I am relatively new to d&d and wanted to ask how people choose to handle situations like these.
I feel its important to note that the dm is pretty set on railroading a lot of key sections to this campaign. Our party was invited to meet with this entity who had information that we had to hear. Upon agreeing to meet them, they instead put us through extremely torturous puzzles and trapped us in a maze (please dms never do a maze). My character originally joined out of a desire to help the group in a time of need and was later hired to deliver a message. I worry that this npc entity will be crucial to the story and in my opinion my character would never want to work with them after everything she was put through (both in game and out).
If my suspicions are correct and the dm will require us to follow the lead of this entity. Would it be wise to just have my character leave return to their life before, maybe return as an npc. Then create a new character who would be more willing to join on this campaign especially as they wouldn't have experienced the torture the previous one went through. I just don't see the logic of my original pc wanting to continue if she has to work with this being she utterly hates.
tldr: my character hates the quest giver, but dm provides no other course of direction should she just leave and be replaced with new pc.
Yeah we had a long discussion about the single direction, and introducing more improvisation on their part. In times when we as players choose to do something different than what he has planned. I honestly just want to see how he handles my character actively going against this entity. As a player I could go along with it all just to save the hassle. Although i think that defeats the point of the roleplay aspect of the game.
From my character's pov I see no reason why she would devote more of her time to pursuing a quest for someone she doesn't want to work with. Particularly from a story telling view, she would just be annoyed the whole time that she is being forced down a path she disagrees with. I will try discussing with him again. I just wanted to see whether its unusual for a pc to just leave the party from having different views.
I think it's perfectly fine to drop a character. Especially if the story isn't character driven. If it doesn't matter for the story if you play your current PC or a new one and you feel that you would rather play a different character it makes more sense for your current PC to leave.
Just remember that if you are attached to this particular PC you will lose control over it and bad things (or at least worse than what's already happened) can happen to it. If taht's not a problem, go ahead.
I recently retired a character from a group for a variety of reasons. The main one being that the character was designed for a game that was going to be a one shot, but we enjoyed so much that it turned into a full on campaign. The character I made was one that I would never have made for a long term game - Lawful Evil Hexblade assassin. So I discussed with the story teller and we agreed to have the character leave the party. He is now becoming a Lich and I have a sneaky suspicion that he will become an enduring enemy to the group. I love it, it was totally unexpected and really can't wait to see how that plays out. But yes, once you retire your character, the DM really could do anything with it.
I once had a similar experience where I made a character that didn't fit with the group. Essentially, we had 2 rogues, a bard who was basically a rogue (urchin background, took sneaky spells, etc.), and a barbarian who was one lockpick away from a rogue. Session one, we found what was effectively a bottle rocket/molotov cocktail. That thing was pickpocketed from a PC's pocket at least 4 times as one of the rogues, the bard, and the barbarian kept stealing from each other. They also like to try sabotaging each other, albeit in a (mostly) harmless way. Meanwhile, I'm playing a lawful good paladin who just wants some friends to help him find a pair of special boots that his family lost.
That game only went 2 sessions, due to scheduling issues, but I was ready to scrap my paladin and make a more fitting character (likely a sorcerer or blood hunter something). There is no way my character would travel with them for any extended period of time. As soon as we finished the quest we were on, I was ready to have him take off on his own.
I am relatively new to d&d and wanted to ask how people choose to handle situations like these.
I feel its important to note that the dm is pretty set on railroading a lot of key sections to this campaign. Our party was invited to meet with this entity who had information that we had to hear. Upon agreeing to meet them, they instead put us through extremely torturous puzzles and trapped us in a maze (please dms never do a maze). My character originally joined out of a desire to help the group in a time of need and was later hired to deliver a message. I worry that this npc entity will be crucial to the story and in my opinion my character would never want to work with them after everything she was put through (both in game and out).
If my suspicions are correct and the dm will require us to follow the lead of this entity. Would it be wise to just have my character leave return to their life before, maybe return as an npc. Then create a new character who would be more willing to join on this campaign especially as they wouldn't have experienced the torture the previous one went through. I just don't see the logic of my original pc wanting to continue if she has to work with this being she utterly hates.
tldr: my character hates the quest giver, but dm provides no other course of direction should she just leave and be replaced with new pc.
Have you talked to your DM about your concerns?
Yeah we had a long discussion about the single direction, and introducing more improvisation on their part. In times when we as players choose to do something different than what he has planned. I honestly just want to see how he handles my character actively going against this entity. As a player I could go along with it all just to save the hassle. Although i think that defeats the point of the roleplay aspect of the game.
From my character's pov I see no reason why she would devote more of her time to pursuing a quest for someone she doesn't want to work with. Particularly from a story telling view, she would just be annoyed the whole time that she is being forced down a path she disagrees with. I will try discussing with him again. I just wanted to see whether its unusual for a pc to just leave the party from having different views.
I think "Session 0" sessions are used to establish the characters and ensure they "fit" with the general theme of the campaign.
Other campaigns have a "player's guide" which gives players some idea as to what sort of character do, or do not, fit into the theme of the campaign.
Have you wondered if your character would stay along to try and ensure that the NPC does NOT get what he wants?
I think it's perfectly fine to drop a character. Especially if the story isn't character driven. If it doesn't matter for the story if you play your current PC or a new one and you feel that you would rather play a different character it makes more sense for your current PC to leave.
Just remember that if you are attached to this particular PC you will lose control over it and bad things (or at least worse than what's already happened) can happen to it. If taht's not a problem, go ahead.
I recently retired a character from a group for a variety of reasons. The main one being that the character was designed for a game that was going to be a one shot, but we enjoyed so much that it turned into a full on campaign. The character I made was one that I would never have made for a long term game - Lawful Evil Hexblade assassin. So I discussed with the story teller and we agreed to have the character leave the party. He is now becoming a Lich and I have a sneaky suspicion that he will become an enduring enemy to the group. I love it, it was totally unexpected and really can't wait to see how that plays out. But yes, once you retire your character, the DM really could do anything with it.
Thank you I appreciate the input. I enjoy my character, but having a fresh character approach to the campaign would be fun.
I once had a similar experience where I made a character that didn't fit with the group. Essentially, we had 2 rogues, a bard who was basically a rogue (urchin background, took sneaky spells, etc.), and a barbarian who was one lockpick away from a rogue. Session one, we found what was effectively a bottle rocket/molotov cocktail. That thing was pickpocketed from a PC's pocket at least 4 times as one of the rogues, the bard, and the barbarian kept stealing from each other. They also like to try sabotaging each other, albeit in a (mostly) harmless way. Meanwhile, I'm playing a lawful good paladin who just wants some friends to help him find a pair of special boots that his family lost.
That game only went 2 sessions, due to scheduling issues, but I was ready to scrap my paladin and make a more fitting character (likely a sorcerer or blood hunter something). There is no way my character would travel with them for any extended period of time. As soon as we finished the quest we were on, I was ready to have him take off on his own.
How to add tooltips on dndbeyond