D&D 5E Class choices that didn't sync well with the campaign.

[Sacrosanct]

So, I had been wanting to play a shadow sorcerer for a while. When I got the chance to be a players that's what I chose.

It was Descent into Avernus.

I found out quickly my choice in class was starting with a handicap. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the character, but the key features of the class are rendered useless when most of the enemies you fight are devils who have devil's sight (rendering your darkness and darkvision features useless), and they all have magic resistance, so while your hound of ill omen helps, it doesn't meet it's goal of imposing disadvantage on your targets saving throws. It just cancels out their normal advantage. Against these types of opponents a support or blaster caster would be better, but a shadow sorcerer is more control via saving throws.

So I'm curious if anyone else had similar experiences. Did you play a class only to find out your class features didn't fit well with the campaign?

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

This is why I allow characters numerous choices as to what adventures they undertake instead of funneling them in one direction. The problem isn't your character; the problem is the railroad format.

If I were you, I'd retire the character and play him/her in a more appropriate setting.

 

[Shiroiken]

I have not, but that's because we discuss the general concept of the campaign in advance. The only time we've had any issues was a player who insisted on playing a wizard in 3E, when we knew we were going to start as slaves. He was all but useless until we recovered his spellbook, but whenever he complained we all reminded him he knew what he was getting into.

We're currently running Avernus, and the bard and wizard are having more difficulty than normal, but that was to be expected. The bard is completely a control character, with a bit of in combat healing, and he just keeps using the spells as normal. The wizard is mostly control, with a touch of blasting, and does the same thing.

 

[TerraDave]

This is why I allow characters numerous choices as to what adventures they undertake instead of funneling them in one direction. The problem isn't your character; the problem is the railroad format.

A DM has to do what a DM has to do.

BUT, especially if you are doing a planned series of adventures, its always good to mix things up. Variety serves many purposes in an ongoing campaign, including allowing all characters to have their moments.

 

[Helldritch]

This is why I allow characters numerous choices as to what adventures they undertake instead of funneling them in one direction. The problem isn't your character; the problem is the railroad format.

If I were you, I'd retire the character and play him/her in a more appropriate setting.

Come on... Railroad format? Is that really all you have to say?
The fun of playing a character is not when he is optimum for the adventure at hand, it is when it has to work against the odds.
His character is perfectly fine. He has to work around the problem by being more than what he is now and strive to find "his" way around Devil Sight. Not all enemies in DiA are devils (though most are) but the shadow sorcerer is not limited to "shadow stuff" either. A shadow sorcerer is still a sorcerer and this means that spell selection can be used to "cover" for the weaknesses.

 

[Coroc]

So, I had been wanting to play a shadow sorcerer for a while. When I got the chance to be a players that's what I chose.

It was Descent into Avernus.

I found out quickly my choice in class was starting with a handicap. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the character, but the key features of the class are rendered useless when most of the enemies you fight are devils who have devil's sight (rendering your darkness and darkvision features useless), and they all have magic resistance, so while your hound of ill omen helps, it doesn't meet it's goal of imposing disadvantage on your targets saving throws. It just cancels out their normal advantage. Against these types of opponents a support or blaster caster would be better, but a shadow sorcerer is more control via saving throws.

So I'm curious if anyone else had similar experiences. Did you play a class only to find out your class features didn't fit well with the campaign?

Hah, that once more proves my grognard dm attitude to limit every selection so that such things among others do not occur.
But even if, like in your case, you go the modern anything goes way, your dm should have discussed your choice upfront with you, and made you aware, that your selection -while he allows it - would be more than suboptimal.

 

[Coroc]

This is why I allow characters numerous choices as to what adventures they undertake instead of funneling them in one direction. The problem isn't your character; the problem is the railroad format.

If I were you, I'd retire the character and play him/her in a more appropriate setting.

That is your solution? Instead of telling players upfront that certain subclasses will not work well with the adventure?
Just to keep unlimited class selection , no matter what?


I mean i do have more time to prep a campaign than maybe some other dms, but i prep one campaign not five, just because player x wants to portray a hobbit ninja turtle in an all-players-should-be-drow- campaign.

 

[akr71]

I don't ever want my players to be unhappy or dissatisfied with their characters. If they mention it to me, we try to find a solution - if the class is underwhelming, maybe we try to home-brew something that is more what they were hoping for. However, switching characters is usually an easier, faster solution. I ask them to save the character and try it in a side game or one shot, which we try to have semi-frequently.

I had one myself in a side game - Roscoe 'Firkin' Goodbarrel the boar riding, halfling cavalier. It turns out, I don't find the cavalier to be very fun to play and there was little to no opportunity to use his mount. Roscoe continued his travels and I started playing a hobgoblin psi-knight instead.

 

[Krachek]

A warlock have plenty occasions to deal and trade with devils, I think it’s a too obvious advantage over other classes.

 

[Oofta]

When planning a new campaign I discuss my upcoming campaign idea(s) and as a group we have a discussion about what types of PCs will fit. Beyond the no evil PCs, don't play a jerk, I also discuss regional considerations and themes. My current campaign is very city focused for example, so that hermit druid who loves the forest may not have been a great fit.

So I give people a heads up on probable direction before they ever commit.

As to the OP, yeah, sometimes the PC's schtick isn't as effective as expected. That doesn't mean they're useless. For example, cancelling out advantage is actually just as useful in many cases (if not more) than gaining advantage for a spellcaster.

In any case, I let players change PCs if they're really dissatisfied as long as they don't abuse the policy. I want people to have fun and don't force them to play something they don't want to play.