Ok, ok. Lemme explain. There's a player I have in my current D&D campaign who's a real sweaty min/max-er. He even goes so far as to get involved with the other players' characters, trying to get the other players to min/max their characters as well. Recently, though, something happened that completely broke my trust in him. We convened a couple sessions ago to dungeon some dragons. You know, the usual. But when I went to adjust his hp on roll20 because he couldn't do it for some reason, I found that he changed his whole character (apart from his race.) He even changed the stats. So now, instead of Wizard 1/Cleric 2, he was a Cleric 1/ Druid 2 with completely different items and spells.
I rolled with this, though I gave the party a stern talking-to about going behind my back. My plan is that, since he changed his whole character, his character has become unstuck in reality. This means that, for every other spell or cantrip he casts, he has to roll on the wild magic table. He now has two options: revert to his previous character, or do a whole quest line where the party seeks out an object/NPC that can stabilize him. Am I going too far? Or not far enough? Am I going about this correctly at all? Feedback is appreciated.
Out of character actions are best addressed out of character. Though I could see announcing that such penalties could occur the *next* time stuff like this happens.
Also, did he change the character after already playing it, or was it just a last-minute swap before the campaign started?
I would recommend you never never never punish a player in game for out of game behavior. In order to resolve the issue without antagonizing or alienating anyone, you need to deal with that out of game with talking. Be honest about your frustrations, be frank, tell them you aren't going to be able to prep good content if you don't know who you're prepping for, and communicate that you need them to run this sort of thing by you. Use "I feel" statements. "When you change things behind my back, I feel disrespected and that frustrates me."
DM's who try "teaching their players a lesson" usually just make issues worse. It creates a player vs dm dynamic, rather than coming to a place of mutual understanding.
you've doubled down on character development and even customized a quest for this guy which, i assume, is intended to pull them in to more fully. the hope being that they'll come to enjoy their character rather than treat it like a remote controlled goblin euthanizer, right? well, great! if the wild magic spills out and annoys the other characters, well, all the better to give them an excuse to interact and build rapport with the dry mechanisms guy. but maybe self examine some of the language you're using: "punish" and "behind my back" and such? it kinda makes you sound like that one petty assistant manager at the store who gives serious talkings-to about being a team player that only lower moral. be careful not to take upon yourself too much of a supervisory role or this will become work and you may begin to experience turnover in your low wage workers.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
As overdesignbob said, this is a player problem. You deal with it by talking to the player, not by punishing the character. If it seems like it’s just him, have an out of character talk with just him. If you’re not a fan of confrontation, try it over email/text/direct messages. Tell him he can’t keep doing whatever it is that upset you, and set clear expectations for the future. Warn that you will need to remove him from the group if he does it again.
Or, you can just skip all that and kick him now. The way you write about him, it seems like you don’t enjoy playing with him, and your fun is important, too. Give him the boot. It will be awkward for a minute when you do it, but you’ll be happier about playing soon after.
Out of character actions are best addressed out of character. Though I could see announcing that such penalties could occur the *next* time stuff like this happens.
Also, did he change the character after already playing it, or was it just a last-minute swap before the campaign started?
We were on our 6th or so session of play. When I confronted him at the table, he explained that his previous character was "extremely underpowered" and since I let someone change their character after the second or so session out of necessity (I made it clear that this was a one-time thing at the time) that he had the right to completely overhaul his character.
The thing is, he didn't even do it when they gained a level. He just sorta came in with a completely different character.
Sorta? Like it was the same character with the same name but different classes? Either way it should be up to you to allow or not.
He changed everything about his character except the name and the race. I want to allow this, but I also want to make it a challenge for him to fully come into his character since he changed his character mid-campaign without my knowledge or permission. A DM friend of mine suggested giving him a different class every session, but I thought that was too extreme.
Another player got to rework their character to feel more engaged/ powerful/ on par. This person did the same thing you had already allowed for, as you said, similar reasons. They just did it later and after you had said "this one time only".
Personally, I would have a heart to heart about motivation, put out what you expect and why you expect it and then once you and the player see eye-to-eye on expectations, move forward and mostly "forget" this all happened. Creating ingame consequences around what really was an out of game call based on, I'm guessing, their desire to fill a role better, will feel odd.
I would say to keep it out of game, talk it through and be clear that as the person investing the most prep time for each session you get to be the final say in "the rules" and one rule you just have to stand by addresses character "adjustments".
Another player got to rework their character to feel more engaged/ powerful/ on par.
I let the other player change their character because I realized that the entire party was spellcasters, and it took around an hour to fight five living shrubs. We've since gained a Rogue, but back then we had a level 3 Cleric, the level 1 Wizard/level 2 Cleric that was referenced in the post, and a level 3 Wizard. I left it up to the group to decide who would change their character, if they would change at all. The Cleric volunteered, and changed classes into a Paladin.
you've doubled down on character development and even customized a quest for this guy which, i assume, is intended to pull them in to more fully. the hope being that they'll come to enjoy their character rather than treat it like a remote controlled goblin euthanizer, right? well, great! if the wild magic spills out and annoys the other characters, well, all the better to give them an excuse to interact and build rapport with the dry mechanisms guy. but maybe self examine some of the language you're using: "punish" and "behind my back" and such? it kinda makes you sound like that one petty assistant manager at the store who gives serious talkings-to about being a team player that only lower moral. be careful not to take upon yourself too much of a supervisory role or this will become work and you may begin to experience turnover in your low wage workers.
This is the interpretation I'm going for. The reason I used harsh language in the title was because this whole situation makes me a little mad. The player in question shattered the trust between DM and player. Instead of a hand-holding guide, I want to be more of a signpost, if you get my drift. If the players come to a fork in the metaphorical road, I want to point out the options and let them decide. It's my world, but it's their story.
The point of sending the party on this quest instead of having a one-on-one talk like most people are suggesting in this thread is I want him to enjoy his character. I want him to develop his character into an actual living organism, instead of the tool he treats him like now. And if he still treats his character like a "remote controlled goblin euthanizer," then so be it. That's how he wants to play his character.
If anything, this strikes me as a communications issue. The player seems to have had different expectations than the DM.
The player apparently decided that they weren't having fun playing a wizard/cleric and changed it without consulting the DM. This was done, possibly based on a mistaken understanding from an event earlier in the campaign when another character was changed from a cleric to a paladin. The DM may see the circumstances as completely different but the player might not have thought so "The DM didn't mind someone changing up their character when he thought the party was unbalanced, why would he be bothered if I switch to two wisdom focused classes?"
Of course, you can force them to continue playing a character they don't like and if they decide they don't want to then they can quit. Or you can impose some egregious in-game penalty on the character until the player decides the game isn't fun and quits. Or you could save everyone the time, effort and angst and kick out the player because you are irritated. At least everyone else wouldn't have to experience the game going sideways while you try to punish the character.
OR, the DM and player could behave like adults (even if they might not be adults yet) and have a chat. The DM can explain that they want the player to play a character they are happy with but that also they'd like the player to decide on their character and stick with it since it makes for more in game continuity. The DM could then have a chat with all the rest of the players and see how they are enjoying playing their characters too and see if there are any adjustments needed. This is especially true for newer players who don't understand the game well yet.
I'd also suggest the DM take a look at their own state of mind. "There's a player I have in my current D&D campaign who's a real sweaty min/max-er." That is a pretty negative way to think of a player sitting at a table where you are all hoping to have fun. It uses min/max as an epithet when there is nothing wrong with wanting to play a character that does things well. In addition, the use of the word "sweaty" is an additional insult that seems to show a really negative attitude towards this player on the part of the DM. What I find most amusing is that there is no sign of being a "real sweaty min/maxer" in the character choices the OP described. 1 wizard/2 cleric is far from optimal. Did they choose a Twilight or Peace cleric? If not, not optimal. Much more optimal is a 1 cleric/X wizard but they didn't go that route so they clearly aren't really min/maxing. Similarly, the only way a 1 cleric/2 druid is "min/max" might be through the use of a Life cleric bonus on goodberries. There is some synergy for both being wis casters but multiclassing 1 cleric/2 druid slows down access to higher level spells so unless they are getting something else better for that (maybe 1 level of Twilight cleric for example) then it isn't really min/max either.
Finally, the player changed up their character. If they were doing it to cheat, or go behind your back, or otherwise diss you - why would they EVER say "sure change my hit points on Roll20"? Clearly, the player wasn't expecting it to be an issue for whatever mis-communicated reason. There is also NO way the player would expect no one would ever notice that they were now a druid - what happens when they say "I use my shape change"? The only complaint the DM has in this case is that the player made changes to their character sheet without checking in with the DM in advance to make sure it was ok. That is all. The only reasonable solution is have a chat and clear up the misunderstanding and move on.
TL;DR
It is NEVER ok to impose in game penalties on characters or the party for out of game player decisions. You have to have a real conversation with the player to resolve such issues.
It is NOT ok for the DM to take out their anger at a player out of game actions by imposing in game penalties. It won't work in the long run and the player might not even understand why you are mad in the first place.
The player apparently decided that they weren't having fun playing a wizard/cleric and changed it without consulting the DM. This was done, possibly based on a mistaken understanding from an event earlier in the campaign when another character was changed from a cleric to a paladin. The DM may see the circumstances as completely different but the player might not have thought so "The DM didn't mind someone changing up their character when he thought the party was unbalanced, why would he be bothered if I switch to two wisdom focused classes?"
The fact that the player apparently switched their character completely without consulting the DM at all inclines me not to give them the benefit of the doubt on this
They seemed to be attempting to get away with something, and were relying on the DM not want to disrupt the campaign too much and letting it slide. I suspect this will not be the first time they try to "adjust" their character without telling the DM, whether it's to add gold and magic items, change spells on the fly (rather than only after a long rest) because they suddenly realize something would prove useful, or what have you
I wouldn't "punish" them, but I also probably wouldn't invite them back to the game. If I think I need to police their character sheet every session to see what they've done with it, they've already become too much work
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
you've doubled down on character development and even customized a quest for this guy which, i assume, is intended to pull them in to more fully. the hope being that they'll come to enjoy their character rather than treat it like a remote controlled goblin euthanizer, right? well, great! if the wild magic spills out and annoys the other characters, well, all the better to give them an excuse to interact and build rapport with the dry mechanisms guy. but maybe self examine some of the language you're using: "punish" and "behind my back" and such? it kinda makes you sound like that one petty assistant manager at the store who gives serious talkings-to about being a team player that only lower moral. be careful not to take upon yourself too much of a supervisory role or this will become work and you may begin to experience turnover in your low wage workers.
This is the interpretation I'm going for. The reason I used harsh language in the title was because this whole situation makes me a little mad. The player in question shattered the trust between DM and player. Instead of a hand-holding guide, I want to be more of a signpost, if you get my drift. If the players come to a fork in the metaphorical road, I want to point out the options and let them decide. It's my world, but it's their story.
The point of sending the party on this quest instead of having a one-on-one talk like most people are suggesting in this thread is I want him to enjoy his character. I want him to develop his character into an actual living organism, instead of the tool he treats him like now. And if he still treats his character like a "remote controlled goblin euthanizer," then so be it. That's how he wants to play his character.
oh, yeah, definitely come vent here! the walls in the DMs only forum are well padded (with old maps, unused dialog, and reams upon reams of meandering background world building). we might have different tables, but our problems are all the same [insert Cheers piano riff here]. i think keeping up the party's momentum is the right thing to do. in that spirit and with the spirit of other commenters rightly pointing out the value of communicating your expectations, i have a thought about next time this happens. because it might.
i'd recommend communicating that you're open to occasional changes to the party that are reasonable in their scope and infrequency. therefore, all future requested shits in class, race, whatever will be in the form of a slow transition. first run it by the DM, then the DM runs it by the players, then the characters meet a new and exciting NPC. maybe this NPC joins the party, maybe they just frequent the same taverns and shops. however it goes, there's ample time to notice them and become acquainted. with two or three sessions as a buffer they'll become a part of the story (and therefore a good spare to have anyway in case of sudden character death). from there the player can transition characters or the player might already be on to the next new thing. who knows, the guy might just really enjoy creating new characters and the NPCs could fulfill that even without transitioning. shrug.
...additionally, is the the sort of player who likes being the main character? well, what if that character begins wracking up battle damage: scars, singed eyebrows, a shock of white in their hair, ripped cloak, chipped and nicked blades, target of pickpockets, first to step on a trip wire, bitten by stray cats, general ire of the gods... and they survive it all. it can even look like "punishment" if the the table thinks that's a fun meta narrative (but obviously only if it's not coming across as actual bullying). what if the character began to grow less generic and more like a storied survivor? maybe the NPCs begin to notice and the character starts to get a reputation. not becoming the leader over night and definitely not the center of most every quest. but definitely not a disposable husk, either. it's a thought.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
As a general bit of life advice punishment only works if the person associates the punishment as a result of the action. It needs to be explained, related to the problem of the behavior and can't be done in anger or cruelty. Fail on any of those and the person will probably just view any punishment as an attack on them.
That's why problems are best dealt with outside of the game so you can give those explanations and don't muddle the causal connection with things like plot.
In this case you'd probably just warn them and say you'll keep a copy of their character sheet and if they do it again they can just run with that copy. That's what you'd do if you want to minimize the chance of it happening again.
If you just want to construct a story out of it that's very different but that wont be a punishment. It will be a story .
Others have said it - but the big thing to do is not just give them a "stern talking to" - but address the issue.
In that, they'd already selected their class (race, stats, whatever changed, etc). And that you can't change it. If they're bored of a specific class, race, whatever - that they should speak with you about "exiting that character" and bringing in a new character.
Sometimes a player thinks they have a fun character, and it turns out to be anything but. I get that. But they should discuss it with the DM.
Punishing them "in game" doesn't do much, I think. So they have to roll wild magic now? So what. Might as well change it again. Now I am a fighter/rogue. No magic. How will you punish me now? Disadvantage on stealth? Already had that because the nifty armor I randomly added.
So, rather than repeat a lot of the good advice given thus far, I will look back on my years running an open game (where anyone could come in and I could not turn them away) and say to you “Let it ride” with explicit instructions and an acknowledgment by everyone in a way they all can hear that they have to play what they have until it dies.
if he wants to jump in front of a snapping dragon after that, hey let him.
here is why…
minmaxers have to win. That is how they have fun. What he did took some of your fun and the fun from other people away, and the point of the game is to have fun.
even when in one of my games when the explicit point of the session is for everyone to feel like their dog just died, there is a payback for that afterwards. The point is fun. Let him have fun.
don’t punish him in game, blah blah, just let it ride, but watch. Take screen caps, print PDFs, whatever as a check, but remember that what he wants to do is win. At everything.
why doesn’t matter, that is t the part you play in this. All you need to know is that for him, this concept of winning is important for him to have fun. If he loses, he will throw a fit, and how will everyone else feel about that? Will it disrupt the game? Will he leave the game, or start an argument, and these questions are important because there is a terrifying truth about D&D a lot of people don’t always realize…
this isn’t a game where you win. You can overcome odds, you can triumph over evil or get that rare item or achieve a goal or any of ten thousand things. For some people, success is a win.
but not everything can be won. Not everything will be successful, if he gets angry about a lousy roll, he is upset because he isn’t winning. Most of us do, lol, because luck (probability) is a factor of the game.
land so either he will come to realize that this is a game where one does not win, or he will get angry and get over it or he will get angry and disrupt the game, and no matter what the outcome of all of it is, you, as DM, still have a responsibility to the Other Players to ensure that they are having fun even while he has a fit. But also to ensure that he has fun when one of them has a bad moment.
a good DM is not going to forget that their role is not that of prosecutor or adversary. Their role is moderator, arbiter, stagecraft to the Actors playing a part. To be a whisper I. The ear and chill along the spine, or a really bad feeling about this.
we are not the focus, we are what makes the focus possible, and this is why DMing is so hard. BEcause when we let our own egos into it, we can forget all of that, and get petty and vindictive, and that is a betrayal of what being a DM is about.
whiners gonna whine, cheaters gonna cheat, and the truth gonna come out. If 280 consecutive weekly sessions where anyone could come in at any time, strangers all, taught me anything, it is that simple rule of the gonnas.
and besides, there will always come a point where you will be able to quietly do a little dance of Justice done. If you are really lucky, you will be the only one to see it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
The lack of basic respect that both parties are showing each other tells me that this game is going to end in tears. Personally I would just call it now. Save all the wasted time and hard feelings.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Ok, ok. Lemme explain. There's a player I have in my current D&D campaign who's a real sweaty min/max-er. He even goes so far as to get involved with the other players' characters, trying to get the other players to min/max their characters as well. Recently, though, something happened that completely broke my trust in him. We convened a couple sessions ago to dungeon some dragons. You know, the usual. But when I went to adjust his hp on roll20 because he couldn't do it for some reason, I found that he changed his whole character (apart from his race.) He even changed the stats. So now, instead of Wizard 1/Cleric 2, he was a Cleric 1/ Druid 2 with completely different items and spells.
I rolled with this, though I gave the party a stern talking-to about going behind my back. My plan is that, since he changed his whole character, his character has become unstuck in reality. This means that, for every other spell or cantrip he casts, he has to roll on the wild magic table. He now has two options: revert to his previous character, or do a whole quest line where the party seeks out an object/NPC that can stabilize him. Am I going too far? Or not far enough? Am I going about this correctly at all? Feedback is appreciated.
NOCTURNE OP55N1
🛈 Meet Hanako at Embers.
All I can add to this is that in Adventurer's League you can do this every time you gain a level.
You of course choose the rules for your adventure.
Maybe your player does AL mostly and did not even think about it?
The thing is, he didn't even do it when they gained a level. He just sorta came in with a completely different character.
NOCTURNE OP55N1
🛈 Meet Hanako at Embers.
Sorta? Like it was the same character with the same name but different classes? Either way it should be up to you to allow or not.
Out of character actions are best addressed out of character. Though I could see announcing that such penalties could occur the *next* time stuff like this happens.
Also, did he change the character after already playing it, or was it just a last-minute swap before the campaign started?
I would recommend you never never never punish a player in game for out of game behavior. In order to resolve the issue without antagonizing or alienating anyone, you need to deal with that out of game with talking. Be honest about your frustrations, be frank, tell them you aren't going to be able to prep good content if you don't know who you're prepping for, and communicate that you need them to run this sort of thing by you. Use "I feel" statements. "When you change things behind my back, I feel disrespected and that frustrates me."
DM's who try "teaching their players a lesson" usually just make issues worse. It creates a player vs dm dynamic, rather than coming to a place of mutual understanding.
you've doubled down on character development and even customized a quest for this guy which, i assume, is intended to pull them in to more fully. the hope being that they'll come to enjoy their character rather than treat it like a remote controlled goblin euthanizer, right? well, great! if the wild magic spills out and annoys the other characters, well, all the better to give them an excuse to interact and build rapport with the dry mechanisms guy. but maybe self examine some of the language you're using: "punish" and "behind my back" and such? it kinda makes you sound like that one petty assistant manager at the store who gives serious talkings-to about being a team player that only lower moral. be careful not to take upon yourself too much of a supervisory role or this will become work and you may begin to experience turnover in your low wage workers.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
As overdesignbob said, this is a player problem. You deal with it by talking to the player, not by punishing the character. If it seems like it’s just him, have an out of character talk with just him. If you’re not a fan of confrontation, try it over email/text/direct messages. Tell him he can’t keep doing whatever it is that upset you, and set clear expectations for the future. Warn that you will need to remove him from the group if he does it again.
Or, you can just skip all that and kick him now. The way you write about him, it seems like you don’t enjoy playing with him, and your fun is important, too. Give him the boot. It will be awkward for a minute when you do it, but you’ll be happier about playing soon after.
We were on our 6th or so session of play. When I confronted him at the table, he explained that his previous character was "extremely underpowered" and since I let someone change their character after the second or so session out of necessity (I made it clear that this was a one-time thing at the time) that he had the right to completely overhaul his character.
NOCTURNE OP55N1
🛈 Meet Hanako at Embers.
He changed everything about his character except the name and the race. I want to allow this, but I also want to make it a challenge for him to fully come into his character since he changed his character mid-campaign without my knowledge or permission. A DM friend of mine suggested giving him a different class every session, but I thought that was too extreme.
NOCTURNE OP55N1
🛈 Meet Hanako at Embers.
Following along:
Another player got to rework their character to feel more engaged/ powerful/ on par. This person did the same thing you had already allowed for, as you said, similar reasons. They just did it later and after you had said "this one time only".
Personally, I would have a heart to heart about motivation, put out what you expect and why you expect it and then once you and the player see eye-to-eye on expectations, move forward and mostly "forget" this all happened. Creating ingame consequences around what really was an out of game call based on, I'm guessing, their desire to fill a role better, will feel odd.
I would say to keep it out of game, talk it through and be clear that as the person investing the most prep time for each session you get to be the final say in "the rules" and one rule you just have to stand by addresses character "adjustments".
"Teller of tales, dreamer of dreams"
Tips, Tricks, Maps: Lantern Noir Presents
**Streams hosted at at twitch.tv/LaternNoir
I let the other player change their character because I realized that the entire party was spellcasters, and it took around an hour to fight five living shrubs. We've since gained a Rogue, but back then we had a level 3 Cleric, the level 1 Wizard/level 2 Cleric that was referenced in the post, and a level 3 Wizard. I left it up to the group to decide who would change their character, if they would change at all. The Cleric volunteered, and changed classes into a Paladin.
NOCTURNE OP55N1
🛈 Meet Hanako at Embers.
This is the interpretation I'm going for. The reason I used harsh language in the title was because this whole situation makes me a little mad. The player in question shattered the trust between DM and player. Instead of a hand-holding guide, I want to be more of a signpost, if you get my drift. If the players come to a fork in the metaphorical road, I want to point out the options and let them decide. It's my world, but it's their story.
The point of sending the party on this quest instead of having a one-on-one talk like most people are suggesting in this thread is I want him to enjoy his character. I want him to develop his character into an actual living organism, instead of the tool he treats him like now. And if he still treats his character like a "remote controlled goblin euthanizer," then so be it. That's how he wants to play his character.
NOCTURNE OP55N1
🛈 Meet Hanako at Embers.
If anything, this strikes me as a communications issue. The player seems to have had different expectations than the DM.
The player apparently decided that they weren't having fun playing a wizard/cleric and changed it without consulting the DM. This was done, possibly based on a mistaken understanding from an event earlier in the campaign when another character was changed from a cleric to a paladin. The DM may see the circumstances as completely different but the player might not have thought so "The DM didn't mind someone changing up their character when he thought the party was unbalanced, why would he be bothered if I switch to two wisdom focused classes?"
Of course, you can force them to continue playing a character they don't like and if they decide they don't want to then they can quit. Or you can impose some egregious in-game penalty on the character until the player decides the game isn't fun and quits. Or you could save everyone the time, effort and angst and kick out the player because you are irritated. At least everyone else wouldn't have to experience the game going sideways while you try to punish the character.
OR, the DM and player could behave like adults (even if they might not be adults yet) and have a chat. The DM can explain that they want the player to play a character they are happy with but that also they'd like the player to decide on their character and stick with it since it makes for more in game continuity. The DM could then have a chat with all the rest of the players and see how they are enjoying playing their characters too and see if there are any adjustments needed. This is especially true for newer players who don't understand the game well yet.
I'd also suggest the DM take a look at their own state of mind. "There's a player I have in my current D&D campaign who's a real sweaty min/max-er." That is a pretty negative way to think of a player sitting at a table where you are all hoping to have fun. It uses min/max as an epithet when there is nothing wrong with wanting to play a character that does things well. In addition, the use of the word "sweaty" is an additional insult that seems to show a really negative attitude towards this player on the part of the DM. What I find most amusing is that there is no sign of being a "real sweaty min/maxer" in the character choices the OP described. 1 wizard/2 cleric is far from optimal. Did they choose a Twilight or Peace cleric? If not, not optimal. Much more optimal is a 1 cleric/X wizard but they didn't go that route so they clearly aren't really min/maxing. Similarly, the only way a 1 cleric/2 druid is "min/max" might be through the use of a Life cleric bonus on goodberries. There is some synergy for both being wis casters but multiclassing 1 cleric/2 druid slows down access to higher level spells so unless they are getting something else better for that (maybe 1 level of Twilight cleric for example) then it isn't really min/max either.
Finally, the player changed up their character. If they were doing it to cheat, or go behind your back, or otherwise diss you - why would they EVER say "sure change my hit points on Roll20"? Clearly, the player wasn't expecting it to be an issue for whatever mis-communicated reason. There is also NO way the player would expect no one would ever notice that they were now a druid - what happens when they say "I use my shape change"? The only complaint the DM has in this case is that the player made changes to their character sheet without checking in with the DM in advance to make sure it was ok. That is all. The only reasonable solution is have a chat and clear up the misunderstanding and move on.
TL;DR
It is NEVER ok to impose in game penalties on characters or the party for out of game player decisions. You have to have a real conversation with the player to resolve such issues.
It is NOT ok for the DM to take out their anger at a player out of game actions by imposing in game penalties. It won't work in the long run and the player might not even understand why you are mad in the first place.
The fact that the player apparently switched their character completely without consulting the DM at all inclines me not to give them the benefit of the doubt on this
They seemed to be attempting to get away with something, and were relying on the DM not want to disrupt the campaign too much and letting it slide. I suspect this will not be the first time they try to "adjust" their character without telling the DM, whether it's to add gold and magic items, change spells on the fly (rather than only after a long rest) because they suddenly realize something would prove useful, or what have you
I wouldn't "punish" them, but I also probably wouldn't invite them back to the game. If I think I need to police their character sheet every session to see what they've done with it, they've already become too much work
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
oh, yeah, definitely come vent here! the walls in the DMs only forum are well padded (with old maps, unused dialog, and reams upon reams of meandering background world building). we might have different tables, but our problems are all the same [insert Cheers piano riff here]. i think keeping up the party's momentum is the right thing to do. in that spirit and with the spirit of other commenters rightly pointing out the value of communicating your expectations, i have a thought about next time this happens. because it might.
i'd recommend communicating that you're open to occasional changes to the party that are reasonable in their scope and infrequency. therefore, all future requested shits in class, race, whatever will be in the form of a slow transition. first run it by the DM, then the DM runs it by the players, then the characters meet a new and exciting NPC. maybe this NPC joins the party, maybe they just frequent the same taverns and shops. however it goes, there's ample time to notice them and become acquainted. with two or three sessions as a buffer they'll become a part of the story (and therefore a good spare to have anyway in case of sudden character death). from there the player can transition characters or the player might already be on to the next new thing. who knows, the guy might just really enjoy creating new characters and the NPCs could fulfill that even without transitioning. shrug.
...additionally, is the the sort of player who likes being the main character? well, what if that character begins wracking up battle damage: scars, singed eyebrows, a shock of white in their hair, ripped cloak, chipped and nicked blades, target of pickpockets, first to step on a trip wire, bitten by stray cats, general ire of the gods... and they survive it all. it can even look like "punishment" if the the table thinks that's a fun meta narrative (but obviously only if it's not coming across as actual bullying). what if the character began to grow less generic and more like a storied survivor? maybe the NPCs begin to notice and the character starts to get a reputation. not becoming the leader over night and definitely not the center of most every quest. but definitely not a disposable husk, either. it's a thought.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
As a general bit of life advice punishment only works if the person associates the punishment as a result of the action. It needs to be explained, related to the problem of the behavior and can't be done in anger or cruelty. Fail on any of those and the person will probably just view any punishment as an attack on them.
That's why problems are best dealt with outside of the game so you can give those explanations and don't muddle the causal connection with things like plot.
In this case you'd probably just warn them and say you'll keep a copy of their character sheet and if they do it again they can just run with that copy. That's what you'd do if you want to minimize the chance of it happening again.
If you just want to construct a story out of it that's very different but that wont be a punishment. It will be a story .
Others have said it - but the big thing to do is not just give them a "stern talking to" - but address the issue.
In that, they'd already selected their class (race, stats, whatever changed, etc). And that you can't change it. If they're bored of a specific class, race, whatever - that they should speak with you about "exiting that character" and bringing in a new character.
Sometimes a player thinks they have a fun character, and it turns out to be anything but. I get that. But they should discuss it with the DM.
Punishing them "in game" doesn't do much, I think. So they have to roll wild magic now? So what. Might as well change it again. Now I am a fighter/rogue. No magic. How will you punish me now? Disadvantage on stealth? Already had that because the nifty armor I randomly added.
So on and so on.
Check out my publication on DMs Guild: https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?author=Tawmis%20Logue
Check out my comedy web series - Neverending Nights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wr4-u9-zw0&list=PLbRG7dzFI-u3EJd0usasgDrrFO3mZ1lOZ
Need a character story/background written up? I do it for free (but also take donations!) - https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?591882-Need-a-character-background-written-up
So, rather than repeat a lot of the good advice given thus far, I will look back on my years running an open game (where anyone could come in and I could not turn them away) and say to you “Let it ride” with explicit instructions and an acknowledgment by everyone in a way they all can hear that they have to play what they have until it dies.
if he wants to jump in front of a snapping dragon after that, hey let him.
here is why…
minmaxers have to win. That is how they have fun. What he did took some of your fun and the fun from other people away, and the point of the game is to have fun.
even when in one of my games when the explicit point of the session is for everyone to feel like their dog just died, there is a payback for that afterwards. The point is fun. Let him have fun.
don’t punish him in game, blah blah, just let it ride, but watch. Take screen caps, print PDFs, whatever as a check, but remember that what he wants to do is win. At everything.
why doesn’t matter, that is t the part you play in this. All you need to know is that for him, this concept of winning is important for him to have fun. If he loses, he will throw a fit, and how will everyone else feel about that? Will it disrupt the game? Will he leave the game, or start an argument, and these questions are important because there is a terrifying truth about D&D a lot of people don’t always realize…
this isn’t a game where you win. You can overcome odds, you can triumph over evil or get that rare item or achieve a goal or any of ten thousand things. For some people, success is a win.
but not everything can be won. Not everything will be successful, if he gets angry about a lousy roll, he is upset because he isn’t winning. Most of us do, lol, because luck (probability) is a factor of the game.
land so either he will come to realize that this is a game where one does not win, or he will get angry and get over it or he will get angry and disrupt the game, and no matter what the outcome of all of it is, you, as DM, still have a responsibility to the Other Players to ensure that they are having fun even while he has a fit. But also to ensure that he has fun when one of them has a bad moment.
a good DM is not going to forget that their role is not that of prosecutor or adversary. Their role is moderator, arbiter, stagecraft to the Actors playing a part. To be a whisper I. The ear and chill along the spine, or a really bad feeling about this.
we are not the focus, we are what makes the focus possible, and this is why DMing is so hard. BEcause when we let our own egos into it, we can forget all of that, and get petty and vindictive, and that is a betrayal of what being a DM is about.
whiners gonna whine, cheaters gonna cheat, and the truth gonna come out. If 280 consecutive weekly sessions where anyone could come in at any time, strangers all, taught me anything, it is that simple rule of the gonnas.
and besides, there will always come a point where you will be able to quietly do a little dance of Justice done. If you are really lucky, you will be the only one to see it.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
The lack of basic respect that both parties are showing each other tells me that this game is going to end in tears. Personally I would just call it now. Save all the wasted time and hard feelings.