so have a new player that seems to be regretting their choice of character a bit and they have admitted to me that they would have done things differently if they knew what they know now. wondering if i should ask they player if they would want me to in game kill their character or send them off somewhere to let them re pick a character. they are level 5 and have been in a campaign now for a while and my only worry is that my other players might see it as an opportunity to do the same and then end up having a brand-new group of characters somewhat deep into a campaign. the player seems to be struggling a bit and i feel like they would have a bit more fun if i let them make a new character. they have a decent build but seem to just struggle connecting with them. anyone have advice on offering to let them remake the character or other advice?
A game is played for fun. If a player isn't having fun, that's going to eventually drag the rest of the table down. You should talk to the player and find out the root of the problem. You think the build they're using is effective, but the player isn't having fun. Try and find out why.
It sounds unusual for a player to not be able to connect with a character they created. But maybe they no longer like the direction the player is going. The first step to a solution is knowing what the problem actually is.
If the player is unhappy with their choice, letting their old character retire or "get an urgent message" which they have to attend to isn't a bad idea.
So, here's the question for you: why is it a problem even if the entire group switched up their characters?
If you're running a published adventure, then there is nothing in them that requires the player characters to be the same all the way through the adventure. In the Forgotten Realms there are adventuring guilds galore, and adventurers are everywhere. There simply is no reason not to allow a player to have their current character decide that this adventuring lark isn't for them and walk off toward the nearest city in search of what happens next in their lives. Similarly, there's absolutely no difficult in having a new character meet the group as the push ahead on their adventures.
Now, if you're running an adventure of your own design that's where you've likely encountered a common weakspot of your design. No adventure should really be contingent upon any specific character being 'the chosen one' or similar. The characters are less important than the party as a unit to the success or failure of the adventure.
Also, you're aware that death isn't the only way of writing out a character right? There is nothing, and I mean nothing preventing you from sitting down with a player and chatting about how they could respec their character. I've actually done this a few times. One player recently decided that they were going to break their pact with their Warlock Patron. This was great and had a lovely scene of them throwing all their magical items off a mountainside into a deep ravine never to be found again (they hope). Thinking about their adventures to date they respeced the character into a Ranger.
Similarly, there's absolutely no harm in having the character visited in their sleep or meditation by a patron or deity. If they choose to accept a simple mission that the patron or deity wants you've got an easy route into allowing the character to become a Warlock, Cleric, or Paladin. Maybe they have a run-in with a mysterious artefact of unknown origin, and now they find magic coursing through their body, they find themselves becoming aware of new knowledge from an unknown source - now they're a Wizard, Bard, or Artificer.
If the party are getting some downtime in a nearby settlement, maybe you extend the downtime and pause any ticking clocks. This offers everyone the chance to do some 'retraining' and become fighters?
The possibilities really are endless. This is an opportunity, and if you're afraid that a change in the roster of the party is going to ruin the adventure you're planning - I hate to tell you this but it's likely that the adventure wasn't well designed in the first place. Player character deaths can and do happen, change in party make-up happens. Allowing players the opportunities to do interesting things with their characters in order to continue and extend the fun - it's always worth it.
thanks for the info. to be more specific it's one of their first PCs and there doing good in my opinion with the PC (rogue). just I've heard them say "if i could start over I'd be a..." so I'm not sure if there seeing the other players evolve and is having FOMO where they are the only non-magic user.
thanks for the info. to be more specific it's one of their first PCs and there doing good in my opinion with the PC (rogue). just I've heard them say "if i could start over I'd be a..." so I'm not sure if there seeing the other players evolve and is having FOMO where they are the only non-magic user.
If you are concerned about others also wanting to change, then ask if they all are having 2nd thoughts. Being new a person may not actually know what is out there. If several are new, then ask them if any want to change their characters.
If a few do, end the current one as soon as possible, let everyone who wants to create new characters and start a new campaign and/or have the new group basically start where the old one left off. Those that want to remain as they are, let them keep them and integrate the "new characters in.
It is unusual for all the players in a campaign to get board of their characters, and usually people want to see the maturity of their characters. I would not let it be known that it is a decision to kill off the Character but have an entry planned for the new character. Now I have thought I would enjoy playing a character that I quickly grew bored of, So i did talk to My DM and we planned an awesome death. This is something that is always with in your scope as a DM. The player can decide if they want to sacrifice themself for the team or die pathetically of an infection from a paper cut.
If other players want to kill off their characters make sure it is staggered over multiple sessions. So that there is a resemblance of the party evolving. It may not be the same party that you started with but it will be a party that is enjoying the game.
I would also lay down the ground rule that a player can not kill off multiple characters on a regular basis just so that they know that there is some perminancy to what they do. Changing Characters usually effect the entire dynamics of the party and the way they all participate in combat, so expect some stumbling along the way.
For me, I have a general rule that for the first 3 sessions, players can change pretty much anything about their character. Things play differently than they read, and it can sometimes take a while to realize that. For a newer player, I’d probably extend that beyond 3 sessions. As Stabby said, it’s a game and we play to have fun. Fun should be more important than a character being perfectly consistent. If they aren’t have fun and want something new, I let them.
Also, as Stabby said, you don’t have to kill them. They can just have some reason to move on. Then, you’ve got an NPC the party knows which can open up some interesting possibilities. In the game I DM, I have a player who wasn’t enjoying their character, so the character left the party. Now the guy has gone a little rogue. He’s still off doing things impacting the world. (The trick is, it’s stuff that was probably going to happen anyway, “off-camera,” but now it’s someone the party knows doing it, so the players are more invested in what’s happening.)
When my current players were newer to D&D, I homebrewed a single-use magic item called an Orb of Regret (the name is shamelessly stolen from Path of Exile, but the function is totally different). It lets you shuffle some of your choices from character creation: swap a couple of ability scores, skill proficiencies, or maybe a language fluency (but not class, species, or saving throws). So the group found a few of these items (conveniently, one for each party member) around level 3 or 4, and got to make any adjustments for things they hadn't fully understood at the beginning. Everybody had one or two little things they felt like they would have done differently, so a one-time "fine tuning" of the character setups went over well with my group. It's a little unorthodox, but seemed less extreme than having people roll up totally new characters.
I mean, sometimes I've built characters I thought were really cool and I thought would be fun to play in the campaign I was joining. But then the campaign had a different vibe, or the DM had a different style than I anticipated, and the thing I thought would be cool seldom showed up in game.
If someone built a character for speed, but the DM never uses a grid/map, then that character might not be as interesting than originally anticipated.
And sometimes, I've seen players really excited about some character they made. But ran into something about the rules they didn't completely understand, and the character isn't nearly as powerful as they thought.
As long as a player uses the same rules to generate their new character that everyone else used to generate their existing characters, I don't think you'll see a stampede of players wanting to build new PC's. If you have everyone roll for stats, then there can be incentive for everyone to want to reroll. But if the party rolled shared stats, or if you require point-buy, then there is no power advantage to rebuild.
And if the other players are engaged with their characters in the story/campaign, most wont want to give that up. I have players who have relationships with NPC's that they want to develop, and if they rolled a new character, they'd have to start over and find new connections to the NPC's.
If its just combat after combat and the NPC's are kinda irrelevant, and there aren't much for relationships between the players/characters and the rest of the world, then you might see players have little incentive to continue their chardacters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
so have a new player that seems to be regretting their choice of character a bit and they have admitted to me that they would have done things differently if they knew what they know now. wondering if i should ask they player if they would want me to in game kill their character or send them off somewhere to let them re pick a character. they are level 5 and have been in a campaign now for a while and my only worry is that my other players might see it as an opportunity to do the same and then end up having a brand-new group of characters somewhat deep into a campaign. the player seems to be struggling a bit and i feel like they would have a bit more fun if i let them make a new character. they have a decent build but seem to just struggle connecting with them. anyone have advice on offering to let them remake the character or other advice?
A game is played for fun. If a player isn't having fun, that's going to eventually drag the rest of the table down. You should talk to the player and find out the root of the problem. You think the build they're using is effective, but the player isn't having fun. Try and find out why.
It sounds unusual for a player to not be able to connect with a character they created. But maybe they no longer like the direction the player is going. The first step to a solution is knowing what the problem actually is.
If the player is unhappy with their choice, letting their old character retire or "get an urgent message" which they have to attend to isn't a bad idea.
So, here's the question for you: why is it a problem even if the entire group switched up their characters?
If you're running a published adventure, then there is nothing in them that requires the player characters to be the same all the way through the adventure. In the Forgotten Realms there are adventuring guilds galore, and adventurers are everywhere. There simply is no reason not to allow a player to have their current character decide that this adventuring lark isn't for them and walk off toward the nearest city in search of what happens next in their lives. Similarly, there's absolutely no difficult in having a new character meet the group as the push ahead on their adventures.
Now, if you're running an adventure of your own design that's where you've likely encountered a common weakspot of your design. No adventure should really be contingent upon any specific character being 'the chosen one' or similar. The characters are less important than the party as a unit to the success or failure of the adventure.
Also, you're aware that death isn't the only way of writing out a character right? There is nothing, and I mean nothing preventing you from sitting down with a player and chatting about how they could respec their character. I've actually done this a few times. One player recently decided that they were going to break their pact with their Warlock Patron. This was great and had a lovely scene of them throwing all their magical items off a mountainside into a deep ravine never to be found again (they hope). Thinking about their adventures to date they respeced the character into a Ranger.
Similarly, there's absolutely no harm in having the character visited in their sleep or meditation by a patron or deity. If they choose to accept a simple mission that the patron or deity wants you've got an easy route into allowing the character to become a Warlock, Cleric, or Paladin. Maybe they have a run-in with a mysterious artefact of unknown origin, and now they find magic coursing through their body, they find themselves becoming aware of new knowledge from an unknown source - now they're a Wizard, Bard, or Artificer.
If the party are getting some downtime in a nearby settlement, maybe you extend the downtime and pause any ticking clocks. This offers everyone the chance to do some 'retraining' and become fighters?
The possibilities really are endless. This is an opportunity, and if you're afraid that a change in the roster of the party is going to ruin the adventure you're planning - I hate to tell you this but it's likely that the adventure wasn't well designed in the first place. Player character deaths can and do happen, change in party make-up happens. Allowing players the opportunities to do interesting things with their characters in order to continue and extend the fun - it's always worth it.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
thanks for the info. to be more specific it's one of their first PCs and there doing good in my opinion with the PC (rogue). just I've heard them say "if i could start over I'd be a..." so I'm not sure if there seeing the other players evolve and is having FOMO where they are the only non-magic user.
If you are concerned about others also wanting to change, then ask if they all are having 2nd thoughts. Being new a person may not actually know what is out there. If several are new, then ask them if any want to change their characters.
If a few do, end the current one as soon as possible, let everyone who wants to create new characters and start a new campaign and/or have the new group basically start where the old one left off. Those that want to remain as they are, let them keep them and integrate the "new characters in.
It is unusual for all the players in a campaign to get board of their characters, and usually people want to see the maturity of their characters. I would not let it be known that it is a decision to kill off the Character but have an entry planned for the new character. Now I have thought I would enjoy playing a character that I quickly grew bored of, So i did talk to My DM and we planned an awesome death. This is something that is always with in your scope as a DM. The player can decide if they want to sacrifice themself for the team or die pathetically of an infection from a paper cut.
If other players want to kill off their characters make sure it is staggered over multiple sessions. So that there is a resemblance of the party evolving. It may not be the same party that you started with but it will be a party that is enjoying the game.
I would also lay down the ground rule that a player can not kill off multiple characters on a regular basis just so that they know that there is some perminancy to what they do. Changing Characters usually effect the entire dynamics of the party and the way they all participate in combat, so expect some stumbling along the way.
For me, I have a general rule that for the first 3 sessions, players can change pretty much anything about their character. Things play differently than they read, and it can sometimes take a while to realize that. For a newer player, I’d probably extend that beyond 3 sessions.
As Stabby said, it’s a game and we play to have fun. Fun should be more important than a character being perfectly consistent. If they aren’t have fun and want something new, I let them.
Also, as Stabby said, you don’t have to kill them. They can just have some reason to move on. Then, you’ve got an NPC the party knows which can open up some interesting possibilities. In the game I DM, I have a player who wasn’t enjoying their character, so the character left the party. Now the guy has gone a little rogue. He’s still off doing things impacting the world. (The trick is, it’s stuff that was probably going to happen anyway, “off-camera,” but now it’s someone the party knows doing it, so the players are more invested in what’s happening.)
When my current players were newer to D&D, I homebrewed a single-use magic item called an Orb of Regret (the name is shamelessly stolen from Path of Exile, but the function is totally different). It lets you shuffle some of your choices from character creation: swap a couple of ability scores, skill proficiencies, or maybe a language fluency (but not class, species, or saving throws). So the group found a few of these items (conveniently, one for each party member) around level 3 or 4, and got to make any adjustments for things they hadn't fully understood at the beginning. Everybody had one or two little things they felt like they would have done differently, so a one-time "fine tuning" of the character setups went over well with my group. It's a little unorthodox, but seemed less extreme than having people roll up totally new characters.
I mean, sometimes I've built characters I thought were really cool and I thought would be fun to play in the campaign I was joining.
But then the campaign had a different vibe, or the DM had a different style than I anticipated, and the thing I thought would be cool seldom showed up in game.
If someone built a character for speed, but the DM never uses a grid/map, then that character might not be as interesting than originally anticipated.
And sometimes, I've seen players really excited about some character they made. But ran into something about the rules they didn't completely understand, and the character isn't nearly as powerful as they thought.
As long as a player uses the same rules to generate their new character that everyone else used to generate their existing characters, I don't think you'll see a stampede of players wanting to build new PC's. If you have everyone roll for stats, then there can be incentive for everyone to want to reroll. But if the party rolled shared stats, or if you require point-buy, then there is no power advantage to rebuild.
And if the other players are engaged with their characters in the story/campaign, most wont want to give that up. I have players who have relationships with NPC's that they want to develop, and if they rolled a new character, they'd have to start over and find new connections to the NPC's.
If its just combat after combat and the NPC's are kinda irrelevant, and there aren't much for relationships between the players/characters and the rest of the world, then you might see players have little incentive to continue their chardacters.