As a Player, you do not have the right to know anything about a character other than what you learn during play unless that information is granted you, for roleplay reasons, by the character's player or the DM.
Right, but if they, as a player, ask another player what they are and that person wants to keep it a secret, there are ways to do that such as describing physical appearance and nothing else. A character DOES have the right to the information they would perceive by looking at another character. Demanding another player make a skill check is just a dick move. and if the player is being a jerkface, why would anyone invest the time into unraveling the mystery of their character? And I say this as a player that consistantly keeps things from other players.
Just to note, though, we only know one side of this. It's entirely possible the OP phrased the question like "what's your race and class" rather than "what does my character see when they look at your character?" - It seems weird to me that the OP was the one asked to leave - I am more inclined to believe he wanted to know what the race and class was and was perhaps too insistent (they mention how "stressed" they got) to the point of frustrating that other player and, evidently, the DM. He does state he asked what the race and class were - not what he saw, what was the race and class because he, and I quote, "need to know".
I find it hard to believe somebody goes "what do I see" and are then told to roll insight and eventually told to leave. Seems more likely the OP wanted to know the class/race, and got upset when they could not be told and think the - possibly very normal- playing was cheating or favouritism or just did not like it ( they describe it as groan worth and that "This was just pure Animu-cringe.").
From their own initial post in this thread, I can see that it seems the OP wanted to metagame (knowing things their character cannot) and got frustrated and then got more frustrated by the simple, ordinary and common 'reflavouring' of events, and stressed themselves out over absolutely nothing causing negativity to other players. The DM resolved that negativity by removing the person causing it.
There are always two sides to every story, and I fail to see anything that would make me think the OP was the innocent victim in this.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
magical DRESS that has AC values the same as heavy armor...
could also block swords with their Fingers!...
...casting spells like firebolt...
Charm Person...
use Trance to cut a Long Rest in half...
The first two items sound like Mage Armor and Shield. It seems like it might've simply been an elven wizard disguised as a human cleric. It's not like they were really hiding the deception (they pretty much announced it when they said "roll insight"). I'd still leave though, since secretive play (and DM's that facilitate it) isn't my cup of tea... but I don't begrudge those that like it.
As a Player, you do not have the right to know anything about a character other than what you learn during play unless that information is granted you, for roleplay reasons, by the character's player or the DM.
Right, but if they, as a player, ask another player what they are and that person wants to keep it a secret, there are ways to do that such as describing physical appearance and nothing else. A character DOES have the right to the information they would perceive by looking at another character. Demanding another player make a skill check is just a dick move. and if the player is being a jerkface, why would anyone invest the time into unraveling the mystery of their character? And I say this as a player that consistantly keeps things from other players.
You are quite correct, just as the player was correct in asking for an insight roll. Personally, I'd have asked the DM to be the arbiter of such. :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Watch your back, conserve your ammo, and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
As a Player, you do not have the right to know anything about a character other than what you learn during play unless that information is granted you, for roleplay reasons, by the character's player or the DM.
Right, but if they, as a player, ask another player what they are and that person wants to keep it a secret, there are ways to do that such as describing physical appearance and nothing else. A character DOES have the right to the information they would perceive by looking at another character. Demanding another player make a skill check is just a dick move. and if the player is being a jerkface, why would anyone invest the time into unraveling the mystery of their character? And I say this as a player that consistantly keeps things from other players.
Just to note, though, we only know one side of this. It's entirely possible the OP phrased the question like "what's your race and class" rather than "what does my character see when they look at your character?" - It seems weird to me that the OP was the one asked to leave - I am more inclined to believe he wanted to know what the race and class was and was perhaps too insistent (they mention how "stressed" they got) to the point of frustrating that other player and, evidently, the DM. He does state he asked what the race and class were - not what he saw, what was the race and class because he, and I quote, "need to know".
I find it hard to believe somebody goes "what do I see" and are then told to roll insight and eventually told to leave. Seems more likely the OP wanted to know the class/race, and got upset when they could not be told and think the - possibly very normal- playing was cheating or favouritism or just did not like it ( they describe it as groan worth and that "This was just pure Animu-cringe.").
From their own initial post in this thread, I can see that it seems the OP wanted to metagame (knowing things their character cannot) and got frustrated and then got more frustrated by the simple, ordinary and common 'reflavouring' of events, and stressed themselves out over absolutely nothing causing negativity to other players. The DM resolved that negativity by removing the person causing it.
There are always two sides to every story, and I fail to see anything that would make me think the OP was the innocent victim in this.
In my case, and this came up in session zero, I simply told the individual asking that I was a tabaxi gambler. That was all. He did nit delve any deeper. If he had, my wording would have been different. I would have said I appeared to be a tabaxi rogue, depending on the DM, he may have learned more. I have a very high deception skill, and I have Advantage on it due to the orginal WGtE Changeling, which is still what we use. Along with the Faceless background the only information gleaned about me, so far, has been due to my own slip ups, which 2 characters have caught. One of them has been coverign for me, the reason to me is currently unknown. I suspect the character to by a spy or charleton himself (maybe evebn another Faceless). He appears to be a tiefling. As a curtesy for his support so far, I have not dove into his persona very closely so far. :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Watch your back, conserve your ammo, and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
I thought the point of playing D&D was to have fun with your friends. How is concealing yourself to any degree fun for the group? I thought we were supposed to work together to overcome the challenge and have fun.
I agree... the DM should have done more to alleviate this conflict. If the player was playing a different race/class than they appeared to be, and they had already okayed that with the DM, then the DM should have made it clear that this was all working as intended and that there are reasons that OPs character is not yet aware of. If the character isn't being deliberately deceitful, then the DM should explain how, mechanically, the character is using these seemingly impossible tasks, either through reflavoring or homebrewing spells/abilities.
As a Player, you do not have the right to know anything about a character other than what you learn during play unless that information is granted you, for roleplay reasons, by the character's player or the DM.
Right, but if they, as a player, ask another player what they are and that person wants to keep it a secret, there are ways to do that such as describing physical appearance and nothing else. A character DOES have the right to the information they would perceive by looking at another character. Demanding another player make a skill check is just a dick move. and if the player is being a jerkface, why would anyone invest the time into unraveling the mystery of their character? And I say this as a player that consistantly keeps things from other players.
You are quite correct, just as the player was correct in asking for an insight roll. Personally, I'd have asked the DM to be the arbiter of such. :)
Nope. Players don't get to ask other players for skill checks. DM's set the DCs that require checks. The DM should have called for a deception roll on the part of the player trying to hide and if the OP chose the could roll an insight agaisnt that.
You should ask to rejoin the game. But ask the DM if you can play new race “Pink Eye” and if says yes infect the other players character with pink eye. And good times were had by all.
All of those special features can be achieved by level 2:
- Race: High Elf, Firebolt as Cantrip
- Class: Warlock, Hexblade
- Invocations: Armor of Shadows, Mask of Many Faces
- Equipment: Shield, Dagger
Mask of Many Faces allows you to cast Disguise Self at will, potentially hiding both the shield and dagger. Armor of Shadows allows you to cast Mage Armor at will. 13 Mage Armor + 3 Dex + 2 Shield = Magical Dress with 18 AC.
The Dagger hits for 1d6 + 3 = 9 points of "unarmed" damage if you roll lucky.
Charm Person is on the Warlock spell list and stealth proficiency can be gained via background.
Maybe the DM and the other player played this a bit bad, but the character seems mechanically possible. :-)
To the best of my knowledge, the OP never gave us any indications of the level of the characters in the4 campaign. From his descriptions of the abilities I went with 3rd to 5th.
This would allow 1 level of Divine Sould sorcerer for cleric spells and 4 levels of hexblade warlock (martial weapons, merdium armor, shields, 2 invoctions, a pack, and a feat. It could be another combo of multiclassing. Throw in race and background and I, for one, can see a multitude of possibilities. :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Watch your back, conserve your ammo, and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
To the best of my knowledge, the OP never gave us any indications of the level of the characters in the4 campaign. From his descriptions of the abilities I went with 3rd to 5th.
This would allow 1 level of Divine Sould sorcerer for cleric spells and 4 levels of hexblade warlock (martial weapons, merdium armor, shields, 2 invoctions, a pack, and a feat. It could be another combo of multiclassing. Throw in race and background and I, for one, can see a multitude of possibilities. :)
Oh, in the 15th post in this thread the OP clarified that this was a level 2 party. Although it's entirely possible the DM allowed this other player to be a higher level.
The Dagger hits for 1d6 + 3 = 9 points of "unarmed" damage if you roll lucky.
If wielding a dagger, they're not unarmed.
Also, while the rest of these spells and abilities could do the things you're saying, at some point they'd have to call their spells. Eldritch Invocations don't auto-cast, and Disguise Self has a duration of only one hour. Armour of Shadows isn't a permanent Mage Armor. Shield would have to be called as a reaction to stop an attack. In all of these cases, the rest of the players would know that they're casting those spells.
I thought the point of playing D&D was to have fun with your friends. How is concealing yourself to any degree fun for the group? I thought we were supposed to work together to overcome the challenge and have fun.
Secrecy, lying, betrayal.. these are all parts of role-playing games and often are among the most fun things that can transpire. But these are things to be done in character, not player versus player, so I agree, the point is to make it fun. Its not fun when someone does this sort of thing as an F-U to another player, but realistically the DM is at fault here for allowing it in the first place, in fact, I would blame the DM in this in its entirety, its just really shitty DMing.
To both of these quotes.
sometimes the DM has PCs in the group that run a char for awhile that turns out to be the BBEG. It does happen.
sometimes people play characters that take a little more convincing to trust their lives to a random group of strangers.
sometimes the DM does suck.
sometimes more than 1 reason could be the case.
sometimes people have fun playing more edgy characters.
i get OPs reason to vent. And given the information provided I agree with their Venting. However, overall, not enough information is provided to glean any insight to the overall situation.
I’ve been in a campaign before. Once. Where the “DM” wasn’t really the DM. There were 2 DMs. And one was a “PC” that after 7 months left the party in the middle of the night. He was the BBEG, enter a quest giver PC. Who needed our help vs BBEG party member, detailing out what they did we didn’t know about over the last 7 months with their “dm” knowledge as their quest proof. And they finished with us as a PC. And the former PC was then the DM finishing out the campaign.
it was quite good storytelling and a nice twist. The other 5 of us enjoyed it throughly after the campaign. In the moment. Mixed bag of emotions amongst the other 5 of us that didn’t know/think there were 2 DMs.
would this be: “shitty DMing” by any of your standards?
The dagger and shield could be hidden by Disguise Self, making the attack looking as as it was unarmed. No need to cast Shueld (the spell), when he has a nearly invisible shield (the item).
This obviously depends on the DM, but according to the Disguise Self spell you can choose what your equipment looks like.
And both Mage Armor and Disguise self can easily be cast while alone... e.g. whenever the character needs to go to the toilet.
Hearing some desenting voices and they all seem to make sense as well.
I am certain that the PC in question was playing a Cleric or Cleric-like Class as they casted Healing Touch at one point.
The attack roll was done on Roll20 and it came up as a solid 9 and listed as "Unarmed Attack". If you can edit attack names so easily, that's one thing but it would draw attention when the numbers are inconsistant. As well as the issue of why "punches" are leaving puncture or slashing wounds.
Someone did bring up the issue with me askin for "Race and Class" instead of "What does your character look like" and that is my fault. I was thinking too mechanically and not open ended.
As for this being some secret BBEG or similiar situation, this was a Lost Mine campaign for a first time DM, one who was still learning the ropes in fact. If they were really goin to be doing something like that, then they must be greatly overreaching.
I'm gonna make a note in the future to start recording these games I'm part of.
The dagger and shield could be hidden by Disguise Self, making the attack looking as as it was unarmed. No need to cast Shueld (the spell), when he has a nearly invisible shield (the item).
This obviously depends on the DM, but according to the Disguise Self spell you can choose what your equipment looks like.
And both Mage Armor and Disguise self can easily be cast while alone... e.g. whenever the character needs to go to the toilet.
And all of that holds up perfectly fine while they're standing still, but not in combat. Stopping an attack with a shield hidden by DS would not look like catching it with fingers, it would look like the blow deflecting a few inches in front of the forearm. A disguised dagger would pierce before the hand ever touched it, and then it would do piercing damage rather than unarmed damage.
And sure, they can secretly cast the spells away from other characters, but the Player still has to call their spells. This is the exact reason why shields have durations and casting costs.
The dagger and shield could be hidden by Disguise Self, making the attack looking as as it was unarmed. No need to cast Shueld (the spell), when he has a nearly invisible shield (the item).
This obviously depends on the DM, but according to the Disguise Self spell you can choose what your equipment looks like.
And both Mage Armor and Disguise self can easily be cast while alone... e.g. whenever the character needs to go to the toilet.
And all of that holds up perfectly fine while they're standing still, but not in combat. Stopping an attack with a shield hidden by DS would not look like catching it with fingers, it would look like the blow deflecting a few inches in front of the forearm. A disguised dagger would pierce before the hand ever touched it, and then it would do piercing damage rather than unarmed damage.
And sure, they can secretly cast the spells away from other characters, but the Player still has to call their spells. This is the exact reason why shields have durations and casting costs.
I would argue that during a combat encounter most people would be too busy with other things to realize the sword was not reflected with bare hands but bounced off a few inches in front of them. At the very least that would imho warrant a perception check.
Even if everyone would notice it: replace the shield with a disguised plate mail gauntlet (e.g. Half Plate) and you're fine blocking attacks with your fingers.
The dagger would obviously cause other wounds than an unarmed strike. There are fist weapons though, even if they are not on the equipment table the DM might just reflavour / homebrew one using dagger statistics... that is by no means a breaking or OP homebrew rule.
Last but not least: maybe they were just a monk / cleric multiclass with firebolt from the high elf racial.
The reason why I am posting all of this is simple: the character at first sounds horribly unbalanced and game-breakingly overpowered, while most of it is actually easy to achieve by using a single class warlock build with PHB races, spells and Standard Array.
If we can settle for 16 perma AC instead of 18 we can even switch out Hexblade for Celestial to gain those Cleric spells.
Maybe that character wasn't "pure Anime cringe" but just a well thought-through, AL legal character who wanted to hide his warlock pact for RP reasons... although it might have been DM favoritism and Anime inspired.
As a player I never give OOC info that another player wouldn't have IC. It gives us opportunity for more roleplay. to a point, I have had characters wear the full hood to hide they are half drow, claim to be the wrong class (one I thought I could pull off) or even "A professional Adventurer." I try to give hints as to what role I might be filling, including I had an artificer claim to be an "expert at locks and traps" and a "Dungeon delver" as to the question of "class." But I always make sure OOC people at the table know what role I fit in the party, so we can still plan.
Also I always make characters with a few tricks up their sleeves. Firebolt via the Ravnica backgrounds is 100% possible for even a cleric, and is a cool way of getting something for the group to talk about. So you dont even have to be an elf to get access to it as any cantrip caster.
Lastly, as a DM, I follow a general rule when describing combat. If they roll less than 10, its just a miss. If it is between 10 and their armor value, then its deflected by their armor, stopped by it, etc. If its between their armor value and their dex bonus AC, then they dodge or did some equally cool feat of dexterity to stop the attack. So like if ac is 12+dex, and the enemy rolls a 13, they could dodge, or could catch the blade between their hands, or whatever. Its all fluff.
Add in, I let my players reskin everything they want, as long as the general flavor is the same. So an Eldrich Blast (force damage) used in melee might just be a cool punch. Or maybe its primal savagry, or some other cantrip reskinned. As long as mechanically its the same, and similar flavor (no describing a fireball as a lightning ball instead), I dont care how my players describe anything they do. I as the DM know what they are doing, and it gives them a little extra investment in the roleplay instead of it all just being rollplay.
all that said, shame on the DM for shrugging you off, its his/her job to talk out problems with players. Even if it is "they are 100% above board, and wish to stay mysterious, so some stuff is reskinned" that they say, they need to be willing to work with their players.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Just to note, though, we only know one side of this. It's entirely possible the OP phrased the question like "what's your race and class" rather than "what does my character see when they look at your character?" - It seems weird to me that the OP was the one asked to leave - I am more inclined to believe he wanted to know what the race and class was and was perhaps too insistent (they mention how "stressed" they got) to the point of frustrating that other player and, evidently, the DM. He does state he asked what the race and class were - not what he saw, what was the race and class because he, and I quote, "need to know".
I find it hard to believe somebody goes "what do I see" and are then told to roll insight and eventually told to leave. Seems more likely the OP wanted to know the class/race, and got upset when they could not be told and think the - possibly very normal- playing was cheating or favouritism or just did not like it ( they describe it as groan worth and that "This was just pure Animu-cringe.").
From their own initial post in this thread, I can see that it seems the OP wanted to metagame (knowing things their character cannot) and got frustrated and then got more frustrated by the simple, ordinary and common 'reflavouring' of events, and stressed themselves out over absolutely nothing causing negativity to other players. The DM resolved that negativity by removing the person causing it.
There are always two sides to every story, and I fail to see anything that would make me think the OP was the innocent victim in this.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
The first two items sound like Mage Armor and Shield. It seems like it might've simply been an elven wizard disguised as a human cleric. It's not like they were really hiding the deception (they pretty much announced it when they said "roll insight"). I'd still leave though, since secretive play (and DM's that facilitate it) isn't my cup of tea... but I don't begrudge those that like it.
You are quite correct, just as the player was correct in asking for an insight roll. Personally, I'd have asked the DM to be the arbiter of such. :)
Watch your back, conserve your ammo,
and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
In my case, and this came up in session zero, I simply told the individual asking that I was a tabaxi gambler. That was all. He did nit delve any deeper. If he had, my wording would have been different. I would have said I appeared to be a tabaxi rogue, depending on the DM, he may have learned more. I have a very high deception skill, and I have Advantage on it due to the orginal WGtE Changeling, which is still what we use. Along with the Faceless background the only information gleaned about me, so far, has been due to my own slip ups, which 2 characters have caught. One of them has been coverign for me, the reason to me is currently unknown. I suspect the character to by a spy or charleton himself (maybe evebn another Faceless). He appears to be a tiefling. As a curtesy for his support so far, I have not dove into his persona very closely so far. :)
Watch your back, conserve your ammo,
and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
I thought the point of playing D&D was to have fun with your friends. How is concealing yourself to any degree fun for the group? I thought we were supposed to work together to overcome the challenge and have fun.
I agree... the DM should have done more to alleviate this conflict. If the player was playing a different race/class than they appeared to be, and they had already okayed that with the DM, then the DM should have made it clear that this was all working as intended and that there are reasons that OPs character is not yet aware of. If the character isn't being deliberately deceitful, then the DM should explain how, mechanically, the character is using these seemingly impossible tasks, either through reflavoring or homebrewing spells/abilities.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
Nope. Players don't get to ask other players for skill checks. DM's set the DCs that require checks. The DM should have called for a deception roll on the part of the player trying to hide and if the OP chose the could roll an insight agaisnt that.
You should ask to rejoin the game. But ask the DM if you can play new race “Pink Eye” and if says yes infect the other players character with pink eye. And good times were had by all.
All of those special features can be achieved by level 2:
- Race: High Elf, Firebolt as Cantrip
- Class: Warlock, Hexblade
- Invocations: Armor of Shadows, Mask of Many Faces
- Equipment: Shield, Dagger
Mask of Many Faces allows you to cast Disguise Self at will, potentially hiding both the shield and dagger. Armor of Shadows allows you to cast Mage Armor at will. 13 Mage Armor + 3 Dex + 2 Shield = Magical Dress with 18 AC.
The Dagger hits for 1d6 + 3 = 9 points of "unarmed" damage if you roll lucky.
Charm Person is on the Warlock spell list and stealth proficiency can be gained via background.
Maybe the DM and the other player played this a bit bad, but the character seems mechanically possible. :-)
To the best of my knowledge, the OP never gave us any indications of the level of the characters in the4 campaign. From his descriptions of the abilities I went with 3rd to 5th.
This would allow 1 level of Divine Sould sorcerer for cleric spells and 4 levels of hexblade warlock (martial weapons, merdium armor, shields, 2 invoctions, a pack, and a feat. It could be another combo of multiclassing. Throw in race and background and I, for one, can see a multitude of possibilities. :)
Watch your back, conserve your ammo,
and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
Oh, in the 15th post in this thread the OP clarified that this was a level 2 party. Although it's entirely possible the DM allowed this other player to be a higher level.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
If wielding a dagger, they're not unarmed.
Also, while the rest of these spells and abilities could do the things you're saying, at some point they'd have to call their spells. Eldritch Invocations don't auto-cast, and Disguise Self has a duration of only one hour. Armour of Shadows isn't a permanent Mage Armor. Shield would have to be called as a reaction to stop an attack. In all of these cases, the rest of the players would know that they're casting those spells.
To both of these quotes.
sometimes the DM has PCs in the group that run a char for awhile that turns out to be the BBEG. It does happen.
sometimes people play characters that take a little more convincing to trust their lives to a random group of strangers.
sometimes the DM does suck.
sometimes more than 1 reason could be the case.
sometimes people have fun playing more edgy characters.
i get OPs reason to vent. And given the information provided I agree with their Venting. However, overall, not enough information is provided to glean any insight to the overall situation.
I’ve been in a campaign before. Once. Where the “DM” wasn’t really the DM. There were 2 DMs. And one was a “PC” that after 7 months left the party in the middle of the night. He was the BBEG, enter a quest giver PC. Who needed our help vs BBEG party member, detailing out what they did we didn’t know about over the last 7 months with their “dm” knowledge as their quest proof. And they finished with us as a PC. And the former PC was then the DM finishing out the campaign.
it was quite good storytelling and a nice twist. The other 5 of us enjoyed it throughly after the campaign. In the moment. Mixed bag of emotions amongst the other 5 of us that didn’t know/think there were 2 DMs.
would this be: “shitty DMing” by any of your standards?
I'm betting the char is a high elf warlock and the player was trying to hide that fact for rp reasons.
The dagger and shield could be hidden by Disguise Self, making the attack looking as as it was unarmed. No need to cast Shueld (the spell), when he has a nearly invisible shield (the item).
This obviously depends on the DM, but according to the Disguise Self spell you can choose what your equipment looks like.
And both Mage Armor and Disguise self can easily be cast while alone... e.g. whenever the character needs to go to the toilet.
Hearing some desenting voices and they all seem to make sense as well.
I am certain that the PC in question was playing a Cleric or Cleric-like Class as they casted Healing Touch at one point.
The attack roll was done on Roll20 and it came up as a solid 9 and listed as "Unarmed Attack". If you can edit attack names so easily, that's one thing but it would draw attention when the numbers are inconsistant. As well as the issue of why "punches" are leaving puncture or slashing wounds.
Someone did bring up the issue with me askin for "Race and Class" instead of "What does your character look like" and that is my fault. I was thinking too mechanically and not open ended.
As for this being some secret BBEG or similiar situation, this was a Lost Mine campaign for a first time DM, one who was still learning the ropes in fact. If they were really goin to be doing something like that, then they must be greatly overreaching.
I'm gonna make a note in the future to start recording these games I'm part of.
Roll 20 you can edit names fairly easily.
LMoP. Well... we briefly had a PC help us that turned out to be the black spider. But not at level 2. Later on in campaign.
i hope you continue to play D&D and find it enjoyable overall though. Sorry this one was a drag.
And all of that holds up perfectly fine while they're standing still, but not in combat. Stopping an attack with a shield hidden by DS would not look like catching it with fingers, it would look like the blow deflecting a few inches in front of the forearm. A disguised dagger would pierce before the hand ever touched it, and then it would do piercing damage rather than unarmed damage.
And sure, they can secretly cast the spells away from other characters, but the Player still has to call their spells. This is the exact reason why shields have durations and casting costs.
I would argue that during a combat encounter most people would be too busy with other things to realize the sword was not reflected with bare hands but bounced off a few inches in front of them. At the very least that would imho warrant a perception check.
Even if everyone would notice it: replace the shield with a disguised plate mail gauntlet (e.g. Half Plate) and you're fine blocking attacks with your fingers.
The dagger would obviously cause other wounds than an unarmed strike. There are fist weapons though, even if they are not on the equipment table the DM might just reflavour / homebrew one using dagger statistics... that is by no means a breaking or OP homebrew rule.
Last but not least: maybe they were just a monk / cleric multiclass with firebolt from the high elf racial.
The reason why I am posting all of this is simple: the character at first sounds horribly unbalanced and game-breakingly overpowered, while most of it is actually easy to achieve by using a single class warlock build with PHB races, spells and Standard Array.
If we can settle for 16 perma AC instead of 18 we can even switch out Hexblade for Celestial to gain those Cleric spells.
Maybe that character wasn't "pure Anime cringe" but just a well thought-through, AL legal character who wanted to hide his warlock pact for RP reasons... although it might have been DM favoritism and Anime inspired.
So a few things about my take on this all.
As a player I never give OOC info that another player wouldn't have IC. It gives us opportunity for more roleplay. to a point, I have had characters wear the full hood to hide they are half drow, claim to be the wrong class (one I thought I could pull off) or even "A professional Adventurer." I try to give hints as to what role I might be filling, including I had an artificer claim to be an "expert at locks and traps" and a "Dungeon delver" as to the question of "class." But I always make sure OOC people at the table know what role I fit in the party, so we can still plan.
Also I always make characters with a few tricks up their sleeves. Firebolt via the Ravnica backgrounds is 100% possible for even a cleric, and is a cool way of getting something for the group to talk about. So you dont even have to be an elf to get access to it as any cantrip caster.
Lastly, as a DM, I follow a general rule when describing combat. If they roll less than 10, its just a miss. If it is between 10 and their armor value, then its deflected by their armor, stopped by it, etc. If its between their armor value and their dex bonus AC, then they dodge or did some equally cool feat of dexterity to stop the attack. So like if ac is 12+dex, and the enemy rolls a 13, they could dodge, or could catch the blade between their hands, or whatever. Its all fluff.
Add in, I let my players reskin everything they want, as long as the general flavor is the same. So an Eldrich Blast (force damage) used in melee might just be a cool punch. Or maybe its primal savagry, or some other cantrip reskinned. As long as mechanically its the same, and similar flavor (no describing a fireball as a lightning ball instead), I dont care how my players describe anything they do. I as the DM know what they are doing, and it gives them a little extra investment in the roleplay instead of it all just being rollplay.
all that said, shame on the DM for shrugging you off, its his/her job to talk out problems with players. Even if it is "they are 100% above board, and wish to stay mysterious, so some stuff is reskinned" that they say, they need to be willing to work with their players.