Who controls your npcs

[Herobizkit]

When it's convenient for the DM, the player controls the NPCs (mostly during combat). If the PC gets overwhelmed or unsure of what the NPC should do, the DM steps in.

In all RP situations, the DM runs the NPCs. It is well within the DM's right to have the NPC disagree with the PCs actions, just like they were a regular PC.

 

[DonTadow]

Might I suggest that you re-read what you wrote? The purpose of the game is to have fun! Why is it a real life dream of hers? And, even more importantly, why are you so willing to Scrooge her out of that dream?

Priorities, man, priorities!

It depends on what time of game you're playing. The DM is running a combat heavy module (shackled cities). IN some games I can perfectly see living out your dreams. And to an extent the DM tried to work with her and keep within the playablity of the campaign. It was heavily advised before game that this was a combat heavy module and that players design characters whom can be helpful and durable. So off the back, the player either ignored the dms original guildlines or didn't really understand how tough this was. Heck, my cleric was down to 2 points because that player didn't use her handle animal skill to calm a wild cat in the room, instead she's playing catch with fido.

 

[Kuld]

When it's convenient for the DM, the player controls the NPCs (mostly during combat). If the PC gets overwhelmed or unsure of what the NPC should do, the DM steps in.

In all RP situations, the DM runs the NPCs. It is well within the DM's right to have the NPC disagree with the PCs actions, just like they were a regular PC.

Well Said.

 

[EdL]

It depends on what time of game you're playing. The DM is running a combat heavy module (shackled cities). IN some games I can perfectly see living out your dreams. And to an extent the DM tried to work with her and keep within the playablity of the campaign. It was heavily advised before game that this was a combat heavy module and that players design characters whom can be helpful and durable. So off the back, the player either ignored the dms original guildlines or didn't really understand how tough this was. Heck, my cleric was down to 2 points because that player didn't use her handle animal skill to calm a wild cat in the room, instead she's playing catch with fido.

That does, indeed, make a difference!

 

[Shemeska]

1) Players control any cohorts, they're effectively secondary PCs anyway. Same goes for animal companions.

2) The DM controls most all non-combat aspects of familiars.

3) All other NPCs the DM controls. Why you'd have PCs controlling some of them I fail to understand.

 

[Drowbane]

Hirelings, Cohorts, Followers, Animal Companions, Familiars... I leave those to the Player they're attached to. But I hold veto-power in case of "out of character" actions... All of these sit on the grey-line between PC and NPC.

As a DM I have more than enough stuff to keep me busy without worrying about remembering to have a PC's lackey do his job...

 

[Acquana]

Uh ... I roleplay everyone except for the PC's themselves as the DM. It's just the way I do it, because I think it's more dynamic for an animal companion who isn't quite intelligent to act on their own, or for a sidekick, hireling, or cohort to be more than just "that dude that gives my character bonuses" ... which is sadly what tends to happen in some games. All too often in the games I was a player in any of the second-string characters not controlled by the DM were near-forgotten for the most part.

Of course, I just have lots and lots of fun acting as lots of different characters with different attitudes and gestures and motivations. So it seems only natural for me to play out the extra stuff, and come to think of it I've never had a single, recent DM who didn't roleplay those kinds of characters. The only one I had that let the PCs do it was Rangerwickett, and he stopped allowing people to after a point. favoring them as NPCs rather than just extra PCs.

 

[Li Shenron]

In every game I've been from my hack and slash's to my straight rpgs to my diceless games ther has been one thing consistant with the dm, he always plays out the npcs, whether it is a party cohort, a familiar, or an animal companion. Unless the player had telepathy with the beast the dm was pretty much in control of the beast's actions.

...

WHo controls your npcs?

When I'm the DM, I always control everyone's cohorts or animals, just as I do with any friendly/unfriendly NPC, and the player interacts with it like with any other NPC. The benefit of having a cohort/familiar/companion (over a generic NPC friend or pet) is that I guarantee that it will be loyal.

I see no big reason why a player should play two characters, but if a player insisted to, I may allow it only if the player is experienced enough to do so in a fair way (which isn't easy IMO).

 

[MonsterMash]

When GMing I use the following (except right to veto obviously suicidal or ooc actions)

Animal companions and familiars I allow players to control
NPC allies are controlled by me as GM except in combat where players control
Cohorts currently I'd thought of player controlling, but I like the idea I've heard where one of the other players controls the cohort meaning it should act for the party, but is not mentally slaved to the owning PC.
All other NPCs are GM controlled

 

[MavrickWeirdo]

To much work to do alone, so I assign some of the NPC's to the voices in my head.