>>97864132
The answer to this question is universally no, because a dmpc is categorically a bad thing, or at the very least an oxymoron.

>>97864132
I occasionally used experienced higher level experts in a campaign. An experienced knight teaching a PC squire, an elderly wizard teaching his PC apprentice, a crime boss recruiting a PC urchin into his Thieve's Guild, etc, can be a good way to start, as it introduces the players to the world in which they adventuring, the society and norms, to guide them through their vulnerably starting levels, as well as showing them the typical power levels that they eventually hope to reach and surpass themselves. You have to do it carefully though, weaning them off their teachers and into independance as the game progresses. Quite often, I had the old trainer die in a manner that taught the PCs an important lesson on how to survive (ie dont try to take on a dragon with melee weapons - they can fly and breath fire, so either bring bows or fight it in a cave) as well as giving them a reason to come back when more competent (or after a side quest to secure potions of fire resistance) to get revenge.

It only really works in long term games with fixed world levels though (the world doesnt level with the PCs, 1HD opponents dont become 2HD the second the players level up, etc) and in games in which the PCs start as low level recruits and work to slowly become experts in their individual fields - DMPCs in one off games with players that want the limelight on them just tend to annoy.

>>97864132
yes
>>97864152
skill issue

>>97864313
You're describing NPCs.
>>97864314
A """"good gmpc""" is an NPC. A gmpc is always a negative thing. The game master cannot have player characters, it doesn't work that way.

>>97864132
Yes, I have written a book before.

>>97864132
Yeah, mainly in one on one games where I mostly use a roll table for a lot of the dm/gm in a similar way to when I play solo.

Like I am technically running the game but not really. It's basically like running a solo game but you bring a friend along.

I also have done it as a in game tutorial guy when running games for literal children, to sort of have a guy in game and in character explain basic stuff to them before running off or whatever once they got the hang of things. More of a NPC+ in that case though.

No.
A GMPC is always shit and fundamentally different from an NPC even if it is one that constantly sticks with the party in a role that is bigger than just loot mule.
A NPC can stick with the group and have his own goals, will and personality. He can fill in for vacant positions like front fighter if every one of your players had the BRILLIANT idea to roll up a merchant, alchemist, dickass thief in a sword & sorcery campaign. He can act as guide and GM mouthpiece so there is no grave missunderstandings between party and GM and easy, immersive information flow.
They can be fun for everyone at the table and the GM can actually take part in the group dynamic without having to feel like the antagonistic outsider all the time.

Signs that indicate a GMPC as opposed to a regular NPC starting with the most telling ones:
-constant dialogue between DMPC and other NPCs (write a book nigger)
-level and skill progression alongside the other party members
-input into group related decisions unasked and even when asked in character in my opinion (gaining meta knowledge is shit unless it's explicitly there to negate player/GM missunderstandings)
-plot relevance in some big ways

This is my objectively correct take.

I'm running one in my game. I made it clear to my players that he's a warm body that was originally meant to exist just so I didn't have to cancel the session when another player couldn't make it, but when one of my players dropped out completely the rest of the party wanted the DMPC to keep tagging along. I play him as an NPC with PC progression, and don't take part in any of the decision making for the party (but will offer input in character if asked).

I'd like to retire him sooner rather than later. He's part of a story hook that would be appropriate for my party to tackle in 3 or 4 levels, so I think if they want to address that hook he'll have some resolution and if not then he can just as easily go "Thanks for the adventure, now my people need me" and fuck off.

>DM
I enjoy games, so no.

>>97864132
I Nearly always include a DMPC. They are more of NPCs that follows the party around. Some examples of DMPCs and how they went:
- Courier whose tasked by the king to help them and bring news of their exploits: basically ended up doing most of the buying/selling and maintenance, treated more as a supply animal than an NPC. Used often, very successful

- Prostitute that has the mcguffin imbedded in her soul (long story): at the start was great and did most of the info collecting for the party, since my friends are retards and seemingly want me to RP sexing them i will never do this again.

- the mage: best DMPC if you are playing a game without much magic. I used this a lot. To make it feel fair have the mage need a lot of time to cast spells and have him be more classic nature magic guy

>>97864706
>>97865762
These are examples of NPCs.
>>97864535
This man is objectively correct.

>>97864132
Yeah. Last campaign I introduced a helper character early on, with the intent of him being consistently 3 or so levels behind the party, and was mainly there to justify the party carrying so much stuff. He was a squeaky-voiced timid merchant boy they rescued from bandits. He got kidnapped, mind-wiped, and ultimately died right near the end, and reappeared in the finale as a spirit who helped them with a few spells. I think they liked him well enough.
This time around, any DMPCs who join up I intend to have controlled by the players. They are built like simpler PCs, with fewer abilities and things to track. Currently they have a dog and a reporter who is a protege of one of the PCs.

File: disdain for garbage.jpg (93 KB, 800x651)

93 KB JPG

>>97864132
>AI image
>AI question

>>97864316
I've heard of good outcomes if the players are put into an encounter several levels above them, and a DMPC is added to the party and played correctly. An Archfiend is supposed to be powerful, so it works well.

>>97864535
>Signs that indicate a GMPC as opposed to a regular NPC
??? you act like you're trying to detect a villain

What most people are describing here is just what I would think of as a follower/hireling. I don't really understand how someone would actually implement a DMPC, because the idea just seems kinda silly. Personally I almost always have some NPCs end up tagging along with my players, but I rarely have them take any sort of real spotlight, if I actually give them any sort of fighting ability, I usually take a couple spells or abilities from whatever class they sorta represent. I did try having them be a little more involved once, by letting my players give them commands, but they would just forget they existed every time

Most people conflate the idea of a fleshed out NPC that has goals, a background and takes actions as a GMPC but really thats just a fleshed out NPC. A GMPC is a pet character the GM makes who is usually the most awesome, cool, and badass character. Usually this character is always very important to whats happening in the game as to not be let out of the spotlight as well.
A gm can also have a NPC be a part of the players party to help them through difficult situations or in odd cases where everyone wanted to play a combat focused character in a non combat game.

>>97866256
Are you being sarcastic? People fucking hate that.
>>97865809
You. Are. Describing. An. NPC.

Why is this hard for people?

>>97866359
>A GMPC is a pet character the GM makes who is usually the most awesome, cool, and badass character. Usually this character is always very important to whats happening in the game as to not be let out of the spotlight as well.
Objectively correct. a GMPC is always a negative thing. A good gmpc is just an NPC.

>>97864132
I played twilight 2000 with three players (Latvian former famous circus clown, drafted out of prison ex-IRA member and ex-NVA pioneer) and three NPC party members (shot down USAF lieutenant colonel, former bradley crewman and drafted paramedic) if that counts. The game kind of requires you to run a 5-6 man party for the survival mechanics to work.

I didn't hog the spotlight with them however, if the players didn't involve them they were away doing their thing, just like any other NPC.

>>97866267
Yes. I am describing a villain.
The distinction between GMPC and NPC and why it's bad is quite clear as >>97866359 also describes.
When a Gamemaster smuggles a character into the player group and treats this character with prefered attention and care, he upsets the balance of the game.
You are the Game Master. You already have every conceivable power to shape the world around the players. The players however only have their own little dude and how he reacts to all the things that are being presented to them by the game. If the GM takes that for himself too then players really just become a secondary thought and everyone would be better of if the GM just plays a solo game (just do that on the side if you really want to tell a specific story, I do it and it's great).

>>97866440
>if that counts
No, it does not.

>>97866352
Like I mentioned above, I heard of a really cool encounter before. Where the threat against the party was so large, that the party opted to bring an Archfiend into the fight through a bargaining. It's a powerful monster and it helped to turn the tide of the encounter in the party's favor. Of course afterwards the deal was concluded and the Archfiend left the party. I've also heard of it working well with the favor of a deity, such as bestowing a powerful artifact to the party in a crisis, and likewise after a threat is dealt with the artifact returned the deity.

>>97866768
You're describing the players enlisting the help of an NPC. You're talking about an NPC.

>>97866876
No I am talking about a DM controlled PC. tard
big juiced up PC controlled by the DM, and levels enemy forces so that the party can tackle threats of a higher level than them.

The key thing to understanding, is to first realize that your view on DM PCs do not fit reality, and you need to work on it to be accurate.

>>97866889
No, you aren't. Character that are controlled by the game master are NPCs, definitionally. A GMPC is what >>97866359 has described. It is always a bad thing. A powerful character that the players interact with and convince to help them in a tough fight is still an NPC.

File: 1764434003600192.jpg (105 KB, 800x450)

105 KB JPG

>>97866889
NTA but thats still just an NPC. A DMPC is the thr dms special oc donut steel character who the DM will shoe horn into the game via making them too important in the game to not be included in each session.
In your example the players summoned a demon to do something. The demon does the thing and leaves. That's just an NPC because it was brought out entirely by the players choices.
An example of a DMPC would be this
>the players need to get a macguffin from a castle.
>as the players are deciding how to get the macguffin from the castle Mr. Cool ice shows up and tells the players how to get the macguffin.
>the plan won't work with out him either, the players need to take him along.
>they get the macguffin.
>Mr. Cool ice tells them the intricate lore of the macguffin and tells them they need more macguffins to complete the quest.
>of course he's the only one who knows where they are and how to get them.
>Mr. Cool ice is now the party leader essentially.

>>97864535
>level and skill progression alongside the other party members
What's wrong with this one? If said NPC is contributing enough why can't they advance?

>>97867090
Because at that point they are not functioning like a retainer, they are the dungeon Master's personal donut steel, and it's almost always a bad time with them

>>97867090
Nothing inherently wrong with it an npc can have a character sheet but all DMPCs will have a character sheet.

>>97866978
>NTA but thats still just an NPC.
You're wrong, you will get over it.

>>97867196
Explain, in detail, why you think that your example isn't just an NPC.

>>97864132
Depends on the definition of DMNPC. Do the 20 named recurring NPCs that make up the warband my players party are a part of count as DMNPCs or just PCs?

If DMNPC is defined as having all the rules of a player character as a way for the DM to also play I only had one in a single campaign (the 5E faerie precon) and it was fairly tame and not a problem and I only realized it was such like 10 sessions in.

>>97867196
Power level of a NPC has nothing to do with it being a DMPC. Do you think Adam smasher is a DMPC?

File: I drink anarchy.jpg (21 KB, 347x448)

21 KB JPG

>>97866359
Exactly this holy shit dude

>>97867119
Yeah but if part of what they're doing is helping out the PCs in combat if they don't level up they're going to fall off and never help again. Which might be fine if you intend the NPC to be training wheels or something.

>>97867228
The twenty names reccuring NPCs count as NPCs. How is this even a question?

>>97867269
Well, the warband members roughly the same power level of the party, with a few higher level and most the same level or slightly lower as the party levels up.

The 5E campaign had a literal tiefling trans stereotype character and all she really did was talk a bit in conversations, make a few jokes and get downed in most fights which became a joke by itself. Tbh if a GM has a bit more fun by also playing its not inherently a bad thing, its just a bad thing most of the time.

Let's be real, the "DMNPC are bad" thing came from horror stories like "my level 20 guildmaster mage chains you up in a dungeon so you can't go on this adventure chad, now its just me and your girlfriend alone in the royal palace and I'll give her 2 level ups if she kisses me-I mean the king hehehe"

If the DMNPC is just a way for the GM to have a mouth piece in game, round out the party, have a little more fun its not a problem. The problem is highly autistic DMs for whom the table is just an avenue to express control, supressed emotions or force the party into their novel instead of what rping really is. And they use some OP NPC self insert to bully people within the game.

>>97867317
You're describing NPCs. The very concept of the gmpc is because of those horror stories. That is what a dmpc is. You guys keep going
>Oh yeah no I totally run gmpcs all the time my players love them
Then you just go on to describe NPCs. As has already been said, a well realized NPC isn't a gmpc, a mechanically complex NPC isn't a gmpc. A gmpc is specifically describing a situation where the GM attempts to position their oc donut steel to be as important (or, as likely, more important) than the PCs. It's always a bad thing.

>>97867317
No, they're bad even in that case. It's sad you don't see why. By putting a voice of yourself as a NPC into the game in any capacity like that your relationship with the group changes. It ALWAYS turns out bad with the NPC trying to push the players into a certain way.

>>97867351
Idk we played like 30 sessions with that DM, and it was a decent job for their first attempt (after playing for 10+ years) and it was never a problem. Never hogged the spotlight or derailed anything. Basically just a DM self insert that was just kind of there.

I agree I find it distasteful but it was also never really a problem.

>>97864132
Ran the WFRP 2e Paths of the Damed arc, starting with the mini-adventure in the rulebook. Had a Militiaman with the party to give them someone else with basic combat skills, and some useful trade skills.
He spoke up when the players either missed something important (enough of a hint to get the players to notice), or when he had specific skill-related knowledge to impart.
I kept him alive long enough for the players to fill out their first careers and get some new skills, then he got messily killed by the Demon at the end of the first book.
This is the closest I will ever have to a GMPC.

>>97867372
Same for me. I ended up with a DMPC basically by accident once.
>Running Gnoll themed dungeon
>Have an encounter with Black Puddings
>One of them has a Gnoll half inside of it
>Players go out of their way to save him and heal him afterward
>Intended for him to just run off and be in another group later, but players made sure to keep him near for 'safety'.
>Eventually start running him as his monster stats on their side, then give him Healer Spellcaster sidekick levels (5e doesn't have giving monsters class levels so I mostly just winged it via general HP and hit levels)
>Clearly much weaker still
>Expected him to bite it at some point but he survived
>Made for some good RP moments
I made it make sense. If he's being a pragmatic survivalist, he'll stick with the pack that protects him right? The cleric was also working hard on trying to 'redeem' him though I tried to make it clear the chances of that happening were pretty low.

My players still talk about him as one of the most memorable NPCs. Way more interesting than him trying to backstab the group or attacking them during an encounter or something.

>>97867492
Bad DM that doesn't understand gnolls

>>97867418
>>97867492
Literally just NPCs

>>97867535
maybe it wasn't DND gnolls. if it was dnd gnolls yea that's not happening.

Do people ITT not realize OP is trying to farm anecdotes about shitty DMs using their level 30 demigod self insert to abuse their friends?

the rubric here is
>anything reasonable isn't a DMNPC
>anything unreasonable is

>>97867559
Your theory is faulty but you are correct. A gmpc is specifically a bad thing. That is what the term refers to, that is the point. I'm not pointing that out to farm stories, nor am I op. I want the thread to fucking die because people seem to think "recurring npc=gmpc," which is a completely flawed premise.

>>97864152
I just cannot understand this sentiment. Maybe it's because we only play with friends and no random people from the internet.
How is it not possible to play a character as a DM without being a full on asshole who uses his DM powers as a boost to his character? Just be cool and it's fine.

We've played with DMPCs for 20 years and never had a single problem aside from one campaign where the DM was a narcissist. And that dude got booted fast anyways.

Just don't play with shitheads and it's no problem at all.

>>97864132
using a DMPC is bad because the DM can create characters without restriction to gear or ability as well as being able to act on knowledge no one should know
the reason why you are discouraged from utilizing DMPCs is because its way too easy for the DMPC to do everything while the party can only helplessly watch as the DM basically just plays against himself

now its okay to have a party member controlled by the DM as long as the players are still the ones doing all the lifting
as a general rule, you can have a DMPC as long as:
>they are not drastically stronger than the party and become the cornerstone of solving encounters
>they do not use the DMs knowledge of hidden information to railroad the party

>>97864132
>Have you ever successfully used a DM PC in a campaign
Almost every time, the secret is to make them a support character.

>>97864132
Kinda. I was a PC, who had to DM sometimes, and in those times my PC was then a DMPC.
I usually made him do off screen adventures, and come back with some implausible and useless trophy or story.

>>97868198
The GM played a bunch of different characters. There is a word for them: NPCs. I'm beginning to think that you might actually be one.

>>97868352
My nigga. This is how I go about it. They're always either a healer of some description or a skill-based creature usually built for knowledge checking.

>>97864132
I made the DMPC into the main villain of the campaign. hoping the party would follow him into literal hell to bring him to justice. They ended up following and then siding with him because he was too charismatic.

>>97868376
Not really. Our DMs (we rotate between campaigns) just create a PC for themselves like the rest of the party at session zero.
The DM them plays them as a PC with the same levels, loot and so on. It's just courtesy to hold back when the party discusses strategies or plans.

Ofc he also plays the NPCs. That's obvious.

And yes, the DM COULD use his powers do be overpowered. But we are adults and just don't do this.
You could also cheat at multiplayer video games or while playing cards but why would you?
If you really are so afraid of DMPCs you are really just convinced that your DM is an asshole who would cheat you if he could. So why play with him in the first place?

>>97868463
>It's just courtesy to hold back when the party discusses strategies or plans.
This makes it an NPC. It doesn't matter that they gain levels and hang out with the party. It's a spotlight thing. It's definitionally an NPC. It's a character that isn't played by a player.

>>97868413
>>97868461
You're describing NPCs.

File: dmpc.jpg (202 KB, 697x539)

202 KB JPG

>>97867208
NPC stands for non player character, a DMPC is a DM controlled player character. They work the same as a PC, you would have to bend over backwards in a straight circle to claim a PC is an NPC. The term DMPC doesn't hardly come up in the books neither, instead you get an assortment of interchangeable terminology, none of which could be described as NPCs.

>>97867240
Morgan Blackhand is a DMPC

>>97867317
>Let's be real, the "DMNPC are bad" thing came from horror stories
Bingo, you only seem to hear about the bad out comes, people tend to have a sick fascination with those and they get lots of views.

>>97867349
a DMPC is a player character that is in the party, it can last for more than one session, it could be an entire campaign where the DM gets to play a character too, so you're just wrong, this isn't a discussion about NPCs.

>>97868198
>How is it not possible to play a character as a DM without being a full on asshole who uses his DM powers as a boost to his character? Just be cool and it's fine.
It is cool and it is fine, everyone has been poisoned by those youtube videos where they only *only* talk about bad things. Those channels farm stories about things that go wrong. They never make a video about good things.

>>97868461
based

>>97868791
Nope. You are incorrect. Even a character that sticks with the player characters for the entire fucking campaign is still a fucking NPC. That's how that works, idiot.

>>97868821
Typically when an NPC joins the party for an extended period of time they can be referred to as sidekicks, cohorts, or even DMPC. Get learned.

>>97868777
A game master cannot run a player character. Any character they run is an NPC. If they try to run a player character, they have fucked up. The very fact that everyone says the same things
>They're just there to fill mechanical gaps
>I make sure they don't steal the spotlight
>They aren't actually make decisions
>They're just there for support

Makes them *fundamentally different* from a player character. A gmpc occurs when the GM attempts to treat an NPC with as much spotlight time as PCs. This is always bad. It's never good. A gmpc is definitionally a bad thing. It doesn't matter if they are with the party for long periods of time. It doesn't matter if they are built like the player characters. They are either fulfilling a fundamentally different role than the PCs, or they are shit. There is no such thing as a good gmpc. There are gmpcs, which are a bad thing, and there are NPCs.

>>97868833
Sidekicks and cohorts sound two different words for an Npc.

File: elf duelist character.jpg (647 KB, 1920x2873)

647 KB JPG

>>97868839
Bewildering that it's taken over 60 posts to get this point across. And we already had it only 7 posts deep >>97864535

>>97866359
No, a dmpc is when the dm is also playing the game as a player, which for certain systems and play styles doesn't work.
If the dm is offloading a lot of the stuff to oracles/random tables and/or using a pre-made module then it works just fine.

>>97867594
A dmpc is simply a pc that the dm is running instead of one of the other players.
It's used when the dm is also a player within the game.
Being a dm and player isn't necessarily mutually exclusive.
That is the thing that is going over your head

>>97868839
A dm can also be a player at the same time.
It isn't even that hard.
Like have you ever played a solo game?
Guess what, you are being both the player and the dm at the same time.
Now just add other co-players.
Oh my god, magic, you have a player character being used by the dm. Making it a dmpc, not a npc.

>>97869169
Dumb fuck. You can't. You have an inherit advantage as the DM and cannot play the PC fairly. Let's say you avoid the typical problems related with a DMPC, you don't meta game, you don't guide the players, you let them do everything and don't get in the way. Why do you even have the DMPC in the first place?

Don't. Just don't. There's never, EVER a good reason to use one.

>>97869131
>>97869142
>>97869169
Okay, so in this incredibly specific and singular type of game where the GM isn't actually the GM and is somehow offloading the powers of a gm, sure.

But that is so hyper specific as to absolutely pointless to the greater conversation. You're talking about a type of game that less than 1 percent of people who play ttrpg are into. It's pointless to bring it up. I'd argue that it still really doesn't count, because you're essentially playing a GM less game, so it isn't a gmpc, it's another PC.

>>97864132
Kinda. He was there to do his job, follow orders and get paid. Just a solid reliable dude recruited for his specific skill set.

>>97869184
>>97869237
You have a predetermined conclusion and no rational argument against DMPCs other than you saying they are definitionally bad just because you personally say so.

File: lichkek.jpg (28 KB, 469x437)

28 KB JPG

>>97870097
Yeah and he's right nigga

>>97870097
I accept your concession.

>>97870097
That anon is being a retard about how he is arguing it, but the central thesis of "a character played by the GM in such a way that undue emphasis is placed on that character is detrimental to the game" is sound. If players' characters are second fiddle to the GM's, they lose the ability to influence events and take their turn in the spotlight, which leads to less enjoyment for most players. Very few people want to just be along for the ride for their GM's story about their cool hero.

>>97868839
>A game master cannot run a player character.
Incorrect, it happens from time to time.

>>97869169
but but but NPC NPC NPC ahhh expletives, these spergs are ruining what could be a good thread

>>97871970
>"a character played by the GM in such a way that undue emphasis is placed on that character is detrimental to the game"
Then lets discuss that instead of claiming everything is some other thing.

>>97872027
Hence why I said he was being a retard about it. It's quite autistic of him to get angry with other people about a narrow definition that he holds, especially when that definition runs contrary to how most other people would define the term.

>>97872053
>>97872027
>We are angry about the definition of the word! How dare you use the definition of the word, and not our made up definition of the word, that we just decided!

Yeah, fuck off. There is already a word for characters played the game master. They are called NPCs. A character that shows up for five minutes to give a single piece of information is an NPC, and a beloved retainer who spends the entire campaign with the player character's is also still an NPC. Gmpc refers to a specific, bad thing, because, definitionally, the game master cannot also be a player character. You're trying to argue that the impartial referee can also be a player in the game. It doesn't work that way.

File: dmpc.jpg (161 KB, 671x508)

161 KB JPG

>>97872164
Then learn the definition, fag.

>>97872187
>Hurr durr AI nonsense and reddit agree with me so it must be true!

You're an idiot, congratulations.

>>97864132
a GM I've played with before tried to run hired retainers as his own GM PCs to give them "personally", it near universally amounted to him undermining player orders
>break through rough forested terrain to a river, it's a little choppy
>the soil along the banks is a thick and slippery mud
>player checks the river with a pole, it's nearly neck deep
>we need to cross it
>player describes them stowing their arms, taking off their chainmail and it and their pack above their head as they start to wade accross
>player says their retainer is going to do the same and follow behind them
>GM says their retainer refuses because they're a knight and it's a DISHONOR to disarm because they already left their plate mail in the cart six miles back
>table goes silent

>>97872273
>no rational argument again
How tiring.

>>97872164
Game books don't agree with your made up definition.
Actual players of the game don't agree with your made up definition.
Several people in this thread don't agree with your made up definition.
Even search engines and AI bots that scrub the internet to compile as much info as possible don't agree with your made up definition.

You are just definitionally wrong and don't know what words mean.

>>97872331
Same thing would happen if they were NPCs, no?

>>97872346
>>97872363
It's a real "they hated him because he told the truth" situation.

Gmpc refers to a negative thing. A "good gmpc" is just an NPC. The GM cannot run an npc. Fucking deal with it.

>>97872331
You've just described NPCs.

>>97872551
*The GM cannot run a player character. Excuse my mistake.

>>97872551
>>97872562
False on both.

Your declarative statements are just your incorrect opinions, not truth.
They never have been truth, they never will be truth.
Deal with it.

>>97872363
>You are just definitionally wrong and don't know what words mean.
Ironic. Player characters are characters played by the players. Nonplayer characters are all the characters played by game masters. That covers the two kinds of characters. There isn't some other, third category. The term gmpc was originated to describe a negative thing: game master characters that took undue spotlight, became the GMs favorite main character, were super tough and cool and could not lose. It's a descriptor of a negative thing: the facilitator and referee of the game using their power in a negative way. It's obvious that's what it is, because the game master cannot play a player character. Because, as you said, words have meanings. And they aren't fucking players, they are the fucking referee. Again, every example of in the thread of a """good gmpc"""" is just a recurring npc. That's all it is! You don't need another, new word for recurring npc, there is already a fucking word for that: recurring npc! Either your recurring npc is good, or the Gm starts treating them as extra special oc donut steels, and then they tread into the fetid pool of gmpc, and that's always a bad thing!

>>97872571
>No, words *don't* actually mean anything, other than whatever meaning I come up with!

>>97872595
>>97872601

>if I say the same wrong thing I read on redit over and over it will change anything

Here, maybe this advice will help you run a DMPC for your self.
I think if you tried it in a actual game you would change your mind.
Your incorrect opinion comes purely from ignorance, likely from not playing much and instead watching youtube videos and spending too much time on redit with retards.
https://www.modularrealms.com/en-us/blogs/news/running-dmpcs-can-dungeon-masters-play-a-character

>>97872630
And more advice on how to do it.
https://nerdarchy.com/running-a-successful-dmpc/

I think actually playing one will change your mind.
Stop with the theory and get some in game experience.

>>97872551
Nah, sometimes I run a PC in a campaign because I want to play too.
>noooo it has to be le epic donut steel
Nah, he's just a regular class.

>>97872595
>Player characters are characters played by the players.
Those are NPCs.

>>97872630
>>97872640
>here is advice on how to do the thing you can't physically do and I am providing it for you against my very own arguments
my god, the time wasting is immense

>>97872679
>do the thing you can't physically do
Just because you are apperently mentally retarded and can't do something, it doesn't mean other people can't.

People have indeed run DMPCs just fine. There are hundreds of games where a DM also is a player and it works out just fine.
If you tried it you would probably like it, but I doubt you ether play or DM so you wouldn't know.

Like seriously, give it a try dude. It's fun.

>>97872558
and that's the problem
AD&D retainer/henchman aren't NPCs, they're meat puppets. they're very explicitly hired hands that are directed by the PCs.
in a situation where the loyalty score is fine and there isn't even a morale roll being made to adjust it, the GM ripping player control away to control them as their own is wrong

>>97872630
>>97872640
Don't even need to read, these are both retarded. The dungeon master can run characters. Those characters are called NPCs.

the autism in this thread is hilarious. any npc I don't like = dmnpc lmao.

if "dmnpcs" can undermine player autonomy, then every single NPC is a DMNPC. The king quest giver can get up and say 'have sex with me cleric or I'll behead all of you' as way for the GM to force some gross ERP. The problem is not DMNPCs, it's bad DMs. which if you have an actual playgroup and aren't an odious autist who has no friends and plays with randoms is never a problem.

OPs point is literally just bad npc = dmnpc and good npc is just a regular npc.

DMs use semi permanent party members to focus the party all the time, there is even one in The Gamers showing they are am almost omnipresent part of the tabletop gaming zeitgeist.

There is no functional difference from a week role played paladin sent by the king to guide the party to the BBEG and act as a representative of the king and the level 30 demi god sorcerer forcing ERP and telling the party what they are going to do other than one is bad.

"upstage" is such a loose, meaningless diatinction because there are tons of times when powerful NPCs driving the plot is good device in the campaign. Hell, Fizban is one of the most famous DND characters of all time.

the criteria is literally OP just going "this feels bad so it must be a DMNPC". NO. what it is is bad DM behavior.

>>97872669
Yeah, that's a called an NPC.

>>97872714
>People have indeed run DMPCs just fine.
No, they haven't. There is a word for the characters that the GM runs. It's called an NPC: a non-player character. This is different from a character run by the players, which is called a player character, or PC. I'm sorry your learning disability makes this so hard for you to understand, but hopefully with repetition, we'll get you there.

>>97872845
Gmpc is a specific description of bad GM behavior, yes.

>>97872858
>>97872841

How about you cite your source for your definitions.

Because this whole argument stems from you pulling a definition from your ass and being mule stubborn about it despite all evidence to the contrary that no one uses the term in the way you insist it be used.

>>97872846
When the dm is a player too, their character is a dmpc
Not a npc.
The dm is not a non-player in those cases so it is illogical to call the character they use a non-player character.

Why is something so simple so hard for you to understand?

File: greentights.png (284 KB, 580x580)

284 KB PNG

>>97872845
>OPs point is literally just bad npc = dmnpc and good npc is just a regular npc
Yes

>>97872927
Then OP's point is stupid.

File: I seriously hope you don'(...).png (34 KB, 406x380)

34 KB PNG

>>97872941
You're stupid

>>97872908
>When the dm is a player too,
What the fuck does this even mean?

>>97872900
Pretty much every single game book from the dawn of the hobby is pretty fucking clear as to what PCs and NPCs are, anon, it's kind of built into the fucking names.

File: lhv32npwqzs11.jpg (33 KB, 329x589)

33 KB JPG

>>97864132
"DMPC" is an inherently pejorative term. If they're done well they're not a DMPC, it's just an NPC or hireling accompanying the party.
And yes I've had plenty of positive experiences with hirelings both as player and GM. The most common scenario is filling in for an unpopular or lacking party role (especially with undersized parties) or for delegating tasks so the party can cover more ground or effectively be in two places at once without wasting a bunch of time.

Example 1: as a player, due to scheduling conflicts we were down to just my druid and another player as a monk as those who could show up every week, we were given a warforged john fighterman butler who followed our orders during combat and could carry heavy shit since neither of us had good strength. We were happy to kit him out with all the weapons and shit we couldn't use ourselves, and while an actual player might find it boring to play the meat shield and "every single turn I do nothing but attack for consistent damage" role as a hireling it's perfect and ensured we had leeway to do other stuff in combat.
Example 2: I GM'd a Mutants and Masterminds campaign where the players were part of a loose alliance of other superheroes. Because nobody likes spending their power budget on stuff like headquarters upgrades or vehicles for transport if it's not a core part of their character's identity, when statting out the founder of the group I had him pay for things like the group's fancy moon base and not-quinjets along with Benefit Wealth:5 to cover expenses. When going out to do superhero shit they could choose to bring along a few team members of their choice while leaving the rest at base or on other missions to help that comic-book feel of shifting lineups and characters rotating in and out of a given run, for these I'd use official premade character stat blocks from Threat Report etc. with some adjustments. Their favorite was the guy who rides a motorcycle out of a portal with a shotgun

File: leto joker.jpg (332 KB, 1400x1400)

332 KB JPG

>>97873109
>"DMPC" is an inherently pejorative term. If they're done well they're not a DMPC, it's just an NPC or hireling accompanying the party.
We've somehow managed to argue about this for over 100 posts. Glad you get it

>>97873022
Cool, cite one specifically.
Should be easy.

>>97873233
Clearly your personal definition isn't agreed upon.
Just because (possibly) one other person shares your incorrect opinion doesn't make it valid.

>>97864132
I have been using DM non-combat NPC since I discovered that my players actually listen the lore stuff when it is explained by NPC they actually like, rather than some randos or books they find.

>>97873286
>Clearly your objective definition isn't agreed upon
>Despite several people agreeing on it

File: the-clanker-wars-v0-mw55f(...).jpg (46 KB, 640x581)

46 KB JPG

>>97864132
Not sure if qualifies as a GMPC, but a literal Healbot. Passive to the extreme, unable to speak anything but binary, unwilling to speak binary except as one-word answers, obeying as literally as could be considered reasonable.

It allowed players to play what they truly wanted while having the high sustainability provided by someone really able to use stimpacks.

But it had XP, was a noble, scout and medic multiclass, levels, feats, skills, gear, etc.

>>97873479
>Not sure if qualifies as a GMPC
It doesn't, you've described an NPC. Thank you for playing!

>>97872845
>DMs use semi permanent player characters to focus the party all the time
oh, are DMPCs more common than you all realize?

>>97872853
>This is different from a character run by the players
In which way?

>>97873020
It means sometimes I roll up a character and join the party, while I am running the game. I am a forever DM.

>>97873109
>"DMPC" is an inherently pejorative term.
None of my sources can collaborate this theory, could you please post some links outside 4chan to back up your trite nonsense?

>>97873929
with even 30 seconds of googling you can find people calling it a pejorative or otherwise infamous tool of bad DMs going back nearly 20+ years, I refuse to believe somebody on 4chan is this illiterate

Just stop replying to that autist trying to derail the thread with his semantics. It's pretty obvious what OP is after, anything else is offtopic.

>>97874074
Where, reddit?
Cite your actual source for once.

>>97874074
Here is 30 seconds of googling btw >>97872187
Where does this corroborate your hair brained theories?