D&D General Character Swapping - How Much Player Agency

Clint_L

Legend
We've recently been discussing the degree of story autonomy D&D players should have, in the context of player agency and DM authority. A few days ago, one of my players reached out with an idea to bench their current character for a bit to bring in a new character who is clearly designed to be more specifically involved with another player character's current story arc. I thought his ideas posed some interesting challenges, and am wondering how others might have handled it.

The challenge I specifically wrestled with was how much narrative authority to grant this player, not only over his new character, but over the setting and, most importantly, over another player's character arc. That last part is where I struggled. I think this example really illustrates how, much as we like to give player's character agency, there are often very complex factors that the DM has to manage (i.e. how one player's ideas might impact another player's ideas).

The context: the campaign is about 18 months old. The party started at level 3 and has just hit level 9. The original character is a paladin named Jeremy, the proposed character is a cleric (I think) named Dagen. "Dorg" is the party member whose story arc is most directly impacted. In general, I build my campaign around backstory elements provided by the players at character creation, and then other tidbits they come up with as we go along. And pure luck, to some degree.

Okay [player], here is my more detailed feedback:

For the next session I'd like to propose something. Jeremy is going to pray to the Lawbearer to clean the pool to return it to clean drinking water through leveling up to 9 in the process, using the two slots to cast dispel magic, beacon of hope, bless, and his laying on hands to cleanse the pool. In doing such a ritual, Jeremy receives a vision from the Lawbearer whom send him on a solo, Luke Skywalker, "dagoba" quest to find someone whom provides a quest for him to earn the title Knight. This doesn't need to be played out in session, but could be presumed he does these things and will return to the party at a later time.

Love it! But I think it does need to be played out during game…and Jeremy might fail!

Here’s the plan: we pick up after the battle to save the goblin settlement - obviously a big story moment for [another player's character] Blimmig. Once that shakes down, I’ll cue up the situation with Jeremy - say, the next day, after a long rest and a celebration with Blimmig’s family, etc. We’ll run it as a series of challenge, with opportunities for the other members to give Jeremy support (bardic inspiration, stroke of genius, etc.). If Jeremy succeeds, the pool is cleansed and Jeremy heads off as you say - we can work out details later when it is time for him to return. If he fails, then the pool remains a problem that might crop up again in the future, and now Jeremy’s quest also involves understanding why he failed, still on his way to earning his title.

That'll give the situation some stakes and be much more fun in the game!

IMPORTANT: Before you make your final decision, consider that Jeremy being gone will affect the decisions made by the other party members! Specifically, the current plan was, I believe, for the party to address Dorg’s business in Kraghammer before heading to Vassalheim as Jeremy requested, but without him in the party it is likely they choose to head next to Wildemount, where three characters (Scylla, Elaine, and especially Caius) have significant story developments. That is all up to the players, and we can't say in advance what will happen.


To replace Jeremy while he is off 'leveling up', the group returns to the airship only to find a dwarf sitting on a nearby bolder who introduces himself as Dagen Stoneforge, Father Captain of the All-Father, of the protectors of House Bronzegrip, 2nd of the titles, first of his name, and that he's hear to find a group known better by reputation than by their laughable name. chortling about "the knights of boom stab."

I’m assuming that Dagen is going to be a cleric? Create him at level 9, using fixed hit points, standard array or point buy, and all 5.5e, legacy 5e (non-core) and Critical Role material. Choose up to 1000 gp worth of equipment (non-magical) and keep the remainder as his available money (unless that goes against your character concept - he can be poor if you want!), and choose one uncommon magic item for him. I will choose and add a second, rare, magic item for him in light of his higher level.

Storywise, love the basic concept, but it could use a few tweaks for consistency with the campaign setting and Dorg’s arc. The main, but not exclusive, deity of Kraghammer is Moradin, the All-Hammer (not All-Father). The city is riven between rival factions of xenophobic traditionalists and more inclusive progressives. These aspects are all really important to Dorg’s backstory and character arc.

Haddi Bronzegrip is the head of House Bronzegrip, very wealthy and a potential rival to Dorg’s foil, Lord Nostoc Greyspine. You can determine exactly what the relationship is between her and Dagen.


He'll call out each member, giving honor to those he deems deserves it, but when it comes to Dorg, Dagen will not believe he's the champion whom hase recoved the Moradin's Hammer thinking he's to sickly looking to be the real champion to hold the hammer. saying things like "Are ye cursed?" and case remove curse on him, and saying he needs to beef up to look the part and such.

Whether or to reveal himself as the bearer of the (still dormant) Hammer of Moradin is a big question for [the other player], and something that Dorg has been debating in-game. So we don't want to take that choice away from him. I also think it would be weird intro for your cool new character - how would he know anything about the party at all? They have never been to Kraghammer.

Instead, let’s have Dagen meet the party soon after they get to Kraghammer - the remainder of journey shouldn’t take too long in-game, barring unforeseen events. How about if, again assuming he’s a cleric, he’s had some kind of vision telling him that Dorg is important so that he knows to greet the party shortly after their arrival - maybe he shows up at their inn or something? We’ll have to play this a bit by ear based on what the other players do when they get to the city, but it shouldn’t be hard.

Recall that what happened to Dorg goes far beyond a normal curse and is integral to his backstory, so we aren’t going to erase it with something as simple as a remove curse!


Dagen will ulitmately be resigned to take Dorg as the new champion back to Kraghammer, being his protector, and that of the rest of the party while Jeremy is off leveling up and earning his title. Jeremy can return into the campaign perhaps in a Hutt's Palace type scenario of some sort.

Thoughts?

I think you have to have a conversation with [the other player] about any potential relationship between your new character and his, as it directly affects his character and story. It strikes me as a bit odd to frame Dagen as Dorg’s “protector,” given that Dorg is a powerful warrior! Maybe more like an advisor? You guys can work it out.

As for Jeremy…the manner of his return will heavily depend on future events! And those will heavily depend on the future choices all of you make, and the luck of the dice, so who knows? I’m looking forward to finding out!
Thoughts?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Not to my knowledge, and yes, I too felt it was pretty presumptuous and was trying to gently get him to consider the implications. Fortunately, they are brothers-in-law, so they can have a conversation about it.

This is an issue when we discuss how much player agency should be allowed - it's not just potential tension with the DM's campaign ideas, but other players' characters and ideas that need to be considered. This is why sometimes the DM needs to say "no," as I gently did with a couple of this player's suggestions.
 

Looks to me like you're handling things and redirecting him pretty well. I gotta wonder if there's some gentle upmanship or hazing going on between bro-in-laws.
 

I'd give Dorg's player a heads up and have a quick discussion with him first before Dagen's player talks to him to get his buy-in. Then it probably set it up so the three of us can discuss details. Not that you have to lead or have much input into anything, more to make sure both players are okay with everything and that the lore they come up with is correct (since Dagen's player made a goof or two).

But other than that what you did was pretty much how I would handle it. I don't know all the dynamics of the party but I also have no issue with these kind of changes.
 

I'd probably be pissed if I was Dorg's player, and hard no on the storyline Dagen's player is trying to inflict on me. I don't mind another player asking me to be involved in his story, but another player trying to get the DM to make my character subservient (ordering me to go back to a city) and inferior to him (he's my 'protector' like I'm not strong enough) moves into very not-OK behavior for me. It could be a cool idea with buy-in, but Dagen is making it extremely uncool.
 

I'm pretty confident that the player didn't do any of that intentionally, though. So I'm sure we can work it out. The other player is my brother-in-law, as well, so we'll all have a conversation.

I think I handled it fine, for my campaign and our relationships, though I am always open to good suggestions. The broader issue is interesting to me and why I posted this: as a DM, how do you handle competing player claims to story agency?

Here the player crossed a couple lines, for me. For example, they suggested using "remove curse" to basically hand wave a key element of another player's story. I've had this happen before - one player had created a blind character, another player insisted that he should be allowed to just "fix" it with greater restoration, and was angry that I said "no."

What do you do when players start to impinge on each other's characters?
 

Players can always come up with backstories and motivations, but I get final say on any changes to the world. If I ever think player 1 is stepping on another player 2's toes I'll make sure it's okay with player 2. While I try to avoid it, I'll call a timeout during the game if I think its important enough. Sometimes it means I'm a mediator between the two sides because I don't want anyone put into the situation where they feel like they are being forced to comply.
 

Yeah, this new cleric needs to have his shtick okayed not just by the GM, but the other player(s) involved.
 

I feel like this is similar, though not exact, to a player A wanting their PC to be related or connected to player B's PC during character creation. The difference is, it would be session 0, and you as DM would probably just say, "I don't know, that is up to player B."

You seem to be doing all the right things. And while it is nice that the player wants to be invested in another player's story, you are correct, it kind of gives them control over another player's character arc. And that is an interesting thought. I mean, as a DM, we control character arcs quite a bit. But our preference is probably to always lean on the side of the "player."

As for intentionally "inflicting" their choice on the player, their proposal (at least to me) seemed genuine and harmless.
 

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top