I normally play small campaigns, normally between 1-4 players, and to balance this out when I have less players, I make a party member NPC to help them in combat, role play them as a player, and make it so they don't hog the spotlight in the game. I know most people think DMPC's are bad, but if you only have one or 2 players, there's not much you can do, especially if they're new and can't handle two characters at once. What are your thoughts? I want to know your guys' opinion? Also, what are the best class/subclass's to have as a side player character? I've used many different types in the past, and want to see what worked well for you, as an easy "support" class that doesn't live for attention.

In the group I most recently DM'd for, the party needed a Cleric and they were in Eberron. So I created a DMPC Warforged Cleric. That made it easy as I could tell the players he had little personality beyond "I'm a warforged Cleric" and they could choose to interact with him or not as much as they wanted.

Turned out they wanted to. Over the course of just a single session, they began working with him to expand his personality and newfound personhood.

So my opinion is "DMPC's are fine".

My advice would be:

Don't make one that's going to be competing for time in the spotlight.

Start minimal and let the players have input into who this character is too.

Quote from TheCubester >>

In the group I most recently DM'd for, the party needed a Cleric and they were in Eberron. So I created a DMPC Warforged Cleric. That made it easy as I could tell the players he had little personality beyond "I'm a warforged Cleric" and they could choose to interact with him or not as much as they wanted.

Turned out they wanted to. Over the course of just a single session, they began working with him to expand his personality and newfound personhood.

So my opinion is "DMPC's are fine".

My advice would be:

Don't make one that's going to be competing for time in the spotlight.

Start minimal and let the players have input into who this character is too.

 Great guidelines, I already try to do those. I have quite a few that I've used through the years.

I wouldn’t even make them support, because if they are too effective at support, the group becomes dependent on them, the support DMPC whether consciously or not will portion off spells and such using “meta” knowledge unintentionally etc.

if you make a DMPC, go for just a 1 trick pony for a situation they don’t have covered.

rangers. Rangers with favored enemies. “I’m here to shoot arrows, and pick up pieces of scat to know which way to go. And I’m all out of arrows.”

even if others can hunt and track, doesn’t matter. They get some minimal fight help. Minimal (cure wounds) healing help, minimal support (pass without trace) but they really just get a 1 trick pony for favored enemies and favored terrain, which don’t have a ton of utility unless you the DM allow it, so they will never steal the spotlight in any way.

Quote from Robazathus >>

I wouldn’t even make them support, because if they are too effective at support, the group becomes dependent on them, the support DMPC whether consciously or not will portion off spells and such using “meta” knowledge unintentionally etc.

if you make a DMPC, go for just a 1 trick pony for a situation they don’t have covered.

rangers. Rangers with favored enemies. “I’m here to shoot arrows, and pick up pieces of scat to know which way to go. And I’m all out of arrows.”

even if others can hunt and track, doesn’t matter. They get some minimal fight help. Minimal (cure wounds) healing help, minimal support (pass without trace) but they really just get a 1 trick pony for favored enemies and favored terrain, which don’t have a ton of utility unless you the DM allow it, so they will never steal the spotlight in any way.

 I know, I almost never do fully support DMPC's. I have done an Artificer, so they can do minor healing and raising from the dead, but not much. I've done Diviner Wizards, support in the way that portent can help or hurt anyone. Rogues are one of my favorites, they're simple, can do quite a bit of damage with some teamwork, and they don't deal too much damage. I haven't tried ranger yet, I might do that next.

Quote from LeviRocks >>

I normally play small campaigns, normally between 1-4 players, and to balance this out when I have less players, I make a party member NPC to help them in combat, role play them as a player, and make it so they don't hog the spotlight in the game. I know most people think DMPC's are bad, but if you only have one or 2 players, there's not much you can do, especially if they're new and can't handle two characters at once. What are your thoughts? I want to know your guys' opinion? Also, what are the best class/subclass's to have as a side player character? I've used many different types in the past, and want to see what worked well for you, as an easy "support" class that doesn't live for attention.

 I think it's usually better to have NPCs. It's a little less threatening to have someone who will be there for maybe a dungeon and then leave. Or use characters of the players who are absent and work out what they are doing together. They can make suggestions but if the suggestions are out of character (from background, personality, or precedent) don't let it happen. Of course that's not possible if you don't have access to the character sheet. 

My #1 tip is to skip the backstory. DMPCs work best when they don't have any story centered on them...think of them more like sidekicks who happen to have equal power.

Bards and clerics make good side characters. If the party has support covered and need more martial characters, a simple fighter works.

I'd probably just use sidekicks now that we have those.

Our group used to rotate DMs and we used our own PC as the "party NPC" when our turn in the barrel came up. It never was a problem. It was understood that the DM would not play the character to full tactical effectiveness unless the players suggested it. For example, unless told not to, I would either have my "DMPC" either attack the nearest target, or attack a target rolled at random. Technically this was rather OOC for the character, but I didn't want to use my DM knowledge of the most effective target for him to attack. And it was also understood that nothing important story-was was going to happen to the DMPC while you were DMing. They were just there to keep filling their role as the party healer or spellmage or whatever.

I DM for a party of 2, accompanied by two DMPCs.

One is a Barbarian Bear. Who doesn't hog the spotlight because she is a bear.

The other is a warforged warlock, who specialises in hitting people with fire, force or lightning.

The thing I find helps is to let the players have as much or as little input in to what the DMPCs do as they want. Then again, my players are 6 and 3, so that might not apply to everyone.

I think that is a key point... to have the NPC (we never called them DMPCs back in the day) obey player directives (and not argue with them about tactics!). When the DMPCs turn came up, I would always say, "What do you want Aaron to do this round?" If they didn't have any directives I would have him attack at random using his primary attack method... but, they almost always had something they wanted the character to do. If it's a thief (no rogues back in those days), I'm not going to *ever* suggest when to check for traps etc. They have to say "Can we have Aaron check for traps?" Then I'd say, "Sure, where do you want him to look?" etc. It's all got to be up to them.

Though there may be a limit to that if your players are 6 and 3! :)

Having NPC's (as in creatures using a relatively simple monster stat block) help the party out now and then works great.  It can fill a niche in the party and help drive the story.  But I would never recommend to make an actual DMPC (as in making an actual Player Character for yourself to control,) it's far too easy to metagame and outshine the party if you do so.  In my opinion, no NPC should stay with the party for long enough for you to get overly comfortable playing them.  They should have their own personality that you control like any other NPC, they should not be "your character."

If it's a recurring issue, I'd probably lean toward letting the players roll up additional characters and just choose a party (sort of Mass Effect-style) of one character per player when they head out on a quest. The "off-duty" PCs spend the time running errands, stocking up on supplies, having a spa day, whatever.

Quote from Jaysburn >>

Having NPC's (as in creatures using a relatively simple monster stat block) help the party out now and then works great.  It can fill a niche in the party and help drive the story.  But I would never recommend to make an actual DMPC (as in making an actual Player Character for yourself to control,) it's far too easy to metagame and outshine the party if you do so.  In my opinion, no NPC should stay with the party for long enough for you to get overly comfortable playing them.  They should have their own personality that you control like any other NPC, they should not be "your character."

 I know, I try hard to keep them from being my character. I make them either normal or messed-up strange personalities for them, I had a dwarf artificer who was obsessed at perfecting his body by replacing parts of him with metal and mechanical contraptions, another DMPC was a halfling rogue that was trying to find a way to become leader of the Zhentarim in Waterdeep. I try to make them generic, but memorable. Dwarf Artificers make sense, but what happens when their immediate family was killed by orcs, and parts of their body were chopped off in the fight, it makes an insane dwarf artificer cyborg named Alberich Trollbleeder who has an imaginary friend, and hates orcs and half-orcs. Halfling rogues are one of the most common race-class combinations, but what happens when they're a member of a dark "family" that is trying to become ruler of the Sword Coast, and they know more than the party does, but don't tell them, so at any minute they can unleash a ton of exposition. My DMPCs are special, but I don't get attached to them, they can die at any minute, and have many times. I don't make them take the spotlight from the players, they have their own smaller spotlights that the players can choose to look at if they want to.

I do babysitter NPCs, but once the players are out of the first-level cradle. I find that NPCs work well if each has a serious flaw.

The little old lady wizard who needs constant breaks and slows the party walking speed by half.  The rogue who is going to disappear with the first valuable item the party finds.  The farmer who is a worse than useless burden in combat but can negotiate them great discounts when shopping. The paladin who thinks HE is the party leader and expects everyone else to be his minions. The druid who will leave the party if they fight wild animals. The cleric who finds the party unholy, and will swap sides if they fight enemies with the cleric's prefered alignment. The loudmouthed fighter who attracts the attention of fierce predators and ruins every attempt at stealth.  The ranger whose beloved animal companion can do nothing wrong so it must be the party's fault when they get bitten, snarled at, clawed, poisoned, peed on or sprayed with skunk musk. The anti-violence sorcerer who demands that every encounter start with an attempt to negotiate or evade, no matter how hopeless it looks.

I do like the idea of characters traveling with DMPCs for only short periods of time, if only because it lets the DM try out a lot of different races adn classes.

Quote from TransmorpherDDS >>

I do like the idea of characters traveling with DMPCs for only short periods of time, if only because it lets the DM try out a lot of different races adn classes.

 I agree, I've had most classes as DMPC's which really helps me learn which ones are good and easy to run as a DMPC or PC. It helps if I'm introducing new characters to the game so I can let them know that rogues and fighters are really good and really easy to play, if you play them certain ways. I really like using DMPC's, not because they're my players, but because it lets me get a feel for how the game works. 

I have two DMPC that my players hire sometimes when they need backup. One is a mastermind rogue who besides being a skill monkey in dungeon crawls will use bonus action ranged help to support the fighter and paladin. The other character they hire is a cleric from a local temple who typically heals between combats and provides some support and control. The drawback is it tends to costs an upfront fee and a percentage of loot found. They also won't risk their life for you so you need to plan accordingly.

I've used similar tactics before as well. I had the dwarf artificer that I mentioned previously save himself with healing spells instead of other DMPC's who were dying, to show that no matter how much he will help you, he won't risk his life for other's. 

I just thought of something that could be potentially interesting... what if, if only for a short time, the group travels with a DMPC who is the same class as one of the players, but is clearly less skilled and knowledgeable about the class. A sort of learning exercise for a player, where they could learn their own class a little better by having to explain details to a less experienced ally. It sounds potentially like an interesting moment, but it does have the potential to just be kind of annoying if not done right.