Took me a while to learn that everything has already been made. I used to paralize myself with fear in attempts to make characters or stories original. I'm glad I learned that nothing I make is new. I have so much fun creating stuff now without really caring if it's similar to something that exists. Plus it's even better when others find similarities. Nice conversation starters.
My favourite DND campaign I ever played was a game where we escorted a DMPC! He was part of the group, but essentially unable to fight so we were in the spotlight, but built links with them as well, and it was a lot of fun!
An interesting piece of advice I can give on the "DMPC" front is that forming the campaign story around a character study can be one of the most compelling ways to write. Players tend to get attached to their allies, especially the ones with a lot of complexity and personality to them, so you can really take that to another level by having a story centered on trying to understand the inner workings of a centrally important NPC and making all the story-changing decisions based around what conclusions the players draw about them. That's what I'm running in my current campaign, and I've gotten very positive feedback over it
The backstory length is something I understand. I tend to make some expansive backstories, but I always have what is called the elevator pitch version too that covers the essentials.
as my friend and GM for a few games when I ran a Dead Space-ish Starfinder homebrew said. "You took the time to do Dead Space but file the serial numbers off, so there was effort involved."
Oh Crispy, you just brought my favorite version of Batman. Kevin Conroy's Batman is legend tier to begin with, but during JLU he really hit his stride.
I had a DM that was a complete doormat to anyone who sounded even a little sure. To the point where we had a time wizard who allowed themselves to re-roll every roll "once each type of roll per turn, but it's OK because this class has low AC and HP". He had 17 AC and got to re-roll every kind of saving throw. Then the second anyone questioned him he'd site a source book no one else had, the second one of us got access to the book he quit, left the server and blocked everyone on it because it turned out his class could only re-roll 1 specific thing once per long rest.
So many people seem to be absolutely zero tolerance about DMPCs. I've played in a lot of games with them, and they're usually fine. When done right, they're around to just flesh out a needed role in the party, and to be there for player characters to role-play off of. It's when they REALLY act like a PC that they're problematic. They shouldn't be solving puzzles or moral quandaries; those things should be up to the players. They shouldn't be the spotlight. But they can be fleshed out and can become important to the PCs. And sometimes the DM can use them to hint at the party that they're about to do something that really isn't a good idea. Really, most absolutes in games are silly (with the exception of actual abusive behavior). There's almost always nuance and ways to balance things the right way.
I made the edgiest edgelord to ever edge in my DnD game and she's often the highlight of the party. She's a soft spoken caring mother figure to the rest of the party wrapped in an edgy Goth mommy package with overly edgy and dark powers (hexblade warlock). I love playing her so much
My group almost always have a dmpc regardless of whos gming. They always take a kind of follower role, usually good in a fight with some utility skills, but only mosty does things when the party asks them to. They won't pick the lock even if they can until the party has failed to do so or we ask them to do it for us. They are fully part of the party, but are very passive until told to be active
Idea for a DMPC: a *Damsel Errant.* In chivalric literature, a damsel errant is a maiden who seeks out questing knights for help. She might have some power of her own to support the knight, but she needs someone else's help to achieve her goal.
I freaking love the Negotiation system in the SMT series. So I ported it over while tweaking it a bit to fit D&D's Gameplay. And my GM loved that idea and how I wanted to play a Pacifist. You know your GM is a great one when they encourage the ideas you have and they want to see you try new things out in a Campaign.
I like to think every character starts with a concept or idea, even the ones you pull inspiration from or blatantly rip off. And when I'm making suggestions to other players regarding character backstories, I recommend and suggest, but never demand from them, they write out 3 to 7 SHORT paragraphs, and maybe have few bullet points, because it makes it easier for you and other people to do a quick check on the important parts of your character's personal story. Granted, I also like to include a caveat about that being a general rule of thumb for characters that are under level seven. If you're writing a story, which can be a great way to introduce a world you made to a broader audience, then each character having multiple pages fo their backgrounds and profiles is fine, and I actually encourage others to write out character profile summaries if they are writing a story or making a game, it helps keep things a bit more concise and cohesive. Maybe sometime Crispy could do a video on practices and habits RPG players should pick up; given the nature of the subject matter, he could turn it into a collab with other content creators. I'm sure Den of the Drake, JoCat, Pointy Hat, and Crit Crab would like the idea of doing a video like that themselves, and possibly be on board with doing that sort of video as a collab.
A good DMPC/NPC Ally can be an amazing addition to a game. One of my favorite campaigns had a few of them, and they added a lot of value and attachment for our characters to the story.
That 2nd one is a big one. With my first completed character under my belt, I tried being more experimental and you would not believe the stuff I've been called unoriginal for. One person was so goddamn angry I used the term "Great Old One," OUTSIDE OF MY BACKSTORY while summarizing it, saying how I didn't have enough imagination for this hobby. Like calm tf down lmao
My one real experience with D&D (maybe 3rd edition, I don’t remember now), my friend who was DMing created a DMPC and it was an overall fun game. He didn’t make his character over powered, didn’t hog the spotlight or anything. I have nothing but fond memories of the campaign.
I'd say with backstories the length isn't a problem. It's when they give you a backstory for their character before they've even heard about the world. As for people against ripping off stuff that's hilarious considering how much of official dnd is exactly that from its very beginnings.
always see DMPC's getting a bad rap, at least from the channels I watch. I'm glad to see a much more level headed middle of the road perspective, and I'm glad that you personally had a lot of success with your own recurring character as a DM. Quite inspiring, and proof that they're not all bad.
With every single roleplaying thing its the same case as with medicine. Its a matter of using it right whether it will work as itented, be a drug, or a poison
I actually made an edgy character recently, well sorta. It’s edgy in as much as I will ever play edgy. I gave him a tragic and traumatic backstory, looping and making it as foil to the intro the dm told us we would begin with during session 0. But here is the thing, I also thought deeply about his core self and trait. I realized pretty early on that he genuinely loves people. He loves learning more about people and meeting them. One of his childhood dreams was to travel. And then of course the incident happened and he lost his entire family. Survival became his priority and he became a refugee instead. Not remotely how he ever wished to travel. But things settled down again and he relearned to love and trust people again. My character had romances, he took on students, he made friends, he watched his community grow and looked after it. And then an invasion happened and he lost nearly everything all over again. And that’s how the story begins for the campaign. Edgy and tragic right? Except one of the things that continually comes up is how deeply my character’s self worth is tied in to how well he can protect and look after the ones he cares about. In this instance, his party. He is codependent and an enabler, but he also serves the role of mentor for his group. He is sad but friendly and willing to learn and take joy from the travels and new sights and sounds and experiences he gets from his journey. He isn’t a constant stream of doom and gloom. In fact, early on with the party he encouraged them to have fun and join games in the market to shake off the terror of the narrow escape they made from the invasion and the bandits they stumbled into as well. He also gives his trust and care to those who are generous and kind to him and tries to repay it in kind if not exponentially more. So when I say edgy, my character is edgy. He is depressed and has ptsd and anxiety and yet…I never forget his core, that he loves people. He has always loved people. Even when everything is telling him to distance himself so he doesn’t get hurt again, he can’t help but want to love people again. The adage of wishing to love and lost rather than never having loved at all, that suits him a great deal. And it isn’t even romantic love. It’s just a genuinely platonic love and joy he finds in the world. Anyway, just wanted to share that. Most recently he had to face his greatest fear when the party member who has been his best friend for years died in battle. We did manage to bring him back but it took a lot out of my character and I had him have a breakdown over it. I had thought long and hard about how he would react to this particular thing. But yeah, it was nice to explore. If I may be honest, when I created this character I was facing burnout in my daily life, not directed at dnd, but just in general. So, feeling I didn’t have much energy to make a more cheery and optimistic type of character, I made this one. He is now quite beloved to me and I love playing him. His journey for me is about healing and learning to stand better on his own two feet with more self confidence. He’ll get there. I intend to make sure of that.
I'm honestly planning on using a DMPC for my campaign of Scion 2e, he's essentially going to be Lobo from DC comics, the son of an aztec wargod (that's how Scion works, children of mythological gods). He's going to be there helping out with his fists to the best of his ability, slightly annoying until eventually he succumbs to the hunger that is part of every aztec warrior and do such horrific acts that the heroes will have no choice but to fight him... The original idea was to use him to show the players that it's okay to use your surroundings: yes, throw a car at the minotaur if that is what it takes. But also, don't destroy to much of people's property???
I run dark fantasy and people called my group edgy like it's bad thing, sure we had pyromaniac, sadist etc. but who cares, we had fun. And the group dynamic was great, nobody was lone wolf they all had fun torturing people together
agreed. I also play Shadowrun, Warhammer 40k and "dark side" campaigns in several other rpg systems. You can easily play morally very grey or outright evil characters in a group setting as long as you remember that even "bad guys" need allies and even friends... or at least loyal minions. And you can only inspire loyalty and trustworthy co-conspirators if you don't stab the backs of your inner circle... and those campaigns thrive off the mindset that the player group is the inner circle of a BBEG or the core criminal gang with insane loyalty towards each other, because "snitches get stitches" and the feeling that the other group members are the "only people that really get you" when you're all social outcasts.
@@hopejohnson6347 Even going against each other can work, I played Alien cinematic mode (really recommend) where agendas sometimes go against each other and it was great. My agenda was to bring back alien at any cost (others including PCs are expendable) someone else's agenda was to destroy aliens (at any cost even if it means killing PCs) and it was amazing. You have no idea what is other people's goal and you're trying to achieve your goal without raising any suspicion
I have a DMPC in my 5e game, but the only reason I made her was becase a) there's only 2 people in the party and I wanted to make sure they didn't get completely hindered over the fact that certain roles in the party were unattended to and b) both are largely still beginners and learning the ropes despite having played for a year (keep in mind that my players are my younger siblings both 14 and 12 years of age).
I have a character who's an old wizard. I described him to my table as having long white hair, a blue peaked cap... and if you picked up on that, yes. As I told them "Imagine if Gandalf was an asshole." He's LN.
In my favorite TTRPG, Blade of the Iron Throne, the book explicitly encourages players to lean into tropes and cliches. It's directly inspired by old school swords and sorcery and thrives on cheesy pulp fare. As for the DMPC thing, one of my favorite campaigns I ever played featured a DMPC. In fact, we asked for it. It was a scifi game and we only had two players to start with. We bought a ship on credit and our whole game was about doing shady jobs for our mysterious benefactor to pay off the ship. Only problem? Neither of us thought to take the piloting skill. So we asked the DM if he'd make a pilot for us, and she ended up being a full-on member of the team. He played her as if she were a normal party member and was almost too good at not abusing his meta-knowledge as the DM. It was super fun and we all loved her!
My roommate and I once played as Hilda and Caspar from FE:3H in a campaign. We just directly ported them over. And then of course, built and adapted their backstories and lives to fit the world, magic system, and what they were doing (the party played as cast and crew in a theatre troupe). It was wildly fun. We knew these characters so well, knew they would bounce of other characters well, and then built something new and a little different, giving them different struggles and relationships. I can’t imagine that campaign without either of them. In fact, most of my rpg characters have some basis/inspiration from existing characters. The only thing to be careful of is being afraid to cut them loose and letting them become their own character going in a different direction than the original.
I'd extend the "ripping off" argument to include "being cliché" as well. There's nothing wrong with a "boring, generic" campaign, where the PCs are a party of heroes who go against the BBEG. There's nothing wrong with meeting in a tavern. There's nothing wrong with playing a muscleheaded barbarian or a promiscuous bard. As long as you mesh well with the other players and keep it in mind that TTRPGs are collaborative games, even the most "clichéd" story can be an epic adventure, because it's YOUR story.
Indeed, there's something unique with using a cliche/trope into a dnd game, you're the one in control of it. Tho on the other side, I think it's fair to be bored of having the same thing at your table over and over. Like I'm bored of seeing hexblade warlocks as that's been 9/10 warlocks I've played alongside with.
While waiting for my next Vampire the Masquerade game to finally get off the ground, I've been continually writing and developing my guy. The doc for him is nearing 15 pages now, but I'm aware of how much that is lol. So there's a one-page write up at the top for my ST's sake. A lot of the detail in the full thing is just for me, for my own fun in delving that deeply into his life. Especially because writing is something I love to do! So I'm not actually expecting the ST to read the entire thing if they don't want to - though knowing my ST... they probably still will at some point lol (LOVE YOU ALLY! Best ST!
I agree! DMPC's, when done right, can be a great addition to a game. I'm currently in a game with a pretty large party (at any given time, we've had between five and seven players), but nobody really wanted to be a dedicated healer. (We had a couple of partial casters who could provide minor healing, but that's it.) So the DM gave us a cleric 'helper' to follow us around and provide healing. And I think that's the key to a DMPC: they're SUPPORT- sidekicks- not main characters. Best that they are healers so the party can take the lead in combat. MAYBE they can tank, as long as they're not doing too much of the damage output. And this goes for out-of-combat, too. The DMPC should not be the one doing all the talking or leading the group. The DMPC in our game practically doesn't exist during social encounters, so that the player characters can drive the narrative. Remember, the player characters are the heroes (loosely speaking... depending on the game). If the DMPC is stealing their thunder- in or out of combat- that's when there's a problem.
Two of my usual rules for PC generation in my games relevant to the "edgy" issue are 1 No pizza cutters (all edge, no point) and 2 Remember this is a team sport. As long as people remember to have an in-universe point and consider the other players (both in term of interacting in-character and being aware of what folks are comfortable out of character), there isn't usually a problem. In the rip-off issue: Some of my most well-received games have been rip-offs of stuff. The players haven't always realised it until later. The intro story I ran to a new fantasy setting was basically a medieval version of Predator 2 (although my players told me it was Beowolf as a police-procedural). Also had a similar experience to your One-Piece moment where a comedy-horror game I was running got called an edgier Gravity Falls long before I ever watched that series. I feel what you're describing as a DMPC has more in common with a tag-along NPC rather than a true DMPC.
I always include a bunch of DMPCs in my games and then let my players pick who they like (be it one person or many) and let them bring them along. I just make sure they are always a level under the party, take a passive role in scenes (talking mostly when talked to by players or if I as the GM want to give them a hint or nudge them in a direction without just word of goding it and 'forcing' them to do anything) and only let them bring one buddy along at a time. (Switching out between quests if they have a bunch they super like and sending down time with all there friends together.) And my players love that stuff! And I love getting to RP off them a little while still letting them be the main characters and heroes! Just make the GMPC the Alfred or Commissioner Gorden to the parties Justice League rather then... Superman or Batman. (Or Robin if they are okay with letting you be involved in a support role.)
I think "ripping things off" is mostly fine as long as you're willing to file off the serial numbers, as it were. Bare minimum, change the name, but it's fine to take a lot of draw from other sources. As for DMPCs, sometimes they can be helpful to fill a role in a party that's okay with it. I'm running a duet game with a buddy, and they're playing a purely support character, which makes combat pretty difficult for them, so we wound up pairing them with a DMPC after they asked around in character for help in a fight they knew they were going into.
My current Dragonborn Blood Hunter is literally Sherlock Holmes, Ghost Hunter and I’ve run a game that was literally Warehouse 13. Stealing from media is a time honored tradition. The only trouble from it is when you are trying to reenact the character’s story with no regard for the game you’ve put them in. Adapting for the new narrative is super important!!
My DNPC is usually either someone they return to often (their personal armorer, for instance) orr as a tutorial character for newer players. Learning D&D is like learning a new language, just doing it
As a DM, I would rather my players be over-invested instead of under-invested. I said as much to somebody in my group who was conscious about writing too much (he enjoys writing and world-building and all that good stuff). As a player, I can understand getting really invested in my character. I played Isaac Snowdale, my human fighter/paladin, for four years in one campaign, learning and growing as a player alongside him. Once that campaign ended, I admit I got a little misty-eyed, because Isaac had finished his quest and made it home safe against all odds. Funnily enough, Percy from Critical Role informed a lot of my fighter's characterisation, and my current genasi warlock takes a lot of cues from Jester Lavorre. So there's nothing wrong with "ripping off" other things, so long as you actually do something with it.
On ripoffs, a DM I'm playing with has been doing something that's getting the best reactions from the party. She made a Jester ripoff... But it's actually a character who's not like Jester at all. It's a water genasi who's pretending to be a tiefling because she thinks that's cooler. And she's deliberately trying to act "like Jester". We've been joking that critical role is probably an IP that exists in universe for the game, but it's very much a meta joke about "people trying to play as Jester in their own games". It's fantastic, and the joke always lands. And we actually became pretty attached to our fake Jester.
0:50 The reason you shouldn't play an 'Edgy' character is twofold: Making a character that won't work with the party, and making a character that won't work with the tone. So try to keep the edge to what the campaign's tone can withstand and make your character willing to work with others - even if grudgingly. JLA Batman is indeed a good example. People complain about expy characters? I've been... pretty open about a lot of my inspirations and I've definitely been in campaigns that were pretty open about their inspirations. Also you can just like. Play a campaign in a setting, if you want. That's a thing you can do. You can spend on as much or as little effort converting as you want. 5:25 Honestly the thing hindering you from playing Danerys Targaryen (very sp?) is that GoT is mostly politics and little mano-a-mano combat, and D&D is... the opposite. 6:36 Hmm. I will admit, the MASSIVE CAMPAIGN LOREDUMP is rather painful, especially because most DM's don't have the editing skills of WOTC or Paizo to make a setting book palatable. I don't know as I'd ever want to make 10 pages of character backstory. For one, I'm not sure how long that character will last, for another, I tend to have a bit of 'playing by ear' in the first few sessions. And I know the chance of me going back and correcting it is tragically low. ... also I feel a bit burned from that 'start at 13th level' campaign where my character backstory made things crash and burn a bit. Mostly my fault, a bit of 'well they're 13th level they've probably done *a lot* of stuff.' 10:57 Oh, yeah I think that's it. DMPCs are problematic when they *could do this without the players*. I don't... entirely condemn the 'playing vicariously through NPCs' even - the DM is *also* a roleplayer - but a DMPC should, like the other player characters - not hog the spotlight, and not be overpowered. What I need to remind myself is that this applies to 'all NPCs collectively' not just one. No making 8 DMPCs, whatever level they are. 13:00 This a warning in a very specific kind of game. A very *game* focused kind of game. Where your characters are interchangable piles of stats but... no, D&D is as much a collaborative storytelling exercise as it is a simulated world as it is a gameplay exercise. I've played 'roguelike D&D' before where the entire point is to fight your way through a randomly generated dungeon with non-character piles of stats, and that can be fun, but I wouldn't call it anything like the 'proper' way to play!
Whenever I run a group with less than four players, I usually deploy a DMPC to help with balance as well as get the party thinking on what they want to do in situations. I'll have the DMPC ask the other PCs what the course of action is. Y'know, I make that DMPC a Robin of sorts to their Batman.
After my only DND campaign ends; I am gonna run a star finder game that's 1930s in space and I am also gonna throw into it many elements of Leiji Matsumoto's work (RIP Leiji Matsumoto. :( ) Works such as Galaxy Express 999, Space Battleship Yamato, Space Captain Harlock, Queen Esmeraldas, etc and elements of Macross, Gundam, Legend of the Galactic Heroes and put it all into a blender and make some sweet sweet smoothies. Yum.
The problem with these ported over characters come when the player expects everything about the character to transfer over as well. The most common version of this is main character syndrome. The character they are basing their character on is the chosen one child of prophecy main character et cetera and they expect their character in the game to be that too. They want the character to work like they work in whatever source material they are borrowing from even if that makes no sense, would make them absurdly overpowered or would effectively make the other characters into supporting cast in their story. That tends to happen quite a bit with players who turn in these lengthy backstories as well. Actually using their backstory would effectively make the whole campaign revolve around them and they will expect you to use their backstory. Not all players who write long backstories do this but the number who do is not insignificant. Never is a strong word but, in this case, I agree with it. A DMPC is not just a recurring NPC, It is exactly what the name suggests. It is the DM's player character. It's not an NPC. It's a PC run by the DM. That's why they are called DMPCs and not just NPCs. There is a large, ignored middle ground between apathy and caring too much. Caring at all and caring too much are not the same thing. That phrase "too much" is in there for a reason. This is not framing caring as a bad thing. It's framing obsession as a bad thing and it is a bad thing.
I would just like to say that I am actually pretty confused over the hatred over DMPCs to be honest. See when I stated with RPGs we didn't even use the term DMPC it was just an NPC accompanying the party. Typically the issue was that in most RPGs healing as the purview of a specific class or build. RPG characters nowadays tend to be a lot more well rounded and in some cases more self sufficient in a general sense even if there is still a team dynamic. At any rate in any game from AD&D to say Role Master or even Palladium it was not uncommon for everyone to be some kind of warrior or wizard or flashy damage dealing character and few people to want to play the cleric, even after specialty clerics made the class overpowered and multi-talented in 2E AD&D. I've also found as GM that having a character with the party oftentimes let's me prod the party along if they start to slow down, or occasionally provide advice or observations if they seem lost. The only issue is typically I only provide such guidance from an IC perspective and sometimes I've had the occasional issue with the PCs thinking such advice was from "on high" and the advice of the GM rather than just an attempt to maybe get them thinking in a different direction. Right now I generally seem to have to provide thief/rogue types for the group I'm in to avoid the party from grinding to a halt every time they need something like Disable Device (locks and traps in Pathfinder) or something that requires a bit of finesses. My last few NPCs, or I guess DMPCs were specifically created once the party solidified to fill that need. I have heard a lot of the RP Horror stories about DMPCs and of course I saw the term first being used a few years ago when I was looking to play or build a group off of "Giant In The Playground" (a gaming site) which is where the group I currently GM for has it's origins. Prior to that I never heard it put that way. To be honest I have gamed enough where I have had similar experiences, but they have generally been rare. Indeed probably my most intense "D&D Horror Story" would be the result of such a character and part of it sort of came from me working under the assumption that it was a harmless support character, although as I understand the situation it started as that. To keep it brief for anyone that might care, it was one of my two attempts to play in an Ancient India setting as Dragon Magazine had covered 2E AD&D kits and stuff for that kind of a setting. The first attempt was just a bad game, though I admit I wasn't at my best then either for a lot of reasons, and it did have a terrible NPC bard guy, but he pretty much did nothing wrong other than be redundant with my PC (and better at everything which I didn't understand at the time) who died a kind of absurd death. The only reason why this game is noteworthy is the GM's wife had this more-beautiful than Henali Celanil character who somehow had an undead arm who never actually appeared in game, though I guess she was going to play eventually before I left the group. Make note of that for anyone navigating this text wall. The second game though I was playing in though there was this whole issue where the GM's NPC was apparently also somehow his PC from another group someone else was GMing with him, and the intent was to cross everything over. He also had a live in girlfriend who had a suspiciously similar character who was another godly elven beauty who was a bladesinger with an undead arm that granted her 24 strength and vampirism (converts some damage from every blow into healing or temporary hit points) with every hit, and she was weirdly into the most extreme sorts of S&M and let's just say she talked about it frequently. I sort of had some kinks in the same area, but let's just say she took it to a disturbing level and also had a massive fetish for serial killers and was amazed I knew so much about them given that I was a Forensics major in school. This should have been a warning sign, yes, but the game was pretty normal, we were doing quests around Ancient India and trying to make Soma to commune with the gods. My character was flirting with another PC who was playing a Kali-worshipping Assassin who was I guess socially acceptable in this setting but nothing overt was going on. Well at any rate we basically camped, and everything was normal until the DM PC throws this dust into the campfire that causes this massive paralytic dust cloud, and then said female character finally joins the group dressed in an S&M outfit and they both pretty much subdue anyone who is left as we were low on spells and pretty much none of the fighter types were in armor. The fact that a monk did some pretty impressive damage to said female bladesinger before going down is pretty much how I know about that vampirism thing and what her strength score apparently was. At any rate the DM PC and our "new arrival" then run around and execute everyone in the party (two people left immediatly) except for me and the Kali player who have been paralyzed. What next happens can basically be described as as pseudo interactive torture porn, before that was a term. It was basically highly sexualized torture and murder, and I will not bother to describe the details here, but let's say the girlfriend acually conferred with me (that's right) on how plausible certain things they wanted to do to us were, and was comparing them to some actual murders. It turns out they claimed this uh "surprise" was not actually planned it was based on the other game, where the female elf who was of course in love with the DM PC had been god cursed to be evil (like this wasn't her tendency anyway) and they needed to conduct this horrific ritual to get another god to reverse it, so they decided the easiest way to solve the problem was to murder this entire gaming group as it was in the same extended universe, steal all the Soma we had for communion with a rival evil god, and then tell the other GM that they had fulfilled the requirements for her to go back to merely being CN as opposed to outright CE and merely a recreational sadist (seriously). We were totally invited to the other group since this one was over, and they were hoping people would leave as they could only handle so many more players, and we'd totally love this other GM. Needless to say neither I, or the Kali player, ever had anything to do with them after this session but we did get offers for a few months afterwards. To put it bluntly though that is the only thing (as horrible as it was) that comes close to one of these kinds of stories everyone else tells. As a result I just don't get it.... also to this day I sort of wonder how two gaming groups in close proximity ran the same alternative kind of setting, and also had a female elf with an undead arm. The coincidence there really sort of gets me, because I asked, and I can find no connection between the two groups. I only saw the second one, but the original from the game run by this guy called Rusty (who was basically okay, we just didn't hit it off, partially my fault) whose wife played one, was described almost identically.
The main reason i don't like long backstories is because in the games i run it is assumed that PCs aren't that experienced yet when the campaign starts and that their story is going to happen while we play. I don't really mind long descriptions of places or characters related to the PC, but long and resolved character arcs are a big no no. There is only so much crazy stuff that can make sense happening to a character before they are level 1... and anything you write that doesn't end up being relevant in the game might as well not have been written at all. I will do my best as a GM to integrate as much stuff from my player's backstories into the campaign and make it relevant at same point, but a 20 pages backstory is likely too much material for just one of my PCs.
Agreed on all points. I don't think you're describing a DMPC, though. A DMPC would probably need to be basically a pc. I couldn't imagine a player being happy playing a quest giver who doesn't actually participate in the quests.
I remember I once wanted to make an edgelord, a scourge aasimar blood hunter who had this religious zealot/angel of death thing going on, and the big thing was that I wanted to be tastefully edgy. I would essentially keep her downplayed but a bit campy since the campaign was generally a bit lighter hearted but would veer into darker stuff from time to time. She actually ended up being really great for the party dynamic, as during her time with them she would usually solve difficult moral conundrums. Big emphasis on "during her time with them" because I had to leave that campaign due to my work schedule. I did later recycle her as a DMPC in my Frostmaiden campaign, with her being like, decades older than her player character appearance to justify her being much weaker than she was back then. I didn't have her do a whole lot, she ultimately followed the party's lead and became fit nicely into the party dynamic until I eventually wrote her out because it was a perfect time to remove her from the story. She served two main functions as DMPC: first, she was to fill the spot of a player that had to leave and whose character I had written out. I wanted to wait until a certain major event in the campaign where I felt the players would reach a certain power level that I would eventually remove her, kinda like taking training wheels off a bike. Second, she kept dialogue moving forward. Most of my players are new and a bit shy about roleplay, but we're all good friends so this didn't happen too too much, but if it did happen she would say something to keep the conversation moving. She wasn't a main character, but she wasn't just a combat bot. She had a place, and she fit nicely into it.
To me the line between NPC and DMPC is based on the level of activity (and screentime) the character gets with the players. If they're not there for combat or social interactions (outside special occasions), they're likely NPCs and not DMPCs. If they don't travel with the party, they're more likely to be NPCs than DMPCs. As far as "Caring" vs "Caring too much", you obviously want players (and DM) to care about the game and characters, that's what tends to make the game memorable and fun for everyone. But when I read "Caring too much" my associations immedately go to things like the player who complains when their character takes any damage or the DM who expects the players will be awestruck by the story/NPCs/DMPCs. Railroading and main character syndrome are often the result of "Caring too much".
"Min maxing" is often code for "wants a character able to survive combat" I find. Like...ok, go ahead and play your wizard with a negative intelligence modifier if you want, but don't make me feel bad for having a warlock with high dex and charisma because I want to play this character for more than one session.
For a long time until recently I felt really uncomfortable with DMPCs. My first GMs didn't do those. But I had two friends who played in a different group and would tell me about it. And what they told me horrified me. Looking back I guess it was beecause they were generally kind of problem players and in a group of people with problems it seemed like a horrible idea. Then came DSA and our GM had a DMPC... I hated her. GM made her a witch with seer-powers to explain why she knew things. And she knew EVERYTHING. On one side she was edgy and always pushing us away but at the same time commanding us as if we were her character's chess pieces. My character had a few secrets (she had the medium flaw which meant she is easily possesed by ghosts, and actually came from a noble family from aneighbouring country). But the DMPC forced those secrets out of her within the first few days openly threatining me to tell or she would. So when our current Pathfinder GM introduced DMPCs I was really sceptical. But they are wonderful. Helpful, mostly support, fitting in well while leaving everyone the room they need to be and to shine. It feels like just a friend added, important plot points rarely falls to the DMPC alone, instead during interaction with our characters. Some leave, some we ask for to stay. I can say without a doubt that I really like those DMPCs.
I made an edgy cleric based off RPG horror story tropes. She became one of my player's favorite NPCs ever, and she's one of my favorite characters. She's an edgy, murderous, weeby dork who had a hard time fitting in. You can make things work if you try.
I think the biggest divide between good and bad DMPCs (aside from how well the party tolerates them) is asking really if the campaign wouldn't be better off without the PCs if the DMPC is around. If no, then the PCs are the ones driving the plot, and the DMPC isn't hogging the spotlight. If yes because the DMPC is doing all the story bits and is doing most of the fighting, then said DM is better off writing a novel than DMing a game.
I think the main difference of opinion on DMPCs is really just over the definition of the term. Pretty sure I've heard some YTers define it such that if the character isn't a problem, isn't being forced on players who'd rather not have them around, then it's not a DMPC according to them. Personally, I don't know what the definition should be, much less where the line is between long-term NPCs and DMPCs 🤷♀
If anyone reads this, I'd like advices on my first DMPC. My PCs are working as private investigators. The campaign is an episodical mistery series that might gain a main plot later on. The DMPC is their boss. Warheit (truth, in german) is a tiefflin paladin of solune, and a mess. He's meant to be an aid to the players and a comic relief as his oath of vengeance puts him in the mindset of helping anyone, even if it doesen't pay well and he's continuously exhausted and hungover. Think of him as batman, crossed with any hot mess detective. His first appearance would be grabed by a sentient tree as he went alone to investigate a missing children case in the woods. The PCs are temporarily hired helps that went sent to him so they could get their job intervew and get payed at least to get there and come back. I will just let him cal for the PCs, fall hung head down at their height and as "Citizen ! Got fire ?" Any ideas to make him compelling and not hoging spotlight ?
I'm not sure if this advice is coming too late, but it sounds like your boss guy is very wrapped up in ensuring he fulfills his oath as best as he can. Playing him as someone who's really wrapped up in his own thoughts/is maybe too preoccupied with a couple of other cases he's working all at the same time could help give him more of a "will speak when spoken to" quality and prevent him from having "too much" of a presence to the point that he feels like another party member with all of the same decision making abilities as a real player character.
@@SeymourDisapproves That makes sense. He might get in over what I would appreciate. I will bear that in mind and make him an optional companion (what I already had in mind for several other NPC, as the group is low in number and requested to hire mercenaries.) My approach is about playing with the fourth wall and let players makes choices their characters won't have a say into. For example, if the players want to play with Warheit, he will impose himself into the PC team, if they don't like him, he'll keep doing other things and let them do their work.
I make dmpcs all the time. And their always underpowered or have a quirks that make them less helpful in combat. There's a chance of fainting before combat or being old with chronic arthritis. Poor eyesight or deaf in one ear. Low wisdom so they're easily duped. List goes on.
Dm pc's arnt bad. As a player I like to make characters with npcs that the dm can use alo g side the party and give them a personality. Example. Akira my druid/sorc has a best friend young dire wolf called Lilith. I control her in combat and for important stuff. But the dm gives her her personality and charecter traits. But the dm uses her to give us plot points reliving to her senses. Hearing/smell and or just typical shenanigans a young curious wolf would get into 😂. Like sticking her head in a random jar filled with blue dust...turned out to be someone's ashes 😅
I think the issue with dmpcs is how vague the term is these days. To me a dmpc is a dungeon master player character. If you are not trying to be a PC or replace one then you do not have a dmpc. You have a major NPC or a recurring cast member or something to that effect. In that context the idea that the DM should be focused on their job as the DM and not also secretly try to be a member of the party is sensible advice.
The thing with dmpcs is that best case scenario they add nothing to the game. Of course if you want to redefine them as detailed NPCs you can do that, just don't go around pretending you are speaking the same language as everyone else.
“Don’t be batman” should be elaborated as “if you wanna be batman, be like batman from the justice league cartoon, not batman from the lego batman movie (unless you’re doing it as a joke *and* you’ve cleared with the rest of the table that it would be ok)”
I think ripping things off is bad *if* it's obvious enough that it breaks immersion. If it's done with any sort of subtlety, or done in a way that doesn't break immersion, then it's perfectly fine. Playing a dark and brooding noble with an alter ego that dishes out justice is cool, playing literally batman with 0 changes in fantasy is not.
"That's what my character would do" is another one. Everything your character does should be what your character would do, except for occasional metagaming exceptions for party cohesion. It's only bad when it's used as an excuse for breaking party cohesion or otherwise ruining other players' fun.
With the idea of Batman I think you had the right universe… wrong Batman. Terry McGinnis from Batman Beyond. Dude was edgy and social. Social enough to take down the joker by psycho-analyzing him.
In the end I think it comes down to moderation. When does an NPC become a DNPC? Isn’t the issue really stealing the spotlight and agency from the players? You be edgy without being an antisocial murderhobo. Caring is great…until it becomes obsession. Drawing inspiration from other sources is great but don’t try to create a carbon copy of a character and expect the game world to conform to copying their arc. It’s cool to use them as a starting point but make them your own. Have fun! Knock yourself out! Just think about how it affects everyone else and don’t be a jerk.
Would disagree on the point about ripping off stuff, though only on a semantic level. All rip offs are homages, but not all homages are rip offs. All clichés are tropes, but not all tropes are clichés. All railroady campaigns are linear, but not every linear campaign has to be railroady. We specifically have these words to describe things that are lacking in creativity, originality, and agency to the point of being groanworthy. But if any of these things are executed well, then we just describe them with a positive or neutral word instead.
Indeed, rip ofs are replicas, clones. When you're going one for one rather than being inspired by something. Ye olden days had the issue of drizzt clones being commonplace and not looked upon fondly for a reason. Tho I think similar could be said for other terms in the advices, myself find similar semantic issues with DMPC, a npc tagging along isn't a DMPC, but most DMPCs tags along the party etc.
Saying there's nothing wrong with ripping things off is kinda like saying "It's okay to be an unoriginal hack fraud" when what you mean to say is "There's nothing wrong with wearing your inspirations on your sleeve" The connotation of the term "Rip Off" implies something of inferior quality, there's an inbuilt insult to the language being used. Kinda undermines the point you're trying to make. That's just the way a pedant like me sees it.
But Callie is not an DMPC, it's a important NPC. The key feature of a DMPC is not if they have a character sheet like a playable character, it is that they accompany the party during the adventure and "dungeoning", a its very tempting and east for the DM to abuse this power. Suddenly, they know were the traps are, what the monsters do (and scolds the player for not knowing it) and became the main character of the story, resulting in the DM speaking to himself for hours.
The DMPC is always bad. Always. You think you're getting the experience of being a Player and GM, but you're depriving yourself of the full experience of either, and you're depriving your Players of a GM focused on the game, not their character. Use NPCs. They've been there since the beginning of the game. But the DMPC is always bad. Always.
@@RiveroftheWither You have no idea what you're talking about and show your immaturity and inexperience by throwing an insult rather than forming an argument or coming near a relevant point Have a good day
@@connorwatson6766 I am experiences actually, I've played games with and without DMPCs for years. I have never had a bad DMPC, I literally have a DMPC in my Strahd campaign. She mostly exists just to be a healer and sometimes we use her connection to the church for our benefit, she takes a back seat on all other things. To say "all DMPCs are bad" is blatant short sightedness and inexperience on your part.
Took me a while to learn that everything has already been made. I used to paralize myself with fear in attempts to make characters or stories original. I'm glad I learned that nothing I make is new. I have so much fun creating stuff now without really caring if it's similar to something that exists. Plus it's even better when others find similarities. Nice conversation starters.
My favourite DND campaign I ever played was a game where we escorted a DMPC! He was part of the group, but essentially unable to fight so we were in the spotlight, but built links with them as well, and it was a lot of fun!
An interesting piece of advice I can give on the "DMPC" front is that forming the campaign story around a character study can be one of the most compelling ways to write. Players tend to get attached to their allies, especially the ones with a lot of complexity and personality to them, so you can really take that to another level by having a story centered on trying to understand the inner workings of a centrally important NPC and making all the story-changing decisions based around what conclusions the players draw about them. That's what I'm running in my current campaign, and I've gotten very positive feedback over it
The backstory length is something I understand. I tend to make some expansive backstories, but I always have what is called the elevator pitch version too that covers the essentials.
as my friend and GM for a few games when I ran a Dead Space-ish Starfinder homebrew said. "You took the time to do Dead Space but file the serial numbers off, so there was effort involved."
I really liked Kalia in shadow! Her being based on Annie makes WAY more sense than it should
Oh Crispy, you just brought my favorite version of Batman. Kevin Conroy's Batman is legend tier to begin with, but during JLU he really hit his stride.
I had a DM that was a complete doormat to anyone who sounded even a little sure. To the point where we had a time wizard who allowed themselves to re-roll every roll "once each type of roll per turn, but it's OK because this class has low AC and HP". He had 17 AC and got to re-roll every kind of saving throw. Then the second anyone questioned him he'd site a source book no one else had, the second one of us got access to the book he quit, left the server and blocked everyone on it because it turned out his class could only re-roll 1 specific thing once per long rest.
So many people seem to be absolutely zero tolerance about DMPCs. I've played in a lot of games with them, and they're usually fine. When done right, they're around to just flesh out a needed role in the party, and to be there for player characters to role-play off of. It's when they REALLY act like a PC that they're problematic. They shouldn't be solving puzzles or moral quandaries; those things should be up to the players. They shouldn't be the spotlight. But they can be fleshed out and can become important to the PCs. And sometimes the DM can use them to hint at the party that they're about to do something that really isn't a good idea.
Really, most absolutes in games are silly (with the exception of actual abusive behavior). There's almost always nuance and ways to balance things the right way.
I made the edgiest edgelord to ever edge in my DnD game and she's often the highlight of the party. She's a soft spoken caring mother figure to the rest of the party wrapped in an edgy Goth mommy package with overly edgy and dark powers (hexblade warlock). I love playing her so much
My group almost always have a dmpc regardless of whos gming. They always take a kind of follower role, usually good in a fight with some utility skills, but only mosty does things when the party asks them to. They won't pick the lock even if they can until the party has failed to do so or we ask them to do it for us. They are fully part of the party, but are very passive until told to be active
Idea for a DMPC: a *Damsel Errant.* In chivalric literature, a damsel errant is a maiden who seeks out questing knights for help. She might have some power of her own to support the knight, but she needs someone else's help to achieve her goal.
I freaking love the Negotiation system in the SMT series. So I ported it over while tweaking it a bit to fit D&D's Gameplay. And my GM loved that idea and how I wanted to play a Pacifist. You know your GM is a great one when they encourage the ideas you have and they want to see you try new things out in a Campaign.
I like to think every character starts with a concept or idea, even the ones you pull inspiration from or blatantly rip off. And when I'm making suggestions to other players regarding character backstories, I recommend and suggest, but never demand from them, they write out 3 to 7 SHORT paragraphs, and maybe have few bullet points, because it makes it easier for you and other people to do a quick check on the important parts of your character's personal story. Granted, I also like to include a caveat about that being a general rule of thumb for characters that are under level seven.
If you're writing a story, which can be a great way to introduce a world you made to a broader audience, then each character having multiple pages fo their backgrounds and profiles is fine, and I actually encourage others to write out character profile summaries if they are writing a story or making a game, it helps keep things a bit more concise and cohesive.
Maybe sometime Crispy could do a video on practices and habits RPG players should pick up; given the nature of the subject matter, he could turn it into a collab with other content creators. I'm sure Den of the Drake, JoCat, Pointy Hat, and Crit Crab would like the idea of doing a video like that themselves, and possibly be on board with doing that sort of video as a collab.
A good DMPC/NPC Ally can be an amazing addition to a game. One of my favorite campaigns had a few of them, and they added a lot of value and attachment for our characters to the story.
That 2nd one is a big one.
With my first completed character under my belt, I tried being more experimental and you would not believe the stuff I've been called unoriginal for. One person was so goddamn angry I used the term "Great Old One," OUTSIDE OF MY BACKSTORY while summarizing it, saying how I didn't have enough imagination for this hobby. Like calm tf down lmao
My one real experience with D&D (maybe 3rd edition, I don’t remember now), my friend who was DMing created a DMPC and it was an overall fun game. He didn’t make his character over powered, didn’t hog the spotlight or anything. I have nothing but fond memories of the campaign.
I'd say with backstories the length isn't a problem. It's when they give you a backstory for their character before they've even heard about the world. As for people against ripping off stuff that's hilarious considering how much of official dnd is exactly that from its very beginnings.
always see DMPC's getting a bad rap, at least from the channels I watch. I'm glad to see a much more level headed middle of the road perspective, and I'm glad that you personally had a lot of success with your own recurring character as a DM. Quite inspiring, and proof that they're not all bad.
With every single roleplaying thing its the same case as with medicine.
Its a matter of using it right whether it will work as itented, be a drug, or a poison
I actually made an edgy character recently, well sorta. It’s edgy in as much as I will ever play edgy. I gave him a tragic and traumatic backstory, looping and making it as foil to the intro the dm told us we would begin with during session 0. But here is the thing, I also thought deeply about his core self and trait. I realized pretty early on that he genuinely loves people. He loves learning more about people and meeting them. One of his childhood dreams was to travel. And then of course the incident happened and he lost his entire family. Survival became his priority and he became a refugee instead. Not remotely how he ever wished to travel. But things settled down again and he relearned to love and trust people again. My character had romances, he took on students, he made friends, he watched his community grow and looked after it. And then an invasion happened and he lost nearly everything all over again. And that’s how the story begins for the campaign. Edgy and tragic right? Except one of the things that continually comes up is how deeply my character’s self worth is tied in to how well he can protect and look after the ones he cares about. In this instance, his party. He is codependent and an enabler, but he also serves the role of mentor for his group. He is sad but friendly and willing to learn and take joy from the travels and new sights and sounds and experiences he gets from his journey. He isn’t a constant stream of doom and gloom. In fact, early on with the party he encouraged them to have fun and join games in the market to shake off the terror of the narrow escape they made from the invasion and the bandits they stumbled into as well. He also gives his trust and care to those who are generous and kind to him and tries to repay it in kind if not exponentially more. So when I say edgy, my character is edgy. He is depressed and has ptsd and anxiety and yet…I never forget his core, that he loves people. He has always loved people. Even when everything is telling him to distance himself so he doesn’t get hurt again, he can’t help but want to love people again. The adage of wishing to love and lost rather than never having loved at all, that suits him a great deal. And it isn’t even romantic love. It’s just a genuinely platonic love and joy he finds in the world. Anyway, just wanted to share that. Most recently he had to face his greatest fear when the party member who has been his best friend for years died in battle. We did manage to bring him back but it took a lot out of my character and I had him have a breakdown over it. I had thought long and hard about how he would react to this particular thing. But yeah, it was nice to explore.
If I may be honest, when I created this character I was facing burnout in my daily life, not directed at dnd, but just in general. So, feeling I didn’t have much energy to make a more cheery and optimistic type of character, I made this one. He is now quite beloved to me and I love playing him. His journey for me is about healing and learning to stand better on his own two feet with more self confidence. He’ll get there. I intend to make sure of that.
I'm honestly planning on using a DMPC for my campaign of Scion 2e, he's essentially going to be Lobo from DC comics, the son of an aztec wargod (that's how Scion works, children of mythological gods). He's going to be there helping out with his fists to the best of his ability, slightly annoying until eventually he succumbs to the hunger that is part of every aztec warrior and do such horrific acts that the heroes will have no choice but to fight him...
The original idea was to use him to show the players that it's okay to use your surroundings: yes, throw a car at the minotaur if that is what it takes. But also, don't destroy to much of people's property???
I run dark fantasy and people called my group edgy like it's bad thing, sure we had pyromaniac, sadist etc. but who cares, we had fun. And the group dynamic was great, nobody was lone wolf they all had fun torturing people together
agreed. I also play Shadowrun, Warhammer 40k and "dark side" campaigns in several other rpg systems. You can easily play morally very grey or outright evil characters in a group setting as long as you remember that even "bad guys" need allies and even friends... or at least loyal minions. And you can only inspire loyalty and trustworthy co-conspirators if you don't stab the backs of your inner circle... and those campaigns thrive off the mindset that the player group is the inner circle of a BBEG or the core criminal gang with insane loyalty towards each other, because "snitches get stitches" and the feeling that the other group members are the "only people that really get you" when you're all social outcasts.
@@hopejohnson6347 Even going against each other can work, I played Alien cinematic mode (really recommend) where agendas sometimes go against each other and it was great. My agenda was to bring back alien at any cost (others including PCs are expendable) someone else's agenda was to destroy aliens (at any cost even if it means killing PCs) and it was amazing. You have no idea what is other people's goal and you're trying to achieve your goal without raising any suspicion
I have a DMPC in my 5e game, but the only reason I made her was becase a) there's only 2 people in the party and I wanted to make sure they didn't get completely hindered over the fact that certain roles in the party were unattended to and b) both are largely still beginners and learning the ropes despite having played for a year (keep in mind that my players are my younger siblings both 14 and 12 years of age).
I have a character who's an old wizard. I described him to my table as having long white hair, a blue peaked cap... and if you picked up on that, yes. As I told them "Imagine if Gandalf was an asshole." He's LN.
In my favorite TTRPG, Blade of the Iron Throne, the book explicitly encourages players to lean into tropes and cliches. It's directly inspired by old school swords and sorcery and thrives on cheesy pulp fare.
As for the DMPC thing, one of my favorite campaigns I ever played featured a DMPC. In fact, we asked for it. It was a scifi game and we only had two players to start with. We bought a ship on credit and our whole game was about doing shady jobs for our mysterious benefactor to pay off the ship. Only problem? Neither of us thought to take the piloting skill. So we asked the DM if he'd make a pilot for us, and she ended up being a full-on member of the team. He played her as if she were a normal party member and was almost too good at not abusing his meta-knowledge as the DM. It was super fun and we all loved her!
My roommate and I once played as Hilda and Caspar from FE:3H in a campaign. We just directly ported them over. And then of course, built and adapted their backstories and lives to fit the world, magic system, and what they were doing (the party played as cast and crew in a theatre troupe). It was wildly fun. We knew these characters so well, knew they would bounce of other characters well, and then built something new and a little different, giving them different struggles and relationships. I can’t imagine that campaign without either of them. In fact, most of my rpg characters have some basis/inspiration from existing characters. The only thing to be careful of is being afraid to cut them loose and letting them become their own character going in a different direction than the original.
I'd extend the "ripping off" argument to include "being cliché" as well. There's nothing wrong with a "boring, generic" campaign, where the PCs are a party of heroes who go against the BBEG. There's nothing wrong with meeting in a tavern. There's nothing wrong with playing a muscleheaded barbarian or a promiscuous bard. As long as you mesh well with the other players and keep it in mind that TTRPGs are collaborative games, even the most "clichéd" story can be an epic adventure, because it's YOUR story.
Indeed, there's something unique with using a cliche/trope into a dnd game, you're the one in control of it. Tho on the other side, I think it's fair to be bored of having the same thing at your table over and over. Like I'm bored of seeing hexblade warlocks as that's been 9/10 warlocks I've played alongside with.
While waiting for my next Vampire the Masquerade game to finally get off the ground, I've been continually writing and developing my guy. The doc for him is nearing 15 pages now, but I'm aware of how much that is lol. So there's a one-page write up at the top for my ST's sake. A lot of the detail in the full thing is just for me, for my own fun in delving that deeply into his life. Especially because writing is something I love to do! So I'm not actually expecting the ST to read the entire thing if they don't want to - though knowing my ST... they probably still will at some point lol (LOVE YOU ALLY! Best ST!
I agree! DMPC's, when done right, can be a great addition to a game.
I'm currently in a game with a pretty large party (at any given time, we've had between five and seven players), but nobody really wanted to be a dedicated healer. (We had a couple of partial casters who could provide minor healing, but that's it.) So the DM gave us a cleric 'helper' to follow us around and provide healing. And I think that's the key to a DMPC: they're SUPPORT- sidekicks- not main characters. Best that they are healers so the party can take the lead in combat. MAYBE they can tank, as long as they're not doing too much of the damage output.
And this goes for out-of-combat, too. The DMPC should not be the one doing all the talking or leading the group. The DMPC in our game practically doesn't exist during social encounters, so that the player characters can drive the narrative.
Remember, the player characters are the heroes (loosely speaking... depending on the game). If the DMPC is stealing their thunder- in or out of combat- that's when there's a problem.
I have a DMPC... she's part of the battle I have one of my players controlling her for the battle.
Two of my usual rules for PC generation in my games relevant to the "edgy" issue are 1 No pizza cutters (all edge, no point) and 2 Remember this is a team sport. As long as people remember to have an in-universe point and consider the other players (both in term of interacting in-character and being aware of what folks are comfortable out of character), there isn't usually a problem.
In the rip-off issue: Some of my most well-received games have been rip-offs of stuff. The players haven't always realised it until later. The intro story I ran to a new fantasy setting was basically a medieval version of Predator 2 (although my players told me it was Beowolf as a police-procedural). Also had a similar experience to your One-Piece moment where a comedy-horror game I was running got called an edgier Gravity Falls long before I ever watched that series.
I feel what you're describing as a DMPC has more in common with a tag-along NPC rather than a true DMPC.
I always include a bunch of DMPCs in my games and then let my players pick who they like (be it one person or many) and let them bring them along. I just make sure they are always a level under the party, take a passive role in scenes (talking mostly when talked to by players or if I as the GM want to give them a hint or nudge them in a direction without just word of goding it and 'forcing' them to do anything) and only let them bring one buddy along at a time. (Switching out between quests if they have a bunch they super like and sending down time with all there friends together.) And my players love that stuff! And I love getting to RP off them a little while still letting them be the main characters and heroes! Just make the GMPC the Alfred or Commissioner Gorden to the parties Justice League rather then... Superman or Batman. (Or Robin if they are okay with letting you be involved in a support role.)
I think "ripping things off" is mostly fine as long as you're willing to file off the serial numbers, as it were. Bare minimum, change the name, but it's fine to take a lot of draw from other sources. As for DMPCs, sometimes they can be helpful to fill a role in a party that's okay with it. I'm running a duet game with a buddy, and they're playing a purely support character, which makes combat pretty difficult for them, so we wound up pairing them with a DMPC after they asked around in character for help in a fight they knew they were going into.
My current Dragonborn Blood Hunter is literally Sherlock Holmes, Ghost Hunter and I’ve run a game that was literally Warehouse 13. Stealing from media is a time honored tradition.
The only trouble from it is when you are trying to reenact the character’s story with no regard for the game you’ve put them in. Adapting for the new narrative is super important!!
My DNPC is usually either someone they return to often (their personal armorer, for instance) orr as a tutorial character for newer players. Learning D&D is like learning a new language, just doing it
Thanks Crispy
As a DM, I would rather my players be over-invested instead of under-invested. I said as much to somebody in my group who was conscious about writing too much (he enjoys writing and world-building and all that good stuff).
As a player, I can understand getting really invested in my character. I played Isaac Snowdale, my human fighter/paladin, for four years in one campaign, learning and growing as a player alongside him. Once that campaign ended, I admit I got a little misty-eyed, because Isaac had finished his quest and made it home safe against all odds.
Funnily enough, Percy from Critical Role informed a lot of my fighter's characterisation, and my current genasi warlock takes a lot of cues from Jester Lavorre. So there's nothing wrong with "ripping off" other things, so long as you actually do something with it.
Omg I love Annie Edison. 😍
On ripoffs, a DM I'm playing with has been doing something that's getting the best reactions from the party. She made a Jester ripoff... But it's actually a character who's not like Jester at all. It's a water genasi who's pretending to be a tiefling because she thinks that's cooler. And she's deliberately trying to act "like Jester". We've been joking that critical role is probably an IP that exists in universe for the game, but it's very much a meta joke about "people trying to play as Jester in their own games". It's fantastic, and the joke always lands. And we actually became pretty attached to our fake Jester.
0:50 The reason you shouldn't play an 'Edgy' character is twofold: Making a character that won't work with the party, and making a character that won't work with the tone. So try to keep the edge to what the campaign's tone can withstand and make your character willing to work with others - even if grudgingly. JLA Batman is indeed a good example.
People complain about expy characters? I've been... pretty open about a lot of my inspirations and I've definitely been in campaigns that were pretty open about their inspirations. Also you can just like. Play a campaign in a setting, if you want. That's a thing you can do. You can spend on as much or as little effort converting as you want.
5:25 Honestly the thing hindering you from playing Danerys Targaryen (very sp?) is that GoT is mostly politics and little mano-a-mano combat, and D&D is... the opposite.
6:36 Hmm. I will admit, the MASSIVE CAMPAIGN LOREDUMP is rather painful, especially because most DM's don't have the editing skills of WOTC or Paizo to make a setting book palatable.
I don't know as I'd ever want to make 10 pages of character backstory. For one, I'm not sure how long that character will last, for another, I tend to have a bit of 'playing by ear' in the first few sessions. And I know the chance of me going back and correcting it is tragically low.
... also I feel a bit burned from that 'start at 13th level' campaign where my character backstory made things crash and burn a bit. Mostly my fault, a bit of 'well they're 13th level they've probably done *a lot* of stuff.'
10:57 Oh, yeah I think that's it. DMPCs are problematic when they *could do this without the players*. I don't... entirely condemn the 'playing vicariously through NPCs' even - the DM is *also* a roleplayer - but a DMPC should, like the other player characters - not hog the spotlight, and not be overpowered.
What I need to remind myself is that this applies to 'all NPCs collectively' not just one. No making 8 DMPCs, whatever level they are.
13:00 This a warning in a very specific kind of game. A very *game* focused kind of game. Where your characters are interchangable piles of stats but... no, D&D is as much a collaborative storytelling exercise as it is a simulated world as it is a gameplay exercise. I've played 'roguelike D&D' before where the entire point is to fight your way through a randomly generated dungeon with non-character piles of stats, and that can be fun, but I wouldn't call it anything like the 'proper' way to play!
Whenever I run a group with less than four players, I usually deploy a DMPC to help with balance as well as get the party thinking on what they want to do in situations. I'll have the DMPC ask the other PCs what the course of action is. Y'know, I make that DMPC a Robin of sorts to their Batman.
After my only DND campaign ends; I am gonna run a star finder game that's 1930s in space and I am also gonna throw into it many elements of Leiji Matsumoto's work (RIP Leiji Matsumoto. :( ) Works such as Galaxy Express 999, Space Battleship Yamato, Space Captain Harlock, Queen Esmeraldas, etc and elements of Macross, Gundam, Legend of the Galactic Heroes and put it all into a blender and make some sweet sweet smoothies. Yum.
The problem with these ported over characters come when the player expects everything about the character to transfer over as well. The most common version of this is main character syndrome. The character they are basing their character on is the chosen one child of prophecy main character et cetera and they expect their character in the game to be that too. They want the character to work like they work in whatever source material they are borrowing from even if that makes no sense, would make them absurdly overpowered or would effectively make the other characters into supporting cast in their story. That tends to happen quite a bit with players who turn in these lengthy backstories as well. Actually using their backstory would effectively make the whole campaign revolve around them and they will expect you to use their backstory. Not all players who write long backstories do this but the number who do is not insignificant. Never is a strong word but, in this case, I agree with it. A DMPC is not just a recurring NPC, It is exactly what the name suggests. It is the DM's player character. It's not an NPC. It's a PC run by the DM. That's why they are called DMPCs and not just NPCs. There is a large, ignored middle ground between apathy and caring too much. Caring at all and caring too much are not the same thing. That phrase "too much" is in there for a reason. This is not framing caring as a bad thing. It's framing obsession as a bad thing and it is a bad thing.
I would just like to say that I am actually pretty confused over the hatred over DMPCs to be honest. See when I stated with RPGs we didn't even use the term DMPC it was just an NPC accompanying the party. Typically the issue was that in most RPGs healing as the purview of a specific class or build. RPG characters nowadays tend to be a lot more well rounded and in some cases more self sufficient in a general sense even if there is still a team dynamic. At any rate in any game from AD&D to say Role Master or even Palladium it was not uncommon for everyone to be some kind of warrior or wizard or flashy damage dealing character and few people to want to play the cleric, even after specialty clerics made the class overpowered and multi-talented in 2E AD&D.
I've also found as GM that having a character with the party oftentimes let's me prod the party along if they start to slow down, or occasionally provide advice or observations if they seem lost. The only issue is typically I only provide such guidance from an IC perspective and sometimes I've had the occasional issue with the PCs thinking such advice was from "on high" and the advice of the GM rather than just an attempt to maybe get them thinking in a different direction. Right now I generally seem to have to provide thief/rogue types for the group I'm in to avoid the party from grinding to a halt every time they need something like Disable Device (locks and traps in Pathfinder) or something that requires a bit of finesses. My last few NPCs, or I guess DMPCs were specifically created once the party solidified to fill that need.
I have heard a lot of the RP Horror stories about DMPCs and of course I saw the term first being used a few years ago when I was looking to play or build a group off of "Giant In The Playground" (a gaming site) which is where the group I currently GM for has it's origins. Prior to that I never heard it put that way. To be honest I have gamed enough where I have had similar experiences, but they have generally been rare. Indeed probably my most intense "D&D Horror Story" would be the result of such a character and part of it sort of came from me working under the assumption that it was a harmless support character, although as I understand the situation it started as that.
To keep it brief for anyone that might care, it was one of my two attempts to play in an Ancient India setting as Dragon Magazine had covered 2E AD&D kits and stuff for that kind of a setting. The first attempt was just a bad game, though I admit I wasn't at my best then either for a lot of reasons, and it did have a terrible NPC bard guy, but he pretty much did nothing wrong other than be redundant with my PC (and better at everything which I didn't understand at the time) who died a kind of absurd death. The only reason why this game is noteworthy is the GM's wife had this more-beautiful than Henali Celanil character who somehow had an undead arm who never actually appeared in game, though I guess she was going to play eventually before I left the group. Make note of that for anyone navigating this text wall.
The second game though I was playing in though there was this whole issue where the GM's NPC was apparently also somehow his PC from another group someone else was GMing with him, and the intent was to cross everything over. He also had a live in girlfriend who had a suspiciously similar character who was another godly elven beauty who was a bladesinger with an undead arm that granted her 24 strength and vampirism (converts some damage from every blow into healing or temporary hit points) with every hit, and she was weirdly into the most extreme sorts of S&M and let's just say she talked about it frequently. I sort of had some kinks in the same area, but let's just say she took it to a disturbing level and also had a massive fetish for serial killers and was amazed I knew so much about them given that I was a Forensics major in school. This should have been a warning sign, yes, but the game was pretty normal, we were doing quests around Ancient India and trying to make Soma to commune with the gods. My character was flirting with another PC who was playing a Kali-worshipping Assassin who was I guess socially acceptable in this setting but nothing overt was going on. Well at any rate we basically camped, and everything was normal until the DM PC throws this dust into the campfire that causes this massive paralytic dust cloud, and then said female character finally joins the group dressed in an S&M outfit and they both pretty much subdue anyone who is left as we were low on spells and pretty much none of the fighter types were in armor. The fact that a monk did some pretty impressive damage to said female bladesinger before going down is pretty much how I know about that vampirism thing and what her strength score apparently was. At any rate the DM PC and our "new arrival" then run around and execute everyone in the party (two people left immediatly) except for me and the Kali player who have been paralyzed.
What next happens can basically be described as as pseudo interactive torture porn, before that was a term. It was basically highly sexualized torture and murder, and I will not bother to describe the details here, but let's say the girlfriend acually conferred with me (that's right) on how plausible certain things they wanted to do to us were, and was comparing them to some actual murders. It turns out they claimed this uh "surprise" was not actually planned it was based on the other game, where the female elf who was of course in love with the DM PC had been god cursed to be evil (like this wasn't her tendency anyway) and they needed to conduct this horrific ritual to get another god to reverse it, so they decided the easiest way to solve the problem was to murder this entire gaming group as it was in the same extended universe, steal all the Soma we had for communion with a rival evil god, and then tell the other GM that they had fulfilled the requirements for her to go back to merely being CN as opposed to outright CE and merely a recreational sadist (seriously). We were totally invited to the other group since this one was over, and they were hoping people would leave as they could only handle so many more players, and we'd totally love this other GM. Needless to say neither I, or the Kali player, ever had anything to do with them after this session but we did get offers for a few months afterwards.
To put it bluntly though that is the only thing (as horrible as it was) that comes close to one of these kinds of stories everyone else tells. As a result I just don't get it.... also to this day I sort of wonder how two gaming groups in close proximity ran the same alternative kind of setting, and also had a female elf with an undead arm. The coincidence there really sort of gets me, because I asked, and I can find no connection between the two groups. I only saw the second one, but the original from the game run by this guy called Rusty (who was basically okay, we just didn't hit it off, partially my fault) whose wife played one, was described almost identically.
The main reason i don't like long backstories is because in the games i run it is assumed that PCs aren't that experienced yet when the campaign starts and that their story is going to happen while we play. I don't really mind long descriptions of places or characters related to the PC, but long and resolved character arcs are a big no no. There is only so much crazy stuff that can make sense happening to a character before they are level 1... and anything you write that doesn't end up being relevant in the game might as well not have been written at all. I will do my best as a GM to integrate as much stuff from my player's backstories into the campaign and make it relevant at same point, but a 20 pages backstory is likely too much material for just one of my PCs.
Agreed on all points. I don't think you're describing a DMPC, though. A DMPC would probably need to be basically a pc. I couldn't imagine a player being happy playing a quest giver who doesn't actually participate in the quests.
Fun fact: In some areas of Swabia "not all bad" is the highest compliment you can get.
I remember I once wanted to make an edgelord, a scourge aasimar blood hunter who had this religious zealot/angel of death thing going on, and the big thing was that I wanted to be tastefully edgy. I would essentially keep her downplayed but a bit campy since the campaign was generally a bit lighter hearted but would veer into darker stuff from time to time. She actually ended up being really great for the party dynamic, as during her time with them she would usually solve difficult moral conundrums.
Big emphasis on "during her time with them" because I had to leave that campaign due to my work schedule. I did later recycle her as a DMPC in my Frostmaiden campaign, with her being like, decades older than her player character appearance to justify her being much weaker than she was back then. I didn't have her do a whole lot, she ultimately followed the party's lead and became fit nicely into the party dynamic until I eventually wrote her out because it was a perfect time to remove her from the story.
She served two main functions as DMPC: first, she was to fill the spot of a player that had to leave and whose character I had written out. I wanted to wait until a certain major event in the campaign where I felt the players would reach a certain power level that I would eventually remove her, kinda like taking training wheels off a bike. Second, she kept dialogue moving forward. Most of my players are new and a bit shy about roleplay, but we're all good friends so this didn't happen too too much, but if it did happen she would say something to keep the conversation moving. She wasn't a main character, but she wasn't just a combat bot. She had a place, and she fit nicely into it.
To me the line between NPC and DMPC is based on the level of activity (and screentime) the character gets with the players.
If they're not there for combat or social interactions (outside special occasions), they're likely NPCs and not DMPCs.
If they don't travel with the party, they're more likely to be NPCs than DMPCs.
As far as "Caring" vs "Caring too much", you obviously want players (and DM) to care about the game and characters, that's what tends to make the game memorable and fun for everyone. But when I read "Caring too much" my associations immedately go to things like the player who complains when their character takes any damage or the DM who expects the players will be awestruck by the story/NPCs/DMPCs. Railroading and main character syndrome are often the result of "Caring too much".
"Min maxing" is often code for "wants a character able to survive combat" I find. Like...ok, go ahead and play your wizard with a negative intelligence modifier if you want, but don't make me feel bad for having a warlock with high dex and charisma because I want to play this character for more than one session.
For a long time until recently I felt really uncomfortable with DMPCs. My first GMs didn't do those. But I had two friends who played in a different group and would tell me about it. And what they told me horrified me. Looking back I guess it was beecause they were generally kind of problem players and in a group of people with problems it seemed like a horrible idea.
Then came DSA and our GM had a DMPC... I hated her. GM made her a witch with seer-powers to explain why she knew things. And she knew EVERYTHING. On one side she was edgy and always pushing us away but at the same time commanding us as if we were her character's chess pieces.
My character had a few secrets (she had the medium flaw which meant she is easily possesed by ghosts, and actually came from a noble family from aneighbouring country). But the DMPC forced those secrets out of her within the first few days openly threatining me to tell or she would.
So when our current Pathfinder GM introduced DMPCs I was really sceptical. But they are wonderful. Helpful, mostly support, fitting in well while leaving everyone the room they need to be and to shine. It feels like just a friend added, important plot points rarely falls to the DMPC alone, instead during interaction with our characters. Some leave, some we ask for to stay. I can say without a doubt that I really like those DMPCs.
Of course DMNPCs aren’t always bad. Xenk was one of my favorite characters in D&D:HAT
I made an edgy cleric based off RPG horror story tropes. She became one of my player's favorite NPCs ever, and she's one of my favorite characters. She's an edgy, murderous, weeby dork who had a hard time fitting in. You can make things work if you try.
I think the biggest divide between good and bad DMPCs (aside from how well the party tolerates them) is asking really if the campaign wouldn't be better off without the PCs if the DMPC is around. If no, then the PCs are the ones driving the plot, and the DMPC isn't hogging the spotlight. If yes because the DMPC is doing all the story bits and is doing most of the fighting, then said DM is better off writing a novel than DMing a game.
I think the main difference of opinion on DMPCs is really just over the definition of the term. Pretty sure I've heard some YTers define it such that if the character isn't a problem, isn't being forced on players who'd rather not have them around, then it's not a DMPC according to them.
Personally, I don't know what the definition should be, much less where the line is between long-term NPCs and DMPCs 🤷♀
If anyone reads this, I'd like advices on my first DMPC.
My PCs are working as private investigators. The campaign is an episodical mistery series that might gain a main plot later on. The DMPC is their boss.
Warheit (truth, in german) is a tiefflin paladin of solune, and a mess. He's meant to be an aid to the players and a comic relief as his oath of vengeance puts him in the mindset of helping anyone, even if it doesen't pay well and he's continuously exhausted and hungover. Think of him as batman, crossed with any hot mess detective.
His first appearance would be grabed by a sentient tree as he went alone to investigate a missing children case in the woods. The PCs are temporarily hired helps that went sent to him so they could get their job intervew and get payed at least to get there and come back.
I will just let him cal for the PCs, fall hung head down at their height and as "Citizen ! Got fire ?"
Any ideas to make him compelling and not hoging spotlight ?
I'm not sure if this advice is coming too late, but it sounds like your boss guy is very wrapped up in ensuring he fulfills his oath as best as he can. Playing him as someone who's really wrapped up in his own thoughts/is maybe too preoccupied with a couple of other cases he's working all at the same time could help give him more of a "will speak when spoken to" quality and prevent him from having "too much" of a presence to the point that he feels like another party member with all of the same decision making abilities as a real player character.
@@SeymourDisapproves That makes sense. He might get in over what I would appreciate.
I will bear that in mind and make him an optional companion (what I already had in mind for several other NPC, as the group is low in number and requested to hire mercenaries.)
My approach is about playing with the fourth wall and let players makes choices their characters won't have a say into.
For example, if the players want to play with Warheit, he will impose himself into the PC team, if they don't like him, he'll keep doing other things and let them do their work.
I have a notepad on my phone of dnd character ideas almost all ripping off problem players from stories.
I make dmpcs all the time. And their always underpowered or have a quirks that make them less helpful in combat. There's a chance of fainting before combat or being old with chronic arthritis. Poor eyesight or deaf in one ear. Low wisdom so they're easily duped. List goes on.
Dm pc's arnt bad.
As a player I like to make characters with npcs that the dm can use alo g side the party and give them a personality.
Example.
Akira my druid/sorc has a best friend young dire wolf called Lilith.
I control her in combat and for important stuff.
But the dm gives her her personality and charecter traits.
But the dm uses her to give us plot points reliving to her senses. Hearing/smell and or just typical shenanigans a young curious wolf would get into 😂.
Like sticking her head in a random jar filled with blue dust...turned out to be someone's ashes 😅
I think the issue with dmpcs is how vague the term is these days.
To me a dmpc is a dungeon master player character. If you are not trying to be a PC or replace one then you do not have a dmpc. You have a major NPC or a recurring cast member or something to that effect.
In that context the idea that the DM should be focused on their job as the DM and not also secretly try to be a member of the party is sensible advice.
Garelt of Rivia and Drizzt Do’Urdan are rip offs of Elric of Melinboné.
What about minmaxing
Make These Tabletop RPG Habits Great Again
The thing with dmpcs is that best case scenario they add nothing to the game. Of course if you want to redefine them as detailed NPCs you can do that, just don't go around pretending you are speaking the same language as everyone else.
“Don’t be batman” should be elaborated as “if you wanna be batman, be like batman from the justice league cartoon, not batman from the lego batman movie (unless you’re doing it as a joke *and* you’ve cleared with the rest of the table that it would be ok)”
I think ripping things off is bad *if* it's obvious enough that it breaks immersion. If it's done with any sort of subtlety, or done in a way that doesn't break immersion, then it's perfectly fine. Playing a dark and brooding noble with an alter ego that dishes out justice is cool, playing literally batman with 0 changes in fantasy is not.
"That's what my character would do" is another one. Everything your character does should be what your character would do, except for occasional metagaming exceptions for party cohesion. It's only bad when it's used as an excuse for breaking party cohesion or otherwise ruining other players' fun.
Must... Resist... Urge... To evangelize... One Piece!!!
With the idea of Batman I think you had the right universe… wrong Batman. Terry McGinnis from Batman Beyond. Dude was edgy and social. Social enough to take down the joker by psycho-analyzing him.
Not All Bad
Not all bad
To me, "rip-off" is inspiration used badly.
In the end I think it comes down to moderation. When does an NPC become a DNPC? Isn’t the issue really stealing the spotlight and agency from the players? You be edgy without being an antisocial murderhobo. Caring is great…until it becomes obsession. Drawing inspiration from other sources is great but don’t try to create a carbon copy of a character and expect the game world to conform to copying their arc. It’s cool to use them as a starting point but make them your own. Have fun! Knock yourself out! Just think about how it affects everyone else and don’t be a jerk.
Day 1 of asking you to read or watch One piece
Would disagree on the point about ripping off stuff, though only on a semantic level. All rip offs are homages, but not all homages are rip offs. All clichés are tropes, but not all tropes are clichés. All railroady campaigns are linear, but not every linear campaign has to be railroady. We specifically have these words to describe things that are lacking in creativity, originality, and agency to the point of being groanworthy. But if any of these things are executed well, then we just describe them with a positive or neutral word instead.
Indeed, rip ofs are replicas, clones. When you're going one for one rather than being inspired by something. Ye olden days had the issue of drizzt clones being commonplace and not looked upon fondly for a reason.
Tho I think similar could be said for other terms in the advices, myself find similar semantic issues with DMPC, a npc tagging along isn't a DMPC, but most DMPCs tags along the party etc.
First?
Saying there's nothing wrong with ripping things off is kinda like saying "It's okay to be an unoriginal hack fraud" when what you mean to say is "There's nothing wrong with wearing your inspirations on your sleeve"
The connotation of the term "Rip Off" implies something of inferior quality, there's an inbuilt insult to the language being used. Kinda undermines the point you're trying to make.
That's just the way a pedant like me sees it.
But Callie is not an DMPC, it's a important NPC. The key feature of a DMPC is not if they have a character sheet like a playable character, it is that they accompany the party during the adventure and "dungeoning", a its very tempting and east for the DM to abuse this power. Suddenly, they know were the traps are, what the monsters do (and scolds the player for not knowing it) and became the main character of the story, resulting in the DM speaking to himself for hours.
The DMPC is always bad. Always. You think you're getting the experience of being a Player and GM, but you're depriving yourself of the full experience of either, and you're depriving your Players of a GM focused on the game, not their character.
Use NPCs. They've been there since the beginning of the game.
But the DMPC is always bad. Always.
Just say you're inexperienced and move on dude.
@@RiveroftheWither You have no idea what you're talking about and show your immaturity and inexperience by throwing an insult rather than forming an argument or coming near a relevant point
Have a good day
@@connorwatson6766 I am experiences actually, I've played games with and without DMPCs for years. I have never had a bad DMPC, I literally have a DMPC in my Strahd campaign. She mostly exists just to be a healer and sometimes we use her connection to the church for our benefit, she takes a back seat on all other things. To say "all DMPCs are bad" is blatant short sightedness and inexperience on your part.
"i have never seen one piece"
Do so
Now
*cocks finger gun with menacing intent*