D&D 5E NPC Allies?

[SirMoogle]

They went out of their way in character to make it happen even though I made clear it was up to them and that it would not affect the plot or the rewards to players.

The rule of thumb I go by is "Are the players and you having fun with this NPC in the party?" If everyone likes the NPC's presence, leave them in.

 

[Li Shenron]

Really hard to say...

Generally speaking, I think DM NPC are a bad idea, too easy for the DM to treat them as pets.

At least I would try to treat them always as temporary allies, not permanent party members: it's good if an NPC joins the party DURING an adventure (not before) as part of the plot, and leaves at the end or before. The idea is make the NPC a feature of the adventure, not a feature of the group itself.

Have the NPC have their own motivations, tied to the adventure or even beyond and more general, but NOT the same motivation of the PC party. At least NOT the motivation of just going adventuring with the others. Keep something there to make it feel they don't permanently belong.

Better have the NPC always in the background when the PCS make decisions or have exploration or social encounters. In combat, it's perfectly fine to play the NPC 100% effectively, but outside combat you should try to have it interact WITH the PCs but not IN Their place. This helps the DM also avoid using their own knowledge too much.

 

[Weiley31]

I'm for em. They can be used to fill a party that's missing a role like a Healer, they can be used as a gauge for the PC's to either become skilled enough to overcome em(or for the PCs to get left behind because nobody has time to babysit your PCs when there are Dragons, Cults, and whatever else can ruin your dungeoning career), reoccuring characters, or even the rival/anti-party.

I say the Tasha's Sidekick rules should be used for non important NPCs and the UA Sidekick rules with the possible addition of class features, class levels, or feats added to em. A UA Sidekick Spellcaster would be more of an accomplished magic user in the world while the Tasha's Sidekick Spellcaster is a rookie still trying to make a break in the spell casting business.

 

[ccs]

Depends on the group & the story

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I've given my thoughts on it elsewhere, so I'll just say that I haven't had a problem with it since very early in my D&D experiences. It is hugely dependant on the group, but there is no inherent issue with NPCs in the group, well-played DMPCs, players with multiple characters, alternating DMs, etc.

 

[Lanefan]

Really hard to say...

Generally speaking, I think DM NPC are a bad idea, too easy for the DM to treat them as pets.

Heh - tell that to the one I killed off the other night...

At least I would try to treat them always as temporary allies, not permanent party members: it's good if an NPC joins the party DURING an adventure (not before) as part of the plot, and leaves at the end or before. The idea is make the NPC a feature of the adventure, not a feature of the group itself.

Sometimes this happens, sure. Other times the NPC* becomes an integral part of the party because the PCs (and-or players) want it to be.

* - or NPCs; I've seen this happen to more than one simultaneously.

Have the NPC have their own motivations, tied to the adventure or even beyond and more general, but NOT the same motivation of the PC party. At least NOT the motivation of just going adventuring with the others. Keep something there to make it feel they don't permanently belong.

Again, sometimes this is fine; not always. Sometimes it can end up being the NPCs that keep the party going, says he having on more than one occasions seen situations where the only survivor(s) is(are) party NPCs, who then haul one or more PC corpses back to town for revival...

Better have the NPC always in the background when the PCS make decisions or have exploration or social encounters. In combat, it's perfectly fine to play the NPC 100% effectively, but outside combat you should try to have it interact WITH the PCs but not IN Their place. This helps the DM also avoid using their own knowledge too much.

Simple answer here: with right of DM veto, have the players speak for/as the NPC as far as possible. If nothing else, if the NPC is halfway intelligent this gives an avenue for the player of the dumb-as-a-post guy to have some input.

 

[S'mon]

My current Roll20 Damara 1359 DR campaign is built with a very 1e AD&D feel, so NPC allies & henchmen are common. Currently there are 3 active PC groups:

#1 (5e) currently in the Forge of Fury has 8 PCs level 2-5 & 2 NPCs level 3 & 4.
#2 (5e) currently on downtime has 8 PCs level 3 & 1 NPC level 1.
#3 (PBP, 1e) currently in the dungeon beneath Narcissa's Inn has 4 PCs level 2-4 & 5 NPCs level 2-4.

I tried the Sidekick rules but did not like them, so the 5e NPCs use the PC-class rules now. I found the 5e DMG advice on this works best - use fairly simple PC-class builds for NPCs.

Mostly I run the NPCs but I have started letting a Monk 4 player in group 1 run his NPC Barbarian 4 girlfriend, they have some good banter going on.

This game does not use the Feat or Multiclassing optional rules, which I find helps combat go much faster & enables these larger, 1e-style parties.

I think NPCs in the party are useful for giving the DM a voice, for one thing I can impart information without always saying "Your character knows that...". They tend to strongly encourage In Character play; often with no NPCs present the players default to OOC talk.

Obviously it's important the GM not think in terms of "This is MY character" - no GMPCs as such, though it's ok to be fond of your NPCs as long as you're prepared to kill them should the dice go that way.

 

[Li Shenron]

Heh - tell that to the one I killed off the other night...



Simple answer here: with right of DM veto, have the players speak for/as the NPC as far as possible. If nothing else, if the NPC is halfway intelligent this gives an avenue for the player of the dumb-as-a-post guy to have some input.

While I was writing, I thought at least three or four times whether to mention to kill off the NPC allies every now and then. Even use them as trap fodder to signal the players about a dangerous situation. But I didn't want that to sound too much like a suggestion.

About the NPC speaking or making decisions. The risk is for the DM to start using the NPC to get the party "unstuck", instead of letting the players figure out, or just let them be stuck and occasionally botch a quest.

It is ok to use the NPC as input. It can be part of the story. For instance the PCs might have found a sage ally that can provide knowledge. But what I mean there, is that it's best not to have a situation where the players are undecided and turn to the NPC for hints about whether to do X or Y, and then the DM risk being in a deus-ex-machina position.

 

[Lanefan]

While I was writing, I thought at least three or four times whether to mention to kill off the NPC allies every now and then. Even use them as trap fodder to signal the players about a dangerous situation. But I didn't want that to sound too much like a suggestion.

My take is to treat the NPCs just like PCs - if one gets in the line of fire, that's the one who's going down. And if it really is random who gets attacked (e.g. a mindless zombie surrounded by the party) I'll roll to see who's the target.

Ideally, the mortality rate of adventuring NPCs in the party should be about the same as that of PCs, assuming vaguely equal level. Henches and hirelings tend to die off more often if they get into combat, simply due to being lower level and (often) having less hit points.

About the NPC speaking or making decisions. The risk is for the DM to start using the NPC to get the party "unstuck", instead of letting the players figure out, or just let them be stuck and occasionally botch a quest.

To avoid this I'll sometimes have a party NPC come up with a wrong or even dangerously wrong idea, just like a PC might. If the players/PCs blindly follow its suggestion assuming I'm trying to guide them they learn pretty quick that such ain't always the case.

It is ok to use the NPC as input. It can be part of the story. For instance the PCs might have found a sage ally that can provide knowledge. But what I mean there, is that it's best not to have a situation where the players are undecided and turn to the NPC for hints about whether to do X or Y, and then the DM risk being in a deus-ex-machina position.

Again, if the PCs are turning to the NPC for hints don't always* give 'em the right hints.

* - tempered of course by the abilities and-or situation of the NPC in question e.g. if an NPC is the party's only Ranger it only makes sense the party are now and then going to ask it to do some tracking, just like they would a PC Ranger. Ditto if the PCs are all foreigners and the NPC is local; here it makes sense both that the PCs would ask it for info and that the info it has will be reasonably true.

 

[fearsomepirate]

I let the players control the NPCs.