The first time I switched was after our first session, so the DM did not really view that as a problem, he just retconned the story so that my ardent never existed and in fact I played as my psion all the time.
Now we have played for a while however, and I just loathe the way my character handles, even if I like the character in itself. I do not know how to bring this up with my GM. I voiced my concerns to him, and he was not all that happy about it. He did not say anything final about it, though.
I am at a loss, and would appreciate any suggestions on the situation.
I am at a loss
We've all played characters that we didn't like at one time or another. I haven't played in 4E yet (I DM) but I do recall some characters that I played in 2e and 3.0 that were real stinkers.
One of my players is playing a Psion, and he LOVES him. Can't be all that bad. I like the class. What lvl are you at?
If it is really bothering you, talk to the DM again. One of my players was playing a goliath sorcerer and hated it. I did to honestly. He did it for story purposes, but the character was largely ineffectual. So we cooked up a way for him to die (what turned out to be plot related) and he rolled a Half-orc barb. If he doesn't let you, well, too bad. Wait it out. Next time, play a character you really like.
Perhaps ask for some assitance, because you were obviously caught by surprise that the class you just chose didn't play the way you like. Also, what you are looking for may not exist perfectly within the game.
Really, it should be no bother to a well-rounded group to change a player's character, for whatever reason, provided:
a) Between you, the DM and the rest of the group, you keep moving the game/story forward
b) You don't repeatedly change characters every few sessions, as this is draining to the DM (it costs him effort to understand the new build and integrate your new character), and annoying to fellow players
That said, you don't necessarily have to change your character. If it's mechanics you don't like, simply change your class. Sure, you're a psion, but altering the characters class to be wizard instead of psion should make the mechanics different enough that you may find you like it better. Then just call him a psion, reflavor and be done. Now you're playing a wizard, but one who uses her mind to alter reality around her instead of words and a book. (And they're both Int classes so you shouldnt even really have to fix scores much either).
If it's your character's personality that you don't like, change it. Say she was depressed about something or whatever, and now she's dealt with those issues and moved on with her life, that's why she's acting different, etc etc. (It's really hard to give examples on this one without knowing the personality already). People in real life make decisions to alter their behavior all the time, and while sometimes that fails and nothing changes, sometimes it doesn't fail and people act different.
So I recommend talking to your DM about altering your character, not making a new one. And see how that goes.
Though, while we're on the subject, if it is mechanics, why on earth would you think changing from the Ardent to the Psion was going to effect play style at all? While I understand yes, one is melee, one is not; one is a leader, the other is controller; etc.... what defines both of those classes is the power point style of the psionic power source and they both play very similarly. I'm just wondering why you thought psion would be a better choice as opposed to a non-psionic class.
My advice: Suck it up, buttercup.
We've all played characters that we didn't like at one time or another. I haven't played in 4E yet (I DM) but I do recall some characters that I played in 2e and 3.0 that were real stinkers.
One of my players is playing a Psion, and he LOVES him. Can't be all that bad. I like the class. What lvl are you at?
If it is really bothering you, talk to the DM again. One of my players was playing a goliath sorcerer and hated it. I did to honestly. He did it for story purposes, but the character was largely ineffectual. So we cooked up a way for him to die (what turned out to be plot related) and he rolled a Half-orc barb. If he doesn't let you, well, too bad. Wait it out. Next time, play a character you really like.
D&D is a fun hobby. If you have to "suck it up", then you are doing it wrong. If the game becomes a chore, then that player will simply stop playing, if not allowed to explore any alternatives.
Simply because you had a player that liked the class doesn't mean it is a fun class for everyone. Psion's have a noted problem of being low level augment spammy. Maybe your player had no problem downgrading his powers to keep the class feeling fresh, or has no problem using the same power over and over, but that clearly is not a fact that can be applied to all players.
To the OP: Easiest way to make the transition is to stay in the same role and possibly even the SAME character. A Psion -> Wizard switch would be trivally easy to adjust to. I was using the playtest Assassin awhile back, and when they removed the only reason I was playing him (Unseen Spearhead), I switch to a Monk using similar weapons. Have your character killed, turn on the party or something, and a new ally emerges to help the party.
In my experience, I'm just happy to be playing the game, as long as everyone is having a good time. Sure, I might like to play a particular class/race combo better than others, but if I'm filling a role, and I feel valued by the other players / characters, then I'll be fine with what I'm playing. As long as a character concept makes sense in my head and the RPing is decent, I'm less concerned with the mechanics.
I did say in my previous post that talking to the DM is always an option. If, for any reason that is not an option, that you can't communicate with the DM in an effective way, then find a new DM (but that's a whole different issue).
What is is about the way your character handles that you are so tomented by? The power points? The lack of encounter powers? Ranged vs. Melee?
While this should totally not become habit (which is what it looks like it has the distict possibility of becoming) every now and then people simply wind up playing characters they don't like. Maybe it's the build, maybe the character didn't come out the way you wanted in play, whatever. The best advice I can give, though, is to make a change of some sort, because D&D is a game we all play to have fun. And if you don't like your character, you aren't having fun so why are you playing?
That said, you don't necessarily have to change your character. If it's mechanics you don't like, simply change your class. Sure, you're a psion, but altering the characters class to be wizard instead of psion should make the mechanics different enough that you may find you like it better. Then just call him a psion, reflavor and be done. Now you're playing a wizard, but one who uses her mind to alter reality around her instead of words and a book. (And they're both Int classes so you shouldnt even really have to fix scores much either).
If it's your character's personality that you don't like, change it. Say she was depressed about something or whatever, and now she's dealt with those issues and moved on with her life, that's why she's acting different, etc etc. (It's really hard to give examples on this one without knowing the personality already). People in real life make decisions to alter their behavior all the time, and while sometimes that fails and nothing changes, sometimes it doesn't fail and people act different.
So I recommend talking to your DM about altering your character, not making a new one. And see how that goes.
Though, while we're on the subject, if it is mechanics, why on earth would you think changing from the Ardent to the Psion was going to effect play style at all? While I understand yes, one is melee, one is not; one is a leader, the other is controller; etc.... what defines both of those classes is the power point style of the psionic power source and they both play very similarly. I'm just wondering why you thought psion would be a better choice as opposed to a non-psionic class.
I think this guy has it right, Kudos to Tiarn for a well stated argument. That being said I would like to expand on his last point and ask What exactly do you not like about how your psion plays mechanically? How can you be certain that you won't dislike what you change to if you do change characters? Could it possibly be that you are in a 'rut' period of levels that doesn't have a lot of good options for you, but will change as you level up? In 3.5 wizards pretty much sucked until level 5, but after that their mechanics and flexibility picked up and they became super awesome to play. 4e has done a lot to level out these curves, but I still feel like there are some dead levels for certain classes.
Overall I suggest that you really figure out (in detail, not just 'mechanically') what part of your psion you don't like to play, and probably write it down somewhere before you go back to your DM. First figure out if there is anything you can do to fix the combat handling issue without changing your character class (perhaps some bad feat choices and powers; I would suggest asking the CO boards about making the psion fun to play[cool combos, tricks, etc.]), then start looking at a similar class and how it would handle in combat differently.
I could even see changing between certain races and still calling them the same race (not that any race can't be any class perfectly well). So, if your DM has an issue with it from a story or believability perspective, you might try that approach.
While this should totally not become habit (which is what it looks like it has the distict possibility of becoming) every now and then people simply wind up playing characters they don't like. Maybe it's the build, maybe the character didn't come out the way you wanted in play, whatever. The best advice I can give, though, is to make a change of some sort, because D&D is a game we all play to have fun. And if you don't like your character, you aren't having fun so why are you playing?
That said, you don't necessarily have to change your character. If it's mechanics you don't like, simply change your class. Sure, you're a psion, but altering the characters class to be wizard instead of psion should make the mechanics different enough that you may find you like it better. Then just call him a psion, reflavor and be done. Now you're playing a wizard, but one who uses her mind to alter reality around her instead of words and a book. (And they're both Int classes so you shouldnt even really have to fix scores much either).
If it's your character's personality that you don't like, change it. Say she was depressed about something or whatever, and now she's dealt with those issues and moved on with her life, that's why she's acting different, etc etc. (It's really hard to give examples on this one without knowing the personality already). People in real life make decisions to alter their behavior all the time, and while sometimes that fails and nothing changes, sometimes it doesn't fail and people act different.
So I recommend talking to your DM about altering your character, not making a new one. And see how that goes.
Though, while we're on the subject, if it is mechanics, why on earth would you think changing from the Ardent to the Psion was going to effect play style at all? While I understand yes, one is melee, one is not; one is a leader, the other is controller; etc.... what defines both of those classes is the power point style of the psionic power source and they both play very similarly. I'm just wondering why you thought psion would be a better choice as opposed to a non-psionic class.
I would initially like to thank everyone for your responses, and furthermore, it seems like a bit of clarifcation on my part would be in order now as I kept my previous post a tad short due to me posting from a phone.
I spent a lot of time developing my character, but not so much time on choosing the class for it. I really like the character, as in its personality, story and mannerisms, however, I do not like the class or the way it handles in combat or the way it progresses as it levels. The major problem I have is that the low level psion powers feel very dull to me and as I started to gain levels I realized that there is an incentive to keep those low level powers and not choose any at-wills from the higher levels.
As for the reason I switched from Ardent to Psion, our controller left our group, he did not have enough time to dedicate to play D&D with us. Before he made his decision to leave I had already approached the DM about me switching to another class, since I did not like my ardent. The initial plan was for me to switch to a cleric, but due to our wizard leaving us and another friend joining us willing to pick up the healing bit the DM did not see me switching characters as a problem at all. We had only played one session at this point. I do not know if the incentive to stay with low level powers exists for Ardents as well and the possibility of such an occurance regarding any class did not cross my mind at the time. When we are not in combat, I really like my character, but when we are, I hate it, and adding to that, we play a pretty combat heavy campaign. At any rate, I whipped up a Psion in about 20 minutes, keeping my Ardent's story and characteristics and we pretended like I always had been standing in the background doing my thing instead of being up in the monster's faces with my greataxe.
If possible I would like to keep the character, but change the class, as I really like it. Thankfully I got presented with some ideas on how such a thing could be done. The main reason I have been hesitant to express my desires in a more direct way to the DM is that I fear one guy switching characters/classes too many times will interfere with the other players enjoyment of the game. I told the DM that I did not really like my new class either, and that I felt that perhaps psionic classes were not for me, but I did not state that I would like to change my class as soon as possible.
I really would like to change my class (I have been looking around a lot more and came to the conclusion that playing a wizard would be really neat), but on the other hand I am hesitant to bring it up since I do not wish to detract from the other player's enjoyment of the game, as well as the DM's. I do not plan on making a habit out of switching characters, and I sort of feel like I got my chance and that I blew it, resuliting in me not having a good time during combat which makes up for 80% of the sessions.
Should I just state directly to the GM that I really dislike my class as well as explain why, and that I would like to change it? I am willing to work with him in order to resolve the issue, and I think he would be willing to work with me. The problem, I think, being that we both fear that me switching again would lessen the enjoyment for the other players.
Should I just state directly to the GM that I really dislike my class as well as explain why, and that I would like to change it? I am willing to work with him in order to resolve the issue, and I think he would be willing to work with me. The problem, I think, being that we both fear that me switching again would lessen the enjoyment for the other players.
The answer I believe is yes, you should directly state to your GM what the issue is, though I think you should do two things to help reduce the stigma of switching:
1. After you get an okay from the DM, talk to the group about how they feel about it. Explain your position clearly (which includes not wanting to be 'that guy') and perhaps ask them for advice on making a clean transition. I think a key thing to bring up is your disappointment with being stuck with effectively the same powers over and over again, and the lack of research you were able to do when constructing your character (this means SPEND MORE TIME MAKING YOUR WIZARD!!!)
2. Make your character thematically similar as possible. If your psion uses a lot of psychic attacks, have your wizard make a lot of psychic attacks. If your psion uses force attacks, try to make a lot of force attacks. Let your DM know that it is your goal to disrupt the game as little as possible, but still have a good time in combat.
I hope this helps. You seem like a reasonable enough guy, even if you can't spell enticement, and if you were in my game I would let you do this, or houserule some more fun into your psion at the least. Good luck.
Should I just state directly to the GM that I really dislike my class as well as explain why, and that I would like to change it? I am willing to work with him in order to resolve the issue, and I think he would be willing to work with me. The problem, I think, being that we both fear that me switching again would lessen the enjoyment for the other players.
I hope this helps. You seem like a reasonable enough guy, even if you can't spell enticement, and if you were in my game I would let you do this, or houserule some more fun into your psion at the least. Good luck.
Thank you for the advice, gave me a lot to think about as well as an idea on how to present the issue to the group. Also I think I meant to use the word incentive, but it seems my brain decided that using a Swedish word was way more fun!
Since the DM probably won't want to retcon again, come up with a different option. Maybe he could advise you of a particularly difficult fight coming up, and you use that as an opportunity to give him a heroic death, then make a new character. It adds something to the story instead of disrupting or taking away from it. Plus you get to go out with a bang.
Use the builder if you have to but I find building a character in pencil / paper grants me much more understanding of the class.
I agree with this. I might use the builder to draft out a couple variations of a character and eyeball them, but I prefer to do the final version on paper. That way I know everything that character can do in and out.
That should be easy enough to do, & do within story.
All you need is an explanation of how you've lost your psion powers (or why you've abandonned using them), and why/how you've aquired wizard powers.
It might also be a good idea to detail why the new powers function at the same lv.
So here's a few ideas;
1) A near-death (or death!) experience.
You go down, & go down hard, in a future encounter.
Sure, you'll recover (this is D&D afterall), but you'll also discover that something's changed. Your psion powers? They're gone! So now you need to pursue some other route to power....
2) A cursed item. Hey, look at this! Sure it grants some decent bonus etc. But with a surprising side effect. And it can't be removed. So, unless you want to go back to being a farmer, you'll need a work around.
3) Related to #1. In previous editions there were some nasty creatures that fed on & stalked psions. Brain-moles, Intellect Devouerers, etc. Don't know if they exist in 4e, & care even less about their exact rule mechanics.
But having the psionic equivilant of an Aliens face-hugger jump you & chew on your brains psychic lobe seems like a good way to strip out those unwanted powers.
Again, assuming you don't want to be a farmer....
4) You decide to expand your skill set. Radically. Inbetween adventure A & adventure B you up & vanish. When you come back (in time for the next adventure) your now a wizard of x lv, not a psion.
This works best if the story you play actually has time passing between adventures/chapters etc. All too often games just run in a continuos series of events with only travel times being noted "and after so many days/weeks...."
5) Something completely out of the players control, and maybe even unknown to them, happens to the world in general. You were a psion. Now your not.
Example; A few years ago in Marvel Comics one of the characters with reality altering powers went on a bender & proclaimed "No more mutants!" And in a flash most of the mutant characters (not the X-Men of course) lost their powers. And no more mutant children were born either.
So why not "No more psions"?
6) Seen the movie Sucker Punch? It's all in your head (or someones). Yep, you were a psion. And now your a wizard. No explanation given, and your friends don't question it.
7) Alternate realities/string thoery
You're the same character (if not class) & lv in multiple realities having virtually identical parrallel adventures.
In one you're an ardant. In another you're a psion. Somewhere you're a wizard.... It just happens that the "camera" is following different versions of YOU around the multi-verse.
The other characters don't question the "change" because to them there is no change.
Use the builder if you have to but I find building a character in pencil / paper grants me much more understanding of the class.
I agree with this. I might use the builder to draft out a couple variations of a character and eyeball them, but I prefer to do the final version on paper. That way I know everything that character can do in and out.
I fail to see how using the builder limits that. All the information is there in both places.
I agree with this. I might use the builder to draft out a couple variations of a character and eyeball them, but I prefer to do the final version on paper. That way I know everything that character can do in and out.
I fail to see how using the builder limits that. All the information is there in both places.
Doing the work by hand helps commit it to memory. I don't get the same feel for the character by clicking the mouse a few times. Plus I feel more confident that the information is correct.
OPTION B. intentionally turn him into roadkill, i mean who says you have to stay in the back or play it safe? provoke those OAs, take those big risks, blast that guy who annoys you, talk trash to the Dwarven king, be a daredevil! RBA in front of the dragon? heck yeah! this is actually a pretty fun way to play D&D.
if your a non confrentational person who dosent like to generate conflict or you fear your DM will be a prick, i suggest option B.
if you want it resolved quickly and hopefully with little fuss, i suggest option A.
Some players have character ADD. As long as it's not disruptive I say do what is fun for you. If that's changing characters every month, have at it.
Also, why are you getting worried about being "that guy" when you switched your character for the first time ONE game in (after people left and new people joined)? Anyone that gets bent out of shape that early in the game needs to chill out.
Some players have character ADD. As long as it's not disruptive I say do what is fun for you. If that's changing characters every month, have at it.
I agree. Character ADD in and of itself is not a problem. When I DM for such a player, I simply don't make their characters an important part of any adventure plot.
Now, Nevahra sounds like he wants his character(s) to be part of the ongoing campaign story -- which does create problems when combined with character ADD. I won't comment on dealing with his problem, because others have already given excellent advice.
Some players have character ADD. As long as it's not disruptive I say do what is fun for you. If that's changing characters every month, have at it.
This I do not suggest. Which is why I said take the time to understand the new character before you make the switch.
Meh, I would not suggest injecting poison into your face to paralyze your eyebrows, but people still do it and I'm not about to stand in their way.
Some players have character ADD. As long as it's not disruptive I say do what is fun for you. If that's changing characters every month, have at it.
This I do not suggest. Which is why I said take the time to understand the new character before you make the switch.
Meh, I would not suggest injecting poison into your face to paralyze your eyebrows, but people still do it and I'm not about to stand in their way.
It's less about standing in the way, than about effort required by the rest of the team to integrate each change. Different people will have different points at which repeated changes get frequent enough to be annoying. It depends on depth of work everyone else has done to work with the current character as well as personal opinions on the matter. But it's easy enough to broach the subject, and instead of worrying too much about any negative DM and other player reactions, it is much better for the OP to just ask and/or make positive suggestions about how the change would work.
My approach as DM would be to allow all players to change character builds as frequently as they like. Each session if they must. But then I would not generally allow story continuity of those re-builds - they are new characters by default, and the player must assist to fit the storyline.
I have also allowed two of my players in the current campaign to alter their characters radically and maintain story with a bit of brain-storming on how it would work. One player wasn't enjoying playing a Hybrid Druid/Invoker, so we made him a Druid, including an encounter created specifically to remove his divine background. I think the psion-wizard idea suggested above could work in much the same way, as the OP wants to keep the character RP/background. This kind of thing is great to do (I enjoy being able to say "yes" and figure out how it works), but the whole group used up table time for that player. I expect that reactions against character ADD will be stronger amongst DM and players feel they need to invest time and effort to keep the game rolling whenever a player wants to switch.
I expect that reactions against character ADD will be stronger amongst DM and players feel they need to invest time and effort to keep the game rolling whenever a player wants to switch.
Well I can't account for other people's feelings.
I like continuity of character and story as well, but if I'm in a game with a player who wants to change his build a lot, as long as it doesn't interfere with my character I'll suck it up.
If the player is changing characters rather than just rearranging his build, then that has greater potential to interfere with the game. But if it can be handled again in a way that is not disruptive, then again I will swallow my objections.
I don't think in general that it is fair to say to a person "No, you can't do X because I feel like I need to do XYZ in response even though there is no objective reason for me to do so." Nobody is forcing you to spend a whole session explaining how one PC changed classes.
In my group if there is something that one player is particularly interested in but other players are not, but the player needs the input of the rest of the group, we will sort it out by email between sessions. I know that's not an option for everybody but it's just one example of how your feelings that you need to spend time explaining a character build change in story can be accomodated while still allowing a player to adjust his build and without taking up tabletime.
I know that players make missteps in creating their characters as well. Sometimes you realize partway through level 4 that your character was never meant to be an avenger, he was always meant to be an assassin/bard all along and you just didn't understand the mechanics well enough or have a good enough grip on the character's personality to know that when you first built it.
No offense but - what exactly is the problem? Does anyone actually think a D&D game has some unbreakable continuity, and that a handwave by the DM is all that big or special even if it means "rewriting" something that exists only in memory and is probably kept in its entireity on one character sheet? I can't imagine any sane DM or player being bothered by such a simple and easy thing.
Well, yes it's only a problem if the group is set up to make it a problem. A change of character should only cost a few minutes of everyone else's time.
If you don't understand why people might resent repeatedly being handed a few minutes work due to you changing your mind over something simple - try this (assuming you live in shared accomodation with family or friends):
1) Pick something of yours in shared space - maybe a chair, books in the bookcase, your D&D suppliesl.
2) Tell everyone that you are moving it to a new and sensible location - ask them where they'd like their own stuff moved to (it's only 1 minute for them to decide and tell you, right?). You'll move everything, all they have to do is get used to the new locations.
3) Repeat (2) every 3 days or so. Each move should be something simple that moves your stuff and requires shifting something else too. You do all the work.
4) See how many times you can do (3) before someone yells at you to stop. But why would they do that, all they have to do is get used to something you've changed?
. . . actually I don't suggest you do the above experiment, for the sake of your home life
Story continuity is not the sacred cow here. It is the bandwidth your friends actually have for handling unexpected work that they have to do to ajdust to you. Groups that like to invest a lot into character stories, or where the DM likes to have read and reviewed each character sheet in detail can burn that capacity faster.
Another possible, and fair, reaction from such a group is to accept repeated changes of character, but stop involving that player's characters in long-term plots and plans (i.e. reducing their own personal workload and investment in decisions that history shows might change), and for the DM to stop reviewing the character sheet (and thus stop personalising encounters and plot to your character).
As a DM, I happily allow frequent character changes, but if the build changes are radically different, I reduce the groups workload by demanding that they are considered different characters. I'm not going to "hand-wave" a Gnome Illusionist to a Warforged Paladin with character continuity, when it's easier on everyones sanity that they are actually different characters.