Hey Veeky Forums

hey Veeky Forums
im gonna DM soon and i am gonna have a sidekick NPC with the party.
but apparently DMPCs are considered bad?
how can i do a DMPC not bad?

You have a couple things to consider.

First, why are you making a companion NPC? Is it because of a lack of a critical role in the party, or because they need direction? Answer that question, then come back here.

If it's because you just want a self-insert OC, you're a faggot and you shouldn't DM.

Dont make them the focus of the story,

Dont purposely make them more powerful then the players.

Give the DMPC almost no opinion on what the group is doing. Gentle suggestions are ok, but dont have them trying to steer the group down a certain path.

Make them a weak sidekick character that only exists to give direction to your players and/or do paperwork. Their purpose is to be a questgiver, facilitator, and supporter.

Basically, if they're a magical negro you're alright.

what is a self insert oc?
its to orient the players in a very exotic culture. and give me a character to play while forever GM

that sounds good. that was already my plan

i dont know what a magical negro is

is asking the right questions.

If you want a character in the game, don't do it. It almost always ends up bad.

If you want to fill a critical role, it could be a good thing (if you have 3 or fewer players in the game) but think hard on it. Some problems begin to develop when players are able to hyper-focus on a small set of concerns. If they're short some critical role, then the remaining characters are forced to fill in a bit so that the role is covered. It tends to create more well-rounded, less troublesome pc's in the long run.

You also run the risk that, eventually, a fill-in npc could also become TOO important. The players may rely roo much on the npc healer or an NPC face could dominate any political stories you have planned. You need to make that decision carefully.

If you're helping them with direction, adding new or interesting wrinkles to the plot or helping players figure story things out, this is probably the best use of the npc.. but be careful. The npc should help the pc's figure out a plotline, not reveal it. They should also occasionally be wrong! Not so wrong that the pc's waltz their way into a tpk due to bad intel.. wrong in a way that causes the pc's to discover a truth that might otherwise have evaded them. If your npc gets the players to look into his theory that translated princess is having an affair with the knight captain and they find out the knight captain is actually blackmailing her because she's having an affair with a low born guard, that's great!

An npc in my star wars game, just last night, turned the players' whole outlook around simply by responding to an in-character assertion that things had to be going a cètain way by simply asking, "Are we sure?"

The resulting re-examination led to their discovery of several important clues and a far more correct theory about how things actually are. So having a voice in the game can be a great tool... used wisely.

The difference is that NPCs are not story drivers, they do not make big decisions, they exist solely as a foil for the PCs.

I usually follow these rules:
1. The NPC must be competent, but not especially efficient. No one wants to drag around a useless escort quest NPC, but they shouldn't be on the PCs level at all either.
2. The NPC is a sidekick, they do not make important decisions, they do not know about the monster's lair, they probably don't know about X magic, or Y history. They don't assist with puzzles, they don't act efficiently in combat (unless directed by a PC).
3. Be very careful when using the NPC to drop any information, the players might begin to use them as a crutch. They will also tend to believe whatever the NPC says as truth or treat it with special importance since it is coming from you, the GM personally, and they might perceive it as a "hint". Personally, I use this as a chance to drop misinformation to trick them, but it's up to you how to handle it.
4. The NPC should have some flaw, this is the reason they are an NPC not a PC. Perhaps they're cowardly, or suicidally brave, easily swayed or skeptical about anything unnatural.

I won't pretend like this is the proper way to do it, GMs and their groups all have different methods of doing things, and one solution is not always the best one. However I find the most success with party follower NPCs to be when you really look into what separates NPCs from PCs, and avoid falling into the trap of a DMPC.

>DMPC
It's not the same as an NPC. Its when you include a character you invest in as much as a player invests in their character, to vicariously live out the typical player's experience, while also running the rest of the world thus creating a conflict of interest from your competing role as GM and Player.
My suggestion is don't create an NPC that aligns too closely to your typical choice of PC type, instead include traits that allow you to distance yourself from the NPC. They aren't supposed to detract from the PC's role as protagonists.

Mostly this. Don't create a GMPC to steal the players' thunder, but don't make him a doormat, either.

By making them not a DMPC, but an NPC.

Namely, they should never take the spotlight, not be anywhere near as powerful as the PCs in what they do, should the PCs have turned their attention to it.

Be the squire to their knight.

Don't know why everyone is still posting.

Fifth post best post.

> how can i do a DMPC not bad?
Make him a servant to the PCs. Like, actual indentured servant.

The best way to orient the players in an alien culture is to have them learn it themselves by doing. If they make a taboo, if they do something illegal, it should be an opportunity, not a hindrance to running the game.

As for being forever GM, I know that feeling. However, it's to the detriment of the party to have the DM look over the party's shoulder all the time. Let them make mistakes.

If they need info, write up a small thing on the culture, or give them resources to work with. If they don't read it, well, that is a problem. However, it's the risk you run.

Creating a character for exposition, info dumps, and/or to guide the party a certain way are never appreciated in my long experience.

They're not, it's just that most DMs use them as their own personal PC (which, combined with the limitless power of a DM, usually goes horribly).

Some things to keep in mind:
>keep the focus on the PCs
Your DMPC should be a fairly passive character. They might occasionally offer advice, help out in combat, and provide more manpower to the party, but that should be about it.

>keep your DMPC restrained, but not too restrained
While a DMPC should be competent, they're abilities should never overshadow the Players'. You don't want them to be an obviously-tacked-on weight to the party (unless they want to play escort mission) nor should they be a walking deus ex machina who solves everything for them.

Many bad DMs will have their DMPC take over scene after scene, showing off how awesome they are to the players, solving problems for them, and sometimes, even forcing the PCs to advance down plotlines they aren't interested in or forcing them to take actions they ordinarily wouldn't. Avoid doing this, follow the advice above, and you should be fine.

A magical negro is basically Morgan Freeman whenever he plays a side character acting as the voice of wisdom and guidance, especially in movies where he was God.

I forgot to add, there is the possibility the party will resent having this character with them. Or worse, they will feel (because they are constantly telling them about the no-nos of the culture) that they never area allowed to make choices for themselves even if they do.

You make a DMPC, but I would suggest making a character that doesn't travel with the party, and just remains a PC and a resource for them to get information from, or to give guidance regarding quests e.i. "While rescuing the chief's son, be sure not to touch him. It is a great offense, and can result in being caged and put on display in the town square".

Does this guide and advisor HAVE to be with the party at all times? If the answer is no, then just make an NPC.

No one has ever respected your opinions before. They won't be starting now.

I run a lot of Sci-Fi campaigns, and of course my group has a short attention span and never know what's going on in the setting. So I use DMPCs like they're player companions: the PCs choose when to take them into situations, they stay on the ship when they're not needed, and they can basically go up to them and say "what's up with this?" and he'll give them his point of view.

DMPCs are great for new or inexperienced groups so they don't forget everything and become totally lost (and also they won't just strait up ask the DM what to do)

A DMPC exists to be support and take orders, at most a DMPC should just be there as a way for the DM to say or lead in a certain direction without having to outright say it.

The best example of a good DMPC

I've used DMNPCs before. The idea is to have them available to players instead of stapling them to the players. Make them useful to the party. A good way to do this is to examine the party and see what they're missing. Also give the NPC their own life. Don't make them a friend for life.

My group had once one and it rather went the way that the gm tried to temporarily get rid of him to give us a proper challenge while we exploited the shit out of him whenever possible.

I'm glad this question came up OP. Sometimes having the DMPC is a requirement, either because of narrative reasons or gameplay.

>Make them an actual servant.

Alfred is pretty much the perfect example of how a DMPC should act. Dignified while subservient. Someone that player can take confidence in without it being.

A sidekick NPC is a fundamentally different thing from a DMPC. A DMPC is the DM trying to run a full-blown PC, with an equal share of the spotlight and story considerations and whatnot.

I usually run one or two. Mostly becuase I tend to run with small groups, but partially because I find it helps the PCs get immersed because there's a character that's part of the world going through things with them and they're just useful.

My personal advice
1. Use them to fill a niche that isn't filled. If someone is filling a role doing something let them do it without stepping on their toes. It's a general rule for PCs, but it's doubly important for DMPCs
2. Make sure they can hold their own and are reasonably independent. You don't want to have the party get bogged down babysitting your character when shit needs to get done.
3. Consider their abilities in line with the other PC's abilities when making challenges. If it's a charisma character, then put in opportunities for characters to be charismatic. If they're a fighter then put in opportunities to fight. The PCs will be leaning on your DMPC as much as they will each other. It happens.
4. Don't let them make decisions for the party. Super straightforward one, they can voice their opinions about certain things in the same ways as any PC or any NPC can, but in the end the players should only follow their own lead.
5. Take yourself out of the equation. The golden rule for roleplay. Do not ask yourself what you're going to do, but ask yourself what your character is going to do. Take all of your knowledge and pre-conceived notions and put yourself in their shoes when deciding what actions they're going to take and what they're thinking about and how they respond to things. Again, this should be something you keep in mind as a PC as well as a DM controlling DMPCs and even normal NPCs
6. Let go. When a PC's character dies then they have some right to be a little upset or melancholy, since their story is over and they need to start a new one. When a DMPC dies you need to acknowledge that and move on, becuase you still have a story to tell. It still stings, but keep it inside and take it in stride.

Oh, and one more thing, make sure they have flesh story wise, but don't force it on the players. If they want to engage with the character and discover their history, then they should be allowed to do so as they can with anything else they might find in the world. It also gives you a lot more incentive to play the character correctly, since you will have precedent to draw on when deciding how they're going to act.

Don't force it on the players, have them decide to keep it on their own.

This.

Whenever my friend and I play Only War, he (the GM) rolls his own character if we're playing with people who are new to Only War, who acts as the squads sergeant as an in character way to show the new recruits the ropes and set them in the right direction, when he thinks they don't need him anymore he kills his own character off and lets them do their own thing without the sergeant.

>Sometimes having the DMPC is a requirement, either because of narrative reasons or gameplay.

No, it's never a requirement. You might have an NPC that's a requirement, but saying that a DMPC is necessary is like saying a Mary Sue is necesary. It's a bad thing, don't do that. Give them hirelings, give them henchmen, give them cohorts and guides and patrons, but don't give them a fucking DMPC. You're the DM, you're not a player, keep those two roles separate, and you're good.

I have never heard of or seen a game with a DMPC added by the DM just because they wanted to play too ever work well. There's a player/DM divide necessary to maintain the integrity of the world and if you cross it then your decisions are going to be compromised.

Another player can roleplay making a bad decision if it's in character, another player can disagree with the group, or take them in a direction they don't want to go. If you do these things with your DMPC, though, it will be seen as railroading. Your advice will always be filtered through knowing what they're going to face next and not wanting to give too much away, and they will be looking at your character's behaviour for hints about what you want them to do and why.

Worst of all, players can normally put a little investment in their characters and if they respect their fellow players they'll be a little invested in their characters as well, but there is no obligation for them to be invested in any NPC the DM sends at them. You can't ever make the players care about an NPC if they don't want to, and that's still true about a DMPC. If they want to ditch your character, or kill them, or cut them out of decision-making then it'll sting because since they're "your" character you'll have put some investment in them but the other players are just going to see another NPC. You'll never get the story out of the character that you imagined and it'll be unsatisfying.

Basically, don't do it. Focus your energy on having lots of interesting NPCs, some of which might even end up working alongside the players if they take a shine to each other, but none of them marked as "special" and "yours". Let an NPC earn that recognition from the players on their own merits.

The GMPC should always be there to enhance the players' experiences, and never to overshadow their characters.

Torchbearers provide illumination, loot carrying, and random tidbits of dungeon advice.
Scholars can enrich the exploration by providing semi-detailed history of the dungeons through which the PCs are crawling.
An "operator" in a modern/futuristic campaign can help the PCs with intel and the overall mission by hacking cameras and security systems, as well as coordinating any other NPCs helping with the job. Maybe some commentary on the mission. Think Bain from Payday.

Listen to this guy. If you don't forsee an adventure needing the DMPC, then the DMPC has something else to do, or is suffering from some disease that has him bedridden.
Don't think "DMPC." Think "major allied NPC."

This. Last time I made an npc attaché for a group he was only there to give them general directions to whatever objective they decided to go after, like "it's about 10 miles northwest, I know about where it is." Small things like that. The only roll he filled other than that was being the only one able to spot what plants were edible and what was poisonous. Other than being okay with a bow, and knowing how to survive in the wilderness, his only purpose was being paid to guide the party to interesting things along the way.
He wasn't a friend so much as a tool who was out for himself and the party, as they were essentially his source of income.

This.

DMPCs are always bad.

I was just about to post that.

The doomed mentor is perfect for this sort of thing.

Why would you deny your players the experience of actually dealing with the party's weaknesses?

E.g. if no one in the party has any wilderness survival skills, why not let them think of ways around this or face the consequences?

If they have no healer, why not let them chug potions, deal with situations where they are wounded and can't fight at full strength, have to avoid combat, etc.?

Because some times they would literally just die or be incapable of accomplishing anything, and that's rather boring.

Sometimes you have a specific campaign setting planned and everyone's really excited about it and they want to run it with you, but when push comes to shove nobody wants to play something that's required. In that case, you just fill the gaps with bubblegum and duck-tape and voila you have a DMPC.

Adaptability is cool and all, but sometimes it pays to not compromise your ideals too hard. That's how you end up GM'ing fatal with a party full of catgirls.

>Because some times they would literally just die or be incapable of accomplishing anything
That's their own fucking fault then.
>Sometimes you have a specific campaign setting planned and everyone's really excited about it and they want to run it with you, but when push comes to shove nobody wants to play something that's required.
Still their fault.

So, the purpose of DMPCs and the like is so you could railroad better?

These were mostly new players who hadn't thought about that kind of thing, and it made the prospect of going to the thing in the wilderness more exciting and interactive to them, like "oh by the way we're half way there and there's some pretty interesting cliff carvings over there".
It was more a way to introduce things they might miss otherwise.
I didn't give them the big things they missed, like a healer or anyone with diplomacy.

> The DMPCs are always bad and never required
> The DM take on the role of these characters is fine however

What the hell is the difference is there between a 'major allied NPC' and 'DMPC' then? You can't keep them separate if you doing that very thing the players would be doing otherwise doing.

>Wot iz diferens if PC or NPC

Honestly that is the only thing I've ever seen a DMPC do.

Not him, obviously, but I was recently in a game where the DMPC was meant to be a helpful guy, but he was an annoying garbage sack who constantly said we needed to do this, that or the other thing.

We got sick of him so eventually we tried to kill him. DM fiated that he got away despite great rolls on our part. Then he came back with 5 lackeys, and we proceeded to almost 1 shot him on the first turn of combat.

Of course the DM fiated that too so that a minion stepped in the way, and they just wanted to talk. So then we cut through a few more, and tried the OTK thing again - mind you it required all of us working in tandem to do this - and of course, despite having killed a minion, the same dead minion suddenly gets up and takes the projectile meant to kill the DMPC.

Then just as we finally 1shot the guy, with no goons to save him this time, the DM says that it simply didn't happen because the guy we were fighting called the friggin creator of the universe to break up the fight. Mind you, this 'universe creator' is another DMPC, so of COURSE he came to the aid of this DMPC.

DMPCs are annoying and just show how bad a DM is when they use them.

>give me a character to play while forever GM

That is a fucking warning sign and a half mate.

The only context in which I have ever seen an outright GMPC go well is in Maid RPG. Part of the reason why it works there is because there are huge restrictions, both mechanical and roleplaying, placed on the master. It essentially amounts to, "The master is completely incompetent, and can only get things done by getting the maids to do it for him or her."

In the context of Maid, this works. It probably wouldn't work in an adventure-centric RPG, but it's a good example of a GMPC actually working out alright.

See pic related

If you are asking this question you probably don't have to worry about it.

Ashley is not a bad dmpc

Is that supposed to be a DMPC or something I don't get it.

This. I'm running one in my DnD game currently, but only because the party insist on keeping them around.
They also seem to want to adopt random NPCs, which I've had to shoot down because I'd just be roleplaying with myself.

I've at least got the DMPC to dispense setting flavour, and effectiveness in combat is nixed by the way the dicebot hates me.

True. She's atrocious DMPC.

...

Because sometimes it's easier to create a temporary DMPC than to let the party play out three sessions of being lost and dying of starvation because nobody wanted to be a ranger or druid.

DMPCs are only as bad as the DM who is controlling them.

I've run DMPCs that the party got along with more-or-less and I've been in games where the DMPC was an MVP who saved us and helped us out of some sticky situations without forcing the narrative onto themselves.

Chances are, if your DM removed the DMPC from the campaign, it would've still been awful because he sounds like someone who has trouble letting go.

Put her in a suit of armor and she's basically a non-issue.

Make the NPC someone that compliments the party without stealing their thunder. Try to create a character who'll be fun to interact with.

When they're desired and serve a purpose.

My group constantly asks major NPCs to tag along on adventures, so I've met them halfway and allow one to tag along somewhat passively. The players get banter and some minor support, whereas I get a way to drop bits of lore and coerce them into action when they're waffling on something for ages. That last bit is just a problem with my particular party though.

Sidekick NPCs should fill a role that is useful to the party and usually is something that is done alone. Good roles for them to fill are pilot (but only when the party is dropped off for long-duration missions), Intel (but only when the party is built for combat only), logistics/repair, stuff like that.

I have 2 DMPCs that are always with the party, because one member kidnapped 2 boys to train as his squires. I only ever role play them if the party looks to them to see wht they are doing, and they never really have any impact on the game, other than being minions for the party member who kidnapped them.

I have another DMPC that I bring in occasionally for large world events, but he really mostly acts as an antagonizing force, or someone to make things more difficult for the party when they need it.

I was in a recent game with a DM who always runs a PC. By level 7 they somehow had more property from their downtime, higher AC than the tank, and usually had the higher modifiers to most of their skills than the PCs who had made that skill "Their job."

It devolved into a pissing contest where we all either gave up on relevance or were trying to minmax to beat a more experienced user of the system who was also in charge of the game.

Not part of that game anymore, by the way.

The only acceptable excuse to do this is if the party manages to make a pet out of a wandering animal/mindless enemy/notably dim monstrous race. This way you're only controlling it so they aren't getting more free reign than they ought to, and they want that character to stick around. Otherwise you can only really give them an NPC's help if they ask for it, such as a guide or a little extra paid muscle. Don't force this kinda thing unless your party wants it or it feels awkward and unnatural.

(OP) Make a quiet support charachter, that has skills other party members do not. Just make something they need, and something that does not interact very much non-combat wise. For me it aint a problem to run an DMPC as I roll for all it does and act, not really hard to do e.e ..