Party NPCs

[irdeggman]

I would have voted "other" if that was a choice.

When I use NPC members in the party it for one of 2 reasons.

1. When the party is too small (basically only 2 or 3 players and they didn't have someone to fill a specific need). Most frequently a traveling cleric (i.e., band aid).


2. When the "story" requires it. These type fade away as the story progresses and don't stay around (except maybe as an off-scene NPC they PCs come across at times).

What is more common is to run an absent player's PC as an NPC when he can't make a session. I usually relegate that charcter toa back gorund role so as not to detract from the other players and also I really don't like "killing" a player's character when he isn't there. A total party kill is another issue and an absent player whose charcter is present is subject to that condition.


I had one DM who "decided" that the 3 of us players didn't have a sufficient amount of characters to handle the challenges he was going to throw at us so he inserted NPCs into the party. Well he ended up running more NPCs in the party than there were PCs. This is bad, real bad, since the "player's" are just sitting around watching the DM game with himself.

 

[Illirion]

I voted Yes, but only for important plots or small stretches

Sometimes it just makes sense for the party to encounter NPCs who travel with them for a while.

Last time for example my PC's freed a paladin prisoner in a goblin camp and he traveled with them for a while. This gave me the opportunity to run some tougher encounters for them and show them the way out of the camp, back to the city. The extra healing didn't hurt either. I admit I statted him higher than the PC's (mainly because he could get out some more healing that way), but I made sure he didn't steal the show when it came to offing enemies. Everyone loved it and noone minded the paladin hanging with them for a while.

Sometimes I get tempted to play a more "permanent" DMNPC, cause I just as much enjoy playing a character as DMing. I never give in however, cause I think it'll give my PC an advantage over the others, because I'll be suconciously metagaming and make the right choices for my character. Don't think it's fair and would rather see my players work things out on their own. They have to earn their treasure after all.

 

[diaglo]

DM PCs are teh Suck.

 

[Dyir]

IMC we play "troupe-style" where every player picks their character for the adventure from a roster. And, because i enjoy interacting with the other characters sometimes, i allow them to select 1 character to act as a GM-PC. It's never been an issue because the selected character could become a PC if someone selects them next week, and i don't get to pick which character they choose for me, so there's no possibility of favoratism. Naturally, i tend to get the character whose skills might be necessary for the adventure, but whom nobody really wants to play (healer, supporting mage, grunt fighter, etc.).

 

[Gold Roger]

So far I haven't really used it, but our next group will most likely contain no healer at lvl 9, so a NPC cleric will most likely be in order (either of growth, rivers and prosperity or peace, comfort and rest, so he won't really have much combat effect).

If it makes sense other NPC's will join the party. I trust myself to not favor him and I think my player trust me to it as well.

 

[MarkB]

I voted "never". If we're really low on players and key roles are missing, I'd let each player have two characters rather than padding out the party with NPCs. If it's a decent-sized group, and they've still chosen to leave key roles un-filled, that's their own look-out. They'll shape up and either find some workarounds or make changes to their characters, or they'll find things more challenging.

 

[Umbran]

I've used long-term NPCs in the past to good effect. I can understand folks advising against them, as if the DM is not careful several nasty issues can develop. But a good DM on his toes should have no problems.

So, I'm a general "Sometimes" answer.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I've only used them to fill a key role and rarely at that. I would rather adjust the game so they can succeed without whatever it is they are missing.

 

[Greylock]

Addendum to my post above:

The party found an NPC necessary, and went looking for one. We needed someone to watch our mounts when we went underground or into building or towns (we didn't have 'normal' mounts). But the campaign was largely overland, so the NPC got in the thick of it every once in a while, depending on who was running him that session.

 

[Shade]

I've done all of the following:

• Yes, I roll them up with the other PCs and they are a party member
• Yes, but I switch them as I need to fill the story.
• Yes, but only for important plots or small stretches
• Sometimes, but they are usually something weird (talking skulls, intelligent swords) Only if the party is short on players or need a key role