Recently, one of the players in my game decided he wanted to create a new character, since his old one wasn't really fitting in with the group.
I took the DM's Guide route, which says to allow someone creating a character above 1st level to start at the average level of the other party members. So, he created a 12th level Druid.
One of the other guys in the group voiced his opinion about this, saying that he felt it was a bit unfair for someone to just create a new character and already be the same level as everyone else.
I sort of see his point, but I've already introduced the Druid into the game and feel like it would be even more unfair to just tell that player that they need to chop a few levels off of their already created character.
So, basically, I feel like there's nothing I can do about this now and I just need to hope that everyone gets over it and we can continue to play our game.
Anyone been through this before or have any advice on the situation?
|
None of my various groups have ever had a problem with this. It has come up in a couple of games where a player, generally between adventures, will determine that their character either doesn't fit in with the group, they can't find the right voice for the character, or whatever, and decide that a new character is called for.
I've always allowed it and, as long as they use whatever YOUR proscribed method of character creation, it's a non-issue. Since you were following what is suggested in the DMG, I think you were handling it well. I like characters in my groups to have about the same levels (energy drains notwithstanding), so I agree with the DMG and you. Did anyone else in the group have a strong opinion?
In the scinario described above, it sounds like the player has been active and contributing to the group and for whatever reason, the character is not quite fitting in. This situation is different than a new player entering the group. If there is a logistical reason that the player should change characters, the DM can give him/her the same amount of XP as the old character had. This approach doesn't penalize the player for a poor character fit with the group. If the player is just joining a group or wants to change characters for the heck of it, the player may be subject to some kind of normalization or penalty.
But, perhaps this is not to the point. I'd suggest consulting the group to come up with a concensus.
As ever,
ACE
Is the complaining player the group's one character that's behind a few thousand XP and therefore behind the new character in level? If so, I can understand his opinion. I thought that the DMG recommends starting new characters at the lowest level of all pre-existing characters or even a level lower. In any case, making the new druid hack off a level or two would only tick him off so that's probly not the best solution. Maybe it would be best to announce that you made a bad decision and the decision that you will make in the future under similar circumstances? If the complaining player is lower level than the new druid, maybe allow him to find a new magical item to balance him out a bit.
My 2 XP,
TS
Director of Narrative
|
Our group has always had new characters come in one level lower than everyone else and usually only allow it before 7th level. By then you should know if your character is working. Of course you can always bring in a new character due to death if the other options are not possible.
I think you are right to not penalize the druid by dropping him back if the character has already been played. Just tell the party how things will be next time this comes up.
The 'complainer' might be upset because he/she isn't so fond of his/her character as well. If that's the case offer him/her the chance to make a new character, but don't settle they're whining with a magic item. That's like giving a brat the candy they want. It doesn't help anyone.
The 'complainer' might be upset because he/she isn't so fond of his/her character as well. If that's the case offer him/her the chance to make a new character, but don't settle they're whining with a magic item. That's like giving a brat the candy they want. It doesn't help anyone.
Agreed; if the complainer is only bored with his own character, a magic 'gift' isn't the way to go. But if the character is a level or two behind the new guy, a magic item is a good way to balance; it gives a bonus or ability which will boost his relative power for a level or two. By the time his 'gift' looses its effectiveness (especially true of items which grant raw bonuses), he should be caught up with everyone else in level.
TS
Something I did in lieu of a "gift" was to really give said character a chance to shine in game - a point in which his skills made it possible to solve the problem at hand.
I have had players create a character above first level, to the average level of the party, rounded down. I have not done this with a new player to D&D, though, as I felt it was really important for the player to learn the concepts of D&D. I had discussed it over with the other players, though, and they were fine with "protecting the character's rear" until he reached a sufficient level. Which didn't take long, as he played a halfling rogue who maximized his Hide and Move Silently rolls. He still managed to hold his own, especially with his sneak attacks, lockpicking and trap skills.
Since one of my players tends to lose at least one character every two levels, I have some experience with this.
Originally, my rule was that your new character begins with the minimum XP required to be one level below the lowest level party member. However, this quickly led to characters who would be three or more levels behind the highest level character, at which point they would get killed even easier.
Next, I removed the penalty entirely. However, this led to situations where players would roll up characters identical to their old one (I'm Taren's twin brother, Tarryn! Can I adventure with you to avenge my brother?) and as an added bonus the party would loot Taren's body. Given the choice between paying for resurrection and being paid one-quarter of their own starting gold to roll up a new guy, nobody ever bothered to get raised.
A superior rule, which I instituted to fix this, was as Sebastian's above. Your new character is at the same level and XP total as if you had raised him. Of course, if your character has access to true resurrection, he can chose to make a new character with no level penalty in exchange for the 25,000gp fee out of his starting gold. I think this is probably the best rule.
However, all this is only for characters who get killed. I have never penalized players who just decided they wanted to retire their guy and play something new. I'd generally discourage them from doing so unless they really want to, but I wouldn't apply any XP penalty if they were intent on changing characters. If they're truly not having any fun with their current character, then either the game isn't interesting enough (in which case it's the DM's fault so he shouldn't penalize the player) or the player will only enjoy the game if he's allowed to change characters (in which case the DM should support the player's choice). The new character should have the same XP and level as the old one, so that he can't gain or lose XP just by swapping to another character.
3 words for your player:
suck it up
You are the DM, you make the calls and you can change the ruling on new characters whenever you see fit (although being CN about it might lead to some problems).
I have always let players bring in new characters at the level of the rest of the group. But then I also make sure that the group as a whole stays at the same level - I crave equality and fairness in a game.
In my new game I am going to have dead/new characters come in at 50% of the XP of the rest of the party and then have them level up quickly. My reasoning is to allow for a slightly more organic progression for a character. Rather than allowing powergamers to build an uber 14th level character right off the bat, they start at level 7 and level up once per session till they catch up with the group acquiring skills and gp as they go.
igi
3 words for your player:
suck it upYou are the DM, you make the calls and you can change the ruling on new characters whenever you see fit
Love it. :)
If a new char's being created mid game, I usually have them start a couple of levels lower than the rest of the group, unless it would seriously handicap the player or the group. No point in rolling up new cannon fodder with a snowball's chance in hell (Acheron, Carceri, pick-your-favorite-plane) to survive. So, I guess what I allow depends on existing group composition and what they're going to be facing.
A compromise, if you're looking for one, is to say, "Hey, would have limited the capability of the group for the new PC to start lower than everyone else. So, instead, going to slow the advancement...." by whatever method makes sense for your style: No XPs this session, half XP's this session, whatever.
But, ignimbrite78's answer works just fine, too. :)
I think you've made the right decision by allowing the player to keep his character since the druid has already seen some use. If you're regretting the decision, inform the group that next time you'll be using a different approach (eg. new character started at a level lower than party average, etc.). By deciding now how you'll deal with this in the future, you'll minimize disruption when the next character dies/changes.
Personally I haven't had a player switch characters in my campaigns yet without the character dying. One player essentially kills off his characters though on purpose...which is kind of annoying as it endangers the rest of the party as they try to save a character bent on suicide... *sigh* ;)
Jimmy
Standard rule at my gaming table; two level penalty as this can get out of hand very quickly and inhibit game play and storyline. I have had people want to change characters every few weeks which can be very problamatic; not fitting in is a fuzzy issue; some tension is good. Here are my standard gm rules; character generation; one free rework of character; some minor tweaks at my discresion; after that; total character change; 2 level penalty from average pc level. If you have never played in my game before or I dont know you; you start at first level and you are sorta the kid brother of the pc's meaning generally very tweaked as the pc can give you great gear but still have to watch over you for survivability; I know it sounds bad; but it works out well in our group.
Personally I haven't had a player switch characters in my campaigns yet without the character dying. One player essentially kills off his characters though on purpose...which is kind of annoying as it endangers the rest of the party as they try to save a character bent on suicide... *sigh* ;)
Jimmy
I've had this problem in my games before. You should bring this up to your players, and let it be known that no further character abuse (by the players) is going to be allowed. Impose a level penalty (heck, make it cumulative), and talk to the offending player. Ask him, is he here to have fun and adventure, or just to try out new builds he's thought of? Remind him why he started playing this game. Otherwise this could become an even worse problem...
All my opinion and experience, of course.
TK
|
As a DM, in case of character death, I prefer an old character getting raised over having to add in a new character. If a new character doesn't start at least one level lower, why would players pay to get raised when instead they could add in a new, just as powerful character with optimised equipment?
With that in mind, the penalty for dying should be less than the penalty than changing characters. However, new characters starting at -2 levels can really hurt the group, especially if playing an adventure path such as Age of Worms. How does one comprimise? Perhaps lessening the death penalty would help. If a raised PC loss 500 XP / level instead of going midway to the previous level, then one could allow new PC's to come in at -1 level than previous character. The only problem I see with this method is that what does one do when the same character dies over and over again? I would think that new characters would have a minimum experience total equal to the party average minus one level so they don't start off too weak.