NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8173170" data-attributes="member: 29398">The third one of these is absolute for me: adventuring NPCs and adventuring PCs follow exactly the same rules for build, roll-up, level-up, etc.Then every levelled NPC I've ever run, be it as party member, opposition, or anything else has been by this definition a GMPC. I don't believe in (and am in fact rather hard-line opposed to) the consistency-breaking 4e-5e school of thought that has NPCs and PCs be mechanically different.As much favour is fine.  More favour is not fine; and that's always where problems arise.Believe it or not I've occasionally caught flak from players if they think I'm treating my NPCs with less favour than the PCs, if for example it seems like I'm picking on one in a combat or one hits a run of bad luck.This is an interesting distinction and is agnostic of all the above criteria.  Oddly enough, there's even times when adventuring NPCs are forced on the GM even though she might not want to run them, as they're a baked-in and not-easily-rewriteable part of an adventure.Which, again, I just don't get.  If your party goes and recruits an NPC Thief then (ideally) that Thief is going to be rolled up just like any other played character.  Hell, if I'm strapped for time mid-session I might even get a player to do the basic rolling for me.If the GM's treating her NPCs differently than she is the PCs, there's a problem.I've nothing against NPCs having input to discussions etc. either as player or DM.  That said, the trick as DM is to allow your party NPCs to make mistakes and come up with wrong or dumb suggestions roughly as often as the PCs do, to prevent the players/PCs from always looking to the NPC for the right answer or best idea.</blockquote>

Verification