How do you feel about DM PCs?

[Nomad4life]

Recently I was inadvertantly acquiring a DM PC when the party resisted every effort of an NPC to leave.

I’ve had that happen a couple of times. The most unexpected time was with a captive the party picked up after a battle. That guy wasn’t even supposed to be an NPC, but the players decided to lug him around as a “bargaining chip” while in enemy territory. Eventually (after much traveling) the party got to know him and his antics, and then didn’t want him to leave.

Some of the examples of “DMPCs” presented in this thread so far seem more like examples of “regular” NPCs to me. A DMPC is very different from a regular NPC in my mind… The difference being that the DMPC overshadows the party/disrupts the game.

You know, like the infamous “Dick Marvil” here:
http://www.albrunothethird.com/ab3frameset-1.htm

(EDIT: Oops. Apparently you have to go to “Rants & Reviews” and then click "RPG.NET
rant #5: Achy Breaky Mythos." Not sure why I can't link directly to the story?)

 

[Gez]

As a DM, I hate them. I can't manage tagalong NPCs. They always end up doing nothing.

 

[thundershot]

I've always used them. It gives the party a little support, and it also give me a "voice" when the party isn't around a town or other NPC. I don't make decisions, but dammit, if they're stalling, I can toss in little hints scattered in the dialogue of my PC. Nothing giveaway, but gets the party on the right direction, as I'd rather do that than sit there and wait 20 minutes for them to decide on a course of action... And they love my characters, anyway.



Chris

 

[Someone]

I personally tend to do support types of characters to bolster the party who can fade into the background, like a bard or the like.

It´s however a problem when the players have 1st level (evil) characters and the DM plays the witch king of Angmar.

Yes, it happened to me.

 

[BlueBlackRed]

If the DM has time to be a player also, then he has time to make a better adventure that doesn't require a DMPC.

If you want to be a player, be a player.

 

[Cam Banks]

As a DM, I hate them. I can't manage tagalong NPCs. They always end up doing nothing.

This is my problem, also. They end up providing comic relief or behaving more like cohorts than anything else.

I've read descriptions of games where the DM gets really excited about leveling up his Mary Sue NPC character or having him finally find some magic item or another, and has the whole party more or less provide support for it. Making your NPC the center of the action is a bad thing. It'd be like you playing Doc Savage as a DMPC and the players taking the roles of his band of skilled lackeys.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[genshou]

As a DM, I make a distinction between DMPCs and PNPCs (Party NPCs). A PNPC is there to fill an extra role or provide role-playing opportunities (especially in single-player campaigns, which I run a lot of), without stealing the spotlight away from the PCs. They're "equal" to the PCs in that they aren't cohorts (so, equal XP and treasure), but are never the party leader unless they're a Jedi knight watching over the padawan PC. And even then you have to be careful not to lead the players around by the nose. It's a difficult balancing act, so I don't usually go with higher-level NPCs tagging along with the PCs.

 

[Abe.ebA]

Running NPCs is the DM's job. I'm okay with it so long as the NPC in question is a lacky, hireling, or story element. I've run and played in plenty of parties with long-term NPC hirlings or hangers-on but they always did their bit (healing, bashing baddies, whatever) and then got out of the way. Luckily I've never experienced a "You all meet in a tavern...oh, and you also meet Stormbringer McBane XIV who will be adventuring with you" situation. I imagine, knowing the guys I play with, that if such a thing did occur the DMPC would become the butt of all jokes and general target of derision until he had a convenient 'accident' or the DM got the idea and he wandered off into the sunset.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I think party NPCs can certainly be appropriate in some cases and inappropriate in others, and as a GM, I play accordingly. Especially frustrating for the players is the way that GMs who absolutely refuse to have any NPC help the party make up excuses for why no NPCs will help when asked. For instance, when the PCs let a powerful evil character who ruled a kingdom know about an incoming invasion of the region and make a pact with her, they manage to get her to bring a Shadow Clone of herself as well as some followers to help in the battle. The Shadow Clone and followers were defeated, and ultimately, it was the PCs who won the day, but it would not have made sense for PCs crafty and diplomatic enough to forge allies with old enemies against a greater threat to be summarily rejected without cause every...single...time...

 

[jdrakeh]

It all depends on the DM.

An immature DM will create a "pet npc" and outshine/annoy the players.

A good DM will create an NPC that becomes actively involved in the party to shore up party weaknesses or for plot reason, but won't lend this NPC more spotlight time than the PCs.

What he said. Sadly, I've run into more of the "pet NPCs" than I have those NPCs on equal footing with the party.