The situations I've seen where GM PCs have not been particularly destructive happen where the GM wants to "play" but (a) is interested only in the social interaction side of play, not the power/loot acquisition and (b) treats the other PCs as well as or better than their GM PC.

GMs who come out of the online Simming tradition are often like this. They tend to be weak RPG GMs in other respects, with a poor grasp of the rules and a tendency to Monty Haul play, but their playing a GM PC doesn't really make it better or worse.

Quote from: Mishihari on December 11, 2024, 12:47:07 AMThere's a tradeoff.  The players running the NPCs is less work for the DM.  But you also get NPCs that do whatever the players want even if it's not something reasonable for them to do, like test all of the doors for glyphs of warding.

True.  If find the tradeoff easy to finesse, though. There's the tried and true gambit of players handle the NPCs but GM reserves the right to step in if they start being unreasonable.  My favorite though is in a game where death is a real possibility, the NPC is going to be your next character when you bite it.  Tends to concentrate the mind.

I had a one-on-one game long ago and had a DMNPC traveling with the PC.
Player really felt it when that NPC died.

my way is to let them blend into the background until a PC chooses to interact with them. I run them technically, but ask the players what they want them to do and if need be, roll to see if they go through with it.

I have basically two conditions where I'll include a GMPC;

A) there are three players and a needed party role isn't being covered.

If there are two players I'll have them each run a primary and secondary PC that should cover the main bases. If there are 4-5 PCs then they should be able to cover them with a PC each.

But at three players you're either looking at a 6 PC party which a big bigger than I prefer (combats in systems I enjoy running seem to slow down exponentially past 4-5 PCs) or insufficient PCs to cover all the needed roles.

In that case I just include a GMPC that's as basic as possible to cover a missing role (a healer or tank most typically is what's missing) and is involved for the most basic of reasons (three players means there's never a need for a tie-breaker; they just follow the majority).

B) The group has been particularly indecisive and/or just really sucks at considering the ramifications of their actions and having someone there to give literal voice to my frustrations at it/point out what is supposed to be obvious can usually get things back on track.

Having a TPK with a group due to poor choices in the first couple sessions is only funny the first few times.

Past that, having someone to point out things like "we've been here 40 minutes trying to decide whether to go left or right and there's no clear right answer, how about we just flip a coin?" is worth any potential grumbling from the players over having a DMPC present.

Typically in this case the DMPC is just a human fighter who doesn't do anything other than some color commentary, carries stuff, and hits things with his sword.

A reasonably decisive party of 2 or 4+ players just doesn't need a DMPC around.

Quote from: Koltar on December 11, 2024, 12:31:23 AMI have also heard these characters called GMNPCs.

Its just misuse of the term. The whole argument falls apart when you point out that every monster and villager and merchant is a 'sic' "DMNPC". And still there are halfwits who will argue that these are all really just DMPCs!!! and must be put an end to!!!

Stupid has no limits.

I don't have problem with retainers, but I treat them like inventory, always refering to them in third person. Otherwise, players start asking them too much questions.

The unspoken social contract of the RPG game genre is that the players are the heroes and not your GM PC or other NPCs. It is perfectly acceptable to have GM PCs who are there for comic relief or to perform story functions or to add flavor. I've even run campaigns where I had characters who were all about teaching inexperienced players how to roleplay and how not to roleplay. While the PCs are strategizing what to do, then undercover cross-dressing pro-wrestler NPC burst out of his disguise and attempts to hijack the airship back from the gestapo only to be blasted out a window and fall 300 meters into the icy cold waters below.

You know, the simple stuff.

It is much less acceptable for the GM PC to displace the player spotlight time, especially when it comes to actually fixing the problem. The goal of a PC is to enjoy the spotlight, and the goal of an NPC or GM PC is to reduce the amount of time players spend in the spotlight so that it can be a brighter spotlight while they are in it.

Quote from: Omega on December 10, 2024, 08:05:51 PMThis is a huge thing on Reddit.

Friend of mine was telling me about how nearly every damn thread over there complaining about "teh horribible DMPC!" was not actually a damn "DMPC". It was a bog standard NPC in the party.

There are morons over there who absolutely can not get that these things are, you kn ow... FUCKING DIFFERENT!

A DMPC is indeed a problem way more than it is a boon. This is when the DM is playing in the party as a player AND DMing in the same breath. They are not running an NPC. This is their character and they are acting as a player.

Party NPCs are just that. NPCs in the party. But these Reddit halfwits think they are exactly they same thing.

Welcome to yet another term completely twisted out of shape and now has no meaning because its been stretched to essentially include everything on earth.

^^This^^

Of the Redditors that aren't just bots, half of the rest are idiots who want to be part of the conversation but contribute nothing of substance because they are clueless and it just muddies the conversation.

NPCs only become a problem if their actions overshadow the group. I've had the best success with NPCs who had the jobs for the PCs, but couldn't do it themselves because they lacked the skills or temperament. One of my favorite NPCs for fantasy games is an Awakened former cat familiar of a wizard. It has got all the knowledge and knows most rumors regarding adventures, but is a cat and so doesn't have the physical nature for adventuring (no hands for one) and must have others adventure for it. I never had to worry about Mischelle Greymalkyn overshadowing the player characters.

On the other hand, I've seen plenty of Players use the hirelings and retainers of their player characters as expendables. Things like, "You, torchbearer! Walk into that odd translucence in the passageway and see if it is a Gelatinous Cube!" With the Players fully expecting these NPCs to lay down their lives at their whim without a second thought.

Misuse of NPCs happens all around the game table.

Quote from: SHARK on December 10, 2024, 06:28:40 PMGreetings!

Ok, I have seen more than a few "DM Videos" and Vlogs where some people cry and scream and admonish DM's to never have "DM NPC's" and that having DM NPC's in a Character Party is terrible and blah, blah, blah.

I have typically, *routinely* included two or sometimes more DM NPC's in Character Parties over the years--decades, even, in campaign after campaign, whether I have three or four Player Characters, or even five or six Player Characters. Having a few useful NPC's that are also party members and friends with at least some of the rest of the party has always, always been a good thing in my experience.

Then, of course, the Player Characters often gravitate towards cultivating boyfriends and girlfriends into joining the group, just rough, cigar-chomping friends, and stalwart companions and hangers on, as time progresses. An old, bearded wagon driver, or a toughened, grizzled hunter, or a proud but inexperienced farm girl, looking for adventure, the list of NPC companions can grow organically pretty quickly. Such relationships are normally founded upon various motivations, whether such is romantic, common goals, common religion, vengeance, hard luck, or just eagerly seeking adventure.

But in the "Online World", especially, there seems to be this huge taboo about DM NPC's. I'm boggled at WTF these people are crying about, or why they typically claim that it is a terrible DM taboo.

In every campaign I have run, as I mentioned, I routinely include DM NPC's in the party. I have never had a Player think it is a bad idea, and in fact, all of them have considered it entirely normal, and actually good. What smart Player Character doesn't want a friendly, allied NPC fighting at their side and sharing the dangers facing the party of adventurers at every turn?

What do you all think, my friends?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I think people are using the term in different ways. NPCs joining the party as friends, spouses, etc isn't that unusual or much of a problem in my experience but also not what I would call a DMPC/GMPC I don't think DMPC is so much about having an NPC in the party who is a regular in the campaign. I think people usually mean by that term, GMs who almost really want to be a player and have an NPC in the party he or she is just as invested in (which leads to problems if the GM isn't good at being fair when they have a dog in the fight). I think the other potential meaning of it, is the NPC who is too awesome to believe. The obvious GM insert, who is often showing off to the party and the players (and maybe has a certain amount of obvious plot immunity: i.e. the players couldn't kill him if they tried). But I also have only ever encountered 1 proper DMPC the entire time I have been playing (always possible I am forgetting a couple, so call it 3 if you want).

In Dungeon Module I6 "Ravenloft", Ireena is the reincarnation of Tatyana, Strahd's lost love

if memory serves me right, the adventurers *should* bring Ireena on as a party member, but the DM is tasked with controlling her as a party NPC.

I am sure there are other examples from the old modules, but that is the one that comes to mind.

the idea that the DM should never control NPCs within the party is not canonical

Quote from: Bedrockbrendan on December 11, 2024, 07:01:03 PM

Quote from: SHARK on December 10, 2024, 06:28:40 PMGreetings!

Ok, I have seen more than a few "DM Videos" and Vlogs where some people cry and scream and admonish DM's to never have "DM NPC's" and that having DM NPC's in a Character Party is terrible and blah, blah, blah.

I have typically, *routinely* included two or sometimes more DM NPC's in Character Parties over the years--decades, even, in campaign after campaign, whether I have three or four Player Characters, or even five or six Player Characters. Having a few useful NPC's that are also party members and friends with at least some of the rest of the party has always, always been a good thing in my experience.

Then, of course, the Player Characters often gravitate towards cultivating boyfriends and girlfriends into joining the group, just rough, cigar-chomping friends, and stalwart companions and hangers on, as time progresses. An old, bearded wagon driver, or a toughened, grizzled hunter, or a proud but inexperienced farm girl, looking for adventure, the list of NPC companions can grow organically pretty quickly. Such relationships are normally founded upon various motivations, whether such is romantic, common goals, common religion, vengeance, hard luck, or just eagerly seeking adventure.

But in the "Online World", especially, there seems to be this huge taboo about DM NPC's. I'm boggled at WTF these people are crying about, or why they typically claim that it is a terrible DM taboo.

In every campaign I have run, as I mentioned, I routinely include DM NPC's in the party. I have never had a Player think it is a bad idea, and in fact, all of them have considered it entirely normal, and actually good. What smart Player Character doesn't want a friendly, allied NPC fighting at their side and sharing the dangers facing the party of adventurers at every turn?

What do you all think, my friends?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I think people are using the term in different ways. NPCs joining the party as friends, spouses, etc isn't that unusual or much of a problem in my experience but also not what I would call a DMPC/GMPC I don't think DMPC is so much about having an NPC in the party who is a regular in the campaign. I think people usually mean by that term, GMs who almost really want to be a player and have an NPC in the party he or she is just as invested in (which leads to problems if the GM isn't good at being fair when they have a dog in the fight). I think the other potential meaning of it, is the NPC who is too awesome to believe. The obvious GM insert, who is often showing off to the party and the players (and maybe has a certain amount of obvious plot immunity: i.e. the players couldn't kill him if they tried). But I also have only ever encountered 1 proper DMPC the entire time I have been playing (always possible I am forgetting a couple, so call it 3 if you want).

Greetings!

Yeah, I usually get to play all kinds of characters, from spouses, relatives, younger squires, and the assortment of guards, scouts, the wagon driver, the cook, and whoever else the party drags along or picks up on their adventures!

I usually have each NPC drawn up with their profiles, equipment, personal possessions, and then four Character Traits--one positive trait, two neutral traits, and one negative trait. These are custom traits, and can be hilarious in many ways. A few are really cool, while many can dial up the "Stupid Factor" to 11. A good number obviously are somewhere in the middle, and safe.

Strangely, the Player Characters often quite like the gimped, weird characters that join their band. *Laughing*

The survival rate of all of these various NPC's can be somewhat modest, to be sure. Especially for the characters that are Super-Heroic, or have the Martyr's Syndrome, Tenacious Guardian, or Noble Fatalism.

The "GMPC" insert. Wow. I have never really embraced that idea, of self-insertion of some uber, super hero character that towers over the Player Characters. I'm content to simply realistically--or comically--portray the cast of needed characters that are along for the ride.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK on December 12, 2024, 03:45:18 AMThe "GMPC" insert. Wow. I have never really embraced that idea, of self-insertion of some uber, super hero character that towers over the Player Characters. I'm content to simply realistically--or comically--portray the cast of needed characters that are along for the ride.

I've only experienced a GMPC twice, both in the 1990s - once in a GURPS game and once in an Amber Diceless game. The GMPCs were technically made according to the same PC creation rules, so they weren't uber in power level at least by raw numbers. What made them insufferable is that they were mouthpieces for the GM to tell us when we were wrong.

Ireena from I6 Ravenloft is definitely not a GMPC. She is lower level than the PCs, with no magic items and no unique information.

This is where I really disagree with Chris24601. He might be handling his GMPCs better than the ones I saw, but I still think it is a bad idea.

Quote from: Chris24601 on December 11, 2024, 11:37:25 AMI have basically two conditions where I'll include a GMPC;

A) there are three players and a needed party role isn't being covered.
...
In that case I just include a GMPC that's as basic as possible to cover a missing role (a healer or tank most typically is what's missing) and is involved for the most basic of reasons (three players means there's never a need for a tie-breaker; they just follow the majority).

B) The group has been particularly indecisive and/or just really sucks at considering the ramifications of their actions and having someone there to give literal voice to my frustrations at it/point out what is supposed to be obvious can usually get things back on track.

Having a TPK with a group due to poor choices in the first couple sessions is only funny the first few times.

Past that, having someone to point out things like "we've been here 40 minutes trying to decide whether to go left or right and there's no clear right answer, how about we just flip a coin?" is worth any potential grumbling from the players over having a DMPC present.

As a GM, I've often had kids and/or newbies as players. I didn't need to have a GMPC present in order to just talk to the players as the GM and tell them to get on with it.

The players shouldn't learn that an NPC is the voice of the GM. NPCs should have their own motivations and flaws. I often have to push players to understand that just because an NPC says something, that doesn't mean that it is true or that it is a good idea. NPCs should regularly lie and/or be wrong.

If the players are having trouble with an adventure, then I can give them resources like more information or magic items that help them - or just make the opposition a little easier. For example, if they don't have a healer, I might let them have access to potions and/or a wand of curing.

Not a fan, but don't begrudge other DMs from using them. I suspect this is more prevalent with games that a low number of players. Generally, I've got my hands plenty full with the monsters and NPCs. But I also don't like saddling my players with a hand-puppet, either. If I have a party with few players, I typically respond with salting the adventures with extra magic items that address the party's shortcomings.

Also, my parties have disturbing habit of using NPC hirelings as meat shields and trap detectors.

There's a difference between an NPC that goes with the party and a DMPC.  The difference is in how the DM handles them.  Does the DM handle them as NPCs like any other NPCs or does them DM play them as if they are a player and that is their PC?  The first one is normal.  The second one can easily become a problem.  If the character is always coming along whether the players want it or not, that's probably a DMPC.  If the DM is coming up with ways why their NPCs survives or wins even if it bends or breaks the rules, that's probably a DMPC.  If the character is as important to them game as the PCs or more so, that's probably a DMPC.  DMPCs are one of those things that can be done well in theory but are seldom done well in practice.  Often, they devolve into the main character with the PCs as supporting cast.