Next week I'm doing my second ever DM session. We only have 2 PC's, a fighter and a monk, which makes them really interesting if even just one of them goes down.
I have played in campaigns where an NPC joins the party and even will fight with the group. So what distinguishes an NPC from a DM ran PC? Is this something that should normally be avoided? On forums and in D&D YouTube videos, many people have said a DM ran "player character" is bad. I can definitely understand that.
1st Question: So again, what distinguishes an NPC from a DM ran PC?
2nd Question: Next session the players are on a quest to rescue a Gold Dragon Wyrmling. My plan is once they un-muzzle and unshackle the Wyrmling, a bunch of bad guys run in and attack them, and the Wyrmling fights on their side. I'm further considering having it join them as a semi-permanent party member. Later on in the campaign, there's going to be a really scary moment when the Wyrmling's seriously PO'd mother finds them and thinks they kidnapped her baby. <--- Does having a baby dragon that I control join the party and fight with them constitute a PC?
The actual difference between an NPC and a DM run PC is statblock vs character sheet. But the difference that matters is whether the story is about the PCs and their companion or about the DMPC and their companions.
The fun of PC storylines is that things won't go exactly how any one player thinks they should. If the DM has a PC, their story tends to go exactly how the DM thinks it should, often overshadowing other stories.
DMPCs have a privilege PCs don't, they're run by the game's show runner. Consequently, and often unintentionally, they tend to pull the spotlight. Plus the DM is now in the position of managing a character sheet and gets pulled away from running the game world by the attention requisite for developing the character.
D&D has some pretty nice rules on Sidekicks, I think presented first in the essentials and expanded upon in Tasha's Cauldoron of everything if you really want to have being who mechanically "grows".
Other problem is your baby dragon can and likely will become the "Gandalf" deus ex machina. Why should the players do anything if they can just unleash the DM's pet dragon on whatever they're up against.
As DM, you present the challenges and opportunities in the world, let the PCs figure out how they want to contend with them without having your stand-in showing up in the game. Let them run the dragon jointly where they debate its action and with consensus you then narrate what it does.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
The problem is not the presence of DMPC or NPC in a party, but the way some DM manage them. The problem is when they're given too much spotlights or there's favoritism, which is DM to blame, not the tool itself. Having a DMPC, NPC, sidekick, hireling or companion tagging along is not problematic in itself for many DM's campaign.
The problem is not the presence of DMPC or NPC in a party, but the way some DM manage them. The problem is when they're given too much spotlights or there's favoritism, which is DM to blame, not the tool itself. Having a DMPC, NPC, sidekick, hireling or companion tagging along is not problematic in itself for many DM's campaign.
You're not wrong, but in this particular instance where the 'DMPC' or +1 is a dragon, in a relatively or completely new DM's campaign, it like the dragon should have hatched with a red flag affixed to its tail signaling all the potential pitfalls such a move could take.
My table, if you're reading this, out. Now.
I write this, of course, as a DM who has embedded in the party a blue duck who is actually a Sapphire Dragon imprisoned in blue duck form after an accident at a magic duel a millennia or more ago. He does nothing but attract unwanted attention as a bright blue duck, stalk and eat spiders, and when stressed winds up pooping a spider web cobbed mess of no practical or game mechanical value, and if referred to as a duck will speak in common "My name is Phillip" (it's all it will tell you with speak with animals too). At some point the duck may be restored to its true form and take on the role of a patron or antagonist, I'm not sure yet, largely depends on how the party treats him as well as how the align in some of the games larger conflicts). But Phillip is not an NPC. His sheet on the party tracker is simply "Phillip: 3 hp AC 10, available actions: dodge, if succeeds on a stealth roll can burrow 5'".
It depend how the dragon is played. If it kills everything in place of the PCs, outshine them in and out of combat etc then it will be problematic, wether it is a dragon or a half-elf NPC. It all depend on how the DM uses it.
For more context, my players are level 3. A gold dragon wyrmling is CR 3. Looking at the stats, it’s a bit strong for the group. So I think I’m going to use the stats for bronze until perhaps level 5 or 6.
Just the big question is what to do about control of the wyrmling. I want it to be unpredictable to them for realism, and also to feel like it’s on their side but they cannot command it.
So for now I’m going to massage the stats so it’s about on par with my players, but I will control it as a DM. The players can interact with it as normal, and it will behave in a manner that is based on their actions.
A Gold Dragon Wyrmling is a powerful sidekick to a party AL3, a Bronze is better i agree.
Personally i would roleplay/run it but if you share the stats with the player, i would probably ask if one of them want to run it in combat just so i don't bother with it ☺
The problem is not the presence of DMPC or NPC in a party, but the way some DM manage them. The problem is when they're given too much spotlights or there's favoritism, which is DM to blame, not the tool itself. Having a DMPC, NPC, sidekick, hireling or companion tagging along is not problematic in itself for many DM's campaign.
I couldn't agree more with the above comments.
It's been pretty common in my personal gaming experience in smaller groups for a DM to play a PC. I'm talking one player and a DM, or in your case, it seems two players and a DM. It usually goes without saying that the DMPC will take a backseat to the PCs. Another thing that has been quite common for me is to take turns as DM, so everyone gets a chance to fully play their PC.
These were usually not serious campaigns. We called them BS Adventures but, they could be really fun.
The creature you are asking the question about is not a playable "character" in my opinion but, I wouldn't see a problem with it being DM controlled or player controlled as long as it was understood by the players that they probably would have limited input on what the creature actually does do.
1) An NPC's motivations serve themselves or a larger group, faction, town. They provide services and products. They are background characters and extras on the set of the movie. A PC, regardless of who plays it, is the main character of the scene. They require products, services and assistance or guidance from the NPCs. NPC - Background Character, PC - Main Character.
DMPCs are main characters that are run by the DM, not the players. One of the points of the game is to make the players, by proxy of their PC, the focus of the story, not the DM. We don't run games so that we can be the hero of the story, we run games so that others can. (If this doesn't apply to how you feel about running games, then to each their own)
2) Your 2nd question is the same question as your 1st. What constitutes a PC vs NPC. If the scene becomes reliant upon the wyrmling that you control for success or failure, I might suggest that the inclusion of that entity in the scene distracted from the PCs as the heroes and focused on the character that you control being the hero. If you portray the wyrmling as something that is attempting to contribute to its own freedom, but at a lesser degree of impact so as to retain focus on your PCs, then that would make them a very successfully run NPC.
If you are concerned that the PCs aren't enough to stand against the tide of battle, then give them Sidekicks. (Rules are in TCoE or in UA format on WOTC Site) You can homebrew monsters down to Minion Stats from 4e if you need to.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
I’m running a very prominent NPC in my campaign because the PCs need him. It’s a water based campaign so the PCs are on ships and none of the PCs has any skills in Navigation. So they’re leaning heavily on an NPC to run their ship so they can adventure.
I’m mostly keeping him in the background and I decided to make him half the level that the PCs are simply so that he doesn’t get killed by being caught in an area of effect spell or attack. The only advice that he gives is running the ship, repairing the ship, or navigating.
Other than that I have too much work to do to run a DM PC. I'm already running the adventure, all of the NPCs, the weather, and the monsters. I’m actually dumping running a major NPC off on the party right now!
The most common practical use for DMPCs are in multi-DM campaigns where the DM swaps in and out from time to time. When the player is DMing their PC becomes an NPC usually run by one of the other players with the DM offering limited input if the character ends up having to make a decision. Otherwise, they usually stay at the back.
A DM running a DMPC in a game that does not require it, is usually a red flag. The DM should be using an NPC, either with a stat block or PC built.
The difference between a DMPC and NPC has nothing to do with how the character is built, it has to do with the attitude of the DM towards the NPC. If the DM is attached to the character, has them take a notable role in the campaign and occasionally over shadows the players then the NPC is being run more like a DMPC. If a DM thinks about their NPC and finds that they are attached to the NPC as more than a story element then there is room for a possible issue to arise where the NPC gets preferential treatment leading to a DMPC situation.
In the OPs situation, the dragon wrymling is an NPC added for story reasons and to increase the party resilience in combat. A creature that could heal might be more useful than a baby dragon but the baby dragon is s fun story element and pretty cool. The dragon NPC isn't an issue unless it turns out to be too powerful and the players wonder what their characters are supposed to do.
The most common practical use for DMPCs are in multi-DM campaigns where the DM swaps in and out from time to time. When the player is DMing their PC becomes an NPC usually run by one of the other players with the DM offering limited input if the character ends up having to make a decision. Otherwise, they usually stay at the back.
A DM running a DMPC in a game that does not require it, is usually a red flag. The DM should be using an NPC, either with a stat block or PC built.
The difference between a DMPC and NPC has nothing to do with how the character is built, it has to do with the attitude of the DM towards the NPC. If the DM is attached to the character, has them take a notable role in the campaign and occasionally over shadows the players then the NPC is being run more like a DMPC. If a DM thinks about their NPC and finds that they are attached to the NPC as more than a story element then there is room for a possible issue to arise where the NPC gets preferential treatment leading to a DMPC situation.
In the OPs situation, the dragon wrymling is an NPC added for story reasons and to increase the party resilience in combat. A creature that could heal might be more useful than a baby dragon but the baby dragon is s fun story element and pretty cool. The dragon NPC isn't an issue unless it turns out to be too powerful and the players wonder what their characters are supposed to do.
In blue this is all correct. The purpose is two-fold, to increase their survivability and also the cool factor them having a baby dragon ally. As a player I would be pretty excited about that, so hopefully they will as well. What's neat is that none of them speak Draconic, so the baby (a male) will be just following them around and helping them, because they are his rescuers. But they can't communicate with it, so they can't coordinate their actions, and (for now) they don't entirely know what it will do.
I have some ideas for future story hooks associated with the dragon. For example, at night the baby dragon might start crying for its mother. What will the players decide to do? Will they go on a quest to try to find her? From the players' perspective, will the mother attack them on sight? What about the mission at hand, should the allow themselves to be sidetracked (duty verses compassion)?
There are only as many problems running a DMPC as there are in terms of any other aspect of running the game: run well, it's great, run badly, it's an issue.
Some things that you should be thinking about when you have to run a character in the party are as follows:
Running a DMPC in combat can be problematic if the character has abilities that will have major impact on fights. Try to restrict their abilities to straight up single target damage and healing, rather than more unusual effects. Having a 5th level fighter making a couple of attack rolls in the combat and absorbing a couple of hits is fine: having an NPC cast Dominate Person on the key enemy NPC makes the fight odd for the players and takes away their spotlight.
The DMPC should have no more knowledge about what's going on than the PCs in relation to the main storyline, though they may have area knowledge that the PCs can tap into when you want them to
When your players reach a higher level, if the DMPC has become a key and well-liked party member, then you'll want to cede combat control of the character to a trusted player who knows how to run the character, and will RP the character during combat as well. Trying to run a 10th level spellcaster as well as 8 monsters and trying to deal with everything else at the same time is hard on the DM. You can alternately give the DMPC a stat-block if necessary to simplify things.
The DMPC should not be involved in social interaction encounters (making persuasion/deception checks etc.), solving riddles and puzzles etc. The players should really understand that this is necessary and a better way for the game to work.
Allow the DMPC to participate in solutions if the players ask them to do something. So my DMPC druid might turn into a squirrel and go gathering information, but only when the PCs ask them to do it.
I typically include a DM-PC for a bit to assist with things.
How I run it usually is that when it comes to dungeon crawls, I keep my mouth completely shut. I let them figure it out, I dont pipe in, Im there for pretty much combat assistance and some roleplay.
i have a DM PC in the campaign I am running for our group. He isn't allowed to do much of anything, he is a simple tool, outside of combat. In combat, he performs as his character would (he's a Bard) and supports the party. He answers local lore questions they ask directly (nothing is volunteered) and he is NOT permitted to offer any help in solving problems, unless given specific direction from the party. They tried to ask him "Well, what do you think the riddle means?" and as he started to respond, "Well, it looks like..." POOF, he was gone. When returned by the higher power that had taken him, the party was advised of his limitations.
He is with them because I was SURE someone was going to make a Bard and part of the campaign I had laid out required one. Mind you, it took the party almost a half hour to realize they had a ready answer at hand (needed to hit an "e" note, true and clear) and asked him to do so. He, of course, knew all along (and HE would have, even without my controlling him) but couldn't offer the solution.
Have fun with the dragon....it sounds like it will be quite an interesting little trip.
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'm tacking in this video because the prohibitions Sanvael and Caius and Falwith against DMPC's problem solving are sound, but the gag order can actually be worked without making it sound like there's a hard barrier. There's a conversational mode sometimes used intensely in interviewing, but is also a known rhetorical technique that's simply reflecting what was just said at you, but returned in a cadence that tends to actually elicit a response from the initial questioner. It's models herein as well as a whole bunch of other guidance for a 1 on 1 game, which a 2 on 1 game definitely is closer than a traditional party oriented game, especially if the players are relatively new.
My instinct would have been to not intro the Dragon sidekick (I still think it functions more along those lines than a DMPC), rather than adding a layer onto the party (meaning the game becomes "two PCs and a Dragon" rather than the adventures of two PCs) I would have scaled back the challenges posed to the duo non-party and maybe introduce a more mundane NPC to be that literal sounding board when a map or thoughtline needs to be drawn out.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Jeff and Clinton, stay out please.
Next week I'm doing my second ever DM session. We only have 2 PC's, a fighter and a monk, which makes them really interesting if even just one of them goes down.
I have played in campaigns where an NPC joins the party and even will fight with the group. So what distinguishes an NPC from a DM ran PC? Is this something that should normally be avoided? On forums and in D&D YouTube videos, many people have said a DM ran "player character" is bad. I can definitely understand that.
1st Question: So again, what distinguishes an NPC from a DM ran PC?
2nd Question: Next session the players are on a quest to rescue a Gold Dragon Wyrmling. My plan is once they un-muzzle and unshackle the Wyrmling, a bunch of bad guys run in and attack them, and the Wyrmling fights on their side. I'm further considering having it join them as a semi-permanent party member. Later on in the campaign, there's going to be a really scary moment when the Wyrmling's seriously PO'd mother finds them and thinks they kidnapped her baby. <--- Does having a baby dragon that I control join the party and fight with them constitute a PC?
The actual difference between an NPC and a DM run PC is statblock vs character sheet. But the difference that matters is whether the story is about the PCs and their companion or about the DMPC and their companions.
The fun of PC storylines is that things won't go exactly how any one player thinks they should. If the DM has a PC, their story tends to go exactly how the DM thinks it should, often overshadowing other stories.
1) The difference is progression. Usually a DMPC level up along, while an NPC's statistics are static.
2) A Gold Dragon Wirmling in the party would not be a PC as it's not controlled by a player. It would be a sort of NPC sidekick companion.
DMPCs have a privilege PCs don't, they're run by the game's show runner. Consequently, and often unintentionally, they tend to pull the spotlight. Plus the DM is now in the position of managing a character sheet and gets pulled away from running the game world by the attention requisite for developing the character.
D&D has some pretty nice rules on Sidekicks, I think presented first in the essentials and expanded upon in Tasha's Cauldoron of everything if you really want to have being who mechanically "grows".
Other problem is your baby dragon can and likely will become the "Gandalf" deus ex machina. Why should the players do anything if they can just unleash the DM's pet dragon on whatever they're up against.
As DM, you present the challenges and opportunities in the world, let the PCs figure out how they want to contend with them without having your stand-in showing up in the game. Let them run the dragon jointly where they debate its action and with consensus you then narrate what it does.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
The problem is not the presence of DMPC or NPC in a party, but the way some DM manage them. The problem is when they're given too much spotlights or there's favoritism, which is DM to blame, not the tool itself. Having a DMPC, NPC, sidekick, hireling or companion tagging along is not problematic in itself for many DM's campaign.
You're not wrong, but in this particular instance where the 'DMPC' or +1 is a dragon, in a relatively or completely new DM's campaign, it like the dragon should have hatched with a red flag affixed to its tail signaling all the potential pitfalls such a move could take.
My table, if you're reading this, out. Now.
I write this, of course, as a DM who has embedded in the party a blue duck who is actually a Sapphire Dragon imprisoned in blue duck form after an accident at a magic duel a millennia or more ago. He does nothing but attract unwanted attention as a bright blue duck, stalk and eat spiders, and when stressed winds up pooping a spider web cobbed mess of no practical or game mechanical value, and if referred to as a duck will speak in common "My name is Phillip" (it's all it will tell you with speak with animals too). At some point the duck may be restored to its true form and take on the role of a patron or antagonist, I'm not sure yet, largely depends on how the party treats him as well as how the align in some of the games larger conflicts). But Phillip is not an NPC. His sheet on the party tracker is simply "Phillip: 3 hp AC 10, available actions: dodge, if succeeds on a stealth roll can burrow 5'".
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
It depend how the dragon is played. If it kills everything in place of the PCs, outshine them in and out of combat etc then it will be problematic, wether it is a dragon or a half-elf NPC. It all depend on how the DM uses it.
For more context, my players are level 3. A gold dragon wyrmling is CR 3. Looking at the stats, it’s a bit strong for the group. So I think I’m going to use the stats for bronze until perhaps level 5 or 6.
Just the big question is what to do about control of the wyrmling. I want it to be unpredictable to them for realism, and also to feel like it’s on their side but they cannot command it.
So for now I’m going to massage the stats so it’s about on par with my players, but I will control it as a DM. The players can interact with it as normal, and it will behave in a manner that is based on their actions.
A Gold Dragon Wyrmling is a powerful sidekick to a party AL3, a Bronze is better i agree.
Personally i would roleplay/run it but if you share the stats with the player, i would probably ask if one of them want to run it in combat just so i don't bother with it ☺
I couldn't agree more with the above comments.
It's been pretty common in my personal gaming experience in smaller groups for a DM to play a PC. I'm talking one player and a DM, or in your case, it seems two players and a DM. It usually goes without saying that the DMPC will take a backseat to the PCs. Another thing that has been quite common for me is to take turns as DM, so everyone gets a chance to fully play their PC.
These were usually not serious campaigns. We called them BS Adventures but, they could be really fun.
The creature you are asking the question about is not a playable "character" in my opinion but, I wouldn't see a problem with it being DM controlled or player controlled as long as it was understood by the players that they probably would have limited input on what the creature actually does do.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
My 2 cp.
1) An NPC's motivations serve themselves or a larger group, faction, town. They provide services and products. They are background characters and extras on the set of the movie. A PC, regardless of who plays it, is the main character of the scene. They require products, services and assistance or guidance from the NPCs. NPC - Background Character, PC - Main Character.
DMPCs are main characters that are run by the DM, not the players. One of the points of the game is to make the players, by proxy of their PC, the focus of the story, not the DM. We don't run games so that we can be the hero of the story, we run games so that others can. (If this doesn't apply to how you feel about running games, then to each their own)
2) Your 2nd question is the same question as your 1st. What constitutes a PC vs NPC. If the scene becomes reliant upon the wyrmling that you control for success or failure, I might suggest that the inclusion of that entity in the scene distracted from the PCs as the heroes and focused on the character that you control being the hero. If you portray the wyrmling as something that is attempting to contribute to its own freedom, but at a lesser degree of impact so as to retain focus on your PCs, then that would make them a very successfully run NPC.
If you are concerned that the PCs aren't enough to stand against the tide of battle, then give them Sidekicks. (Rules are in TCoE or in UA format on WOTC Site) You can homebrew monsters down to Minion Stats from 4e if you need to.
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
I’m running a very prominent NPC in my campaign because the PCs need him. It’s a water based campaign so the PCs are on ships and none of the PCs has any skills in Navigation. So they’re leaning heavily on an NPC to run their ship so they can adventure.
I’m mostly keeping him in the background and I decided to make him half the level that the PCs are simply so that he doesn’t get killed by being caught in an area of effect spell or attack. The only advice that he gives is running the ship, repairing the ship, or navigating.
Other than that I have too much work to do to run a DM PC. I'm already running the adventure, all of the NPCs, the weather, and the monsters. I’m actually dumping running a major NPC off on the party right now!
Professional computer geek
The most common practical use for DMPCs are in multi-DM campaigns where the DM swaps in and out from time to time. When the player is DMing their PC becomes an NPC usually run by one of the other players with the DM offering limited input if the character ends up having to make a decision. Otherwise, they usually stay at the back.
A DM running a DMPC in a game that does not require it, is usually a red flag. The DM should be using an NPC, either with a stat block or PC built.
The difference between a DMPC and NPC has nothing to do with how the character is built, it has to do with the attitude of the DM towards the NPC. If the DM is attached to the character, has them take a notable role in the campaign and occasionally over shadows the players then the NPC is being run more like a DMPC. If a DM thinks about their NPC and finds that they are attached to the NPC as more than a story element then there is room for a possible issue to arise where the NPC gets preferential treatment leading to a DMPC situation.
In the OPs situation, the dragon wrymling is an NPC added for story reasons and to increase the party resilience in combat. A creature that could heal might be more useful than a baby dragon but the baby dragon is s fun story element and pretty cool. The dragon NPC isn't an issue unless it turns out to be too powerful and the players wonder what their characters are supposed to do.
In blue this is all correct. The purpose is two-fold, to increase their survivability and also the cool factor them having a baby dragon ally. As a player I would be pretty excited about that, so hopefully they will as well. What's neat is that none of them speak Draconic, so the baby (a male) will be just following them around and helping them, because they are his rescuers. But they can't communicate with it, so they can't coordinate their actions, and (for now) they don't entirely know what it will do.
I have some ideas for future story hooks associated with the dragon. For example, at night the baby dragon might start crying for its mother. What will the players decide to do? Will they go on a quest to try to find her? From the players' perspective, will the mother attack them on sight? What about the mission at hand, should the allow themselves to be sidetracked (duty verses compassion)?
There are only as many problems running a DMPC as there are in terms of any other aspect of running the game: run well, it's great, run badly, it's an issue.
Some things that you should be thinking about when you have to run a character in the party are as follows:
I typically include a DM-PC for a bit to assist with things.
How I run it usually is that when it comes to dungeon crawls, I keep my mouth completely shut. I let them figure it out, I dont pipe in, Im there for pretty much combat assistance and some roleplay.
This is pretty much perfect, what Sanvael staed.
i have a DM PC in the campaign I am running for our group. He isn't allowed to do much of anything, he is a simple tool, outside of combat. In combat, he performs as his character would (he's a Bard) and supports the party. He answers local lore questions they ask directly (nothing is volunteered) and he is NOT permitted to offer any help in solving problems, unless given specific direction from the party. They tried to ask him "Well, what do you think the riddle means?" and as he started to respond, "Well, it looks like..." POOF, he was gone. When returned by the higher power that had taken him, the party was advised of his limitations.
He is with them because I was SURE someone was going to make a Bard and part of the campaign I had laid out required one. Mind you, it took the party almost a half hour to realize they had a ready answer at hand (needed to hit an "e" note, true and clear) and asked him to do so. He, of course, knew all along (and HE would have, even without my controlling him) but couldn't offer the solution.
Have fun with the dragon....it sounds like it will be quite an interesting little trip.
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'm tacking in this video because the prohibitions Sanvael and Caius and Falwith against DMPC's problem solving are sound, but the gag order can actually be worked without making it sound like there's a hard barrier. There's a conversational mode sometimes used intensely in interviewing, but is also a known rhetorical technique that's simply reflecting what was just said at you, but returned in a cadence that tends to actually elicit a response from the initial questioner. It's models herein as well as a whole bunch of other guidance for a 1 on 1 game, which a 2 on 1 game definitely is closer than a traditional party oriented game, especially if the players are relatively new.
My instinct would have been to not intro the Dragon sidekick (I still think it functions more along those lines than a DMPC), rather than adding a layer onto the party (meaning the game becomes "two PCs and a Dragon" rather than the adventures of two PCs) I would have scaled back the challenges posed to the duo non-party and maybe introduce a more mundane NPC to be that literal sounding board when a map or thoughtline needs to be drawn out.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.