I'm running a campaign where the party will encounter a variety of recruitable NPCs to aid them on their adventure. I'm going for a classic JRPG vibe in which you can change out your party for folks with different skills, but you can't just throw 30 people into your party. To that end, I'd like to run my idea past you, and have you poke holes, and offer suggestions to those holes. Thanks!
So, I'm of the mind that there is no perfect system here, and that it requires the willingness of the party to "play along". Large groups are tougher to coordinate, and it's easier to spot and ambush a big group, and that will be the general idea most of the NPCs will agree to. My plan is to point that out, and have a few of the NPCs not get along well in an adventuring group (the rogue tries to 1up the bard, the bard tries to bring attention to the rogue during stealthy encounters, etc). No one is directly hostile to each other, but differences are had.
To further push that idea along I'm giving the party an HQ somewhere mostly secure that comes with a limited teleporter. An enchanted runestone will have a couple functions with the teleportation circle:
1. Once every dawn the person attuned may cast teleportation with it, but may only select the circle in their headquarters.
2. Once per seven days the attuned user may swap places with one person standing in the circle. This feature gains it's charge again seven days after use.
3. The person with the stone may use the sending spell, ignoring range limitations, to send a message with one person they are familiar with who is inside the grounds of the HQ.
It's all in it's prep stage, which is why I wanted to bring it here. Thoughts? How have you handled limiting your parties to 1 NPC at a time? I'd like to avoid "conveniently the NPC must leave for personal reasons that will resolve exactly in time for x or y to happen" type solutions.
Why does the party even need a stable of NPCs in the first place? They need to stand or fall based on their own skills, abilities and dice luck, not based on whether they guessed right and brought the “right” NPC for the day. D&D does not work like a video game and trying to fit it into that sort of hole usually just creates problems. Video games are based on a single character and need a few NPCs to fill out roles that the main character doesn’t fill, and to provide someone for witty banter. In D&D, you already have a party which should be able to fill all the roles, and provide its own witty banter.
Beyond that, you are talking not about NPCs, but more like a cast of DMPCs — assuming you’re running these characters. That’s another recipe for trouble. You already control all the other NPCs in the works, you don’t need to add to it, and keeping their personalities straight will be a pain. But most importantly, it will take the focus off of the PCs. They are supposed to be the heroes, if one of these NPCs is the one who lands the killing blow on the dragon, or disarms the trap that lets them escape certain death, it undercuts the players, and just becomes you playing by yourself.
But to answer your question, that teleport mechanic seems like it would work. Or if they don’t have a base, tell them the area is dangerous and some people will need to hang back and guard the supplies, so only one of the DMPCs can come along.
Why not just use an OOC solution? Tell the players that they can have one NPC, and they have to pick which one. There doesn't need to be an IC reason for it unless you really want there to be.
But I agree with Xalthu both in terms of why need an NPC at all, and in terms of watching out for DMPCs. Which can possibly work but usually are trouble.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
To answer your first question about why in the first place, it's fun. The party has a habit of recruiting NPCs they like, and they enjoy having them along for adventure. I'm not going to stand in the way of their fun, and it gives me a chance to give them information beyond "the cave smells bad" or "the orcs are hiding in the forest". You're right, it's not a video game, it's whatever the table wants. The unique thing here is the group (DM included) have the ability to tailor everything about the experience to get the most enjoyment out of things. Also, it is a weak DM who lets the NPC solve the problems, or kill the monsters. No responsible DM should ever just have the NPC pick the lock, solve the riddle, or be first to exploit a monsters weakness. DMPCs are NPCs with character levels, which these are not. They have stat blocks, and are significantly weaker than the PCs. They exist exclusively as flavor, and a small bonus here and there.
Thank you for the answer after all of the lecturing.
BioWizard: I typically like to have some IC reason, but that's a me thing. I've had players abuse situations like this, and I like to avoid encouraging power gamers from running away with things. That said, this group is much more tame, and I'm sure they'd respond well to simply asking them to limit themselves. Thanks for the answer!
I'm not really a big DMPC kinda guy, and maybe I could have worded things better. Their not characters with levels, they're truly NPCs. No real class abilities, they've got stat blocks instead of whole sheets, and their combat abilities are pitiful next to any individual party member. The group just likes having friends, and really enjoys role-playing off NPCs. A few of the players are newer, and they respond much better to role-playing with an NPC rather than each other. I consider it like water wings.
A DMPC is not the same thing as a PNPC. In fact they are vastly different.
A DMPC is a PC used by a player who wants to play on their own game. (No bueno.)
A PNPC is an NPC that is built like a PC, and is run by the DM, but is a “passive” party member. They don’t earn XP, they just keep pace with the PCs. They only do what the PCs tell them to do. The only social interactions they have are either with the PCs, or are done “off screen.*1” They get narrated as participating in combat but they don’t actually effect anything unless your players actually want*2 them to participate (or you need to pull their fat out of the fire.) Much of the time, they are useful because it’s in “in character” way for the DM to remind the Players about something they forgot but their characters remember.*3 The other major in game use for a PNPC is to fill a hole in the party.*4
The only major distinction between an NPC and a PNPC is in how the players perceive them on a completely subconscious level. A traditional NPC with a statblock is the same as everyone else in your campaign world. A PNPC with a character sheet is “one of them.”
If your players just really enjoy having NPCs in the party to hang out with a PNPC might be the way to go. Just some food for thought.
*1: By that I mean if the PCs send them to go deliver a message to someone and return with an answer then that PNPC’s interaction with “someone” doesn’t get RPed or anything. *2: I have actually had players ask me why the NPC in the room isn’t helping and my answer was “if they help, they get an equal share of the XP.” Something the players say “never mind,” sometimes they say “blast ‘em.” 🤷♂️ *3: It may have been 6 weeks ago for the players, but it might have only been 6 hours ago to the characters. *4: Perhaps none of them has made a character who can heal or something.
A notion that would work well is that there is a group of adventurers and they will hire on with other parties at times, but only one of them may go with any party at a given time. Rules of the clan, kind of thing. They don't want to end up carrying another group of adventurers and they want to ensure anyone who truly needs a helping hand can get one. Almost like a mercenary band, with rules and guidelines.
I have introduced the party I am running to 2 potential allies who would travel with them and ended up having one ask if he can tag along, to experience and eventually immortalize their trials (he's a Bard) because I needed to get someone inside the group to help feed them info and guide them a little. I have 2 or 3 others set up, ready to meet and I will be introducing them as their skills are needed. For now, they are faring well enough, but an odd party makeup is going to make a few spots tough to get through. Their party addons will be simply following the group, doing what they are told, offering little, if any ideas, especially when facing puzzles or mechanical challenges. So far the Bard was left behind once entirely, causing the party to backtrack to town again tp pick him up, and the party doesn't ask him along during investigations, so the few fights they've had since he joined them, he hasn't lifted a finger, as he was waiting with the horses.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
I am using these in my campaign, relying strongly on the "Followers" mechanics in Matt Colevilles Strongholds and Followers books.
My party will never have a bunch of NPCs with them because they are not full adventurers and they all have different goals. Adventuring is extremely dangerous, especially for someone weaker than the rest of the party members. JRPG's tend very much to handwave this, having every party member just totally willing to do every sidequest and optional boss which I think is really unrealistic. My NPCs typically are only facing dangers with the party because the current adventure is something they are deeply invested in. Once that goal is achieved (or lost), they eagerly retreat to the safety of the PC base or wherever they came from.
I feel like if you're going to have NPCs come along with the party, you should use them to enhance the narrative. Use them to show how others are emotionally invested in what the party hopes to accomplish. Show other perspectives on what's going on. Provide exposition or background or context when needed. That doesn't work when the character has no real reason to be with the party besides something like "I want experience."
One alternative, to take an idea from Ars Magica, is for each of the players to create a pool of PCs for themselves. For each mission/adventure/story each player picks one of their PCs which they take along on that occasion. This allows the players to try different classes and skill sets, but still avoids the DM being bogged down having to run additional characters as well as telling the story.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hey, hivemind!
I'm running a campaign where the party will encounter a variety of recruitable NPCs to aid them on their adventure. I'm going for a classic JRPG vibe in which you can change out your party for folks with different skills, but you can't just throw 30 people into your party. To that end, I'd like to run my idea past you, and have you poke holes, and offer suggestions to those holes. Thanks!
So, I'm of the mind that there is no perfect system here, and that it requires the willingness of the party to "play along". Large groups are tougher to coordinate, and it's easier to spot and ambush a big group, and that will be the general idea most of the NPCs will agree to. My plan is to point that out, and have a few of the NPCs not get along well in an adventuring group (the rogue tries to 1up the bard, the bard tries to bring attention to the rogue during stealthy encounters, etc). No one is directly hostile to each other, but differences are had.
To further push that idea along I'm giving the party an HQ somewhere mostly secure that comes with a limited teleporter. An enchanted runestone will have a couple functions with the teleportation circle:
1. Once every dawn the person attuned may cast teleportation with it, but may only select the circle in their headquarters.
2. Once per seven days the attuned user may swap places with one person standing in the circle. This feature gains it's charge again seven days after use.
3. The person with the stone may use the sending spell, ignoring range limitations, to send a message with one person they are familiar with who is inside the grounds of the HQ.
It's all in it's prep stage, which is why I wanted to bring it here. Thoughts? How have you handled limiting your parties to 1 NPC at a time? I'd like to avoid "conveniently the NPC must leave for personal reasons that will resolve exactly in time for x or y to happen" type solutions.
Why does the party even need a stable of NPCs in the first place? They need to stand or fall based on their own skills, abilities and dice luck, not based on whether they guessed right and brought the “right” NPC for the day. D&D does not work like a video game and trying to fit it into that sort of hole usually just creates problems. Video games are based on a single character and need a few NPCs to fill out roles that the main character doesn’t fill, and to provide someone for witty banter. In D&D, you already have a party which should be able to fill all the roles, and provide its own witty banter.
Beyond that, you are talking not about NPCs, but more like a cast of DMPCs — assuming you’re running these characters. That’s another recipe for trouble. You already control all the other NPCs in the works, you don’t need to add to it, and keeping their personalities straight will be a pain. But most importantly, it will take the focus off of the PCs. They are supposed to be the heroes, if one of these NPCs is the one who lands the killing blow on the dragon, or disarms the trap that lets them escape certain death, it undercuts the players, and just becomes you playing by yourself.
But to answer your question, that teleport mechanic seems like it would work. Or if they don’t have a base, tell them the area is dangerous and some people will need to hang back and guard the supplies, so only one of the DMPCs can come along.
Why not just use an OOC solution? Tell the players that they can have one NPC, and they have to pick which one. There doesn't need to be an IC reason for it unless you really want there to be.
But I agree with Xalthu both in terms of why need an NPC at all, and in terms of watching out for DMPCs. Which can possibly work but usually are trouble.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
To answer your first question about why in the first place, it's fun. The party has a habit of recruiting NPCs they like, and they enjoy having them along for adventure. I'm not going to stand in the way of their fun, and it gives me a chance to give them information beyond "the cave smells bad" or "the orcs are hiding in the forest". You're right, it's not a video game, it's whatever the table wants. The unique thing here is the group (DM included) have the ability to tailor everything about the experience to get the most enjoyment out of things. Also, it is a weak DM who lets the NPC solve the problems, or kill the monsters. No responsible DM should ever just have the NPC pick the lock, solve the riddle, or be first to exploit a monsters weakness. DMPCs are NPCs with character levels, which these are not. They have stat blocks, and are significantly weaker than the PCs. They exist exclusively as flavor, and a small bonus here and there.
Thank you for the answer after all of the lecturing.
BioWizard: I typically like to have some IC reason, but that's a me thing. I've had players abuse situations like this, and I like to avoid encouraging power gamers from running away with things. That said, this group is much more tame, and I'm sure they'd respond well to simply asking them to limit themselves. Thanks for the answer!
I'm not really a big DMPC kinda guy, and maybe I could have worded things better. Their not characters with levels, they're truly NPCs. No real class abilities, they've got stat blocks instead of whole sheets, and their combat abilities are pitiful next to any individual party member. The group just likes having friends, and really enjoys role-playing off NPCs. A few of the players are newer, and they respond much better to role-playing with an NPC rather than each other. I consider it like water wings.
A DMPC is not the same thing as a PNPC. In fact they are vastly different.
A DMPC is a PC used by a player who wants to play on their own game. (No bueno.)
A PNPC is an NPC that is built like a PC, and is run by the DM, but is a “passive” party member. They don’t earn XP, they just keep pace with the PCs. They only do what the PCs tell them to do. The only social interactions they have are either with the PCs, or are done “off screen.*1” They get narrated as participating in combat but they don’t actually effect anything unless your players actually want*2 them to participate (or you need to pull their fat out of the fire.) Much of the time, they are useful because it’s in “in character” way for the DM to remind the Players about something they forgot but their characters remember.*3 The other major in game use for a PNPC is to fill a hole in the party.*4
The only major distinction between an NPC and a PNPC is in how the players perceive them on a completely subconscious level. A traditional NPC with a statblock is the same as everyone else in your campaign world. A PNPC with a character sheet is “one of them.”
If your players just really enjoy having NPCs in the party to hang out with a PNPC might be the way to go. Just some food for thought.
*1: By that I mean if the PCs send them to go deliver a message to someone and return with an answer then that PNPC’s interaction with “someone” doesn’t get RPed or anything.
*2: I have actually had players ask me why the NPC in the room isn’t helping and my answer was “if they help, they get an equal share of the XP.” Something the players say “never mind,” sometimes they say “blast ‘em.” 🤷♂️
*3: It may have been 6 weeks ago for the players, but it might have only been 6 hours ago to the characters.
*4: Perhaps none of them has made a character who can heal or something.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
A notion that would work well is that there is a group of adventurers and they will hire on with other parties at times, but only one of them may go with any party at a given time. Rules of the clan, kind of thing. They don't want to end up carrying another group of adventurers and they want to ensure anyone who truly needs a helping hand can get one. Almost like a mercenary band, with rules and guidelines.
I have introduced the party I am running to 2 potential allies who would travel with them and ended up having one ask if he can tag along, to experience and eventually immortalize their trials (he's a Bard) because I needed to get someone inside the group to help feed them info and guide them a little. I have 2 or 3 others set up, ready to meet and I will be introducing them as their skills are needed. For now, they are faring well enough, but an odd party makeup is going to make a few spots tough to get through. Their party addons will be simply following the group, doing what they are told, offering little, if any ideas, especially when facing puzzles or mechanical challenges. So far the Bard was left behind once entirely, causing the party to backtrack to town again tp pick him up, and the party doesn't ask him along during investigations, so the few fights they've had since he joined them, he hasn't lifted a finger, as he was waiting with the horses.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
I am using these in my campaign, relying strongly on the "Followers" mechanics in Matt Colevilles Strongholds and Followers books.
My party will never have a bunch of NPCs with them because they are not full adventurers and they all have different goals. Adventuring is extremely dangerous, especially for someone weaker than the rest of the party members. JRPG's tend very much to handwave this, having every party member just totally willing to do every sidequest and optional boss which I think is really unrealistic. My NPCs typically are only facing dangers with the party because the current adventure is something they are deeply invested in. Once that goal is achieved (or lost), they eagerly retreat to the safety of the PC base or wherever they came from.
I feel like if you're going to have NPCs come along with the party, you should use them to enhance the narrative. Use them to show how others are emotionally invested in what the party hopes to accomplish. Show other perspectives on what's going on. Provide exposition or background or context when needed. That doesn't work when the character has no real reason to be with the party besides something like "I want experience."
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
One alternative, to take an idea from Ars Magica, is for each of the players to create a pool of PCs for themselves. For each mission/adventure/story each player picks one of their PCs which they take along on that occasion. This allows the players to try different classes and skill sets, but still avoids the DM being bogged down having to run additional characters as well as telling the story.