How to run NPC allies in D&D as Battle Companions
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 июн 2024
- At best, NPC allies slow down combat in D&D. At worst, they steal the spotlight and become Dungeon Master Player Characters. Battle Companions are my solution.
▼CLICK▼
📢📢 Links Mentioned 📢📢
▶ Written by Randall Right: / randallright
▶ Full Battle Companions: www.patreon.com/posts/battle-...
▶ Bare-bones Battle Companions: www.patreon.com/posts/mpdm-ba...
❤️❤️ Support the Channel ❤️❤️
💚 Patreon: matthewperkins.net/patreon
💚 Tips: matthewperkins.net/tips
💚 Store: matthewperkins.net/store
💚 DM Guild: matthewperkins.net/dmsguild
💜 Twitch: matthewperkins.net/twitch
💜 TikTok: matthewperkins.net/tiktok
💜 RUclips: matthewperkins.net/youtube
🧡 Discord: matthewperkins.net/discord
🧡 Facebook: matthewperkins.net/facebook
🧡 Twitter: matthewperkins.net/twitter
🧡 Instagram: matthewperkins.net/instagram
🧡 Reddit: matthewperkins.net/reddit
✏️ Blog: matthewperkins.net/blog
📧 For marketing/business/sponsorship inquiries, email: mperkins.dm@gmail.com
______________
This is unofficial Fan Content permitted under the Fan Content Policy. Not approved/endorsed by Wizards. Portions of the materials used are property of Wizards of the Coast. ©Wizards of the Coast LLC.
______________
This work includes material taken from the System Reference Document 5.1 (“SRD 5.1”) by Wizards of the Coast LLC and available at dnd.wizards.com/resources/sys.... The SRD 5.1 is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License available at creativecommons.org/licenses/....
▼▼ Timestamps ▼▼
0:00 Why your Dungeon Master HATES your backstory
0:53 Four goals for your backstory
2:17 Brainstorm multiple ideas
4:01 Make the character sheet
4:54 Mine the character sheet
6:04 Scaffolding
9:21 Flesh it out
#dnd #5e #skt 
Игры
Here are the initial design brief I wrote for this system, so you can see what my goals were.
The goals of these rules are to be:
- Streamlined. Simplify combat involving NPC allies by abstracting their participation.
- Useful. Incentive players to bring an NPC ally along with them by providing a reliable mechanical benefit.
- Fun. I want this be rad.
This project should break into two parts: #1 Battle Companion Rules, and #2 specific stats for battle companion templates. This will skew 80% towards the first part with just a few examples of specific Battle Companions. Later, we can develop a broader roster of Battle Companions.
I have some rules outlined in my head for how this system should work, but if you have any adjustments you’d like to make to this vision, I’m open to suggestions:
- Battle Companions are not combatants. They do not appear on the map. They are not affected in the traditional sense by the dangers of combat. They do not have hit points in combat. If the party succeeds, the Battle Companion is succeeds. If the party fails, the Battle Companion is fails.
- Battle Companions provide a benefit. Some benefits might be passive, where it applies automatically without any decision necessary. Some benefits might require some decision-making in initiative order. If it’s the latter, battle companions always go last in the initiative order, and the player with the lowest initiative decides how the Battle Companion’s benefit is applied.
- Battle Companions are abstract. In the narrative of the story, Battle Companions are fighting alongside the players in slaying monsters or helping in their special way. The Battle Companion is not literally phasing out of existence or standing still the entire combat.
- Only one Battle Companion is active at a time. If the players have multiple companions, they’ll have to declare which is their active companion during a short rest.
- Battle Companion abilities only apply to combat. The purpose is to speed up combat, so the scope is of these rules only applies to combat.
- Battle Companion abilities can get strange. I don’t care against balance or convention. If you can make the abilities SPECIAL in a way that doesn’t exist readily in the official material, like changing damage dice or messing with initiative, go for it.
- Battle Companion abilities evolve. There should be tiers to a Battle Companion’s powers, where it either changes or evolves mechanically to reward players for deepening their relationship with their allies. However, this shouldn’t make combat more complicated.
- Battle Companion are generic templates without restrictions. I want a dungeon master to import these abilities on to their own NPCs rather have dedicated abilities for dedicated companions.
-------------- ❤ Support the Channel ❤ --------------
💚 Patreon: matthewperkins.net/patreon
💚 Donate: matthewperkins.net/donate
💚 Store: matthewperkins.net/store
💚 DM Guild: matthewperkins.net/dmsguild
💜 Twitch: matthewperkins.net/twitch
💜 TikTok: matthewperkins.net/tiktok
🧡 Discord: matthewperkins.net/discord
🧡 Facebook: matthewperkins.net/facebook
🧡 Twitter: matthewperkins.net/twitter
🧡 Instagram: matthewperkins.net/instagram
🧡 Reddit: matthewperkins.net/reddit
✏ Blog: matthewperkins.net/blog
📧 For marketing/business/sponsorship inquiries, email: mperkins.dm@gmail.com
Just a thought this system would also work really well for groups who still play when players are away like mine. You could have a custom ability for each of the PCs
ooh, i like the idea of a "PC lite" sheet to use when they're away. Defending them from getting targeted also prevents ruining their fun by accidentally submitting them to death by NPCitis.
@@starshinewindlord2716 yeah our group had wave pcs who are not there. They don’t act and can’t be acted upon but a system like this would be cool so they’re still sort of there
That is a very very good idea and I'm ashamed I didn't think of it - I'm going to do this for sure!
@@heyitsMattyP definitely worth adding to this system I reckon. Perhaps with an ability that relates to each of the classes or something?
@@jakeholmes9296 Yeah that might be fun - good idea! I'm defs planning on touching on BC stuff every now and then. Next week's video will look at 10 NPCs in LMOP and talk about what it would take for them to join the party, what their abilities look like as a Battle Companion, and what events could trigger their Affinity upgrade.
Coming back to this video after a bit to report back - this has completely changed the game for me and my party. With six players, monsters, and at one point three NPCs (Sildar, Garaele, and Gundren) for me as the DM to keep track of, I was really struggling. This has been a lifesaver for me, and my players really enjoy it too, especially as they're able to control the NPCs! It also had the pleasantly unexpected result of turning Gundren from a bit of a dead weight to everyone's absolute favorite character. With his "Rolling Rock" feature we've decided he must have played football (or the D&D equivalent) in school. :D I voice him in a country drawl so now he's this little jock hometown dwarf running everywhere and knocking people over yelling stuff like "I got 'im! Quick, punch in his face!" and everyone loves it. Thanks Matty P!
Thank you for the feedback Kai! I worked on this with my mate Randy, so I forwarded your kind message to him too :)
On one hand it smoothes a lot out, but on another you've got additional systems to memorize which is something I detest greater than long fights. Plus, the purpose of the legendary resistance is to avoid failing saving throws that a powerful target wants to, for lack of a better term, 'legendarily resist'. To take the opportunity of a saving throw from them is no small thing, for something as serious as prone that could potentially give the party a full round of advantageous attacks, is a huge give.. for free no less.
And there's nothing that the boss can do to stop the companion because from a combat standpoint they're shroedingers cat. They both exist, and don't.. They get to influence the battle, without being influenced.. without having any risk associated with having the companion on the field, it's as if the players themself are losing agency because 'Gundren can fix it'. Even with the free help action, it's a little wild to think of giving up a nearly free grapple check**, or shove. And then to do the same 80ft away the next turn. You've essentially given this character unlimited movement by 'removing them from the field', and still allowing an action.
I love the concept, and do my best personally to avoid that kind of 'Gandalf' situation by making my 'powerful npcs' have taken an oath of silence, or maybe they're a Kenku that can't speak, or have lost pieces of their memory.. and then the lore heavy characters are a burden in combat, by being weak, slow, loud, etc.
I find keeping a degree of separation between NPCs having power and story gives the players enough of a break between the two to think creatively in fights when they're alone, and 'learning from the master' while they're present.. I find this particularly useful before a certain quest.. removing the powerful NPC midway through, when the group is confident and cheery about having all this power on their journey, and then bringing them back mid-boss fight /IF/ they beging to struggle, or have a few too many bad rolls. This is so they don't grow dependent, but aren't punished for a fight theyre struggling with.
And breaks between depending on my 'lore sponge' to wet their appetites just enough to get them on whatever path interests them, and always be curious if trivia and lore means something greater when they're gone.
Plus, by** keeping the two key parts of D&D separated in advanced, and having that separation** reflected in NPCs makes it easier to weave story for me, because I can make it a sort of matching game of 'which lore sponge has information that this Gandalf MF needs'.
Or vice versa; 'what magical artifact, or lost secret does the powerful fighter have that the lore sponge is searching for, like the last piece to the puzzle?' And what does the result entail? Catastrophe or Reward?
I also host for newer players with regularity, so they don't entirely understand the mechanics let alone story. It's just my personal work around for dealing with the 'Gandalf effect'. 😂
To get back to the Battle Companion system, instead of just rambling on even further, I love the concept, but the way the math works it just feels like it's tipping very heavily into a balance-threatening area by 'giving it all away' for free. In my mind, and with my humble opinion as a small town DM of only 5ish years.. Unless you can introduce a saving throw mechanic, & find a way to make the battle companion vulnerable to risk it's highly abuseable, more so than coming up with a DM PC. As the DM you can always kill 'your PC' off, or have them fall into a 'sleeping-beauty-esque' slumber. You just have to avoid making the entire world about one person as you're improv-ing conversation and lore, which just takes some prep. If you know what the story is about, where the key pieces all fit together, and treat all other NPCs like your 'Gandalf' is a nobody, there should be no issue of them taking focus accidentally, because there's no vacuum for them to fill.. you've already filled** the space of hero. It's up to us as DMs to tell that story, though. 😅
**Edit: Typo(s) / Syntax.
Final thought: instead of creating a new systen to deprive yourself the opportunity of over stepping bounds and giving a free & invulnerable weapon/tool to the players, I'd focus more on creating an entirely new creature to add to the initiative list. Maybe alot of adventuring parties in your world get a 'battle bot' type construct, or your group found it. If everyone has one; make it dumb, but strong. If no one has one, make it weak, and smart. 😅
Thanks for the thoughtful response here - interesting stuff. I'm typing on my phone so I can't get into too much detail, but here's some things for BC balance:
1. The math does benefit the players, though not as much as having an extra party member. They're not balanced. Some BCs are more powerful, some are more mundane. All up there are 10 BCs out now, 13 more coming out next week.
2. There are a few handbreaks to curb BC overreach / account for their abstract intangibility: the alternating ability pattern & the overwhelming odds trait
3. You're right that this might be too complicated / weird for new players, but I think it's accessible enough with the wording on the handout for new players with at least three sessions in
4. These BCs are intended to be temporary. Gundren joins for a bit, Sildar joins for a bit, the Owlbear joins for a bit -- productive players will try out new companions rather than look for edge cases and abilities to exploit
Design perspective though, I'm a super generous DM -- I love seeing my players succeed and I'm so happy when they outsmart me with their strategy.
Thank you, Matty P for giving me a way to deal with the party bringing Nundro along to the Wave Echo Cave!
Oh sick! Hopefully he was a good helper :)
Love it, Mattew! =)
Great idea!
This video is Radical And Daring . . . if you will.
Naming it RAD Feature was a great gag on my writer's part, because all through our design meeting and brief, I kept talking how I wanted the players to be excited about the abilities, they needed to be "rad" haha
im def gonna be trying this out in an ICRPG one-shot im doing tomorrow! awesome stuff!!
ICRPG! I've been reading it for the first time this week, it's so good. It's really challenging some of my assumptions about TTRPGs.
I had to come up with something like this on the fly as a first time dm for one player before the companion idea was out there. I did it a little differently inspired by final fantasy type games. I let them have stats, hp, ac, 2 passive abilities like dark vision or +2 to history checks type thing. And 2 active abilities like parry and riposte for a knight. Any rolls like initiative etc just use the stats. It’s kind of like a lite PC. It’s worked really well. It let us new players get a taste for different classes and if the player attempts something reckless bc they don’t know as a new player, I can advise them against it as one of the Npc party members if applicable.
Sometimes NPCs join the party and here is a technique for handling that situation which is streamlined, useful and fun. Nice work Randall and Matthew! This is an elegant tool to add to my DM's toolbag.
... also, the premise is valid: NPCs joining a party creates work for the DM, and this is a well thought out solution to a real (non-imaginary) problem.
Cheers Joel! This was the FIRST thing Randy and I made together back in the day (we're up to project #15 this week) but this is still my favourite :)
love this! My players really loved the 'you made a wolf friend' handout and this is very much a similar mechanic. I love the idea of two choices they can do, and I can hand it to a player to run and it doesn't bog down combat with more rolls. My players have been really rp and people oriented so they've had some npcs 'tag along' and I often forget about them in combat but don't want to make a character sheet for them to hand to a player. Definitely will use this as we wrap up lmop. (Glasstaff just blasted fireball at the party after they made bffs with the nothic and rescued the sherrif who was taking his dying breaths. More shenganigans to ensue)
Good news for you, then: next week I'm publishing all the LMOP-specific Battle Companions, which includes the Nothic
Hi Matthew. In my game, the key inside the puzzlebox will be a small ancient coin that turns into a modron-like companion. This rules will work great with him.
Oooh that's a good idea! I'm working on a document with 10 suggestions for puzzle box theme, contents and guardian challenge, and something like that might make the cut :D
@@heyitsMattyP Awesome!
It’s almost like giving the party a lil “lair action” they can bring with them and talk to
That's exactly it! I'll steal this explanation the next time I talk about these rules.
This is interesting, considering the Sidekick rules included in Tasha's. I feel like these rules can mix easily with Sidekick stats/level system. On a side note, I've played a ton of games with DM PCs that ran the same lvl as the party, with success. It depends entirely on the DM, I think.
I don't EXACTLY remember those sidekick rules, but weren't they kind of weaker PC class-style NPCs to round out solo or duo parties? I like that in small parties and balance-wise for limiting DM overreach, but in a full party, I want to cut down combat length as much as possible.
I think Matty C might have something for NPC allies too? But what I saw looked like a kind of shorthand stat block
@@heyitsMattyP the Sidekick rules narrow the npc powers down to a track matching Expert ('im Helping!!, very close to what you have) Spellcaster (fewer spells, more casts, basically no pc-interesting side powers), or Warrior (better at hackslash, basically no pc-interesting clobber powers) and still has a 20 level "xp" track, but stays the level that matches the party (so, no wasting time tracking their XP).
it's of middling complexity between your "they can do two things" and a PC sidesheet (they have all the mindbending decisions a pc might have).
I did something more like "grab a dwarf block, grab the blurb from Life Cleric, slap it on, give him a backstory of a battle gone sour where he'd prayed his butt off and it worked"
Affinity with players has had me add things to him over time, but not so fast as, nor fancy enough, to overshine the party.
@@starshinewindlord2716 Yeah, my idea was to use the stats/classes provided and then relegate their role in combat with these ideas. It honestly doesn't seem any more complicated than animal companions or monster summons.
If the party in my game picks up any NPCs, I'll see how it works out.
I have Gundren act like Sallah from Indiana Jones “verrrrry dangerous my friends!” I had Sildar Halwinter join the party for a few good months. I had him played more like Michael Caine, just full of experience and advice as well as being good in a fight. I had Venomfang kill him in a very devastating fashion that the party is still upset about. Their plan had failed which ended up putting Sildar in grave danger.
I also make DM videos too! I know quite a bit about dragons and shield spells in my first ever video. Come check me out!
Ripping off celebrity impersonations for NPCs is always A+ - especially if it's a bad impersonation so the players can't tell who you're ripping off
@@heyitsMattyP exactly! An impersonation can go so badly that it appears to be an original if that makes sense lol
So next week I will run LMOP goblin arrows and the Cragmaw Hideout. Is battle companion a good idea for Sildar? My initial thought would be protective stance or healing help? I don't see Sildar as an attacking companion but I also see Sildar as being too weak to do much. ...I guess the answer is "just have fun, man!" :)
I don't remember exactly what I had for Sildar, but if you're a patron, I have specific Battle Companions coming out for every LMOP NPC in about four days. If you need it earlier than that, swing me a private message on Patreon and I'll email it to you or something :)
I am! Thanks, that will be awesome.
Well as my party currently managed to get themselves captured in the Cragmaw Castle and still has Droop the Goblin following them, i think i'm gonna implement that mechanic.
Don't listen to the ppl that think its a terrible mechanic, with me and my group being first-time-players/dm, i greatly apprechiate something that abstracts the extra work required to run a full extra turn.
I already gotta focus on 3 goblins, a hobgoblin and a bugbear with extra moves, i don't have the mental capacity to run yet ANOTHER character with completely opposite motives...
Edit: They enjoyed it :)
Oh nice! Give it a go, let me know how you feel about it after having a run of it.
Im dming curse of strahd and my party has a level 20 wizard npc that follows them around he is very useful to the party but he is very distracted and unhelpful out of combat unless the players ask him something specifically.
Party NPC that have power equivalent to the players or more need to fade into the background until engaged with most of the time.
If it works for you, it's the right thing to do. All I'm saying is that I would be frustrated as a player by having a level 20 ally in the party.
@@heyitsMattyP yeah your system sounds really cool, it's very interesting. I'm gonna have to give it a try.
They love him he is mostly a utility character to make cool events happen like the party fighting a dracolich while the party flees on a bigsby`s hand.
I've made everything incredibly broken in that game to were it doesn't even matter. The Villians are op the characters are op the npcs are op.
I find my party can enjoy powerful npc as long as they don't solve problems on there own. Alot of the time my party is either choosing npc actions either in character or out of character.
🙌
To be honest, I'm not buying the idea since we already have "companion" rules in DoIP. But when you showed the RAD features of Gundren I smiled and wowed! I was mindblown. Good job!
I haven't seen the companion rules in DoIP, but I have seen the ones in Tasha's - they're probably the same? I wanted a system that took up minimal table time in combat though.
@@heyitsMattyP sorry I mean "sidekick" not companions. Nevertheless, those in the appendix only refers to the sidekick types, stat blocks with actions and reactions, proficiency and level up rules. That is why I love this Battle Companion idea much more.
Interesting system, but since I'm going to be DMing a small group of three (with only two particularly excited to play, the third only putting in an effort at trying it out mostly since we'll be playing in that household for a family game, so might not stick with it), not really addressing the concerns I need.
So far, my current plan, since we'll be starting from level 1 and teaching 5E for the first time will be part of the campaign for all the players and first time playing D&D in general for two of them, is that the campaign will start with a recruitment drive by the guardsmen of the local capital city to counter a recent unexpected militarization of the local goblin population, with untrained commoners going into bootcamps and any able fighters being sent to help counter raids by the enemy scouting parties in the outlaying villages.
As such, I'm going to use a combination of Guard statblocks for the professional actual Guardsman and the Survivors statblocks from the Van Richten's Guide for allied NPCs to give some good narrative flavor to the combat capable conscripts that have never seen battle before. The Survivors are only designed to level up twice (and I'll base their Talents on how well the PCs manage to keep themselves and others alive, and rather they simply route or totally defeat the goblin combat parties), so, as the PCs get stronger, I'll transition from bigger defensive battles to giving the PCs more opportunities to act as a strikeforce with fewer allies in tow until they're full-fledged adventuring material and discover what's behind the goblins being organized into assault troops. The answer both is and isn't hobgoblins, since this particular group of hobgoblins will be outsider mercenaries waging this miniature war as a proxy for higher (or possibly lower) interests.
The PCs will be hired help for the guardsmen, not full army recruits, so they'll be given some latitude on where they go or don't go after each battle, and what they do to aid the combat efforts. For instance, while the first mission will have them and an acolyte from the starting town's church quickly escorted from the starting town to the next village over by a militia member for a hasty defense from an incoming goblin scouting party, after that battle is over they can choose to go back to the starting village to request others to reinforce that village while they help in the starting town and possibly receive other deployments, or stay in the village and help make it more defensible, interacting with the villagers in various fields in the process.
...Guess I'm kinda nervous, haven't DMed since 3.0E. That one had started with an immediate dungeon crawl with lots of small fights against minor undead, so I really want to start this one off with more chances for NPC interaction and the bigger, more important, battles that have been popularized in recent generations of play. The exact balance I go with as it progresses will probably depend on how short rest dependent the classes the players choose to play are, though. That said, I'm actually going to purposefully make the first battle include a lot of NPCs, intending it to be the only combat encounter of the first gameplay session. Basically, I'm going to give each PC a different party of NPCs to defend the village from three sides since it lacks any fortifications, making it like I'm running solo one-shots for each of them, but where the others can watch the different types of actions the NPCs, monsters, and other PCs are taking in a tutorial by fire. Though, we will all being making characters together beforehand going over the rules then, likely even making it a session zero, so the first battle will really be more of a recap tutorial in the second session most likely. (Also, if one group dispatches their group of goblins early, like my one player with some experience, they'll be able to have their group split up and rush in to help the other groups.) ...No idea if the whole thing falls apart if that one player decides they don't want to keep playing, since the players live together, so the first fight needs to have a lot of interesting ideas going on so I can at least say I tried my best.
P.S. The somewhat veteran player from my 3E game has so far expressed an interest in playing a Wild Magic Barbarian Fairy, so I at least know one PC will be capable of taking the point position.
P.P.S. Also, unless the group expresses an interest in playing totally vanilla, I'm thinking of homebrewing no concentration or material components on Racial feature castings of spells (and maybe some tweaks to races without innate spellcasting to compensate if need be), some bonus equipment (like the option to grab leather armor, hide armor, or a shield for the Barbarian if they're not two-handing due to the limitations of Small size or two-weapon fighting, or if their Dex+Con is bad since they insisted we should roll for ability scores; always preferred class equipment options included considerations for all their proficiencies, like Monk class should have the option to grab a tool or instrument they're proficient in, as that just makes sense), and each PC starting with a level 1 bonus feat (cause 3E habits die hard).
P.P.P.S. I'm way overthinking and oversharing here.
Even more Post of a Script: I'll probably end up eventually having to make an outright DM PC if the one player does drop out, maybe even if not. I do plan for death of at least the NPCs I have lined up to be very much on the table, with repercussions from their loved ones, and the opening premise would make rolling up a new PC if one dies pretty easy to add to the party if it does come to that. The one "veteran" player already assumes that playing a party character myself might be what I should do, but I want to avoid it if I can.
(okay, got to promise myself no more edits, now)
Three players is enough for a balanced experience, though you have to keep the action economy in mind when making encounters, because the smaller party size amplifies the disadvantage of fighting too many enemies.
You can even balance encounters for two players. You'd definitely have to rewrite every encounter in a published module though.
@@heyitsMattyP Of course, I agree (my own currently level 16 party was only three members for most of their adventuring career). But part of the fun of weaker enemies is their strength in numbers, so it kinda ruins their flavor if you have to put so much effort into over-adjusting for action economy at super low levels. I feel like you need to start/be at level 3 if you want to have any fair encounters where the enemy outnumbers a party of three or less (unless they're set up to be easily picked off before they pose a threat). Need a few expendables. Which is why I fell upon using the survivors for combat NPCs, since they can grow a little bit, but slowly enough that the PCs will easily be able to see themselves growing stronger more quickly until it's time to leave them behind and move on to a new region. Already have a homebrew setting (that I was working on for fun before I knew I'd need it) to plop the scenario I have in mind into.
Either way, with a smaller party, after they do get some experience under their belt, probably better off with a DMPC with a tactical presence on the battlefield than the Battle Companion system. Think I might do it like Final Fantasy 2 (famicom numbering, not FF4) is structured if I do start to include a fourth, DM-run, party member, where there's multiple of them but only ever one at a time as they always cycle in and out of the party depending on their attachment to the current questline in the story and/or die off when thematically appropriate obstacles come around. Won't totally script such events out in advance, though, just be on the lookout for ways they could die to bail the PCs out of serious jams if they happen. I'm one of like only a handful of people that even like that game, so I could even outright steal a few of my favorite temporary party members from it for fun inspiration.
Bro how do you title your video that when TOMORROW I was planning for Gundren’s sister to join the party
Sorry, it's a typo. It's meant to be "What if Gundren's sister joins the party?"
Matty fuckin' P! I love it
My first real introduction to TTRPG was in college by this really cool dude who called himself Matty. Coincidence? I think not.
Haha rad! I used to hate the name Matty by itself because I knew a kid in high school named Matty who tripped on a randomly placed, unopened can of peaches and fell down a flight of concrete stairs, breaking an arm, and I didn't want to be anything like that person. But I'm OK with it in the full context of Matty P!
@@heyitsMattyP I assume you're also very careful with canned fruits, just in case
correcto. i don't fuck with fruit.
Nice shirt
new text thanks
Sildar makes sense. Gundren does not. Gundren should be a businessman and miner.
Gundren's a blank slate for me - he can be whatever he needs to be for the story
Algorithm, tips hat.
eyyy thank you
Eh, I think your entire premise is problematic.
If you have a DM that insists on playing a character that steals the spotlight and giving them all sorts of OP shit, you've got a problematic DM and no amount of "rules" will change that. The solution is rather to have a talk with your DM or to find another DM. If you have a DM who is concerned with DM:ing, then having an NPC temporarily joining the party is not going to turn into Gandalf stealing the spotlight. Because the DM presumably knows not to metagame and knows that its really the PC:s story, so the NPC will only be there to enhance the players experience.
In other words this is an imaginary problem.
The Gandalf gag is a bit of hyperbole. This is a design to include NPC allies while keeping the spotlight focussed on the players without bloating the combat.
@@heyitsMattyP A fair amount more than "a bit" hyperbole. I am not sure I as a player would like the NPC to be treated differently than what the PC:s are in combat.
C'mon man, this is a video about a fun little homebrew which has worked well for me and my mates. If you won't look past the introduction, I just don't know what to say.
I agree, the game is about making PC-centric stories, and NPCs can be used to enhance the player's experience. Having an NPC join the party is one way to achieve that goal. To me, this system looks like a streamlined, useful and fun technique a DM can use for handling that situation. Do you view this as a system for fixing a bad DM? I didn't see it that way.
@@SonOfSofaman The intro certainly makes it sound like it considering all the talk about DMNPCs, which are solely the result of poor DM:ing.
This is stupid. The only thing that is needed to keep an NPC from being a DMNPC is some restraint on the part of the DM. This isn't some world ending problem that needs specific rules to keep in check.
Cool
I agree completely.
worst. rules. ever.
k
Worthless comment