PDA

View Full Version : Let's play "Spot the DMPC".



Jarawara
2010-01-13, 10:08 AM
I got totally passed over in the DMPC thread, and I should have known better to try to wade into that one. Way too much intense conversation to be noticed on the sidelines. But still, my question remains... can people viewing my game from the outside tell who within the party is the DMPC, and who would be PC's and NPC's.

Part of the debate in the DMPC thread is the definition of the term, and the other part is the benefits and detriments of having one, but whenever I apply those logics to my own campaign, I keep thinking that I must just be playing an entirely different game than most people. Maybe I'm doing things wrong... or maybe I'm doing them right.

So, if you all would indulge me, I would like to play a little game. It's called: "Spot the DMPC". I'm going to define seven members of the adventuring party, and I want people to guess who's the DMPC amongst them. Then I'd like to see people's opinions on my using a DMPC.

If you'd like, you could also post your own stories of DMPC's, good or bad. Try to keep the thread on the actual characters, and not turn this into a "Kill the DMPC with Fire" thread #217. Thanks.

*~*

1st up we have Leayas Nem Lara. A Kargish Witch/Druid/Monkish type, (I'm not going to get too specific on character classes, as I got lots of homebrewing going on), Leayas is betrothed to another of her kind, Harod Ar-Idas. She joined the party early on, by specific instructions from her mother, the notorious Witch Nisstra (who may very well become the campaign's BBEG someday.

2nd, we have Tugov Morkan Estualgan. "The Morkan's have been serving the Estualgans for generations, and I am no exception!", is one of this warrior's favorite sayings, which he uses to introduce himself (to just about everybody he meets). He leaves out the part of how all the Estualgans have been killed off, which leaves him out of a job.

3rd on the list, Jonich Tarascon. He is often referred to as "Prince" Tarascon, due to his next-in-line status to his older brother Lucag, the leader of the country of Tiatia. Of course, that was before Lucag went mad, and the new warlord Jaran Lyall took over the country. It's kind of a liberating experience, not having to worry about living up to the job that he apparently now will never get.

4th up, Chegrin Leall, distance cousin to the warlord Jaran Lyall, Chegrin did not choose to follow his cousin. His path took a different track, as one day he was gravely injured by a Cayrinshia, and lost an arm. He was saved that day by a priest named Allis, and he found religion. He goes around spreading the gospel of Allis, and is willing to sacrifice his life in her service. And is willing to sacrifice *anyone else's* life in her service.

5th, we have the foreigner, Jarath Von Spelding. The man of many talents, tall and handsome, but lacking any understanding of other people's feelings. He is an experienced adventurer, knowing more of the nuts and bolts of the art of staying alive and warm in hostile terrain, but his actual combat skills seem lacking. Is as likely to wade into a fight with his big-ass sword as he is to use his limited selection of spells. A decent singer. (Not a bard.)

6th, Livia Bearfolt. Daughter of Issac Bearfolt (NPC type) and Hannala Tarascon (sister of Jonich), Livia is a recent addition to the group of travelers. Extensively trained in the staff-fighting techniques her father instituted nation-wide, she instead prefers to learn a new fighting technique, which she learned from her new friend Miranda. (Miranda, by the way, is dating Jarath, but that's quite irrelevant.)

And last, we have Cetra Molari. A priest of Learun, he has recently dabbled in the forbidden dark arts, including the projection of fear effects. This is a bit of an irony, as he himself seems utterly fearless, putting his life in the path of danger without a concern for the consequences. In an earlier roleplay with the warlord Jaran, he inadvertantly demonstrated his fearlessness by stepping out over the edge of the tower wall to reattach a cable pulley. He almost fell, and it was Jaran who doubled over with vertigo, not Cetra. (Cetra's next line was: "Ha, that was close. Hey, what's the matter with you?") An engineering genius, he has designed advanced seige weapons for Jaran, but now he finds he spends more of his time near Chegrin and Jonich... though he actively dislikes both of them.

Honorable mention goes to Issac Bearfolt, (father of Livia), who is much higher level than anyone in the party, is an arrogant son-of-a ...., and is openly demeaning of the party members, and yet somehow ends up being loved by the people. But he doesn't travel with the party, so I guess he can't be a DMPC, right?

So, of those seven members of the party... can you tell me who is the DMPC?

Hint: There is more than one NPC, though only one is properly listed as DMPC.

*~*~*

I'll check back in a little bit, see if I got any responses. I'd be really curious, if people can list who the NPCs/DMPC are, and also what their opinions of them are.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-13, 10:10 AM
Backstory alone cannot possibly define a DMPC.

I don't know why you would think it could.

Saph
2010-01-13, 10:14 AM
The problem here is that we've only got your descriptions to go on, and they're much too full of backstory. Nothing you've written really tells us much about what your game is like to play in, except possibly by implication.

dsmiles
2010-01-13, 10:14 AM
Ummmm....yeah...what she said.

Lamech
2010-01-13, 10:25 AM
Not enough information. Try a sample session or some such... a campaign journal with all metagame references scrubbed. (Player names, what each player has learned and so forth... anything that is not included in the game world.)

Duke of URL
2010-01-13, 10:25 AM
I don't even have to read it. The answer is simple -- the characters played by the players are PCs. Any character who joins the party played by the DM is a DMPC, and the others are NPCs.

The descriptions are irrelevant. They are the definitions of characters, but do not indicate in any way whether each character is a PC, NPC, or DMPC. It is how they are played at the table the defines that.

Starbuck_II
2010-01-13, 10:27 AM
With no other data, I'm likely to make a false prediction. We need combat data, roleplay, etc.
It is not who they were but what they do that makes a DMPC.
but:

Jarath Von Spelding or Cetra Molari
1) Jarath sounds mary sue-ish, but he does possess a few flaws like few combat skills and no empathy. Though, it could easily be a PC as well.

2) Cetra due to fearless trait (outside of as Pally) I've seen many a DMPC, but then PCs can do that as well.

But need more data.

Lamech
2010-01-13, 10:30 AM
I don't even have to read it. The answer is simple -- the characters played by the players are PCs. Any character who joins the party played by the DM is a DMPC, and the others are NPCs.

The descriptions are irrelevant. They are the definitions of characters, but do not indicate in any way whether each character is a PC, NPC, or DMPC. It is how they are played at the table the defines that.

What is commonly meant by DMPC on this board is not so simple. If a princess joins the party because the characters are being paid to rescue her and ever so slightly end up deep in the plane of shadow, and the princess is rather useless (well at least deep in the plane of shadow), and the party decides to keep her around thats not a DMPC. If the princess one shots the BBEG and then teleports them out of deep shadow and then stops an invading army, then kills a party member who annoyed her then one has a DMPC.

Assassin89
2010-01-13, 10:33 AM
All of the characters you listed are NPCs. The assignment of DMPC is arbitrary since any of the descriptions could fit. 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 look suspicious due to notes, but they could still be NPCs with better descriptions.

Serpentine
2010-01-13, 10:34 AM
If a princess joins the party because the characters are being paid to rescue her and ever so slightly end up deep in the plane of shadow, and the princess is rather useless (well at least deep in the plane of shadow), and the party decides to keep her around thats not a DMPC. If the princess one shots the BBEG and then teleports them out of deep shadow and then stops an invading army, then kills a party member who annoyed her then one has a DMPC.And if the princess turns out to be a Ranger of comparable power to and with the same build restrictions as the rest of the party, is useful without overshadowing any of the other characters, and is as much a party member as any other character?
It's not an either/or situation. It's not "useless lump that sits in a corner" or "overpowering super-Sue". So where do the middle bits fit in?

Lamech
2010-01-13, 10:41 AM
And if the princess turns out to be a Ranger of comparable power to and with the same build restrictions as the rest of the party, is useful without overshadowing any of the other characters, and is as much a party member as any other character?
It's not an either/or situation. It's not "useless lump that sits in a corner" or "overpowering super-Sue". So where do the middle bits fit in?
That would also probably fall in the NPC catagory, I was making two simple examples... it probably depends on who you ask. I don't think everyone has the same defenition of DMPC. I think the common defenition on these boards (and I'm no more qualified then you, Serp, to make this call) is a problem NPC who travels with the party.

Also on a side note in a game of rolemaster I played we had a ranger much like the one you described (though not a princess). Ironically she later became more powerful after I made her take the divine power-up...

Duke of URL
2010-01-13, 10:43 AM
What is commonly meant by DMPC on this board is not so simple. If a princess joins the party because the characters are being paid to rescue her and ever so slightly end up deep in the plane of shadow, and the princess is rather useless (well at least deep in the plane of shadow), and the party decides to keep her around thats not a DMPC. If the princess one shots the BBEG and then teleports them out of deep shadow and then stops an invading army, then kills a party member who annoyed her then one has a DMPC.

Then the definition is wrong. A "DMPC" is a player character (contributing member of a party) played by the DM. It can be used in a negative connotation as you note, but that's not the definition of DMPC, but rather a specific subgenre of DMPC referred to as "Mary Sue/Marty Stu".

The definition of what a DMPC is is completely independent from whether or not it's a good thing and if it is played properly.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-13, 10:44 AM
*groan*

We don't need the definition argument to spill over to yet another thread, do we?

I'm fine with the idea of testing people's ability to detect a DMPC from actual campaign journal's and the like, provided enough info is given. However, I think taking this into a hypothetical realm isn't really going to be different than the last umpteen threads on the subject.

Darcand
2010-01-13, 10:47 AM
And if the princess turns out to be a Ranger of comparable power to and with the same build restrictions as the rest of the party, is useful without overshadowing any of the other characters, and is as much a party member as any other character?
It's not an either/or situation. It's not "useless lump that sits in a corner" or "overpowering super-Sue". So where do the middle bits fit in?

Still a DMPC. If she's doing anything a PC could be doing then she's a DMPC.

Choco
2010-01-13, 10:49 AM
That would also probably fall in the NPC catagory, I was making two simple examples... it probably depends on who you ask. I don't think everyone has the same defenition of DMPC.

Which is why there is a neverending argument about that. Though luckily it seems to be mostly contained in one thread at the moment :smallbiggrin:

A DMPC to me, in the most literal interpretation of the word (DM's Player Character), is:

1. A permanent member of the party, played by the DM,
2. That shares in the loot,
3. The XP,
4. And the decision making process, as well as being
5. A participant in combat with the PC's, thus resulting in
6. Glory either being stolen from or simply shared with the PC's.

That being said, a good DMPC is still a DMPC and not an NPC. If the party wants to keep an NPC permanently in the party, that NPC has basically become elevated to DMPC status in my opinion.

EDIT: dsmiles does have a point, changed last 2 points.

dsmiles
2010-01-13, 10:53 AM
Maybe we need a "Let's Play: Define DMPC" thread so we can find an acceptable definition of the term (before we have any more "discussion" on whether they work or not, and/or how they can be detrimental and/or beneficial)?

EDIT: I agree with Choco, to a point. The first few points are good, but the last two need some help, IMO. I'm willing to accept that a DMPC isn't necessarily more effective than a PC and doesn't always steal the spotlight.
However, in my experience, they usually do, and this is why I don't like to play in a game with them.

Choco
2010-01-13, 10:55 AM
Maybe we need a "Let's Play: Define DMPC" thread so we can find an acceptable definition of the term (before we have any more "discussion" on whether they work or not, and/or how they can be detrimental and/or beneficial)?

That will go as well and be over as quickly as the current DMPC thread.

arguing about DMPC's seems to be like arguing about religion or abortion or politics or anything else that is banned on these forums. Neither side will give in no matter what the other side says.

Whatever you are looking for you will find it, so there will always be reasons why you are right and your opponent is wrong :smallwink:

Another_Poet
2010-01-13, 10:57 AM
I found the DMPC:


Chegrin Leall

edit: am I right?

Anonymouswizard
2010-01-13, 11:13 AM
We have the foreigner, Jarath Von Spelding. The man of many talents, tall and handsome, but lacking any understanding of other people's feelings. He is an experienced adventurer, knowing more of the nuts and bolts of the art of staying alive and warm in hostile terrain, but his actual combat skills seem lacking. Is as likely to wade into a fight with his big-ass sword as he is to use his limited selection of spells. A decent singer. (Not a bard.)

And we have Cetra Molari. A priest of Learun, he has recently dabbled in the forbidden dark arts, including the projection of fear effects. This is a bit of an irony, as he himself seems utterly fearless, putting his life in the path of danger without a concern for the consequences. In an earlier roleplay with the warlord Jaran, he inadvertantly demonstrated his fearlessness by stepping out over the edge of the tower wall to reattach a cable pulley. He almost fell, and it was Jaran who doubled over with vertigo, not Cetra. (Cetra's next line was: "Ha, that was close. Hey, what's the matter with you?") An engineering genius, he has designed advanced seige weapons for Jaran, but now he finds he spends more of his time near Chegrin and Jonich... though he actively dislikes both of them.

These are the two I say are the most likely, one is a jack-of-all trades who would of been built to make sure that they did not outshine the others (I am basing assumptions on all characters are the same level), and the other one has more detailed description, and could of been made as the DM never gets to play but has an interesting, evolving character concept.

I would go with Cetra, due to the mention of the possibly fudged roll, except that DMs would forget about their own DMPC during roleplaying so they have to do less voices. I'll guess that it is:


Jarath Von Spelding

valadil
2010-01-13, 11:17 AM
A DMPC is not inherently distinguishable from other PCs nor is it inherently detrimental to a game. A DM who favors a PC is likely to be detrimental to a game, and is something that can be spotted from afar. ie, the character who never gets attacked and always gets the loot he wants while the rest of the group gets an eclectic mix of weapons they don't know how to use. When it's a DM's own PC who recieves favoritism, then you've got the kind of DMPC that makes the rest look bad and leaves players with a desire to either kill it with fire or nuke it from orbit.

I will decline to comment on the likelihood of a DM being the type who uses DMPCs while also being the type who shows favoritism at the expense of the PCs. Even if I did comment on that, I'd be basing it solely in my own experience with a couple dozen players from the greater boston area - not a sufficient sample size to draw any conclusion.

DabblerWizard
2010-01-13, 11:18 AM
The problem here is that we've only got your descriptions to go on, and they're much too full of backstory. Nothing you've written really tells us much about what your game is like to play in, except possibly by implication.

Saph - Since the OP means for us to analyze his character narratives, it might be better to suggest that we could understand his descriptions only through inference as opposed to implication. In other words, the situation we're in, is such that we're stuck with figuring out what he's implying, while our job is to infer his meaning, or to infer from his implication. Just a thought. :smallsmile:

~ ~ ~

Stepping beyond semantics for a moment, I find Duke of URL's comment interesting... and I talk about it, and my thoughts on DMPCs, in the spoiler.



... the characters played by the players are PCs. Any character who joins the party played by the DM is a DMPC, and the others are NPCs.

The descriptions are irrelevant. They are the definitions of characters, but do not indicate in any way whether each character is a PC, NPC, or DMPC. It is how they are played at the table the defines that.

^^ I like this point.

NPCs and PCs have internal significance. It's probably commonly stated that PCs should be cooler (or more significant) than a NPC. I agree. The focus of the game is the player character, not the backstage antagonist fabricated in the mind of the DM. So, it's not a bad definition that any NPC that overshadows the PCs, or in other words, receives this overpowering special attention and detail from the DM, is a DMPC.

Yet, we all know how the quarrel goes. "I never make my DMPC more important than the PCs... I do it only because I want to help the PCs in a bind..." ad infinitum.

Why an NPC is significant, and how much bravado they end up oozing, might tell us a lot about their stance on the NPC-DMPC axis.

One might also depend on the screen time a NPC receives, but like with the other definitions, it's not fool proof. An NPC can have a lot of screen time without being dominating, or annoying to the PCs.


I also hope the OP ends his foreshadowing and lets us in on his DMPC intuitions. :smallsmile:

[Edit]

Here's a side comment for Choco.


That will go as well and be over as quickly as the current DMPC thread.

arguing about DMPC's seems to be like arguing about religion or abortion or politics or anything else that is banned on these forums. Neither side will give in no matter what the other side says.

Whatever you are looking for you will find it, so there will always be reasons why you are right and your opponent is wrong :smallwink:

^^ There's a great Stuart Chase quote that neatly sums up what you're saying.

“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible.”

Saph
2010-01-13, 12:07 PM
Maybe we need a "Let's Play: Define DMPC" thread so we can find an acceptable definition of the term (before we have any more "discussion" on whether they work or not, and/or how they can be detrimental and/or beneficial)?

Yeah, it's hard to define. Mine would be:

• DMPC (dee-em-pee-cee) - Basic

Acronym for the Dungeon Master's Player Character. Frequently perjorative.

• DMPC (dee-em-pee-cee) - Detailed

A character who exhibits many of the traits of a PC but who is controlled by the DM. Can be distinguished from a PC or an NPC by possessing the following three qualities:

1. Controlled by the DM.
2. Important to the story.
3. DM identifies with and has an emotional investment in them.

Distinguishing an NPC from a DMPC can be difficult. In general the key difference between the two is quality 3 - emotional investment. A quick way to tell if an NPC is a DMPC is to ask the question "Would the DM let one of the PCs kill it?" If the answer's yes, it's not a DMPC. If the DM responds with shock, anger, and resentment, and does everything he can to keep the character alive, it's a DMPC.

For this reason, DMPCs are widely disliked. DMs are supposed to be impartial, and having a character around all the time that the DM favours is not a good thing. It doesn't always make for a bad game, but it often does.

Alternate Definition: DMPC is sometimes used to mean "any NPC who hangs around the party on a regular basis". Used this way, the label of DMPC covers everyone from henchmen to torchbearers to drivers to pets. This definition doesn't have much to do with the acronym (Dungeon Master's Player Character), and as such is the source of most DMPC arguments (one party is using one definition, one's using the other).

• DMPCs - Distinguishing Features

DMPCs almost always possess at least one, and usually more, of the following characteristics:

They accompany the party everywhere, even if the party specifically tries to get rid of them.
They're more powerful than any of the PCs, and often more powerful than the whole party put together.
They break the rules somehow, having special abilities that the PCs and other NPCs can't possibly have. Bonus points if the abilities are unique. Additional bonus points if the uniqueness of the abilities is a major plot point.
The DM thinks the character is incredibly interesting, and will describe them at length to anyone who'll listen.
They have special protection from death. The DM will fudge rolls, load them down with extra powers, or outright cheat to keep them from dying.
The DM loves them, while at least half of the players secretly hate them and wish they would die. The DM is usually oblivious of this dislike, and if he ever comes to realise it, his first response will be surprise that everyone else doesn't find the character as cool as he does.
They contribute more than any other PC to the overall progression of the story. In extreme cases the PCs effectively become their entourage.

• Examples of DMPCs

- Gandalf from DM of the Rings.
- R2D2 from Darths and Droids (while Pete was DMing).
- Elminister from most games or stories that include him.

dsmiles
2010-01-13, 12:53 PM
Yeah, it's hard to define. Mine would be:

• DMPC (dee-em-pee-cee) - Basic

Acronym for the Dungeon Master's Player Character. Frequently perjorative.

• DMPC (dee-em-pee-cee) - Detailed

A character who exhibits many of the traits of a PC but who is controlled by the DM. Can be distinguished from a PC or an NPC by possessing the following three qualities:

1. Controlled by the DM.
2. Important to the story.
3. DM identifies with and has an emotional investment in them.

Distinguishing an NPC from a DMPC can be difficult. In general the key difference between the two is quality 3 - emotional investment. A quick way to tell if an NPC is a DMPC is to ask the question "Would the DM let one of the PCs kill it?" If the answer's yes, it's not a DMPC. If the DM responds with shock, anger, and resentment, and does everything he can to keep the character alive, it's a DMPC.

For this reason, DMPCs are widely disliked. DMs are supposed to be impartial, and having a character around all the time that the DM favours is not a good thing. It doesn't always make for a bad game, but it often does.

Alternate Definition: DMPC is sometimes used to mean "any NPC who hangs around the party on a regular basis". Used this way, the label of DMPC covers everyone from henchmen to torchbearers to drivers to pets. This definition doesn't have much to do with the acronym (Dungeon Master's Player Character), and as such is the source of most DMPC arguments (one party is using one definition, one's using the other).

• DMPCs - Distinguishing Features

DMPCs almost always possess at least one, and usually more, of the following characteristics:

They accompany the party everywhere, even if the party specifically tries to get rid of them.
They're more powerful than any of the PCs, and often more powerful than the whole party put together.
They break the rules somehow, having special abilities that the PCs and other NPCs can't possibly have. Bonus points if the abilities are unique. Additional bonus points if the uniqueness of the abilities is a major plot point.
The DM thinks the character is incredibly interesting, and will describe them at length to anyone who'll listen.
They have special protection from death. The DM will fudge rolls, load them down with extra powers, or outright cheat to keep them from dying.
The DM loves them, while at least half of the players secretly hate them and wish they would die. The DM is usually oblivious of this dislike, and if he ever comes to realise it, his first response will be surprise that everyone else doesn't find the character as cool as he does.
They contribute more than any other PC to the overall progression of the story. In extreme cases the PCs effectively become their entourage.

• Examples of DMPCs

- Gandalf from DM of the Rings.
- R2D2 from Darths and Droids (while Pete was DMing).
- Elminister from most games or stories that include him.

In the other thread, I used the term "has a vested interest in," which your point #3 covers in terms that everyone can understand, instead of just people who have access to Merriam-Webster 24/7 (I only used it after there was some debate over the definition of "vested interest").

I absolutely agree with your definition, though. Because DMPCs aren't inherently bad, but I personally don't like them because of bad experiences. Many people feel that DMPC can only be used in a negative sense, but if PCs are capable of not stealing the spotlight from other PCs, then DMPCs (being PCs controlled by the DM) must by definition be capable of not stealing the spotlight.

Gnaeus
2010-01-13, 01:23 PM
I absolutely agree with your definition, though. Because DMPCs aren't inherently bad, but I personally don't like them because of bad experiences. Many people feel that DMPC can only be used in a negative sense, but if PCs are capable of not stealing the spotlight from other PCs, then DMPCs (being PCs controlled by the DM) must by definition be capable of not stealing the spotlight.

I'm not sure I agree with your characterization of the anti-DMPC argument. I, and I think most of the anti DMPC posters from the other thread, wouldn't say that they can only be used in a negative sense. I would say that the practice contains inherent risks to a game which always or almost always outweigh any benefits it brings to the table. Very very few of us (I think) would say that they can't be used well, only that there are other, less problematic tools in the DM toolbag that should be used instead.

Also, stealing the spotlight isn't the only risk. There are also rules favoritism, metagaming, and railroading concerns, either real or in the perception of the players. Their use as a railroading tool is common enough to be added to Saph's definition, although that might be included in "contributing more than PCs to progression of the story."

Mystic Muse
2010-01-13, 01:37 PM
The monk witch is a DMPC is my prediction.

dsmiles
2010-01-13, 01:39 PM
I was actually referring to the term DMPC, and the fact that most users of that term only use it to indicate a bad DMPC, and use the term NPC to indicate a good DMPC.

Jayabalard
2010-01-13, 01:57 PM
I'm not sure I agree with your characterization of the anti-DMPC argument.IT's not a "characterization of the anti-DMPC argument" ... it a "characterization of AN anti-DMPC argument"

Danin
2010-01-13, 01:58 PM
You see, the problem with just providing descriptions is that sometimes the character's back story is wonderful but the mechanics are unbalanced. For example:

Logan: Foreman at a logging camp after leaving the security business.

Jesher: Retired druid adventurer. Quit the business young to help raise his grand daughter.

Riddick: Head of security at the logging camp and practitioner of the dark arts.

Jareth: Second in command of security, filled with a strong sense of duty and morality.

What those descriptions fail to point out is that Logan, the 4th level fighter, Riddick, the 4th level shadowcaster and Jareth, the 4th level paladin became the sidekicks of Jesher, the 18th level druid who decided to help us on our quest.

Yeah, this actually happened.

Jarawara
2010-01-13, 02:50 PM
Well, in my very roundabout way, I got my point across. Namely, that we still don't have a clear consensus as to what 'DMPC' actually stands for.

Some people are using to say "The DM's PC', but even that's not very clear.

Some are saying an NPC who travel's with the party is a DMPC, but that includes hirelings and packbearers. And of course, the DM's PC might not travel with the party, only show up now and then.

Some of course use it as a derogatory term, which is fine, but that pretty much removes all other connotations. Then it's just a Mary-or-Marty Sue, to which my Issac Bearfolt might apply (arrogant and demeaning, strong enough to beat up a PC, yet loved by the people)... but he doesn't travel with the party, is not my PC, and rarely even has screen time. (In fact, he's there to get the party to hate him, but learn to use his talents wisely to train the populace for war.)

There's an ever-growing criteria for the DMPC, not all of which is consistant between people, and quite frankly, shouldn't be. I humbly suggest we should quit using the term. If it's a Mary-or-Marty Sue, call it that. If it's a bad DM, call him that. If it's a PC to play D&D, happens to be run by the DM, call it a PC. If it's a storyline character that travels with the party, call it an NPC. Just don't call anything DMPC, because everyone else has got a different definition that you have.

As for the various guesses, two seem relatively correct...

*~*

Several guessed the DMPC:

Jarath Von Spelding is a former PC of mine, in several previous campaigns. I ported him over to my own campaign to continue a quest he had been on. I fully intend for his quest to eventually become the party's quest. Jarath is the only one I would consider using plot-armor on, but only so he lasts long enough for people to learn what he's come to understand, so that others can be warned about what I've got coming down the pike.

However, once that 'Jarath's quest' storyline gets going... Jarath is not technically needed to complete that quest. If he dies in the execution of that quest (or for that matter, in any other side-activity along the way), then so be it. I brought him into my campaign to *complete his story*... and death is certainly a completion.

I'm with Serpentine on a critical point: If somebody killed Jarath just because they didn't like me using a DMPC - then I'll overrule it, kick them to the curb, and continue play as if they hadn't been there. But if Jarath screws up, or is about to open the gates of hell (intentionally or by accident, either way), and the PC's find they need to kill him - then go for it! Jarath's story is over. Jarath's quest is now yours - you've just inherited it.

Incidentally, Jarath was only supposed to do a cameo in Tiatia, to preview a later phase of the campaign world. It was the players who asked him to join, and rooked him into 'helping these poor commoners in need'. If they hadn't pulled the 'civilians-in-distress' card on him, he'd have been long gone by now. Instead, he's still along for the ride, to shine in his own right.

And shine he does... for the 2.7 seconds he usually lasts in a fight, until the PC's figure out that all he has in his spell list is Jump, Spider Climb, Push, and Shocking Grasp. And while he does have that big-ass sword always at his side, he's a full up wizard - so barging into the fight doesn't do him so well.

The players have learned to keep him safely in the back, where he can do the least harm...

But yes, he's my PC, and I'm the DM, therefore, he's the DMPC.

*~*

The second guess that was close was from Assassin89: Namely, that all of them are NPC's. Well, he was mostly correct.

Livia Bearfolt, daughter of the aformentioned arrogant basta... Issac Bearfolt, is actually a PC. Funny story about that, the player wanted to bring in a new character, and said "Can I play Issac's daughter?" To which I replied: "Uh... Issac has a daughter?... (blink, blink)... why of course you can play Issac's daughter. Stat her up!"

It's worked really well to have so many connections between the PC's and the townsfolk. That way, when such-and-such town is in dire need of help, I don't have to worry about apathetic players. After all, it's not just some families in danger... it's the player's mother and father that is beset by demonic terrors!

But as for the rest of them - yeah, they're all NPCs.

If you want to know who the player characters are:

**As just mentioned, Livia Bearfolt.
**The warlord Jaran Lyall, who overthrew the government and deposed Lucag Tarascon (brother of Jonich)
**The priestess Allis Milambor, who saved Chegrin's life (and now has him as an devoted follower).
**Harod Ar-Idas, of the Kargish hills. Leayas was sent to join the party by her mother Nisstra, due to a long plot to seize power in the hills. Nisstra needed Harod's assistance to do that. Leayas was sent to seduce him. It worked too well, and now Leayas and Harod are getting married, and Nisstra's been shown the curb.
**And Jarath's girlfriend Miranda Aen Darion, who's teaching Livia a new fighting style she brought with her from the northlands. She's the one who convinced Jarath to stick around, though she believes it's due to love. I hope I can let her down easy...

*~*

And this brings up another of the key disconnects I've had with the whole DMPC discussion. People keep talking about the DM having *a* NPC who travels with the party, and whether or not that consitutes a DMPC or just an NPC. Some say that if the NPC is consistantly with the party, and has dialog and personality, then it's a DMPC (who must be killed with fire).

Jeesh... if so, then much of the populace of Tiatia is going to be getting uncomfortably warm. Because, as you can see, I have a party of 5 PC's, but 6 other NPC's accompanying them. And that's just currently - if I included in the list those who traveled with them (and fought in battles, roleplayed, and so on), then I have to include Marcel, Brucian, Goroth & Vesemi, Elrood, Cal, several townsfolk from both Vhomlette and Marais... and a few Kobolds...

And of course, I didn't include Jaran's staff. He took over the army and then the country. You don't just run things single-handedly. So include Thocul, Hiln, Garion, that guy who I can never remember who leads the slave-soldiers they liberated, and of course Issac Bearfolt himself. And then members of the Jaran-appointed civilian government. And heck, how about a couple of thousand nameless mooks, who I still seem to get around to naming and providing roleplay scenes.

We have "DMPC's", in our campaign, because that's how we roleplay - by developing the personalities and then letting the PC's interact with them. You can't very well do those interactions in a vacume, so yeah, some of those guys come along on the 'adventures', in order to allow for further roleplays and interactions.

I think that the anti-DMPC crowd would have an instant head-stroke if they joined my game, outnumbered as they are by so many apparent DMPC's. But to my players, it's a party of five, with assistance.

*~*~*

Just to make an already long post longer, I thought I'd give an example of what the purpose of some of these NPC's are, and how they came to be. I'll use the example of Cetra Molari, as some of you thought he sounded like a DMPC (being fearless, and some referenced the dialog he had in a roleplay scene). He's also been with the party the longest, joining the party before they even left town the first day.

Though he did have a long stint in Hell (literally, not an analogy), after he tried to kill Jaran and Allis. The players try not to dwell on the past. But I get ahead of myself...

I include NPC's as being available to the party, both as combat assistance, but also as specialty-support. It's up to the party to learn how to put their unique talents to best use. In the case of Cetra, he's not really that good in a fight, though he is reliable (fearless). That fearless quality is even better when a dangerous task needs to be done, and Cetra is willing to do it without a consideration for his own well-being.

Case in point, when they had to rescue a guy who had fallen partially down the side of the cliffwall overhanging the marshlands. Jaran usually takes the lead in any dangerous situation... but he's got a serious fear of heights. But Cetra? 1000 feet up is no different than being 10 feet up. Just don't fall, and you'll be fine. Cetra got the rope down to the guy, and they pulled him up with no problems.

But the players have to go get Cetra, and ask him to climb down there to affect the rescue. Cetra isn't much the hero type, and is often busy with other things. The players have to think "How can we best tackle this issue. Hey, let's get Cetra, he can handle this no problem, while we can continue to fight the attacking warriors" (I should have pointed out this rescue was during a fight scene). If the players don't pay attention to the unique talents, as presented in various roleplays (why do you think I have all the 'interaction opportunities', so you can learn what these talents are!)... then too bad for them, they gotta figure out another way.

Cetra is also an engineering genius, which was really just an afterthought. I had no idea he's last this long... and I had no idea that Jaran was going to turn my campaign world on it's ear by overthrowing the government and sending the army off to war. But once again, they remembered that little tidbit about Cetra, and a short while later, seige weapons galore!

Interestingly enough, my original notes on Cetra read "Plan to kill this guy off, the first time the players do something stupid or lax, in order to show that this can be a deadly game, and that the PC's shouldn't let the NPC's just wander into a dangerous situation. (That's where the PC's should be leading the way!)."

Instead, it was Vesemi who walked towards the big animated golem-statue with the oversized maul held up high. I gave full warning, full description of the statue. Any player worth his salt would give that statue a wide berth... but the NPC's don't know anything about that. It's up to the players to keep watch of the NPC's actions. I gave ample description and ample opportunity for them to intervene, and when they kept up their own little investigations of pictographs and discarded trash on a shelf... I had the statue animate and attack, and Vesemi was crushed in one blow.

They didn't make that mistake again. And as such, Cetra survived. And then... a campaign's worth of roleplay happened, and the Lord of Darkness came, and now Cetra's a preist all right - of the Dark Lord. Which is why he doesn't really like the companions he's traveling with, as they're all Learun fanatics. This could turn ugly...

Some of the others are far less elaborate. They meet a Goblin. The Goblin's trapped. He's got a nice looking sword (a pair of them, in fact). They could kill the goblin and take the swords. They could free the goblin but take the swords as payment. They do neither. They free the goblin from the trap, ask him some questions (gotta learn more about the campaign world), and then let him go, swords and all.

Later, when they encounter him again, he's inclined to be helpful. They ask him if he's like to accompany them. And seeing that he's got nowhere else to go, Tugov Morkan Estualgan joins to the party.

Help someone out, and you could find yourself being helped in return. He's theirs, till death or storyline do they part. Nothing else needed to know about him, though I like getting to roleplay a goblin now and then.

*~*~*

So thanks to everyone for participating. Anyone else got any NPC stories to tell, so we can all debate as to whether or not they were actually DMPCs?

lsfreak
2010-01-13, 03:19 PM
I agree 99% with Saph, with one exception. Or rather, something that needs clarification.


If the DM responds with shock, anger, and resentment, and does everything he can to keep the character alive, it's a DMPC.

As long as the DM stays in the rules, *every* character - DMPC or PC or NPC or BBEG or worthless minion - should be played that way, and it's a bit unfair to call out the DMPC specifically. And oftentimes, the DM may be shocked or at least thrown off by who the PC's attack, if not angry or resentful.

When you adjust that statement to include 'even going beyond the rules,' then I'd often agree when the character in question is 'supposed' to be on the PC's side or is neutral. I'm okay with DM's keeping some enemies alive longer than they should for the sake of drama or not making something unduly anticlimactic, provided they know how to pull it off.

I'd also say that if arbitrary consequences are given to the PC's as a result of killing a character, it's probably a DMPC. An investigation into the murder of a paladin is warranted, a trio of solars swarming a bunch of level 10 PC's is not.

Gnaeus
2010-01-13, 04:00 PM
But yes, he's my PC, and I'm the DM, therefore, he's the DMPC.

Sort of. He's a railroading, god-armor protected character in which the DM has a significant emotional investment, so he's the DMPC. He would get there just by being your PC, but you managed to get most of the danger warning signs in there just to be sure.

I find it slightly difficult to determine how many of the 5-6 other guys would be DMPCs. Most of them probably aren't. They don't sound like they are active PCs from the description, and you don't describe them as being particularly powerful or having unique pull on your heart. One could probably check them against saph's distinguishing features list to be sure.

The thousand nameless mooks are NOT DMPCs. They do not act like player characters. They do not have significant roles in the story. They are like the pets from saph's definition.

Starbuck_II
2010-01-13, 04:05 PM
Yeah, your exact words were: "If somebody killed Jarath ... then I'll overrule it, kick them to the curb, and continue play as if they hadn't been there"

Doesn't matter your reason for overrulling them. By giving plot armor: that is DMPC.
You only let them kill him if it fits the plot (plot armor).

But as long as no bad DMPC issues: good.

Kurald Galain
2010-01-13, 04:20 PM
5th, we have the foreigner, Jarath Von Spelding. The man of many talents, tall and handsome, but lacking any understanding of other people's feelings. He is an experienced adventurer, knowing more of the nuts and bolts of the art of staying alive and warm in hostile terrain, but his actual combat skills seem lacking. Is as likely to wade into a fight with his big-ass sword as he is to use his limited selection of spells. A decent singer. (Not a bard.)
This is the one that most sounds like a Mary Sue, and therefore the most likely candidate for being a DMPC. That said, the short descriptions given in your original post are really insufficient data to base a meaningful conclusion on.

Melamoto
2010-01-13, 04:38 PM
Yeah, your exact words were: "If somebody killed Jarath ... then I'll overrule it, kick them to the curb, and continue play as if they hadn't been there"

Doesn't matter your reason for overrulling them. By giving plot armor: that is DMPC.
You only let them kill him if it fits the plot (plot armor).

But as long as no bad DMPC issues: good.

Many NPCs have Plot Armor, especially those important to the plot. Giving him plot armor for the sake of the plot is normal. And it will fit the plot at any time after his use is done.

And you're taking that quote out of context. If someone killed him for being a DMPC, then it could be seen as meta-gaming, and pretty much a **** move. You only kill DMPCs over that if they also happen to be more powerful than you, hog all of the glory, or have super plot powers.

Yakk
2010-01-13, 04:43 PM
Guesses:
+ Jarath Von Spelding or Cetra Molari

+ All of the characters you listed are NPCs. The assignment of DMPC is arbitrary since any of the descriptions could fit. 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 look suspicious due to notes, but they could still be NPCs with better descriptions.

+ Chegrin Leall

+ Jarath Von Spelding


Well, in my very roundabout way, I got my point across. Namely, that we still don't have a clear consensus as to what 'DMPC' actually stands for.
Note that you included only 1 PC in your list.

You provided short backstories.

Despite this, out of 4 guesses asto the DMPC, your PC was chosen twice. From a brief description. If you include the person who posted after you, it is a 60% hit rate.

When you where asked "what would you do if a PC where to kill your DMPC", you said "I would only allow it if I considered that the PC had a good reason (by my measure) -- if they didn't, I'd kick the PC from the game, and retroactively erase their action".

Seems like a GMPC.

Starbuck_II
2010-01-13, 04:45 PM
Many NPCs have Plot Armor, especially those important to the plot. Giving him plot armor for the sake of the plot is normal. And it will fit the plot at any time after his use is done.

And you're taking that quote out of context. If someone killed him for being a DMPC, then it could be seen as meta-gaming, and pretty much a **** move. You only kill DMPCs over that if they also happen to be more powerful than you, hog all of the glory, or have super plot powers.

Wait, what NPCs have plot armor other than a DMPC and the BBEG? I can't recall any.
There are DMs who make up reason that their BBEG escaped (Plot armor) even when they fail saves and should die, but not a normal NPC. At least I've never seen that happen for a random NPC.

Calemyr
2010-01-13, 04:47 PM
I'd like some clarification on this, because I'm working on a new campaign and (as a bit of rookie as a DM) I'm curious if I'm doing something wrong.

The basic problem is that I've got two players (no other prospective players in the area, we've looked), so they want an NPC in the party just to balance it out. My idea is to create a half dozen characters and campaign directions related to them, then allow the players to pick which one they want. These would be built with the same rules as the player characters and would ideally never take center stage, being involved in their respective plots without being central to them. Most of them, anyway. Not every character works as a shrinking violet, after all.

Which one they select decides the opportunities that come up for them, some of the overarcing goals of the campaign, and a lot of the exposition, but not the world itself. Siding with the slightly fey druid girl or the snake-oil peddling bard only changes their perspective on the same world.

Anyway, that's the approach I'm playing with. Am I totally off base?

Starbuck_II
2010-01-13, 04:50 PM
As long as you don't go out of your way to protect them more than any other NPC, you should be fine (no plot armor).

DMPCs are usually only viewed as bad when they have special benefits.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-13, 06:19 PM
Wait, what NPCs have plot armor other than a DMPC and the BBEG? I can't recall any.
There are DMs who make up reason that their BBEG escaped (Plot armor) even when they fail saves and should die, but not a normal NPC. At least I've never seen that happen for a random NPC.

If you use plot armor on every random NPC...wow. That'd be an entirely new level of railroading that I have thankfully not yet experienced.

Yeah, bad DMs rely on plot armor for their BBEG as well. But to go beyond DMPC and BBEG's having plot armor is an unusually extreme level of bad DMing.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-13, 06:21 PM
I'd like some clarification on this, because I'm working on a new campaign and (as a bit of rookie as a DM) I'm curious if I'm doing something wrong.

The basic problem is that I've got two players (no other prospective players in the area, we've looked), so they want an NPC in the party just to balance it out.

Aright, look at what they want, and what you're giving them. It's not the same.

If they feel they want additional characters to fill a party hole, make hirelings available(DMG has rules, so does SBG). That's pretty much what they exist for. Boom, problem solved, they have their wish, you don't need to work out some elaborate set of choices they don't even realize they're picking between, saving you a lot of work, and removes possible risks from DMPCs.

Superglucose
2010-01-13, 06:24 PM
Jarath Von Spelding is a former PC of mine, in several previous campaigns. I ported him over to my own campaign to continue a quest he had been on. I fully intend for his quest to eventually become the party's quest. Jarath is the only one I would consider using plot-armor on, but only so he lasts long enough for people to learn what he's come to understand, so that others can be warned about what I've got coming down the pike.

However, once that 'Jarath's quest' storyline gets going... Jarath is not technically needed to complete that quest. If he dies in the execution of that quest (or for that matter, in any other side-activity along the way), then so be it. I brought him into my campaign to *complete his story*... and death is certainly a completion.


I'm with Serpentine on a critical point: If somebody killed Jarath just because they didn't like me using a DMPC - then I'll overrule it, kick them to the curb, and continue play as if they hadn't been there. But if Jarath screws up, or is about to open the gates of hell (intentionally or by accident, either way), and the PC's find they need to kill him - then go for it! Jarath's story is over. Jarath's quest is now yours - you've just inherited it.

That is what people hate about GMPCs. Way to give your guy plot armor!



Yeah, bad DMs rely on plot armor for their BBEG as well. But to go beyond DMPC and BBEG's having plot armor is an unusually extreme level of bad DMing.
Sometimes the dice do funky things and the GM needs to throw plot armor on to keep the game fun. We're not talking "Natural twenty? Well you missed anyways!" but rather, rolling that dispel check to break the Dimensional Anchor behind the scenes, introducing his ally a bit earlier than intended, or pretending you didn't just crit one of your players for max damage and death.

GMs who rely on plot armor are bad, GMs who use plot armor aren't necessarily bad.

Reverent-One
2010-01-13, 06:32 PM
That is what people hate about GMPCs. Way to give your guy plot armor!


However, once that 'Jarath's quest' storyline gets going... Jarath is not technically needed to complete that quest. If he dies in the execution of that quest (or for that matter, in any other side-activity along the way), then so be it. I brought him into my campaign to *complete his story*... and death is certainly a completion.


I'm with Serpentine on a critical point: If somebody killed Jarath just because they didn't like me using a DMPC - then I'll overrule it, kick them to the curb, and continue play as if they hadn't been there. But if Jarath screws up, or is about to open the gates of hell (intentionally or by accident, either way), and the PC's find they need to kill him - then go for it! Jarath's story is over. Jarath's quest is now yours - you've just inherited it.

Way to totally miss the point. He's perfectly fine with the character dying, with only two stipulations, one is that he delivers the info he has to the players (Which sounds like it pretty much means not dying before he meets the party and saying at least a couple sentences), or two, that a player tries to be a meta-gaming jerk and kill him for no reason, in which case shutting them down is no different from stopping a player from making Pun-pun or similar meta-shenanigans.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-13, 06:40 PM
That is what people hate about GMPCs. Way to give your guy plot armor!

Agreed. The "you can kill him if it's for a reason I deem good enough" is pretty sketchy, imo. I really don't care if you want him to deliver his plot-related info first. It's something players can't do, so it's inherently unfair when the GM abuses his power to protect his character.


GMs who rely on plot armor are bad, GMs who use plot armor aren't necessarily bad.

Hence my use of the word "rely". =)

Saph
2010-01-13, 07:05 PM
Well, in my very roundabout way, I got my point across. Namely, that we still don't have a clear consensus as to what 'DMPC' actually stands for.

I don't really think you did. I gave a fairly clear definition, which I'll repeat:

1. Controlled by the DM.
2. Important to the story.
3. DM identifies with and has an emotional investment in them.

The third one is the really key point, and the trouble is that the DMs who do it the most are almost invariably the least qualified to judge it.

The alternate definition - "an NPC who hangs around the party on a regular basis" - is so vague as to be pretty much useless, as it covers way too wide a field and doesn't really have anything to do with the whole reason that so many people dislike them in the first place.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-13, 07:07 PM
I like Saph's definition. It matches up well with what I see in real life, and isn't phrased so as to be biased in favor of either all-positive or all-negative sides...those ones always end up wonky.

Reverent-One
2010-01-13, 07:16 PM
I don't really think you did. I gave a fairly clear definition, which I'll repeat:

1. Controlled by the DM.
2. Important to the story.
3. DM identifies with and has an emotional investment in them.

The third one is the really key point, and the trouble is that the DMs who do it the most are almost invariably the least qualified to judge it.

The alternate definition - "an NPC who hangs around the party on a regular basis" - is so vague as to be pretty much useless, as it covers way too wide a field and doesn't really have anything to do with the whole reason that so many people dislike them in the first place.

I don't see why point 2 would necessarily be the case. The DM could have a character they run like a normal player runs their PC that could be unimportant to the story.

Saph
2010-01-13, 07:26 PM
I don't see why point 2 would necessarily be the case. The DM could have a character they run like a normal player runs their PC that could be unimportant to the story.

Because you need all three (DM played + story importance + emotional investment) to create the issue. If you only have two, then it's not generally a problem and no-one is likely to get worked up about it.

If you have 1 and 2 but not 3 (DM played, story importance, no investment) then you have someone like the king or boss or BBEG or recurring enemy or NPC-of-the-week. Not a DMPC because they're treated like other NPCs.

If you have 1 and 3 but not 2 (DM played, investment, no story importance) you have someone who doesn't play much part in the story and doesn't really matter. You could argue that they're a DMPC if you want, but nobody is really going to care very much.

If you have 2 and 3 but not 1 (investment, story importance, not played by DM) then you have a PC.

Reverent-One
2010-01-13, 07:31 PM
Really? What if you have a character that is for all intents and purposes a member of the party, has class levels and such as the rest of the party, contributes in combat like the rest of the party, and is controlled by the DM, who has some emotional investment in them like a player has investment in their PCs? That sounds like a PC to me, though since it's controlled by the DM, it would be a DMPC.

Starbuck_II
2010-01-13, 07:43 PM
Because you need all three (DM played + story importance + emotional investment) to create the issue. If you only have two, then it's not generally a problem and no-one is likely to get worked up about it.

If you have 1 and 2 but not 3 (DM played, story importance, no investment) then you have someone like the king or boss or BBEG or recurring enemy or NPC-of-the-week. Not a DMPC because they're treated like other NPCs.

If you have 1 and 3 but not 2 (DM played, investment, no story importance) you have someone who doesn't play much part in the story and doesn't really matter. You could argue that they're a DMPC if you want, but nobody is really going to care very much.

If you have 2 and 3 but not 1 (investment, story importance, not played by DM) then you have a PC.

1 +3 would mean a DMPC who is not story important, but still a PC played by DM. Like let us say players on quest to deliver a ring to Mount Mordor. This NPC (we will call Gandalf) is traveling with them. I don't think he is important to the story (if he dies he dies), but he is played like a PC.

Although, were the DM to reincarnate that NPC when he dies for free (Gandalf the white): maybe he was a DMPC.

Penitent
2010-01-13, 07:45 PM
Really? What if you have a character that is for all intents and purposes a member of the party, has class levels and such as the rest of the party, contributes in combat like the rest of the party, and is controlled by the DM, who has some emotional investment in them like a player has investment in their PCs? That sounds like a PC to me, though since it's controlled by the DM, it would be a DMPC.

But anyone who accompanied the party everywhere by definition is important to the story.

The point is that the story is "what happens at the table."

Saph isn't saying that the character is only a DMPC if he started the quest, or if his blood is the only thing that can kill the BBEG.

It's just, if you tell the story, but leave that character out, do you have gaping plot holes.

And anyone who accompanies the party, the answer is yes.

Jarawara
2010-01-13, 07:51 PM
Saph, that's a really good description... but you miss the fact that even as we speak others are still posting their own descriptions of a DMPC. If everyone is still defining DMPC differently, then 'consensus' has not been reached.

Heck, in the other thread someone is defining DMPC as someone who contributes and advances as the party advances. So... if Jaran and Issac help train the army, then a couple thousand faceless mooks all became DMPC's, as they clearly contribute and did advance in capability.

Another posts a list of criteria, including that the DMPC "shares in the loot, and the XP". Well, I award XP in fixed amounts, and the 'loot' can hardly be defined as loot, and is not shared. Therefore, none of my NPC's are DMPCs.

I don't accept either definition, by the way, but they are still being posited in a thread that then continues to debate the pros and cons without clarifying exactly which definition of DMPC is being used with each post.


Edit: Ah, Ninja'd, thus proving my point. I need to make smaller posts.

Reverent-One
2010-01-13, 07:52 PM
But anyone who accompanied the party everywhere by definition is important to the story.

The point is that the story is "what happens at the table."

Saph isn't saying that the character is only a DMPC if he started the quest, or if his blood is the only thing that can kill the BBEG.

It's just, if you tell the story, but leave that character out, do you have gaping plot holes.

And anyone who accompanies the party, the answer is yes.

My thinking is if this hypothetical character followed the party around, participated in combat, roleplayed with the PCs, but never made any plot important actions or choices the other PCs didn't, I'd have a hard time saying they were important to the story.

I guess one could make the argument they were important to the story in that if they hadn't been there in combat, the party may have died, or they were important to the PCs in term of character development, but I wouldn't see it that way. Perhaps I associate "story" with "plot" moreso than others.

Jarawara
2010-01-13, 08:01 PM
It's just, if you tell the story, but leave that character out, do you have gaping plot holes.

And anyone who accompanies the party, the answer is yes.

I liked your thought processes here, but I got a little lost on this last part.

If I tell "Chegrin's story", and leave Chegrin out... well of course, it leaves a gap. Like, the entire story is remains untold, that kind of gap.

But if I tell Allis's story, and leave out Chegrin, what gap is there?

I mean, it could be said that Chegrin's past up to this point is obviously part of Allis's story, so a retelling of Allis's story would have a gap if we deleted Chegrin. Though to the reader, they wouldn't notice the gap. It'd be like a retelling of any story that gets changed in the retelling. You see that alot when books go to theater - some characters get changed, deemphasized, multiple characters get morphed into one to simplify the plot, others deleted outright (or *added* outright).

If Chegrin was deleted in the movie-version of Tiatia, no such gap would be apparent in Allis's storyline.

As for the game - if Chegrin were to die right here, right now, there would be no gap. Allis would be sad, story would continue.


So did I misunderstand your post?

Vizzerdrix
2010-01-13, 08:04 PM
Target is undefinable. Recommended action is to scrub them all. Scorched Earth Policy.

Jarawara
2010-01-13, 08:11 PM
Target is undefinable. Recommended action is to scrub them all. Scorched Earth Policy.

Ha! You cannot kill us all. We shall burrow deep in the earth, and thousands of years from now shall emerge in our machines, with technology far beyond yours, and proceed to destroy your civilization and process your bodies for blood-fertilizer. That is, until we catch the common cold.

Vizzerdrix
2010-01-13, 08:17 PM
Ha! You cannot kill us all. We shall burrow deep in the earth, and thousands of years from now shall emerge in our machines, with technology far beyond yours, and proceed to destroy your civilization and process your bodies for blood-fertilizer. That is, until we catch the common cold.

But Lo! I shall train an elite squad of those hairless mole thingies to track you down befor you can advance! they shall then enslave you and become your creepy masters! Mwahahahahaaa! :smallsmile:

Penitent
2010-01-13, 08:18 PM
My thinking is if this hypothetical character followed the party around, participated in combat, roleplayed with the PCs, but never made any plot important actions or choices the other PCs didn't, I'd have a hard time saying they were important to the story.

I guess one could make the argument they were important to the story in that if they hadn't been there in combat, the party may have died, or they were important to the PCs in term of character development, but I wouldn't see it that way. Perhaps I associate "story" with "plot" moreso than others.

If your version of a story involves someone who acts exactly like a PC in every way being not important...

Well then your story sucks and no one wants to play in your game, because if the PCs aren't important to the story...

Reverent-One
2010-01-13, 08:23 PM
If your version of a story involves someone who acts exactly like a PC in every way being not important...

Well then your story sucks and no one wants to play in your game, because if the PCs aren't important to the story...

Did I say the PCs didn't do anything important? I was just talking about this one character, who would act like a PC, but not independently come up with a idea to solve the problem the PCs face or otherwise control the plotline itself. Jarawara put it better than me.

Jarawara
2010-01-13, 08:45 PM
I love it!

The character who has been with the party for the least amount of time, contributes the least, and has NO FRICKING CONNECTION TO THE PLOTLINE has now earned the title of "railroader".

It's true, he was needed to start a future plotline, but I've already planted the seeds, so the 'god-armor' isn't really needed anymore. (Counter-point would be that I never needed god-armor in the first place, as I could have presented the plot-hook in some other way, and so I remain guilty on this issue. I brought it up because I do recognize my own guilt.) Of course, the best god-armor I can think of would be to get him out of the way, and so as soon as the party has returned to home base (and if he's still alive), then it's time to have him part ways with the PC's. They know where to look him up in Nerevaln after the Tiatia campaign has concluded, if they need him.

*~*

I like Starbuck's comments. He took my words out of context, sure, but after that he added: "But as long as no bad DMPC issues: good. " That's an important point. If the players don't have a problem, then the DMPC might still be a DMPC, but he's not a problem.

*~*

Another comment from Starbuck: "Wait, what NPCs have plot armor other than a DMPC and the BBEG? I can't recall any.
There are DMs who make up reason that their BBEG escaped (Plot armor) even when they fail saves and should die, but not a normal NPC. At least I've never seen that happen for a random NPC. "

I've seen it done. That happens when the DM is unsure how to push the plot forward without a critical NPC. Which does sound alot like Jarath, doesn't it (guilt is mine again). I haven't needed to save him yet, but 'yet' is proof that I could have resorted to that.

Plus, the term BBEG is often used only for the one, big, bad, uber, world-threatening badguy who is behind everything, everywhere. He's often the point of the whole game. Kill the BBEG, Save the world (to heck with the cheerleader). But I don't use those kinds of characters. I use minor BBEGs, the guy who's responsible for ....., and thus creates the threat the PC's choose to fight. They don't always create a story, because it's up to the PC's to fight them. And they come a dime a dozen, so if the PC's kill the BBEG early on, then threat never happens, and I find a different direction to go.

Cetra, given his background up to this point, is prime material for this role. I see him as a minor BBEG going forward, only becoming major if he found some way of really causing some harm. Otherwise, he'll prolly end up being that pathetic guy who talks to himself and provides an interesting gamesession when some other party encounters him and deals with him.

Or, he'll die, quite soon. Or, Allis will straighten him out, and he'll retire to some cushy engineering job.

So all in all, my BBEG's don't even need plot armor.

But I don't get majorly hung up when a DM pulls plot-armor to save their BBEG from me - It means less stress for the DM if he's able to pursue his original story without my mucking it up.

*~*

Reverant One: "(Which sounds like it pretty much means not dying before he meets the party and saying at least a couple sentences)"

Exactly. Except that once we start roleplaying, I try not to force the roleplay towards a particular direction. Thus, 'a couple of sentences' ended up taking a half-dozen roleplays over a six month period.

We do like to roleplay!

*~*

From Superglucos:
"Sometimes the dice do funky things and the GM needs to throw plot armor on to keep the game fun. We're not talking "Natural twenty? Well you missed anyways!" but rather, rolling that dispel check to break the Dimensional Anchor behind the scenes, introducing his ally a bit earlier than intended, or pretending you didn't just crit one of your players for max damage and death.

GMs who rely on plot armor are bad, GMs who use plot armor aren't necessarily bad. "

That deserves a +1.

*~*~*

Penitent
2010-01-13, 08:49 PM
I liked your thought processes here, but I got a little lost on this last part.

If I tell "Chegrin's story", and leave Chegrin out... well of course, it leaves a gap. Like, the entire story is remains untold, that kind of gap.

But if I tell Allis's story, and leave out Chegrin, what gap is there?

I mean, it could be said that Chegrin's past up to this point is obviously part of Allis's story, so a retelling of Allis's story would have a gap if we deleted Chegrin. Though to the reader, they wouldn't notice the gap. It'd be like a retelling of any story that gets changed in the retelling. You see that alot when books go to theater - some characters get changed, deemphasized, multiple characters get morphed into one to simplify the plot, others deleted outright (or *added* outright).

If Chegrin was deleted in the movie-version of Tiatia, no such gap would be apparent in Allis's storyline.

As for the game - if Chegrin were to die right here, right now, there would be no gap. Allis would be sad, story would continue.


So did I misunderstand your post?

If you try to tell the story of you and your merry band, but don't mention one player or his actions ever, try it.

Stop using NPCs who's stories you made up and start using actual games.

Let me tell you about a situation once:

So we played this game, and the party was: Me: Paladin variant, Guy: Fighter, Other Guy: Barbarian.

We started off in the woods, heading to this place, when the Barbarian saw a Kobold, so he started chasing him up the hill, and we followed, and came around a corner and a bunch of goblins were there, but the Barbarian chased the Kobold, meanwhile, me and Guy beat up the goblins. Then we went back down the mountain, then came back up the mountain and went looking for the Barbarian.

After finding him, we went back, killed the Kobolds he had run from, then gave him a shiny new axe. We continued on to find my characters house, and it was burning. So we did some investigation, and I discovered they had been magical flames, and couldn't find my mother's amulet.

So we went back to town and did some odd jobs, but that night, some people attacked us to take my mother's amulet. After we killed them all and interrogated one of them, I ran down the stairs and tripped, then ran through the streets and eventually stopped. Meanwhile, guy and other guy caught up to me, and we ended the game due to interparty conflicts.

Did that story make sense? Of course not, because I left out the Rogue that fell off the cliff, stole my amulet, and that I chased through the streets.

But if I left out the Blacksmith who told the Barbarian about Kobolds (who I also left out) you won't notice.

And that's the point. Some characters are important to the story of what happens at the table, and if you are playing right, that's all the PCs.

Jarawara
2010-01-13, 09:25 PM
Thank you, Penitent. I understand your point better now.


One thing, though. Your story, as posted, *did* make sense to me. I'm sure it comes out different than how you remember it, but to me, it was a complete story with a mystery involved. I'm sure the story continues as the mystery unfolds (but then again, your story would have to continue anyway, and so it remains fundamantally similar without any apparent gaps to the reader).

You deleted the rogue from the scene, without the reader (me) missing him.

And that's a major story element. Chegrin is anything but major (most of the time. I guess he was a bit more important to the scene when they first were saving his life).


But anyone who accompanied the party everywhere by definition is important to the story.

They saved Chegrin, so they get Chegrin's assistance. He accompanies the party. Kill him, leave him behind, delete all references to him, and the story remains the same. He's just not important enough.

Saph
2010-01-14, 06:14 AM
Saph, that's a really good description... but you miss the fact that even as we speak others are still posting their own descriptions of a DMPC. If everyone is still defining DMPC differently, then 'consensus' has not been reached.

This forum is populated by Internet gamers. You're not going to get universal consensus on anything. :)

The best you can do is pick a definition which seems to get at the core of what most people are using.

dsmiles
2010-01-14, 12:43 PM
This forum is populated by Internet gamers. You're not going to get universal consensus on anything. :)

The best you can do is pick a definition which seems to get at the core of what most people are using.

+1 to Saph.

You'll never get a complete consensus, even when you're face to face with the other gamers. You have to find the one thing that everybody's definition has in common. Only then can you compromise on a complete definition. I'm pretty sure that Saph's got it covered.

Indon
2010-01-14, 02:47 PM
I would have guessed number 5, Jarath.

I'll put up a group, an Exalted group including all the characters that have ever passed through the group. There's one and only one DMPC in that party (complete with plot armor and other DMPC measures, not that my players were ever able to tell), and everyone else is a player's character. People who have read my posts in previous DMPC posts may already know the answer, but nonetheless.


-Damael, the party's long-term Dragon-Blood. Possesses a pair of exceedingly powerful relics that allow him to compete with the Solars in combat. Has attracted the ire of a Deathlord who was slain by the previous holder of his relics. Isn't afraid of anything, even fighting Anathema in single combat. Devised a new charm tree to train wild Dragon Kings from notes written down about the Solar charm that accomplishes the same. The most charismatic character the party had seen.

-Another Dragon-Blood whose name I forgot. Owned a massive soulsteel blade and armor, basically reminiscent of Guts from Berserk. Fairly quiet and focused on his objective, being to find the Scarlet Empress. Cut one of the Solars in the party in half when he joined the group (which is a long story), and eventually went on his way again.

-Logan, the party's Lunar. Mostly the party's tough guy and a quiet and unassuming combat monster. Has a history of awesome duels against a variety of powerful beings.

-Keeper (short for a longer name I forget), the party's Sidereal. The party's face in heaven and a manipulative bastard. Weakest at combat (even bad at SMA), not bad at sorcery, excellent at rewriting fate. Loves his Dodge charms. Eventually lost touch with the party as part of heavenly politics.

-A Twilight Solar whose name I forget. Possesses an ancient artifact used by Sidereals to manipulate fate before the construction of the Loom, which he doesn't know how to use fully but knows some basic functions of - essentially, it's a TARDIS. Powerful sorceror and one of the party's weaker combatants, he eventually decided to stay behind with another Solar building a private kingdom near the edge of the world.

-Croup Vandemar, Solar #2, a Night caste. The only member of the party who used a combo in combat, and to great effect dispatching mortals generally as he was an archer-type. Had his Limit go off more than anyone else's. The most attractive character the party had seen, if I recall, but not the most charismatic.

-A Night Solar whose name I also forget. A good-natured sociopath who did horrible things to bad guys the party encountered. Was eventually cut in half by one of the party's Dragon-bloods.

-A Fae-blooded whose name I also forget, with an axe that sung in combat. Also fairly quiet. Not that much history to him as he was the last character who joined the group before the campaign eventually petered out due to not being able to play for about half a year.


If you use plot armor on every random NPC...wow. That'd be an entirely new level of railroading that I have thankfully not yet experienced.

Yeah, bad DMs rely on plot armor for their BBEG as well. But to go beyond DMPC and BBEG's having plot armor is an unusually extreme level of bad DMing.

Or an indicator of a group that just kills people for no reason.

Sometimes, DMs need to use crude measures to hack a group together out of players who would not otherwise be able to make a cohesive party.


If you have 2 and 3 but not 1 (investment, story importance, not played by DM) then you have a PC.

PCs aren't always 2 either.

You know that guy. He comes to eat chips, drink drinks, and BS with the other players, treating the game as a social event more than collaborative storytelling.

Mystic Muse
2010-01-14, 02:51 PM
well, the fact that you can't remember the peopl'es names kind of removes them from DMPCship I'd think. I'm going to go with Logan as the DMPC

Indon
2010-01-14, 02:54 PM
Hey, Logan isn't the only name I remembered. I also remembered Damael and Croup's names, too.

Mystic Muse
2010-01-14, 03:08 PM
yes, which is why I chose the one who sounds most like a Marty stu out of those three.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-14, 03:11 PM
-Keeper (short for a longer name I forget), the party's Sidereal. The party's face in heaven and a manipulative bastard. Weakest at combat (even bad at SMA), not bad at sorcery, excellent at rewriting fate. Loves his Dodge charms. Eventually lost touch with the party as part of heavenly politics.

This is my bet. Why?

Has a name remembered(or at least one form of the name).

Party face.

Rewrites fate.

Has other traits as well. So, despite not having a very fleshed out description, and being "bad at combat", whatever that means, he's got a lot of power. This seems least likely to be the PC.


That said, I maintain that, like the original descriptions, we're not given enough info. Characters consist of more than a short paragraph, and the way in which you write that paragraph can skew perceptions quite a bit.

Mystic Muse
2010-01-14, 03:17 PM
oh. didn't see that for some reason. >_>

Tyndmyr
2010-01-14, 03:25 PM
It's amusing how much "spot the DMPC" is like "spot the marty stu".

PlzBreakMyCmpAn
2010-01-14, 03:25 PM
Quick show of hands. Who, who has not yet posted, has bothered to read this all the way through? Anyone? Yeah I thought so.

Indon
2010-01-14, 04:06 PM
That said, I maintain that, like the original descriptions, we're not given enough info. Characters consist of more than a short paragraph, and the way in which you write that paragraph can skew perceptions quite a bit.

It's been quite a while since I ran the game, thus my poor memory. It was an awesome game, but the stories we all have about it were more sweepingly epic than character-oriented, so that doesn't help either (and is largely why half the character synopsies just describe various character capabilities).

And in Exalted, being bad at combat means you don't have much combat-oriented capability. It's not a level-based RPG like D&D is and you can specialize in one area or another. You can also have characters of outright overall different power levels, and the party has had a couple of those (of note, the fae-blooded, who was simply not as powerful as the other party members).

Knaight
2010-01-14, 04:09 PM
I don't even have to read it. The answer is simple -- the characters played by the players are PCs. Any character who joins the party played by the DM is a DMPC, and the others are NPCs.

If they join as an equal or superior. A group of soldiers under the command of a PC is not a group of DMPCs if they stay with the party.

Indon
2010-01-14, 04:17 PM
If they join as an equal or superior. A group of soldiers under the command of a PC is not a group of DMPCs if they stay with the party.

I dunno. In some games that could turn out vague - in my game, for instance, not all the players were at the same power level. So at what power level would the DMPC have managed 'equal or superior'? At the level of the mechanically weakest character? The strongest? The average?

I'd say that the DMPC status has a lot to do with characterization. Do any of those soldiers have names assigned to them, for instance?

Jarawara
2010-01-14, 06:36 PM
Thank you, Indon. It's nice to see another entry.

I'll go with:

"-A Twilight Solar whose name I forget. Possesses an ancient artifact used by Sidereals to manipulate fate before the construction of the Loom, which he doesn't know how to use fully but knows some basic functions of... essentially, it's a TARDIS. Powerful sorceror and one of the party's weaker combatants, he eventually decided to stay behind with another Solar building a private kingdom near the edge of the world."

Reasons:

I'm not sure what DM would allow a player a Tardis, but a DMPC could be kept in line. Also, a powerful sorcerer, yet a weak combatant. Like he was meant to be shown as experienced, but without dominating the game. Good traits for plot development, or as detractors would say, 'railroading'. (I use that term as a compliment, because nothing gets my goat more than a DM who has no point to his game. Where do I buy my ticket, I wanna ride!)

Most any DM wouldn't forget the name of their player's characters unless it's been awhile. At which point, the name of the NPCs would fade before the names of the PC's would. Therefore, I think it's more likely that the DMPC would be one of the names that you have forgotten, rather than the named characters in that list.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-14, 07:17 PM
Good traits for plot development, or as detractors would say, 'railroading'. (I use that term as a compliment, because nothing gets my goat more than a DM who has no point to his game. Where do I buy my ticket, I wanna ride!)

I would argue that it's quite possible to have a point to a game without railroading. Plot development can happen even in sandbox styled games, and requires nothing that looks even vaguely like railroading.

Plot Control, on the other hand, does.

Indon
2010-01-15, 12:38 PM
I would argue that it's quite possible to have a point to a game without railroading. Plot development can happen even in sandbox styled games, and requires nothing that looks even vaguely like railroading.

Plot Control, on the other hand, does.

And, indeed, a DM can guide a plot in a heavy-handed, 'railroading' way, or in a softer way that few would claim is railroading.

Not many people are playing round two. I'll reveal the DMPC next time I get to the thread (probably on Tuesday), regardless of how many people post. I'll also go into more detail about the characters, as I've since remembered more and can go further in-depth on the characterization of both the PCs and the DMPC alike.

Indon
2010-01-20, 12:56 PM
And the winner is: Tyndmyr, guessing Keeper.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that another DMPC-thread fan guessed correctly, considering that I had publicly expressed my preference of Sidereals as quality DMPC characters for their fate-manipulation abilities, which allow them to guide the plot while still allowing the players to take all the glory.

Anymore, more on the characters.

Logan, the first guess, I honestly didn't think anyone would think of as a DMPC of any kind. Logan was played by the 'social' player of the group - the guy who comes in, makes jokes, has fun, but doesn't really get engaged in the game. He has since branched out more, however, and in my current Exalted game is playing a Night caste Solar in a much more engaging fashion.

The other guess was the Twilight modeled after the Doctor, who ended up not really using his TARDIS artifact much, probably because he was a fan of Doctor Who and realized the trouble he could get into with it (and I had, in fact, designed alternate history worlds and such for them to adventure in had something gone wrong). In Exalted, one of the biggest threats to the world is the exalts themselves, so giving the players plenty of rope to hang themselves, in the form of massive, over-9000 power, helps to facilitate that.

I'm really surprised nobody guessed Damael - as a weaker type of Exalt artificially boosted in power to become competitive, and listing even only some of the more interesting things he had accomplished, I was sure people would think him to the point where I intentionally left things that I had remembered about him out so as to not make him sound like a personal favorite and lead people guessing the wrong way. Arguably, he was my favorite character out of the group, having shown the most character development that I think I've ever seen in a game, as well as providing a wealth of fascinating plot hooks. That's probably why I remembered so much about him.

I'm also surprised nobody guessed Croup, if only due to his name, but I guess with only three people guessing most of the candidates are going to remain unguessed.