Its almost become part of a running joke in all my campaigns that my players recruit a (usually unwilling at first) NPC to the party. For example, in the last campaign, the barbarian took one of the enemy's kobold slaves with him as the party fled via teleportation circle, liberating the kobold and taking him under his wing (queue new party member). This campaign, the party was being shoved down a seemingly bottomless pit and the paladin grabbed the collar of the guard pushing him, dragging them both deep into the underdark (another new party member).
In both examples, the party worked towards building a relationship with both NPC's that would make them WANT to stay (kobold became kinda the group baby and the guard is now the warlocks lover lol). As a DM, i do not like MAKING things happen, I mostly improvise sessions by reacting to the situations the players create. Because of this I would never just be like "all the monsters target the NPC, now he's dead and i dont have to worry about it". And at the end of the day, I really DON'T mind having them there. My main concern is that they want these NPC's to be full contributing members of the party (in and out of combat) and being in control of the story AND this character creates unavoidable biases. For example, maneuvering strategically in combat gets funky when i know exactly what the enemy is planning. And having the NPC ask questions in RP situations (like an investigation) gets weird since I already know the answer and any question/answer i give is essentially a hint. I guess my real question is, How can i continue to have these characters involved (and not just for convenient moments) without providing the players with a flashing arrow quest marker?
At that point, stop running the NPC for them. They take over, decide what the NPC does in combat (though I would guess the NPC would be wildly less effective than the PCs, since they don't have character levels and shouldn't level up.) And in conversation make the player's take ownership of saying "Hey, does NPC know anything about this?" Or whatever.
Basically, if you're running them, I'd make them passive unless specifically addressed by a PC.
This is how I handled NPCs that accompanied the party in the past:
1. They are NPCs, so they are under the DMs control. Players don't get to decide what the NPC does. They can make suggestions, the DM might give them a choice what general action they will take for the next sequence etc .... but in the end, it is the DM's call. The party will enter a dungeon and the NPC will guard the base camp. The NPC offers to help during a night's watch, allowing one player to get advantage on his Perception role. 2. Players do not manage stats or profession development. They might know, that the NPC is good at forgery, but they do not know whether the NPC has +5 or +8 as a bonus. Should the NPC advance in levels, the DM chooses how the advancement is used (e.g. which spell the NPC wizard will learn) 3. NPCs have "free will". Should the NPC decide, it does not want to stay with the party, it is allowed to leave. The kobold from your campaign finds tracks of other kobolds during a long rest and decides to go back to his people, leaving the party. The guard is no longer in love with the warlock and breaks up in a dramatic scene with him in the inn the party is staying. 4. There is a difference between NPCs and "hirelings". If the party wants to employ five heavily armoured caravan guards, they have to pay them, feed them and care for them on their journeys. That should not be just "they cost 5 gold each day, so I give you 20 gold for their obedience in the next month" kind of thing. 5. It is the DMs call on how many "NPC slots" are in the party. If they already have two NPCs being with them, don't allow them more, or make it clear that they have to let one go for the new addition.
I have a character who is recruiting anyone he can so that he can build a network of spies and go-fers. So far he's recruited 3 were-rats, he's attempting to convert a member of an opposing faction into a double agent, and he's trying to usurp power of the faction he belongs to in order to have control of it and use the faction to his own whims.
The thing about it is that you, as DM, should really take into account the NPC's desires and motivations, then play to them. As well they are NPCs and as such are under your control, not the party's. Unless you choose to make them sidekicks, the party really can't do much except give it orders and hope those orders are followed.
The kobold slave, why would it stay with the party? When/if the party places it in danger, why would it assist rather then flee? Kobolds are generally the minions of stronger creatures, so if the party runs into something like....a dragon....would the kobold switch sides?
The guard is a whole different kettle of fish. Here you have an NPC, that was already against the party, forcefully dragged into this danger by the party. There would be no reason for this guard to want to be friends. The chances of him becoming a companion to the group would be enormously slim, he may curb his appetite to destroy the Paladin for what happened until the mortal danger has passed, but in the back of his head he'd be plotting. Your party would need to do a major amount of work to shift this guard into their favor.
As to using them in party, they're silent partners, they only know what they would need to know to function in their role. A guard wouldn't know the inner workings of the major players, they only know that they are to keep a location safe or prisoners kept. They don't need to ask questions that aren't important to them. There is also the point that you are in control of the NPC, the party can suggest any action that the NPC could take, but you will ultimately decide if that is in line with what the NPC would do. No matter what the situation, an NPC is not an information desk, encyclopedia, or search engine for the players to use, it is an individual, just like each of the party members.
thanks all! What I'm getting from this is that I need to work on the NPC's wants and motivations. The guard thats been pulled along was originally a "nameless guard #4" but since he's been trapped with the players for almost 3 months in the underdark, they've bonded and got over their differences. (the guard is actually thankful because he wasn't aware of the corruption in the government that led to the players being arrested!) but seeing as he was literally given life on the spot (named Alfred after looking at the pantry and seeing ajar Alfredo sauce) i didn't exactly have a life story planned for him. Until now ive just been pulling answers at random as they were asked or came up (ex. every athletics check he's done to climb has been either a nat 19 or 20 so I peppered in that rock climbing was a hobby of his).
But now imma make a flushed out character with goals and that should help ME know what HE knows!
In ye olden days adventuring groups recruited additional NPC's by default. A few hunters, houndmasters that guard the camp at night, people that just carry loot on wagons, torchbearers etc. Traveling with a troupe was pretty standard. It isn't that odd. You basically setup a forward base near the entrance of a cave. The 4 players with maybe a few NPC hirelings to accompany them will enter and do their black-ops/strikeforce task.
However NPC's should NEVER join just because the PC's roll good persuasion checks. NPC's have personalities. Often NPC's turn down my PC's even if they roll really well. Simply because NPC can not leave their spouse behind no matter how much they want to go. Or some other personal motivation they have. Not to mention that the PC's have to make sure their hirelings are looked after and get paid every single day.
Both the Kobold and the Guard in OP's post are there against their own free will. Depending on their personal goals they could, and should, be pissed off with the PC's. Not falling in love with the warlock because that one rolled high charisma rolls. The kobold and guard will probably, temporarily, join forces with the party until they're out of their predicament. Ditching the party as soon as they enter the first village.
Why are they automatically becoming party members? Maybe temporary allies. The kobold, especially, seems like he'd up and bolt the first chance he got, and the guard is likely more pissed than grateful.
As for NPC's in combat. let your players handle 1 of them. just give a basic sheet with 1 main attack and 1 or 2 extra attacks they could do. with a very basic summary of their skills. It doesn't task the player that much, if at all.
As for interacting. That is a DM problem of not being able to roleplay and distance yourself. NPC hirelings that my group has... well they have a guard traveling with them as well. Someone who wanted to try the adventuring life one day. She's now getting a taste while still in service to the local lord. Since the group is investigating stuff for that lord. And its easier to send one guard with them instead of sending an entire company out into the wilds. She is sassy and has a mind of her own. She shares various ideas to situations, but never the correct one. She NEVER asks leading questions, but open ones that have multiple answers. She asks the kind of questions that gets the PC's to think and it is them that has to come with a solution in the end. She could find clues with investigation, but doesn't mean she knows how to analyse them.
For all those asking about why the NPC's stuck around. I promise it wasn't just a lucky skill check. Both incidences involved the group being stuck somewhere for a long period of time with them and GREAT roleplay on their side.
For the Kobold: Yes he was taken against his will and brought in for questioning. But upon seeing that he was used as slave labor and didn't really want to be there in the first place, the party couldnt bring themselves to do the usual "murder-hobo-interogation" that was expected of them. The groups Barbarian decided that if he wanted to follow the strongest creature he could find, to follow him. and with that the barbarian consistently proved that he was in FACT the strongest thing the kobold had ever seen. So the kobold became his lackey for a while. The Barb used this time to slowly change the relationship from lackey to friend by excellent uses of downtime RP, travel conversations (as well as introducing him to the concept of a brothel). When the Barb retook his clan as the leader, the kobold became his second in command. So thats why the kobold didn't flee and became permanent
For the Guard: He was already reluctant to push them into the pit in the first place and after the Paladin pulled him in, he WAS pissed. but there was no where else to go other than with them. they were in this dungeon for a total of 57 in-game days and the wanted to RP PRETTY MUCH all of them lol. The guard learned that the reason they were sentenced to the dungeon in the first place was based on false allegations, and that the REAL reason is that the party knew the truth behind the start of the current war (pretty much the king of this country WANTED the war for *plot* reasons and lied that the other side attacked first when he did it to his own people). The guard lost friends and family in that initial attack so his already questioning loyalty was shaking even more. and throughout the 2 months they were stuck together, many life-saving occurances, late night campfire chats, and frankly heartwarming RP of reconciliation, the guard became close to ALL of them. The warlock tended to be the one staying up with him the most (her drow darkvision made up for his human-ness) so they had LOTS of bonding time. When they finally emerged, they were HUNDREDS of miles away (partly cause of travel, partly cause of some magic they didn't pick up on) and are currently thinking of what to do next.
This reply wasn't a complaint or a "me not knowing what to do" I just wanted to defend my party a little bit (and show them off a little like every proud DM with his goofy-ass players lol). These were by no means "you rolled 25 persuasion, he's a party member now". in fact, both tried escaping at some point but my group is just REALLY INTO the roleplay and gave them reason to stay lol
The main purpose of this post wasn't to make them stop i guess... it was mainly to find out HOW to better distance myself from the NPC character so that the internal bias of DM knowing the answer and NPC being unaware, don't overlap!
If your sole purpose of this post is "How do I not give players all the info because NPC" then the answer is fairly simple: the NPC only knows what is necessary to accomplish their job.
The guard, as you rightfully played him, didn't know about the subterfuge of the king. He would be ignorant of anything but his day to day life and anything above his pay grade. If this guy was nothing more than a glorified babysitter for prisoners, then why would he know about the inner workings of the troops being sent into war? The same holds true for the kobold, it wouldn't know anything more than it's position in the pack. In this case it was a slave, where things can be a little tricky depending on what its jobs were. If it was allowed to go into different chambers to clean, maybe it heard something by accident, if it was simply doing grunt work in the quarry, it wouldn't know much more than what it was mining and moving around.
You don't have to worry about how much you, as DM, know since everyone already assumes you have all the answers. The trick is to figure out how much the NPCs are privy to and how they can convince them to divulge that information.
Kobold, seeing how it was a slave. I'd run him wanting to return and free the rest of them. Asking the party for help. If they help them great! New quest! If not he'd slowly begin to question his so called me friends and get mad enough to simply leave being disgusted with the party for not helping him and using him for their own personal needs which in the kobolds eyes is also slavery-ish.
For the guard, he'd have family that he was forced away from when the paladin pulled him into the pit. Consequences later would be something happening to his family and he wasn't there to protect them.
While both can be seen as bad the issues should tug at the parties heart strings so that they see the consequences of their actions by doing what they did.
Even the best intentions have consequences.. just have to add them into the story.
I'm reeeeally liking having something happen with his family (insert evil DM laugh). Because they've already been hinted towards some stuff thats happened back in their homeland while theyve been gone like the king implementing a form of "disease-bomb" thing (they don't know this but the king is like possesed by an ancient god of death and pestilence so he's converting the city into a nasty pus-filled brain-washing disease hole lol) and this is RIGHT where the guards family are from.... muahahaha....
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Its almost become part of a running joke in all my campaigns that my players recruit a (usually unwilling at first) NPC to the party. For example, in the last campaign, the barbarian took one of the enemy's kobold slaves with him as the party fled via teleportation circle, liberating the kobold and taking him under his wing (queue new party member). This campaign, the party was being shoved down a seemingly bottomless pit and the paladin grabbed the collar of the guard pushing him, dragging them both deep into the underdark (another new party member).
In both examples, the party worked towards building a relationship with both NPC's that would make them WANT to stay (kobold became kinda the group baby and the guard is now the warlocks lover lol). As a DM, i do not like MAKING things happen, I mostly improvise sessions by reacting to the situations the players create. Because of this I would never just be like "all the monsters target the NPC, now he's dead and i dont have to worry about it". And at the end of the day, I really DON'T mind having them there. My main concern is that they want these NPC's to be full contributing members of the party (in and out of combat) and being in control of the story AND this character creates unavoidable biases. For example, maneuvering strategically in combat gets funky when i know exactly what the enemy is planning. And having the NPC ask questions in RP situations (like an investigation) gets weird since I already know the answer and any question/answer i give is essentially a hint. I guess my real question is, How can i continue to have these characters involved (and not just for convenient moments) without providing the players with a flashing arrow quest marker?
Thanks!
At that point, stop running the NPC for them. They take over, decide what the NPC does in combat (though I would guess the NPC would be wildly less effective than the PCs, since they don't have character levels and shouldn't level up.) And in conversation make the player's take ownership of saying "Hey, does NPC know anything about this?" Or whatever.
Basically, if you're running them, I'd make them passive unless specifically addressed by a PC.
This is how I handled NPCs that accompanied the party in the past:
1. They are NPCs, so they are under the DMs control. Players don't get to decide what the NPC does. They can make suggestions, the DM might give them a choice what general action they will take for the next sequence etc .... but in the end, it is the DM's call.
The party will enter a dungeon and the NPC will guard the base camp. The NPC offers to help during a night's watch, allowing one player to get advantage on his Perception role.
2. Players do not manage stats or profession development. They might know, that the NPC is good at forgery, but they do not know whether the NPC has +5 or +8 as a bonus. Should the NPC advance in levels, the DM chooses how the advancement is used (e.g. which spell the NPC wizard will learn)
3. NPCs have "free will". Should the NPC decide, it does not want to stay with the party, it is allowed to leave. The kobold from your campaign finds tracks of other kobolds during a long rest and decides to go back to his people, leaving the party. The guard is no longer in love with the warlock and breaks up in a dramatic scene with him in the inn the party is staying.
4. There is a difference between NPCs and "hirelings". If the party wants to employ five heavily armoured caravan guards, they have to pay them, feed them and care for them on their journeys. That should not be just "they cost 5 gold each day, so I give you 20 gold for their obedience in the next month" kind of thing.
5. It is the DMs call on how many "NPC slots" are in the party. If they already have two NPCs being with them, don't allow them more, or make it clear that they have to let one go for the new addition.
I have a character who is recruiting anyone he can so that he can build a network of spies and go-fers. So far he's recruited 3 were-rats, he's attempting to convert a member of an opposing faction into a double agent, and he's trying to usurp power of the faction he belongs to in order to have control of it and use the faction to his own whims.
The thing about it is that you, as DM, should really take into account the NPC's desires and motivations, then play to them. As well they are NPCs and as such are under your control, not the party's. Unless you choose to make them sidekicks, the party really can't do much except give it orders and hope those orders are followed.
The kobold slave, why would it stay with the party? When/if the party places it in danger, why would it assist rather then flee? Kobolds are generally the minions of stronger creatures, so if the party runs into something like....a dragon....would the kobold switch sides?
The guard is a whole different kettle of fish. Here you have an NPC, that was already against the party, forcefully dragged into this danger by the party. There would be no reason for this guard to want to be friends. The chances of him becoming a companion to the group would be enormously slim, he may curb his appetite to destroy the Paladin for what happened until the mortal danger has passed, but in the back of his head he'd be plotting. Your party would need to do a major amount of work to shift this guard into their favor.
As to using them in party, they're silent partners, they only know what they would need to know to function in their role. A guard wouldn't know the inner workings of the major players, they only know that they are to keep a location safe or prisoners kept. They don't need to ask questions that aren't important to them. There is also the point that you are in control of the NPC, the party can suggest any action that the NPC could take, but you will ultimately decide if that is in line with what the NPC would do. No matter what the situation, an NPC is not an information desk, encyclopedia, or search engine for the players to use, it is an individual, just like each of the party members.
thanks all! What I'm getting from this is that I need to work on the NPC's wants and motivations. The guard thats been pulled along was originally a "nameless guard #4" but since he's been trapped with the players for almost 3 months in the underdark, they've bonded and got over their differences. (the guard is actually thankful because he wasn't aware of the corruption in the government that led to the players being arrested!) but seeing as he was literally given life on the spot (named Alfred after looking at the pantry and seeing ajar Alfredo sauce) i didn't exactly have a life story planned for him. Until now ive just been pulling answers at random as they were asked or came up (ex. every athletics check he's done to climb has been either a nat 19 or 20 so I peppered in that rock climbing was a hobby of his).
But now imma make a flushed out character with goals and that should help ME know what HE knows!
Also remember that if an NPC is travelling and fighting with the party full-time, they get a share of XP and treasure.
Once the players realise that those two NPCs mean they all get 1/3 less XP then they might not be so keen on having permanent hirelings around.
In ye olden days adventuring groups recruited additional NPC's by default. A few hunters, houndmasters that guard the camp at night, people that just carry loot on wagons, torchbearers etc. Traveling with a troupe was pretty standard. It isn't that odd. You basically setup a forward base near the entrance of a cave. The 4 players with maybe a few NPC hirelings to accompany them will enter and do their black-ops/strikeforce task.
However NPC's should NEVER join just because the PC's roll good persuasion checks. NPC's have personalities. Often NPC's turn down my PC's even if they roll really well. Simply because NPC can not leave their spouse behind no matter how much they want to go. Or some other personal motivation they have. Not to mention that the PC's have to make sure their hirelings are looked after and get paid every single day.
Both the Kobold and the Guard in OP's post are there against their own free will. Depending on their personal goals they could, and should, be pissed off with the PC's. Not falling in love with the warlock because that one rolled high charisma rolls. The kobold and guard will probably, temporarily, join forces with the party until they're out of their predicament. Ditching the party as soon as they enter the first village.
Why are they automatically becoming party members? Maybe temporary allies. The kobold, especially, seems like he'd up and bolt the first chance he got, and the guard is likely more pissed than grateful.
As for NPC's in combat. let your players handle 1 of them. just give a basic sheet with 1 main attack and 1 or 2 extra attacks they could do. with a very basic summary of their skills. It doesn't task the player that much, if at all.
As for interacting. That is a DM problem of not being able to roleplay and distance yourself. NPC hirelings that my group has... well they have a guard traveling with them as well. Someone who wanted to try the adventuring life one day. She's now getting a taste while still in service to the local lord. Since the group is investigating stuff for that lord. And its easier to send one guard with them instead of sending an entire company out into the wilds. She is sassy and has a mind of her own. She shares various ideas to situations, but never the correct one. She NEVER asks leading questions, but open ones that have multiple answers. She asks the kind of questions that gets the PC's to think and it is them that has to come with a solution in the end. She could find clues with investigation, but doesn't mean she knows how to analyse them.
For all those asking about why the NPC's stuck around. I promise it wasn't just a lucky skill check. Both incidences involved the group being stuck somewhere for a long period of time with them and GREAT roleplay on their side.
For the Kobold: Yes he was taken against his will and brought in for questioning. But upon seeing that he was used as slave labor and didn't really want to be there in the first place, the party couldnt bring themselves to do the usual "murder-hobo-interogation" that was expected of them. The groups Barbarian decided that if he wanted to follow the strongest creature he could find, to follow him. and with that the barbarian consistently proved that he was in FACT the strongest thing the kobold had ever seen. So the kobold became his lackey for a while. The Barb used this time to slowly change the relationship from lackey to friend by excellent uses of downtime RP, travel conversations (as well as introducing him to the concept of a brothel). When the Barb retook his clan as the leader, the kobold became his second in command. So thats why the kobold didn't flee and became permanent
For the Guard: He was already reluctant to push them into the pit in the first place and after the Paladin pulled him in, he WAS pissed. but there was no where else to go other than with them. they were in this dungeon for a total of 57 in-game days and the wanted to RP PRETTY MUCH all of them lol. The guard learned that the reason they were sentenced to the dungeon in the first place was based on false allegations, and that the REAL reason is that the party knew the truth behind the start of the current war (pretty much the king of this country WANTED the war for *plot* reasons and lied that the other side attacked first when he did it to his own people). The guard lost friends and family in that initial attack so his already questioning loyalty was shaking even more. and throughout the 2 months they were stuck together, many life-saving occurances, late night campfire chats, and frankly heartwarming RP of reconciliation, the guard became close to ALL of them. The warlock tended to be the one staying up with him the most (her drow darkvision made up for his human-ness) so they had LOTS of bonding time. When they finally emerged, they were HUNDREDS of miles away (partly cause of travel, partly cause of some magic they didn't pick up on) and are currently thinking of what to do next.
This reply wasn't a complaint or a "me not knowing what to do" I just wanted to defend my party a little bit (and show them off a little like every proud DM with his goofy-ass players lol). These were by no means "you rolled 25 persuasion, he's a party member now". in fact, both tried escaping at some point but my group is just REALLY INTO the roleplay and gave them reason to stay lol
The main purpose of this post wasn't to make them stop i guess... it was mainly to find out HOW to better distance myself from the NPC character so that the internal bias of DM knowing the answer and NPC being unaware, don't overlap!
If your sole purpose of this post is "How do I not give players all the info because NPC" then the answer is fairly simple: the NPC only knows what is necessary to accomplish their job.
The guard, as you rightfully played him, didn't know about the subterfuge of the king. He would be ignorant of anything but his day to day life and anything above his pay grade. If this guy was nothing more than a glorified babysitter for prisoners, then why would he know about the inner workings of the troops being sent into war? The same holds true for the kobold, it wouldn't know anything more than it's position in the pack. In this case it was a slave, where things can be a little tricky depending on what its jobs were. If it was allowed to go into different chambers to clean, maybe it heard something by accident, if it was simply doing grunt work in the quarry, it wouldn't know much more than what it was mining and moving around.
You don't have to worry about how much you, as DM, know since everyone already assumes you have all the answers. The trick is to figure out how much the NPCs are privy to and how they can convince them to divulge that information.
I'm evil.. so..
Kobold, seeing how it was a slave. I'd run him wanting to return and free the rest of them. Asking the party for help. If they help them great! New quest! If not he'd slowly begin to question his so called me friends and get mad enough to simply leave being disgusted with the party for not helping him and using him for their own personal needs which in the kobolds eyes is also slavery-ish.
For the guard, he'd have family that he was forced away from when the paladin pulled him into the pit. Consequences later would be something happening to his family and he wasn't there to protect them.
While both can be seen as bad the issues should tug at the parties heart strings so that they see the consequences of their actions by doing what they did.
Even the best intentions have consequences.. just have to add them into the story.
Or let it be and just have fun with it.
I'm reeeeally liking having something happen with his family (insert evil DM laugh). Because they've already been hinted towards some stuff thats happened back in their homeland while theyve been gone like the king implementing a form of "disease-bomb" thing (they don't know this but the king is like possesed by an ancient god of death and pestilence so he's converting the city into a nasty pus-filled brain-washing disease hole lol) and this is RIGHT where the guards family are from.... muahahaha....