As a DM, what would you do in this situation?

[reveal]

Here's the scenario:

The party is 11th level. A player decides he "has done all he can" with his current PC. He wants to bring in a new PC. The "retired" character joins an organization in Eberron to study on his burgeoning psionic abilities.

The standing house rule is that if you die and don't want to be resurrected, or when a new character joins the party, the new PC has the same XP as the character in the party with the lowest XP, so the new PC has this amount of XP.

A few sessions, and 2 levels, later, the party is 13th level. The player decides he doesn't like his new character and wants to bring back his old one.

So would you:

A) Bring his old character back with the same XP as the character in the party with the lowest XP?

B) Bring his old character back at one level lower than the lowest PC in the party?

C) Bring his old character back with the same amount of XP he had when he "retired?"

D) None of the above and I have another idea?

On a side note, the player in question has not asked to bring his old character back but has expressed dissatisfaction with his new character. I'm just planning for possibilities.

 

[Mirage_Patrick]

It doesn't make sense for him to come back with less xp than he had before.

I would say bring him back at the Xp he had when he left.

 

[Turanil]

I vote for "C". Also, I suggest that new PCs begin without magical items.

 

[DM-Rocco]

B or C

Having character too far apart in level can screw things up, so if you feel that it could unbalance things having a character two levels behind, then I would split the difference and call it xp gained during down time or bar fights. This might also encourage him to go back to the other character he was kinda happy with but not feel like he really lost that much.

Otherwise, he retired him, he should really stay at that level.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I'd go with C, as long as it doesn't mess up the campaign continuity. Maybe he just wanted a break from the character. I wouldn't think that giving essentially free levels to the character would be needed, since there's only a difference of two levels.

On the other hand, maybe the player isn't happy with either of the characters and is going to wander on to a third character. At that point, I would start the character out at about 8th or 9th level. He shouldn't be too badly behind them, and hopefully it'll discourage him from further character jumping.

 

[delericho]

In my last campaign, all PCs had the same XP total (less anything spent on making magic items), so new characters came in with that same total. Of course, no character died and was raised - a few received Trtue Resurrections, though. For my next campaign, I was going to rule that a ne wPC to replace a character who died came in either one lower level than the rest of the group or 25,000gp down (the cost of the True Resurrection), while a PC brought in the replace a character who retired had the same XP total of the departed character.

However, all of this is irrelevant to your question.

I would stick with the same ruling you have used so far: new characters have the same XP total as the lowest total in the party. The fact that this 'new' character is actually the old character returned is irrelevant to this. The only exception I would make is if the old character had a higher XP total when he left than the current lowest total in the group (and so would lose XP upon returning). In that case, I'd bring him back as-is.

(Note, if the character goes up in level as a result of 'being away', I would grant him the chance to re-equip using the PC wealth per level table in the DMG, or whatever equivalent holds in the campaign.)

 

[ThirdWizard]

Same level as before. It is the same character after all, and he "retired" so I assume he has been sitting around enjoying the good life instead of adventuring in his retirement.

 

[Ashrum the Black]

I'd bring him back with the same level of XP as the lowest member of the party. Keeps him on par with the rest of the group, yet keeps him from really benefiting from being indecisive.

On the other side of the coin though when he asks for how much money he's gained I'd tell him he's spent it all on his training and studies. I personally hate players that jump around and this would be my way of saying to make a decision and stick to it.

Of course this indecision may be a symptom or a larger disatisfaction. I had a player that was just never able to decide what he wanted to play, and the grass was always greener playing something else. The player finally quite and took a hiatus from gaming. He's back now and much better for the break.

-Ashrum

 

[Random Hero]

my thoughts...

Personally, I would recommend option B given the situation. If the PC's previous character joined an organization to train in his skills, it would make sense for him to gain some experience.

As far as allowing him to come back at an equal level as the other characters, I don't see how it would make sense. How would his training get him as much experience as the "real world" experience of the other characters?

The PC willingly retired his character because he was getting bored with it--which is bound to happen at one point or another in any group. For him to be able to bring the character back into the group with equal experience wouldn't be fair to the other characters.

Anyway, I think that 1 level is a generous enough benefit/penalty for bringing his charcter back...2 levels distances his abilities too far from the other PC's.

 

[the Jester]

C. The price of indecision about what character you are playing is not getting xps.

On the other hand, this means that he'll gain xp faster and eventually catch up.

A 2-level gap isn't too big of a deal ime.