So my turn as DM has come to a close, and I suggested someone else at the table takes a turn. This is something we frequently do when the DM needs a break. One of the players said she was interested in playing the next campaign and learning how to DM. She took a few months to learn how to DM from her husband, who also is in our group and a former DM, and she decided to run TofA. We made some characters and did a session zero, but that was when the trouble began, and I needed some advice. It started small, adjusting skills here, adding background notes here, and eventually turned to her taking full control of all players' characters. She has chosen my background for me and given me a backstory, changed my stats, told me what mini I HAVE to use, doesn't let me see my character sheet, and decides rolls without telling us what the check is or what our modifiers are. I have not seen my character sheet since I made it. I'm old school and like a paper copy, and when I asked for it, she told me that she threw it away and made a digital version for her use. This was only the beginning, but I'll spare those details. Now I've had bad DMs in the past, and a quick conversation usually helps, and if it doesn't, I leave the table, but the problem this time is the DM is my sister. She will not listen to my complaints and refuses to adjust her DM style, and if I leave the table, it will likely cause some out-of-game fight. Please, any DMs who read this, give me some advice.
This is more a people (or family) problem than a DM problem. You know what you don’t like about how she DMs and you know what you would/should do if she wasn’t your sister. There’s very little that can be done until you get past the latter.
How do the other players (her husband in particular) feel? It sounds like something everyone should be displeased with. I could see why the husband might want to put up with this (though if she learned from him, I’m sure there a whole dynamic there too), I can see why you’d want to keep the peace in the family, but is everyone in that boat? Or do the others simply want to avoid conflict?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Ugh. That’s about all I can say. I guess you need to weigh the negatives of upsetting your sister against you being miserable in the game. Not an easy choice. Best thing I can think is to check in with the other players and see if they feel the same. If so, then, respectfully, approach her as a group and talk it through.
FWIW, and keeping in mind I’m only seeing your side of this, it sounds like she’s a terrible DM. Choosing a background and changing stats is a no-no. Player agency issues aside, that’s just mean. And not letting you see your own character sheet is right out. At that point, why are the players even there, if she’s going to control so many aspects of the characters? Sounds like she wants to write a book, not play a game.
So, the good thing about this, just from the sounds? You want to play D&D?
She isn't playing D&D.
I think that's an important thing to call out. I'm not sure how old you are, but the fact is that you want something that isn't being provided. You, as a person, have the right to go no, this isn't fun to me anymore, sorry, I'm out. It doesn't have to cause a fight either. If it becomes an argument, just leave.
Part of D&D is the player experience, and it's not all about the DM. It sounds like she is having fun crafting and creating this story that you are a part of, and if I were explaining why I'm not having fun, I would lean into that. Explain why you love how creative she is, but that creativity that YOU want bring to the table is being stripped from you because you don't have choices on what YOUR character would do. You guys don't want to have creative control over some NPC actions, you want your characters to be under your control, and she controls the NPCs.
That's the first part of having that conversation and communicating. If it gets reciprocated, then great, you start to have meaningful dialogue and explain why its a problem for you, and why you aren't enjoying it anymore. The big thing is trying not to place blame, but looking for solutions. If that doesn't happen though? Don't sacrifice your own happiness to pander to someone else.
Ugh. That’s about all I can say. I guess you need to weigh the negatives of upsetting your sister against you being miserable in the game. Not an easy choice. Best thing I can think is to check in with the other players and see if they feel the same. If so, then, respectfully, approach her as a group and talk it through.
FWIW, and keeping in mind I’m only seeing your side of this, it sounds like she’s a terrible DM. Choosing a background and changing stats is a no-no. Player agency issues aside, that’s just mean. And not letting you see your own character sheet is right out. At that point, why are the players even there, if she’s going to control so many aspects of the characters? Sounds like she wants to write a book, not play a game.
There are absolutely a lot of parallels in co-operative storywriting , but from a communication piece, do not call her a terrible DM. Honestly, I think it's just unchecked balances. Players have to be willing to challenge a DM who is leaning too far into it.
As pangurjan said, this definitely seems like a people problem. Eventually you're going to need to initiate a reset of this campaign, and the only question is how smoothly you can pull it off. Given that the DM is your sister, you might have some insights into her behavior that can guide your next steps.
Why is she taking control of every aspect of the game? Is she controlling in other areas of her life? Does she suffer from anxiety or an inferiority complex? Does she have any other hobbies or interests that you can appeal to when explaining the issues?
When the time comes, it's worth keeping in mind that while there is no wrong way to play D&D, not everyone enjoys the same style of play, and that's ok. You can express your disinterest without placing blame.
Right now, the most important thing for you to consider is damage control. Starting any new DM off with a whole campaign was a risky move, and you might be able to help everyone by proposing that the campaign be shrunk down to a more tolerable adventure. Say, 6~12 sessions. Building in a soft reset is a fantastic way for a new DM to safely make mistakes and recalibrate. You should think about a natural transition point that doesn't draw attention to her. For example, ask one of your other players if they would be interested in running an adventure of their own (1-3 session). Make it about giving everyone an opportunity to learn.
I would just tell her that control of your character is an important part of the game. Since you aren't being allowed to do that, you don't need to play.
Personally I would choose to not play in that game. Regardless of who was the GM.
edit:
OK no wait, I'd give up race, class, stat choice and having a sheet in my hand if I could play with Colville or Mercer or Skorkowski or Iyengar.....
I would just tell her that control of your character is an important part of the game. Since you aren't being allowed to do that, you don't need to play.
Personally I would choose to not play in that game. Regardless of who was the GM.
edit:
OK no wait, I'd give up race, class, stat choice and having a sheet in my hand if I could play with Colville or Mercer or Skorkowski or Iyengar.....
Stated far more civilly than I was thinking of saying that exact same thing.
She expects you to have all your inventory, spells, and class abilities memorized at all times? Or does she not want people to know what all the tools at their disposal are at any given time to make challenges way harder?
If neither of those are true, that's bad. If either of those *are* true? Also bad. That's just not the game.
You could do the passive-aggressive thing and declare that your character is going to use their flugelhorn to cast Bombly’s Badapple Quickstep on the enemy and when she says that’s not a thing you could say “Oh, I had no clue, I can’t actually see my character sheet and so I have no effing clue what my character can or cannot do.” And then when they give it to you say “That’s not right, I didn’t choose those skills or that background, you must have made a mistake, I asked for my character sheet. You know, the paper one I was using….” Then when she reminds you that she threw it away simply respond, oh, we’ll then I guess I don’t have a character in this campaign” and leave.
That will more than likely cause the exact arguments you are hoping to avoid, but it would most certainly get your point across.
My eyebrows went up a little when I read that your brand new DM was running you through the Tomb of Annihilation. While that is a half decent adventure for new players to be in, it's by no means one meant for a sparkling new DM. That's going to have to be part of the problem right there. You said your sister started out making "small" changes. I think that's the wrong way to go about things. A DM suggests changes, and leaves it up to the players. If the player doesn't do what the DM wanted, that's the time to have a private talk. Session zero is fine, but that's public.
When she "took control over all player's characters", physical or virtual, she crossed the line entirely. That's almost never the right way to handle a game. Giving people a custom background and allowing them to choose to use it is fine. Creating a backstory together is fine. Making changes beyond putting in the names for people and places is right out of the ballpark. Nobody changes my backstory. If I took the time to make one, I'm not changing it beyond names and details to allow it to fit the setting.
It is often quoted that "No D&D is better than Bad D&D". Tell her "no" and deal with the fallout.
In your situation, I would leave the table. I would do so calmly and matter of factly, "This is not the game I want to play. Being able to choose, see, and control my character is essential for me. Since that's not an option for me in this game, I won't be playing." If a fight erupts between your sister and you after you leave this way, you did not start the fight, she did. You are under no obligation to play D&D with her. If she or anyone else pressures you to return to the game, continue to keep it matter of fact. "I've decided I don't want to play, and my answer is final." If they persist, "I've made my decision. I don't care to talk about it any more. We can talk about something else, or I can leave/hangup." If necessary, leave, hangup, or don't respond to texts/emails about if after that point. Your sister and others may become upset. That is not your responsibility. Your only responsibilities in this are 1) to be clear with yourself and others about what you do and don't want, 2) to communicate clearly and calmly, and 3) to care for your own wellbeing.
I'll say it again because some of us (myself included) need to hear this repeatedly: You are not responsible for other people's feelings.* Just because she or others get upset doesn't mean you've made the wrong choice or you have to do something you don't want to.
*The caveat to that: If you (generic you) do something to harm, insult, or bully someone, you do bear some responsibility for that harm and the feelings the elicit. But calmly pulling out of a game that isn't what you want is none of those things.....even if your sister says it is.
This is more a people (or family) problem than a DM problem. You know what you don’t like about how she DMs and you know what you would/should do if she wasn’t your sister. There’s very little that can be done until you get past the latter.
Perfectly said.
However, I’ll be honest with you. What she’s doing is not D&D. Simple as that. It’s more like writing a novel and expecting everyone else to voice the audiobook.
Maybe talk to some of the others? I feel like there’s no way they aren’t upset with this too. I mean, if they don’t create their own character, and they don’t stat themselves out, and they don’t have life or death excitement, and they don’t even get to roll the shiny goblin number click clacks, what even is there to like anymore?
How to leave amicably is the tough question. I suggest talking to your sister one on one and tell her that you are not having fun anymore and you do not want to continue the campaign.
Another thing you can do when talking to her is to avoid using second person and only speak from first person, if that makes sense. For example: Sister: "Why are you leaving the game?" OP: "I am not having fun at the table anymore, and I want to do something else." (You are speaking in first person, and you are not accusing her of anything. You basically want to avoid the word "you" as much as humanly possible.) OP: "You are controlling my character and refuse to consider my side of the story." (You are speaking in second person, and whether you intend to blame her or not, all she is going to hear is that you are blaming her.)
You can also ask for having another session zero (you can never have too many session zeroes, and session zeroes can be had throughout a campaign to check in on everyone and gauge their interests and ideas for improvement). However, she might see this as a group attack on her though, and making her feeling cornered might not be a good idea.
You do not have a potential DM, you have a storyteller. Not that it's a bad thing, but a DM is a storyteller who wants the players to help write the story. While I can understand to a point, the reservations of bringing up this mishandling of characters, in session zero, no less, it MUST be done. No character sheet + no player, full stop. End of statement. Players without character sheets are called spectators, nothing more.
Let her know that you see her INTENT is good, to make sure everyone is synched and has what they will need to play through, her implementation of her wishes is heavy handed and removes ALL player control. While it may be a conflict addressing it, that is far superior to a crap game where nobody but the DM has ANY control over anything. As my sig says, talk to the other players around this as well. Point out that never before has any DM taken away all the players choices and input, which should alone, be evidence she is WAY out of line.
As a twist, if she MUST have such absolute control, propose a compromise. SHE makes all the characters (works really well here on DDB) and the players each claim a character. That way SHE dictates who will be there (race/class) and her players fill the roles she has selected. Not as free or fun, maybe as actually allowing the players to create their own dreams, but at least they would have, once selected, absolute control of the character they are supposed to be. I am thinking of doing this for a future campaign, just to make it more interesting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
There is a type of campaign we used to call the "Limited Information Campaign." I'll abbreviate it LIC. In a LIC, the GM controls all of the mechanics. You don't see your character sheet. You don't actually know what class your character is (if there are classes), or what your stats are, or any of that. You discover this through the act of RP. Normally the GM works closely with you to make sure they are creating up a sheet you would like, but it is not "incorrect" to run a D&D game this way. In fact, when I announced that I would need to step down for a bit for health reasons, and one of the other players said he might like to DM, he talked about doing theater of the mind (which I do NOT do), and how "in some variants the DM even controls the character sheets." One of the other players immediately nixed this idea, especially when I brought up the LIC and how I have always wanted to try it.
My point here is -- maybe your sister is trying to run a LIC, and you don't like LICs. This is something to discuss with her. But a LIC is a perfectly valid way to play an RPG, and I briefly ran a Champions game that way back in college. I stopped right away, btw, because they are so much more work for the GM than a regular game. And I had 100% buy-in from the players, who also wanted to try the LIC model. Again, this is a valid way to play... assuming she does it correctly.
Now, a LIC's GM should not "take over" characters, tell you how to RP, and telling you what mini to use is just bizarre. But, from the OP, I am not clear on what "take over our characters" means, because from the text, I think you might have considered my LIC game to be me "taking over" the characters, but we all did that together, and nobody "took over" anything.
Now, maybe you don't like LIC play -- I'd guess most players would not -- and you definitely should have had some say in whether the group was going to do a LIC or not. But it is a valid way to play an RPG.... Just sayin'.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
In your situation, I would leave the table. I would do so calmly and matter of factly, "This is not the game I want to play. Being able to choose, see, and control my character is essential for me. Since that's not an option for me in this game, I won't be playing." If a fight erupts between your sister and you after you leave this way, you did not start the fight, she did. You are under no obligation to play D&D with her. If she or anyone else pressures you to return to the game, continue to keep it matter of fact. "I've decided I don't want to play, and my answer is final." If they persist, "I've made my decision. I don't care to talk about it any more. We can talk about something else, or I can leave/hangup." If necessary, leave, hangup, or don't respond to texts/emails about if after that point. Your sister and others may become upset. That is not your responsibility. Your only responsibilities in this are 1) to be clear with yourself and others about what you do and don't want, 2) to communicate clearly and calmly, and 3) to care for your own wellbeing.
I'll say it again because some of us (myself included) need to hear this repeatedly: You are not responsible for other people's feelings.* Just because she or others get upset doesn't mean you've made the wrong choice or you have to do something you don't want to.
*The caveat to that: If you (generic you) do something to harm, insult, or bully someone, you do bear some responsibility for that harm and the feelings the elicit. But calmly pulling out of a game that isn't what you want is none of those things.....even if your sister says it is.
But a LIC is a perfectly valid way to play an RPG, and I briefly ran a Champions game that way back in college. I stopped right away, btw, because they are so much more work for the GM than a regular game. And I had 100% buy-in from the players, who also wanted to try the LIC model. Again, this is a valid way to play... assuming she does it correctly.
I think Champions is a much better platform for this mode of play. It would follow several hero tropes and popculture references. It would be akin to every origin story where the hero discovers her powers. I would play that.
But up front D&D is not that. Unless you ping your players and all of them are on board for it, it will be a tough run. Without knowing class/race and without having the information in front of you, it's pretty hard to pursue the goblin kidnappers.
A side effect would be skill dogpiling where everybody says they try to X-skill, because nobody knows if they have proficiency or not.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So my turn as DM has come to a close, and I suggested someone else at the table takes a turn. This is something we frequently do when the DM needs a break. One of the players said she was interested in playing the next campaign and learning how to DM. She took a few months to learn how to DM from her husband, who also is in our group and a former DM, and she decided to run TofA. We made some characters and did a session zero, but that was when the trouble began, and I needed some advice. It started small, adjusting skills here, adding background notes here, and eventually turned to her taking full control of all players' characters. She has chosen my background for me and given me a backstory, changed my stats, told me what mini I HAVE to use, doesn't let me see my character sheet, and decides rolls without telling us what the check is or what our modifiers are. I have not seen my character sheet since I made it. I'm old school and like a paper copy, and when I asked for it, she told me that she threw it away and made a digital version for her use. This was only the beginning, but I'll spare those details. Now I've had bad DMs in the past, and a quick conversation usually helps, and if it doesn't, I leave the table, but the problem this time is the DM is my sister. She will not listen to my complaints and refuses to adjust her DM style, and if I leave the table, it will likely cause some out-of-game fight. Please, any DMs who read this, give me some advice.
This is more a people (or family) problem than a DM problem. You know what you don’t like about how she DMs and you know what you would/should do if she wasn’t your sister. There’s very little that can be done until you get past the latter.
How do the other players (her husband in particular) feel? It sounds like something everyone should be displeased with. I could see why the husband might want to put up with this (though if she learned from him, I’m sure there a whole dynamic there too), I can see why you’d want to keep the peace in the family, but is everyone in that boat? Or do the others simply want to avoid conflict?
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Ugh. That’s about all I can say.
I guess you need to weigh the negatives of upsetting your sister against you being miserable in the game. Not an easy choice. Best thing I can think is to check in with the other players and see if they feel the same. If so, then, respectfully, approach her as a group and talk it through.
FWIW, and keeping in mind I’m only seeing your side of this, it sounds like she’s a terrible DM. Choosing a background and changing stats is a no-no. Player agency issues aside, that’s just mean. And not letting you see your own character sheet is right out. At that point, why are the players even there, if she’s going to control so many aspects of the characters?
Sounds like she wants to write a book, not play a game.
So, the good thing about this, just from the sounds? You want to play D&D?
She isn't playing D&D.
I think that's an important thing to call out. I'm not sure how old you are, but the fact is that you want something that isn't being provided. You, as a person, have the right to go no, this isn't fun to me anymore, sorry, I'm out. It doesn't have to cause a fight either. If it becomes an argument, just leave.
Part of D&D is the player experience, and it's not all about the DM. It sounds like she is having fun crafting and creating this story that you are a part of, and if I were explaining why I'm not having fun, I would lean into that. Explain why you love how creative she is, but that creativity that YOU want bring to the table is being stripped from you because you don't have choices on what YOUR character would do. You guys don't want to have creative control over some NPC actions, you want your characters to be under your control, and she controls the NPCs.
That's the first part of having that conversation and communicating. If it gets reciprocated, then great, you start to have meaningful dialogue and explain why its a problem for you, and why you aren't enjoying it anymore. The big thing is trying not to place blame, but looking for solutions. If that doesn't happen though? Don't sacrifice your own happiness to pander to someone else.
There are absolutely a lot of parallels in co-operative storywriting , but from a communication piece, do not call her a terrible DM. Honestly, I think it's just unchecked balances. Players have to be willing to challenge a DM who is leaning too far into it.
As pangurjan said, this definitely seems like a people problem. Eventually you're going to need to initiate a reset of this campaign, and the only question is how smoothly you can pull it off. Given that the DM is your sister, you might have some insights into her behavior that can guide your next steps.
Why is she taking control of every aspect of the game?
Is she controlling in other areas of her life?
Does she suffer from anxiety or an inferiority complex?
Does she have any other hobbies or interests that you can appeal to when explaining the issues?
When the time comes, it's worth keeping in mind that while there is no wrong way to play D&D, not everyone enjoys the same style of play, and that's ok. You can express your disinterest without placing blame.
Right now, the most important thing for you to consider is damage control. Starting any new DM off with a whole campaign was a risky move, and you might be able to help everyone by proposing that the campaign be shrunk down to a more tolerable adventure. Say, 6~12 sessions. Building in a soft reset is a fantastic way for a new DM to safely make mistakes and recalibrate. You should think about a natural transition point that doesn't draw attention to her. For example, ask one of your other players if they would be interested in running an adventure of their own (1-3 session). Make it about giving everyone an opportunity to learn.
I would just tell her that control of your character is an important part of the game. Since you aren't being allowed to do that, you don't need to play.
Personally I would choose to not play in that game. Regardless of who was the GM.
edit:
OK no wait, I'd give up race, class, stat choice and having a sheet in my hand if I could play with Colville or Mercer or Skorkowski or Iyengar.....
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Stated far more civilly than I was thinking of saying that exact same thing.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
She expects you to have all your inventory, spells, and class abilities memorized at all times? Or does she not want people to know what all the tools at their disposal are at any given time to make challenges way harder?
If neither of those are true, that's bad. If either of those *are* true? Also bad. That's just not the game.
You could do the passive-aggressive thing and declare that your character is going to use their flugelhorn to cast Bombly’s Badapple Quickstep on the enemy and when she says that’s not a thing you could say “Oh, I had no clue, I can’t actually see my character sheet and so I have no effing clue what my character can or cannot do.” And then when they give it to you say “That’s not right, I didn’t choose those skills or that background, you must have made a mistake, I asked for my character sheet. You know, the paper one I was using….” Then when she reminds you that she threw it away simply respond, oh, we’ll then I guess I don’t have a character in this campaign” and leave.
That will more than likely cause the exact arguments you are hoping to avoid, but it would most certainly get your point across.
(Note, I do not recommend this approach at all.)
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
My eyebrows went up a little when I read that your brand new DM was running you through the Tomb of Annihilation. While that is a half decent adventure for new players to be in, it's by no means one meant for a sparkling new DM. That's going to have to be part of the problem right there. You said your sister started out making "small" changes. I think that's the wrong way to go about things. A DM suggests changes, and leaves it up to the players. If the player doesn't do what the DM wanted, that's the time to have a private talk. Session zero is fine, but that's public.
When she "took control over all player's characters", physical or virtual, she crossed the line entirely. That's almost never the right way to handle a game. Giving people a custom background and allowing them to choose to use it is fine. Creating a backstory together is fine. Making changes beyond putting in the names for people and places is right out of the ballpark. Nobody changes my backstory. If I took the time to make one, I'm not changing it beyond names and details to allow it to fit the setting.
It is often quoted that "No D&D is better than Bad D&D". Tell her "no" and deal with the fallout.
<Insert clever signature here>
In your situation, I would leave the table. I would do so calmly and matter of factly, "This is not the game I want to play. Being able to choose, see, and control my character is essential for me. Since that's not an option for me in this game, I won't be playing." If a fight erupts between your sister and you after you leave this way, you did not start the fight, she did. You are under no obligation to play D&D with her. If she or anyone else pressures you to return to the game, continue to keep it matter of fact. "I've decided I don't want to play, and my answer is final." If they persist, "I've made my decision. I don't care to talk about it any more. We can talk about something else, or I can leave/hangup." If necessary, leave, hangup, or don't respond to texts/emails about if after that point. Your sister and others may become upset. That is not your responsibility. Your only responsibilities in this are 1) to be clear with yourself and others about what you do and don't want, 2) to communicate clearly and calmly, and 3) to care for your own wellbeing.
I'll say it again because some of us (myself included) need to hear this repeatedly: You are not responsible for other people's feelings.* Just because she or others get upset doesn't mean you've made the wrong choice or you have to do something you don't want to.
*The caveat to that: If you (generic you) do something to harm, insult, or bully someone, you do bear some responsibility for that harm and the feelings the elicit. But calmly pulling out of a game that isn't what you want is none of those things.....even if your sister says it is.
Trying to Decide if DDB is for you? A few helpful threads: A Buyer's Guide to DDB; What I/We Bought and Why; How some DMs use DDB; A Newer Thread on Using DDB to Play
Helpful threads on other topics: Homebrew FAQ by IamSposta; Accessing Content by ConalTheGreat;
Check your entitlements here. | Support Ticket LInk
Perfectly said.
However, I’ll be honest with you. What she’s doing is not D&D. Simple as that. It’s more like writing a novel and expecting everyone else to voice the audiobook.
Maybe talk to some of the others? I feel like there’s no way they aren’t upset with this too. I mean, if they don’t create their own character, and they don’t stat themselves out, and they don’t have life or death excitement, and they don’t even get to roll the shiny goblin number click clacks, what even is there to like anymore?
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Honestly, I would just leave.
How to leave amicably is the tough question. I suggest talking to your sister one on one and tell her that you are not having fun anymore and you do not want to continue the campaign.
Another thing you can do when talking to her is to avoid using second person and only speak from first person, if that makes sense. For example:
Sister: "Why are you leaving the game?"
OP: "I am not having fun at the table anymore, and I want to do something else." (You are speaking in first person, and you are not accusing her of anything. You basically want to avoid the word "you" as much as humanly possible.)
OP: "You are controlling my character and refuse to consider my side of the story." (You are speaking in second person, and whether you intend to blame her or not, all she is going to hear is that you are blaming her.)
You can also ask for having another session zero (you can never have too many session zeroes, and session zeroes can be had throughout a campaign to check in on everyone and gauge their interests and ideas for improvement). However, she might see this as a group attack on her though, and making her feeling cornered might not be a good idea.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
You do not have a potential DM, you have a storyteller. Not that it's a bad thing, but a DM is a storyteller who wants the players to help write the story. While I can understand to a point, the reservations of bringing up this mishandling of characters, in session zero, no less, it MUST be done. No character sheet + no player, full stop. End of statement. Players without character sheets are called spectators, nothing more.
Let her know that you see her INTENT is good, to make sure everyone is synched and has what they will need to play through, her implementation of her wishes is heavy handed and removes ALL player control. While it may be a conflict addressing it, that is far superior to a crap game where nobody but the DM has ANY control over anything. As my sig says, talk to the other players around this as well. Point out that never before has any DM taken away all the players choices and input, which should alone, be evidence she is WAY out of line.
As a twist, if she MUST have such absolute control, propose a compromise. SHE makes all the characters (works really well here on DDB) and the players each claim a character. That way SHE dictates who will be there (race/class) and her players fill the roles she has selected. Not as free or fun, maybe as actually allowing the players to create their own dreams, but at least they would have, once selected, absolute control of the character they are supposed to be. I am thinking of doing this for a future campaign, just to make it more interesting.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
I just want to toss this out there...
There is a type of campaign we used to call the "Limited Information Campaign." I'll abbreviate it LIC. In a LIC, the GM controls all of the mechanics. You don't see your character sheet. You don't actually know what class your character is (if there are classes), or what your stats are, or any of that. You discover this through the act of RP. Normally the GM works closely with you to make sure they are creating up a sheet you would like, but it is not "incorrect" to run a D&D game this way. In fact, when I announced that I would need to step down for a bit for health reasons, and one of the other players said he might like to DM, he talked about doing theater of the mind (which I do NOT do), and how "in some variants the DM even controls the character sheets." One of the other players immediately nixed this idea, especially when I brought up the LIC and how I have always wanted to try it.
My point here is -- maybe your sister is trying to run a LIC, and you don't like LICs. This is something to discuss with her. But a LIC is a perfectly valid way to play an RPG, and I briefly ran a Champions game that way back in college. I stopped right away, btw, because they are so much more work for the GM than a regular game. And I had 100% buy-in from the players, who also wanted to try the LIC model. Again, this is a valid way to play... assuming she does it correctly.
Now, a LIC's GM should not "take over" characters, tell you how to RP, and telling you what mini to use is just bizarre. But, from the OP, I am not clear on what "take over our characters" means, because from the text, I think you might have considered my LIC game to be me "taking over" the characters, but we all did that together, and nobody "took over" anything.
Now, maybe you don't like LIC play -- I'd guess most players would not -- and you definitely should have had some say in whether the group was going to do a LIC or not. But it is a valid way to play an RPG.... Just sayin'.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
That’s a much better way to do things. ☝️
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I think Champions is a much better platform for this mode of play. It would follow several hero tropes and popculture references. It would be akin to every origin story where the hero discovers her powers. I would play that.
But up front D&D is not that. Unless you ping your players and all of them are on board for it, it will be a tough run. Without knowing class/race and without having the information in front of you, it's pretty hard to pursue the goblin kidnappers.
A side effect would be skill dogpiling where everybody says they try to X-skill, because nobody knows if they have proficiency or not.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale