|
5 months ago ::
Jan 29, 2013 - 2:04PM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2009
|
Guys thanks for feedback it is actually helpful! )
So far the advices are (not mentioning switching DM or party)
- Be carefull about DM making PC, better opt for NPC. Idea is ok, execution is the key
- Challange in itself is ok, however it should tilt towards players
- In case **** hits the fan and battle is overwhelming, opt for any other solution than continue fighting
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 29, 2013 - 2:14PM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
Guys thanks for feedback it is actually helpful! )
So far the advices are (not mentioning switching DM or party)
- Be carefull about DM making PC, better opt for NPC. Idea is ok, execution is the key
- Challange in itself is ok, however it should tilt towards players
That's only if death is the only way to fail. Skill challenges don't need to favor the players, because even if they lose the game is interesting.
- In case **** hits the fan and battle is overwhelming, opt for any other solution than continue fighting
Or look for those solutions up front. And be aware that the DM might just block them, and force you to fight.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 29, 2013 - 2:25PM
#33
|
|
|
I'd suggest offering to DM your own campaign. That way the DM gets to run a player for a bit and maybe he'll learn a thing or two from you. You will of course be awesome, because you come here for advice.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 29, 2013 - 4:11PM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2004
|
Strictly my opinion:
it's always a bad idea for the DM to also have a PC.
Always. No exceptions.
NPC's are fine.
That seems to be the forum concensus (indicating that there are so many players that are deeply opposed to DMPC's that it is inherently a bad idea even if it one's situation allowed it to work).
Luckily, the OP's post doesn't seem to actually be about DMPC's, despite the thread title.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 29, 2013 - 4:16PM
#35
|
|
|
Or maybe the DMC (is that a common acronym?) could be used, as suggested, to fill in roles that the PC's aren't, but be several levels lower than the PC's so that s/he depends on them, rather than the other way around, and tries to stay out of the way in combat whenever possible? That way, even if he joins combat as "the cavalry" when things get really bad, he's still probably not going to make as much of a difference and the players dont feel Deus ex Machina-ed? (and could that be abbreviated to DexMed?)
A character sheet is a player's love letter to the DM. If someone wants to do something and they want to do it well, let them. Encourage them. Have fun with it. -Unknown
An adventure is a DM's love letter to the players. If the DM wants something to happen in the game, let it. Encourage the DM. Have fun with it. -Centauri I'd love for input as to what it should be rather than arguments against why I shouldn't have it at all. -lialwyn Best defense that I've read in favor of having alignment systems as an option
Spoiler:
Show
However, if some people are heavily benefiting from the inclusion of alignment, then it would behoove those that AREN'T to listen up and pay attention to how those benefits are being created and enjoyed, no? -YagamiFire
But equally important would be for those who do enjoy those benefits to entertain the possibility that other people do not value those benefits equally or, possibly, do not see them as benefits in the first place. -wrecan
That makes sense. However, it is not fair to continually attack those that benefit for being, somehow, deviant for deriving enjoyment from something that you cannot. Instead, alignment is continually attacked...it is demonized...and those that use it are lumped in with it.
I think there is more merit in a situation where someone says "This doesn't work! It's broken!" and the reply is "Actually it works fine for me. Have you considered your approach might be causing it?" than a situation where someone says "I use this system and the way I use it works really well!" and the back and forth is "No! It is a broken bad system!" because the former posits that improvement could be made...the latter only undermines the enjoyment of the person who is using alignment. -YagamiFire
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 29, 2013 - 4:44PM
#36
|
|
|
The important thing to keep in mind is that a DMPC and an NPC with the party are not necessarily the same thing. In my current campaign I have had as many as 3 NPCs heading around with the PCs at any given time...but, of note, is that none of them are A) stronger than the PCs (except one sorta instance) and B) they're typically loyal henchman/minions who the players can make decisions for...I just provide the rolls and personality for them in many instance.
The one exception was the evil dwarf assassin who the PCs basically forced into helping them find his evil boss. He only reluctantly helped them in battle (when he himself was in danger) and did so with the handicap of having received a Bestow Curse that TANKED his strength (his most important stat)...so yeah.
Generally, the difference between a DMPC and a partyNPC is fairly obvious socially rather than mechanically...the DMPC is super-awesome, can do no wrong and is ALWAYS around. PartyNPCs can also be great for making the players themselves feel awesome because if they are competent in their own right but outperformed by the PCs it makes the PCs look that much better because they are working in comparison rather than in a vacuum.
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
My blog and stuff http://dmingtowin.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 29, 2013 - 5:19PM
#37
|
|
|
Generally, the difference between a DMPC and a partyNPC is fairly obvious socially rather than mechanically...the DMPC is super-awesome, can do no wrong and is ALWAYS around. PartyNPCs can also be great for making the players themselves feel awesome because if they are competent in their own right but outperformed by the PCs it makes the PCs look that much better because they are working in comparison rather than in a vacuum.
To expand on this slightly further:
Generally speaking, The best use i've seen of a permanent party member that was run by a DM fit the following criteria:
1) The party was a small size (3 players), and wanted to have all of the basic roles covered.
2) The DM made a leader that only buffed/granted actions, but otherwise didn't take an active role in combat (lazylord or pacifist cleric or similar)
FWIW [4e designer] baseline assumption was that roughly 70% of your feats would be put towards combat effectiveness, parties would coordinate, and strikers would do 20/40/60 at-will damage+novas. If your party isn't doing that... well, you are below baseline, so yes, you need to optimize slightly to meet baseline.
-Alcestis
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 29, 2013 - 5:58PM
#38
|
|
|
Generally, the difference between a DMPC and a partyNPC is fairly obvious socially rather than mechanically...the DMPC is super-awesome, can do no wrong and is ALWAYS around. PartyNPCs can also be great for making the players themselves feel awesome because if they are competent in their own right but outperformed by the PCs it makes the PCs look that much better because they are working in comparison rather than in a vacuum.
To expand on this slightly further:
Generally speaking, The best use i've seen of a permanent party member that was run by a DM fit the following criteria:
1) The party was a small size (3 players), and wanted to have all of the basic roles covered.
2) The DM made a leader that only buffed/granted actions, but otherwise didn't take an active role in combat (lazylord or pacifist cleric or similar)
It can also be useful for the NPC to be non-permanent. If an NPC is likely to leave (and actually does) then the players will usually appreciate when NPCs stop by to help out and tag-along. NPC allies, friends and cohorts can cycle in and out of the group in that way depending on where the PCs are or what they're doing or even if they need a specific kind of assistance.
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
My blog and stuff http://dmingtowin.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 30, 2013 - 9:13AM
#39
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2004
|
Or maybe the DMC (is that a common acronym?) could be used, as suggested, to fill in roles that the PC's aren't, but be several levels lower than the PC's so that s/he depends on them, rather than the other way around, and tries to stay out of the way in combat whenever possible?
That sounds like an NPC.
Non-Player Characters are fine. DMPC's (i.e. handled as a Player Character) are not. In 4e, they use separate mechanics.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 30, 2013 - 10:35AM
#40
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2007
|
Guys thanks for feedback it is actually helpful! )
So far the advices are (not mentioning switching DM or party)
Just to be clear, the reason why this advice is given so often in this situation is because the problem seems to be one of DM attitude. In order for any of these solutions below to work, the DM will need an attitude adjustment. The difficulty in doing so may not be worth the effort.
- Be carefull about DM making PC, better opt for NPC. Idea is ok, execution is the key
True. It is fine to have recurring NPCs, even ones that travel with the party. When they become extensions of the DM and main characters in their own right, instead of being supporting cast, is where we run into problems. It sounds like the DM in this case is not content with controlling most of their world, they also want a equal (or greater than equal) say in the party decisions.
- Challange in itself is ok, however it should tilt towards players
And this is another place where your DM will need an attitude adjustment. He thinks it is his job to kill you, and that is how he "wins." D&D is not about "winning", it is about beating up monsters and taking their stuff, and maybe telling a few stories in between.
- In case **** hits the fan and battle is overwhelming, opt for any other solution than continue fighting
And this part ties in with the DM feeling he needs to "win" each fight with you guys. Any solution that circumvents the battle may be considered "cheating," and, if I read the attitude correctly, will be blocked.
|
|
|
