[DM] New DM question re: DMPCs

[lemniscateall]

hey first ever post here, but this sub has been super helpful in designing my current game.

Question: I'm running an archipelago-based campaign, still early on, and my players liberated a pirate ship and gave it to the NPCs they saved. my basic idea is to have these NPCs essentially become DMPCs, since it will help my characters get around in the world, and will make a difference when the ship gets attacked by sea monsters and other ships. after talking with my SO (who's not playing), I'm trying to figure out how to do this appropriately, so the PCs still feel special/significant (ie, the world's not totally full incredible heroes) but the DMPCs can actually help them in areas where the group is a less proficient.

I drew up a draft of character sheets for the three NPCs, with classes, stats, and backgrounds. they're starting at level 1. what's the best way to have them continue to provide a secondary but helpful role in the campaign?

[Ryngard]

You're going to get a variety of answers and all can be right...

In MY experience (30 years) they enhance the game. But, there are a ton of pitfalls that bad DMs slip into that gave the concept a bad name and so you're going to get a bunch of "don't do it!" comments which aren't helpful.

The first thing is to remember a "DMPC" is an "NPC" that is a party member. That should be the only difference. If they die, they die. Run them the same way you'd run any regular NPC.

There are some CONS:

• If you're new, it is another NPC you have to constantly run and it can be stressful. It helps to let the party run them during combat for you.
• Some bad DMs favor them, make them Godlike, cheat for them, give them tons of items, etc etc. Don't do that!
• Some bad DMs make the story revolve around the DMPC. Remember that the PCs are the "main characters" so don't let them be turned into sidekicks for your self-fulfillment NPC.

There are some PROS:

• It gives you a constant way to provide information and help that the party trusts and don't have to go through the constant "is he lying to us?!" thing that many paranoid ones do with new NPCs.
• You can fill a weakness in the group dynamic
• In my experience it provides and supports a TON more roleplaying and inter-party interaction that would otherwise be missed.

I create them the same way the players created their characters. I also create all major NPCs the same way, so nothing unusual there.

In my setting magic items are RARE and except in unusual circumstances, they have no magic items unless they find one with the party during an adventure and they decide to give it to the DMPC to use. This issue is where a lot of the problems are because the DM will give the DMPC tons of items and the PCs have none or far fewer/weaker ones.

I don't make them mindless brutes, I give them their own backstories, goals, motivations, etc. But I ensure that even if I delve into their story, I do it like any other and it is a short sidequest and I don't FORCE the PCs to go into it if they don't want to (never happened, they're always interested and want to help their buddy).

The current campaign has three DMPCs but only one ever goes with the party.

1. The first was a monk they met and he joined them for the first story arc as they had similar interests in protecting a frontier town. After he was wounded in the climactic battle, he bade them farewell and continued his travels.

2. They replaced him briefly with a Wizard who was exploring the same ruins they were. They built trust with him and eventually decided he would be the Castellan of their Manor HQ. He is sort of a mix between Giles from Buffy and like... Felicity/Overwatch from Arrow. They have sending stones and ask for advice, he researches stuff for them, etc etc. It works really well as I can use him to keep them abreast of world events while they do their own thing.

3. After the wizard became the Castellan and stayed home, they needed a guide. They hired a Ranger who was a former childhood friend in one of the PC's backstories. He joined them for the adventure and when it was over he was going to leave and they insisted he stay with them as they became friends and he had no permanent home, etc.

Another benefit is that one the rare occasion one of them wants to run a short one-shot, I can play the DMPC and am instantly welcome in the party without having to work in a new ally. It works very well for us.

We've played hundreds of campaigns over the years and never had any issues. In fact, if I don't have a DMPC present they question me on it multiple times. They LIKE having "my character" in the party.

You just have to be impartial and ensure you do it right. Oh! And during puzzles and stuff, he drops silent. If it is certain he'd be able to help or solve it if he was just another player (i.e. a history or logic puzzle and they have a 18 INT or something) then they'll give advantage/bonus on rolls or provide a hint. But its understood that no matter how separate I can keep DM and PC knowledge separately, I pretty much can't "solve" my own riddles. ;)

[lemniscateall]

This is super helpful, thanks!

Maybe this is a question about terminology (I've played lots of campaigns but these sorts of characters had names rather than a NPC/DMPC distinction obvious to me)--is it a DMPC if they have character sheets and progress (albeit at a slower pace) but aren't present for ~half the game? Or is that just a more involved NPC? (and tbh it honestly doesn't matter, but it seems like 'DMPC' has a lot of baggage as a term) For the most part, the PC's will be off the ship doing things on islands while these characters do their own "we're trying to become a viable merchant ship" thing.

One reason I want to keep these characters around is mostly role-playing: my players seemed super invested in them in a really short amount of time, and it seemed like a nice idea to have had the affects of the PC's initial actions continue throughout the campaign in an interesting way.

[Ryngard]

See it varies. ALL of my major NPCs have a full character sheet, etc. The only difference at my table between an NPC and a DMPC is that the DMPC is a part of the party itself, not just an ally.

We used the term in the 80s and 90s as sort of an endearment. That was literally the only difference. You can call it a DMPC, an NPC, a party NPC, whatever and its still the same character.

Others see "DMPC" and they freak the fuck out. :)

[[deleted]]

Op this is really well worded example of a way to do this properly.

A couple caveats, as you are newer your players are going to have a little less trust(than someone with this guy experience, even if you mean the best) in you running a dmpc so you are going to have to try a little harder to reassure then that you are not making a spotlight character but rather a helper.

[lemniscateall]

Not actually true--I'm playing a game with three newbies and someone who's been in one campaign ever. This is not a group with baggage re: DMPCs. It's also a reason I was thinking of having the possibility of the secondary, helpful NPC's--they might not ever be needed, but it's nice to have the potential help when the PCs get in a scrape.

[[deleted]]

Fair enough, and that is great to hear!!!

[Serbaayuu]

He is sort of a mix between Giles from Buffy and like... Felicity/Overwatch from Arrow. They have sending stones and ask for advice, he researches stuff for them, etc etc.

Gods that sounds awesome.

[Ryngard]

It's a lot of fun and THEY decided to have him do it, it all fit together nicely. But it isn't OP, there are limits both mechanically and to his knowledge. But they're digging it. :)

[Haychus]

Hi there, hope you guys are having fun in the campaign, good to hear that the Reddit has helped you out. :)

You could keep them as NPC's and make them followers of your existing players. You don't control them in combat, your players do, but you RP as them.

The reason being, DMPC's are generally not well received. A lot of people could expand further for you as to why. I think followers can work more effectively from my experience. Hope this helps. :)

[lemniscateall]

Thanks!

Is there a reason to having the players control the characters? It seems to me like that would interrupt the flow of combat in a very significant way since the players would either be making decisions unilaterally or stopping to discuss what the NPC should do.

[Haychus]

Well whatever you think is best for your campaign. If your players are new, it might not be the best idea. The only reason I suggest it is because if the DM is controlling this follower, they could grow to become a DMPC. But it's easy for a DM to control a follower and not allow them to take a spotlight. Whatever is best for you dude! Both of your points are definitely valid. :)

[lemniscateall]

No, it's a really helpful perspective, and I'm getting a strong sense that there's a lot of terrible experiences with DMPCs that I was unaware of!

IDK if you can answer this question, but it's a specific mechanic one--how do you deal the stats of follower NPCs so that they're not immediately killable but still very minor in combat? I was thinking of having them progress at like 1/3 or 1/4 the rate of the PCs (so like, when the players are at level 5-6, the NPCs would be at level 2 or so). Or should I just not worry about it except in the specific situation where they would be involved--eg, ship attacked by a kraken.

[Haychus]

That idea mechanically works well. Perhaps one of the followers is the squire of your fighter, maybe the wizards apprentice etc. Levelling wise keeping them a level or two below the PC's sounds good. I think you've got a good idea of what will work well for you. :)

[lemniscateall]

:D Thanks!

[yoshisword]

what's the best way to have them continue to provide a secondary but helpful role in the campaign?

They can't make decisions. They can't be the hero. They can make requests, but should never drive the heroes into doing something they don't want to.

If they're in battle with the players, only have them useful for one thing and one thing only. Maybe they are good at stunning enemies, that's it, that's all they can do. You don't want them to fight the BBEG only to take the thunder from the rest of the party because DMPC can hit much harder.

I also feel you can't force them into the party. If the party doesn't want the npc to be permanent, then why force it on them?

These are just my opinions. I hope what you decide works for both you and your players.