overall, and should not be taken as such For folks who work with random numbers, we often forget how statistics work.

this point is well taken. I am trained in stats and research design.

our samples are surely not random and there are tons of confounds. The adults I have games with over the years are have college or grad school under the belt.

we are also actual lifelong friends.

I can see the potential for bad gaming with strangers who have a dm pc.

that said, I don’t think it’s an immediate red flag or clear indication of power tripping creeps, either. I merely wanted to point out its far from universal.

my brother played with a group where it was abused and not what he is used to. Needless to say he avoided like the plague.

but I would say this: if it’s a good group, they SHOULD be able to handle this. If it’s a bad group with a lot of selfish behavior, their dm pc is going to the tip of the iceberg.

in short, imho if folks really are trying to engage in mutually rewarding play they can make most things work. If their fun has to come at the expense of others, it will come out in their dm pc or otherwise.

i cannot see why this one thing would be reliably representative of bad behavior. Among kids with immature frontal lobes? Sure.

 

[FrozenNorth]

I can see the potential for bad gaming with strangers who have a dm pc.

that said, I don’t think it’s an immediate red flag or clear indication of power tripping creeps, either. I merely wanted to point out its far from universal.

I agree with all this. I will also point out that the OP (and a few others) immediately jumped from “the DM has indicated that they will run a PC” to “the DM is a bad DM and deserves to have their PC gutted” before the character has done anything to warrant such an extreme reaction.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

This seems like hyperbole to me.

we have had shared campaigns off and on for many years.

then again, we’re mature and friends. We bask in each other’s successes but have also let the dice fall where they may. We have killed each others characters and DMPCs have died too.

I can appreciate that other’s experiences can differ along with different players.

I would clarify that we have killed eachother’s characters via tpk or PCs biting off more than they can chew.

actual pc murder has never been a big issue.

if we played evil we had a reason to lean on one another, were more lawful or whatever.

I would say a lot of intraparty murder is by far a bigger red flag than a dm pc