D&D 5E Sudden changes to the party dynamic

[S'mon]

Controversial OP!

As a GM I don't believe in niche protection, players should be able to play whatever they want, the group is not entitled to a tank or a healer or an arcanist etc if no one wants to play one. If the players wish to talk among themselves about what would be an optimal PC combo team that's fine, but I have no desire to impose one. In many of my games the PCs are a random assemblage. In my Wilderlands 5e campaign the current groups are:

Group 1
Barbarian-17
Barbarian-14
Fighter-11

Group 2
Barbarian-7
Barbarian-7
Fighter-7
Sorceress-7

That works fine IME. There is certainly no need to only have eg one stealth ranged PC. An all stealth-range group would be just as much fun.

My advice to the OP would be to play your PC and not worry about what other people are playing. If you feel your PC is massively underpowered compared to a new player's PC that might be an issue worth raising with the GM, to nerf one or boost the other.

 

[S'mon]

Exactly. We all know the kid and honestly none of use were really chomping at the bit to spend 4 hours of our only gaming time with him. It would have made our fun less fun so we said no thanks.

Yeah, even as GM I wouldn't bring my nearly-10-years-old son into an ongoing game on a
permanent basis without checking with the other (adult) players first. What I would do is start a
new campaign with him as a founding player, then offer places to other players who can play
with him, or not play in that campaign if they don't like being around children.

I have let him guest star in games though. In 4e playing the monsters works best - he played a mean ancient black dragon in one 4e game and ate one of the PCs...

 

[zymurgy65]

Just FYI:

The player in question tends to treat her characters as walking stat blocks (not just my opinion, players from other campaigns confirm this), and only really seem interested in hurting people. On more than one occasion we've had to restrain her from beating up random NPCs for information (or setting her "torture rat" on them!), which highlights the problems caused by an evil character in a otherwise good-aligned group. The new character is also evil, which is likely to mean more of the same.

In our last session our group converted a beached ship into a school-cum-orphanage for the kids we rescued from the rakshasa. She missed that session, but it made no difference because she has no interest in helping out NPCs. From what I've seen of the halfling gunlinger, he's going to be an obnoxious know-it-all, which should at least give me the opportunity to roleplay one of my character's flaws (doesn't suffer fools).

My main concern is that with four characters who rely largely on ranged attacks our cleric is going to suffer a disproportionate number of melee attacks. Should've mentioned that before, sorry.

Looking at the replies (I really wasn't expecting so many!) I think the best thing I can do is play it by ear and see how the campaign develops. I have a good relationship with our cleric and sorceress players, so hopefully we can negotiate this little minefield together.

 

[S'mon]

Started a thread in General about adding new players - http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...ew-players-to-the-group&p=7115973#post7115973

 

[S'mon]

Just FYI:

The player in question tends to treat her characters as walking stat blocks (not just my opinion, players from other campaigns confirm this), and only really seem interested in hurting people. On more than one occasion we've had to restrain her from beating up random NPCs for information (or setting her "torture rat" on them!), which highlights the problems caused by an evil character in a otherwise good-aligned group. The new character is also evil, which is likely to mean more of the same.

I think Good & Evil PCs in the same party is always problematic. It can work, but the GM needs to be careful not to artificially constrain especially the Good PCs. They shouldn't be forced to tolerate Evil behaviour, or be forced to accommodate a murderous evil PC in their mostly Good group.

Either the group needs to be ok with intra-party conflict, possibly including expulsion of PCs from group, or they need to stick to Good + Neutral IME.

Really a Good group should not be forced to accept an Evil character joining them in the first place. This is a much bigger issue than that character's class.

 

[BoldItalic]

Just FYI:
....

Ah, that makes a lot more sense. Thanks for the clarification. Sorry if my earlier reply seemed harsh. I'd go with S'mon - it's not so much the mix of classes that's causing the grief (in 5e, the classes are so well balanced that almost any mix can be successful) or even a failure of bonding between characters (which is what I was, wrongly, guessing at), as the mismatch between the personal goals of the players. I'm thinking about the styles of play that are talked about on p.6 of the DMG, if you are familiar with that. A skillful DM will try to balance the game so that each player gets a fair share of what they want to get out of it, even if that means a compromise and no-one is getting all they want all of the time. (I must confess I'm not very good at that myself and I prefer to play with people like me (I'm the 'storyteller' type) but that's the easy way out, not exactly a virtue). It may be helpful if you talk to the DM and the other players (all of them) about who is which type, and how your game can accommodate you all. If you can do that, it may help to clear the air and lead to a more enjoyable experience for everyone.

 

[zymurgy65]

S'mon/BoldItalic:

Sound advice. I'll bear that in mind - thank you.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Regarding sharing the same niche... in my current 2 person party we somehow stepped on each other's toe... and wgen we branched out into another class we did it again. We were explicitely not telling the other one what we were up to. First we were both a bit unsure if our characters can work together and we found out, it is not terrible. We have different classes and backgrounds and personalities... and sharing the same niche can give you a lot of synergy effects.

2 sneaky characters can support each other on a recon mission. 2 ranged characters can help each other laying waste to enemies before they reach the rest of the party.

 

[Kalshane]

Ugh. Halfling gunslinger. Hadn't even considered that. Practically eliminates the chance of a misfire.

 

[zymurgy65]

Ugh. Halfling gunslinger. Hadn't even considered that. Practically eliminates the chance of a misfire.

The DM has said that if he rolls a 1 he then has to roll a d6, with a 1, 2, or 3 still resulting in a misfire. Also, he's applying the heavy weapon rule to the "bad news" rifle, something Matt Mercer should've done to begin with.