D&D 5E Sudden changes to the party dynamic

[zymurgy65]

I've been with our D&D group from the start, running a half-elf ranger (with 1 level in rogue since our full-time rogue bailed on us). Our other members were a half-elf (draconic) sorceress, a human cleric and a dwarf fighter. We're now at level 12, and things have taken a disturbing turn.

We just spent 2 entire sessions rescuing the dwarf from what turned out to be a disguised rakshasa, only to have her do a bunk and be replaced by a different character entirely, specifically an elven assassin. Apparently the player was bored and wanted a change. Trouble is, we now have no tank.

The DM also said another player could join the party, without running it by the rest of us first. His character uses Mercer's homebrew gunslinger class, which puts me in a bit of a bind. We now have a dedicated stealth character, and another who can do ridiculous damage at incredibly long ranges, which kind of makes my ranger redundant.

Any suggestions?

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Well first off adding new players with the consent of the rest of the group is a no-no. We had that with a player trying to add in his step-son and we had to say no can do, too many players. As for a player changing characters, well if they don't want to play the "tank" they don't have to. Improvise, adapt, and overcome. Change strategy and tactics.

 

[Blue]

In regards to not having a tank -- you can't force someone to play something they aren't having fun with. Unless you want to volunteer to retire your ranger and play a tank, it sounds like you will need to work out a new party dynamic.

As for the character that overshadows you in your existing niche, that's one of my personal peeves. I would be upfront without being confrontational with the DM and the new player. Explain the party has someone in that niche, the 3rd party is overshadowing you. Also mention there are unfulfilled niches (such as the tank) that could give the new player a place to shine without stepping on your toes.

 

[jgsugden]

There are many ways to address the situation... including doing nothing. Tanks are not an absolute necessity. However, if you want one, you can hire an NPC, summon fodder, ask to play a 2nd melee oriented PC. One party I was in had a NPC dragon join the group while the fighter was on medical leave and it was hilarious.

 

[Blue]

Well first off adding new players with the consent of the rest of the group is a no-no. We had that with a player trying to add in his step-son and we had to say no can do, too many players. As for a player changing characters, well if they don't want to play the "tank" they don't have to. Improvise, adapt, and overcome. Change strategy and tactics.

For adding a player, it depends on the situation. The game I run mirrors what you said - the DM is in charge in-world only. Expanding the group is up to the group as a whole.

On the other hand, playing at a FLGS, a school club or a library may requires acceptance of new players the DM approves.

Other tables may have social contracts elsewhere on the spectrum, or may not have ever addressed it. If the DM is also the host they may not have even thought about asking the other players.

In other words, while for my table I completely agree with you, other tables may have other rules.

 

[CydKnight]

Well first off adding new players with the consent of the rest of the group is a no-no. We had that with a player trying to add in his step-son and we had to say no can do, too many players. As for a player changing characters, well if they don't want to play the "tank" they don't have to. Improvise, adapt, and overcome. Change strategy and tactics.

I am curious why you feel the other PCs should "improvise, adapt, and overcome", when a player decides to change characters mid-to-late in the campaign adventure without consulting the others, while the DM introducing a new player to the campaign in the same manner "is a no-no". You seem to at least hint at why it's OK for the player but really give no further explanation why it isn't OK for the DM. I am not saying your view is incorrect at all, I would just like to know your reasons for this position on the matter. Thanks, in advance.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I am curious why you feel the other PCs should "improvise, adapt, and overcome", when a player decides to change characters mid-to-late in the campaign adventure without consulting the others, while the DM introducing a new player to the campaign in the same manner "is a no-no". You seem to at least hint at why it's OK for the player but really give no further explanation why it isn't OK for the DM. I am not saying your view is incorrect at all, I would just like to know your reasons for this position on the matter. Thanks, in advance.

Well I can only speak for myself but if I'm not having fun playing a character I'm not going to keep playing that character. Of coruse I play with long term friend so things may well be different as some said at a game store game or the like. But if I'm not having fun playing a fighter, why would I keep on doing something that is not fun? So by the same token I'm not going to expect another player to do the same.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

For adding a player, it depends on the situation. The game I run mirrors what you said - the DM is in charge in-world only. Expanding the group is up to the group as a whole.

On the other hand, playing at a FLGS, a school club or a library may requires acceptance of new players the DM approves.

Other tables may have social contracts elsewhere on the spectrum, or may not have ever addressed it. If the DM is also the host they may not have even thought about asking the other players.

In other words, while for my table I completely agree with you, other tables may have other rules.

True, a public game at a store will have different rules

 

[pogre]

That is frustrating. I certainly would share your frustration with the DM, but as many others have said I don't know what the social contract at your table is. The alternate class would bother me a lot more than an existing player changing character classes. I really wish players would stick out a class for an entire campaign, but Flex is right, if they are not having fun you have to let them change.

 

[CydKnight]

Well I can only speak for myself but if I'm not having fun playing a character I'm not going to keep playing that character. Of coruse I play with long term friend so things may well be different as some said at a game store game or the like. But if I'm not having fun playing a fighter, why would I keep on doing something that is not fun? So by the same token I'm not going to expect another player to do the same.

Yes, as I was poorly trying to say, I think I understood why you felt the player should have carte blanche to change his/her character without discussion. It was more that I didn't understand why a Player could make such changes but a DM could not in the case of allowing another player to join the campaign without first consulting the players.