Getting bored by your Character (Or: What to do with a S&B Champion?)

[Wasp]

Hi everyone

I have recently talked to a relatively new player who said they were incredibly bored by their character mechanically, both inside and outside combat.

They are playing a Basic Human Outlander Background Champion Fighter (Duelist Fighting Style) at level 5 fighting with a longsword and shield. They like roleplaying the character (even though their character's family was killed by Orcs, but hey, that's a phase most people go through) but feel they can't really do interesting stuff in combat except hit things and outside combat they can't really contribute much when interacting with NPCs or explorig/investigating (their skills are Acrobatics, Animal Handling, Athletics and Survival)

Which lead me to think about two questions:

1) What do you do in general if you get bored by a character (mechanically)? Do you just switch characters? Try to convince the DM to retroactively change class features, skills, feats? Take the character in a new direction on level-up?

2) What would you recommend to do in this case? How would you go on about "fixing" this problem? The main issue seems to be that they want to have more and more interesting options in combat than just whom to hit. Would you recommend to multiclass (their attributes at lvl 5 are STR 18, DEX 16; CON 16; INT 10; WIS 11; CHA 10)? Try to change class or subclass? Start over with a different character?

I would love to hear your opinions!

[Mastikator]

Tasha's has rules for changing subclass. I'd start with that. A 5th level Eldritch Knight would have 4 spells known and 2 of those could be utility spells off the wizard spell list. Battle master has skill maneuvers. Rune knights have runes. I think those are the most mechanically interesting/versatile. Echo knight has tons of shenanigans if you're creative/willing to exploit object interaction rules.

[Chaos Jackal]

1) Typically, I don't like changing characters mid-game outside of death. Depending on the game, wholly new characters might be difficult to fit into the adventure or the party (it's the same reason why I am often reluctant, both as a player and as a DM, to accept a new player in a progressing campaign).

Keeping the same character but switching around the class, subclass etc. is less of an issue in my opinion, but not something to be done more than once, maybe twice in the entire length of a game, and the longer the game has been going for, the less radical the changes. If someone's been playing something for 2-3 sessions and are unsatisfied, sure, change everything; if we're talking 20-30 sessions, it'll probably be less pronounced to keep consistency, because it would feel... weird to have someone suddenly beginning to cast spells or do maneuvers. And well, if it happens more than once or twice in the length of a game, then you might as well just keep 3-4 characters in reserve and bring whichever one you feel like every session at that point; part of sticking to a campaign is making a character evolve both in the fluff and the crunch, not just switching everything whenever you feel bored. If anything, it's unfair to the rest of the party if someone's switching their character around every ten sessions.

2) The above being said, in this specific case I'd probably allow for at least a partial reroll. Keep the same character, possibly keep the same class, definitely allow for a change in subclass. Two reasons for this.

First, it seems to be relatively early in the game, in addition to the player being new. They're trying stuff, and the game itself probably hasn't settled either. So some changes, especially if the class and character stay the same and only the subclass differs, aren't going to be too disruptive or feel out of place. In this particular case, there's even less issue in that regard, since, unless they change their whole class (which I don't recommend) they won't lose anything. Without feats, Champions just attack. Nothing else. With a different subclass they'll still attack; they'll just have learned some new tricks.

Second, we're talking Champion, one of the supposed beginner-friendly subclasses which, however, outside of being weak, is also a trap in the beginner-friendly aspect. Many new players feel intimidated and pick such a simplistic and dull subclass or have it recommended to them, only to quickly find out that the game in general isn't actually all that difficult and that they now have a character which, mechanically, is little more than a statline. And they naturally grow frustrated with that. A Champion really is just the basic rules, for the most part.

So, I'd support giving them the option to try at least a different subclass. Let them stick to their sword-and-board since they chose that path, but also have the option to do something other than stab people. Have them play the frontline commander via Battle Master and their maneuvers. Or augment their attacks with spells through Eldritch Knight. Or add some extra story layers alongside a few tricks for both combat and out of combat with Rune Knight.

Depending on the new subclass, you can have a small side story with a giant's cave or some training sessions with a mage for the character or something, to explain why they don't just swing their longsword and nothing else anymore, or it can just be handled in a similar way to levelling; picked up new tricks during our last battles, wanna see me trip that orc with my sword?

It's early enough I think, and there's nothing lost if three levels of Champion, of all things, are replaced. Go for a switch. Just make it clear that this isn't something to be done lightly every few sessions; they'll have to learn to live with a character long-term if they wanna tag along for a campaign of some duration.

[Leon]

New player, absolutely let them change the class up with no hassles.

[Sandeman]

I would just make a new charachter from scratch and talk to the DM on how to manage the switch in the campaign.
You play the game to have fun and if the game isnt fun, you change things.

[tokek]

A new player should always be allowed to re-spec their character to have more fun. If they like the character but not the rules this is the way to go. Having said that the Fighter is a bit of a build-your-own-bear class with all their feats so that is an option. Champion fighter is clearly designed as the super simple stripped down fighter subclass, it only suits players who want that level of simplicity.

Least change to most :

Use Feats to add more interest to the character instead of just pushing for more combat efficiency. There are a whole collection of feats which add magical tricks or extra skills and expertise, a 5th level fighter can take one at 6th and another at 8th and could retrospectively switch around to have taken one at 4th.

Change subclass. Personally I love Echo Knight or Rune Knight for their flexibility but I would strongly recommend this player also look at Eldritch Knight and Battle Master. They all have a lot more moving parts than Champion fighter and all can have out of combat utility that Champion does lack. Easy to RP as the character learning a new way of fighting - add in an NPC mentor and you are good to go.

Multiclass. This might require changing around ability scores and it can begin to impact the core concept of the character. Also its quite complex for a new player.

Change class. If Fighter was just a mistake then you can switch to one of the half-caster classes without missing a beat in terms of character. Paladin is an easy pick for sword and board but ranger is playable too and just has a different emphasis (I find rangers have more to do outside combat than Paladins since Tasha's came out)

[Unoriginal]

Aside from what was said about respeccing, maybe the player would enjoy taking a Feat outside their usual routine at level 6?

Telepathy or Telekinesis can do wonder to mix things up for a Champion.

[MrStabby]

Oh goodness, let them change.

Its a game. For fun.

Sure consistancy helps and all and this isn't to decry the value of all those other things but if someone isn't having fun - help them change.

If they were new and had a character with the training wheels on, then all the more reason to change and to support them.

[LudicSavant]

2) What would you recommend to do in this case? How would you go on about "fixing" this problem? The main issue seems to be that they want to have more and more interesting options in combat than just whom to hit. Would you recommend to multiclass (their attributes at lvl 5 are STR 18, DEX 16; CON 16; INT 10; WIS 11; CHA 10)? Try to change class or subclass? Start over with a different character?

I would love to hear your opinions!

Let them respec to a more mechanically interesting build. A different subclass like Rune Knight or Eldritch Knight, for instance. The game even has some suggestions for justifying this storywise.

[Dienekes]

In my experience things like narrative consistency is something that only a fraction of us actually care about especially when it comes to the player characters.

So ask yourself a question. Does allowing them to change their class/subclass improve someone’s enjoyment? Does it actually hurt anyone else’s enjoyment, more than just that strange gut feeling people get that it “shouldn’t be that way!”?

[Unoriginal]

In my experience things like narrative consistency is something that only a fraction of us actually care about especially when it comes to the player characters.

So ask yourself a question. Does allowing them to change their class/subclass improve someone’s enjoyment? Does it actually hurt anyone else’s enjoyment, more than just that strange gut feeling people get that it “shouldn’t be that way!”?

Also respeccing can be done narratively.

[paladinn]

While multiclassing is very optional (and in some cases discouraged) in 5e, it could be very useful in this case. This is an opportunity to bring in some interesting things in-game. Have an entity of some sort make an offer to the character and bring in a few warlock levels. The pact idea lends itself to this more than some other classes do.

If you don't want to go full MC, there are ideas in Tasha's about mixing things up. If none of that catches the player's fancy, there are a few "minor" class ideas on Dandwiki that I'm looking into. For the cost one one feat, you can get a few basic abilities of a rogue, druid, barbarian or paladin (and probably others with a little work).

Lots of ideas out there; and it's Your game, so do with it as you will!

[J-H]

A 10 Charisma doesn't keep you from interacting with NPCs effectively. It just means that your character isn't unusually persuasive.

The Champion level 7 ability means Acrobatics proficiency is pretty redundant, so I'd swap that to something else like a knowledge or diplomatic skill. Animal Handling may not come up often, either.

Rebuilding is pretty easy. If the player or DM doesn't want to go that route, I suggest taking some feats:
1) the Skilled feat gives expertise in one skill (take Athletics), proficiency in another, and lets him bump a stat by 1. Maybe Wisdom for Insight or something? Eldritch Adept for the invocation giving proficiency in 2 social skills is a decent option as well.
2) Shield Master gives a boost to saves and a reliable shove every round.
3) If he can pick up a warhammer as a reliable magic item, Crusher gives a free knockback every round as well as +1 to a stat.
4) Poisoner has some interesting RP implications, as well as giving the ability to use a bonus action to prep a debuff on his next attack. Depends on having GP and time to craft poisons.

[Yakk]

Draw a line through "Champion" and write in "Battlemaster" on the character sheet.

It is more mechanically complex (at both play time and build time), but it literally does everything narratively the Champion does better.

No need for a story justification even.

(You do need to ask the DM for permission, naturally).

Most other subclasses are best served with an in-game story justification.

[Catullus64]

In the event that this player's DM (which from the wording of your post, I assume is not, you, I think?) isn't willing to let them switch or retcon their character, a few suggestions for how to enjoy combat more with a mechanically basic character:

1. Take a detailed look at the list of actions in combat for ways to break up your attack routine. Sometimes you'll actually contribute more with a well placed Dodge, Grapple, Shove, or Help action than you will with just more damage.

2. Start developing an eye for ways you can use the environment in improvised actions.

3. Pick up and start using items like oil flasks, caltrops, ball bearings, hunting traps, etc; ideally with setup before combat, but in the right circumstances out of combat too.

4. Find an NPC to train them in new Language and Tool proficiencies to round out their value in non-combat sections. Xanathar's Guide provides some great information for how various tool proficiencies can be utilized.

5. Accept that having a mechanically simple build can free up the mental headspace to really swing for the fences with your in-combat roleplaying.

In general, as a DM, I like consistency, and for people to make the best of the choices they've made. If a player isn't having fun with a character, I generally ask them to stick it out for a few more sessions, trying new approaches within the existing character, while I as DM work to alter the game's challenges and scenarios to suit them better; If they do that and still aren't having fun, I give my permission to switch out characters or do mechanical retcons. (Part of the reason for this is simply to give me time to plan and lay groundwork for introducing a new character or making serious changes to an existing one; and if a character is going to be leaving, I prefer to have there be some narrative lead-up to it.)

[GooeyChewie]

Regarding engaging outside of combat, that's more of a roleplay question than a mechanics question. Sure, you don't want to be the one rolling Charisma checks, but you can be the one suggesting plans of action that play to your physical capabilities. And don't forget that anybody can use the Help action, so you can roleplay non-combat interactions that way without actually using your Charisma score.

1. I've never gotten straight up bored with a character, but I have had characters which I felt ended up not meshing well with either the rest of the party or the themes presented in the campaign. In those instances, I've approached the DM about finding an appropriate way to write my existing character out of the campaign and a new, more appropriate character into the campaign. I try to go into such conversations with four major points laid out - why the current character does not fit, why this new character will fit better, a reasonable way to write the old character out, and a reasonable way to write the new character in.

2. In this instance, I agree with those who have said to change subclasses. Champion basically just takes the base Fighter class and makes it a bit more efficient, rather than adding anything mechanically interesting. Let the player pick roll the character into something more interesting and explain it in-universe as the character developing new fighting techniques. Battle Master adds a lot of options without fundamentally changing the character's flavor. Or with a bit more development, almost any other subclass would do, outside of Psi Warrior and Eldritch Knight (on account of the 10 Int, unless the DM also allows an ability score change).

If the DM is open to an ability score adjustment, switching to Rogue or Paladin could also be explained in-character. For Rogue, just say you've been studying how to attack weak spots, but that you've found you need to drop the shield to do it (or take Fighter 1/Rogue 4 and keep the shield) and switch Str and Dex. For Paladin, just say you've found a higher calling and swap Dex and Cha. You might be able to justify a change to Ranger, but I feel like that'd be more difficult to justify.

[KorvinStarmast]

A 10 Charisma doesn't keep you from interacting with NPCs effectively. It just means that your character isn't unusually persuasive. If one takes Persuasion as a skill proficiency, becoming more persuasive tracks with level gain somewhat.

The Champion level 7 ability means Acrobatics proficiency is pretty redundant, so I'd swap that to something else like a knowledge or diplomatic skill. Animal Handling may not come up often, either. I'd offer that choice to change as well.


1) the Skilled feat gives expertise in one skill (take Athletics), proficiency in another, and lets him bump a stat by 1. Maybe Wisdom for Insight or something? Eldritch Adept for the invocation giving proficiency in 2 social skills is a decent option as well.
I am pretty sure that is Skill Expert. {Tasha's} Skilled {PHB} gives proficiency in three skills. (And Prodigy {Xanathar's} was similar but different).

Shield Master gives a boost to saves and a reliable shove every round. My champion used it before and after the nerf, and it was great.

3) If he can pick up a warhammer as a reliable magic item, Crusher gives a free knockback every round as well as +1 to a stat. Wasn't an option for our game, but the one time I've seen it in action it was pretty nice.

FWIW, my level 14 Champion never bored me. He had Defensive and Dueling Fighting styles, was sword and board, had shield master and also had Medium Armor Master and proficiency in Stealth. Half Orc. The only reason I didn't play him further was that the campaign went dormant due to RL hammering the DM pretty hard.

[MoiMagnus]

1) What do you do in general if you get bored by a character (mechanically)? Do you just switch characters? Try to convince the DM to retroactively change class features, skills, feats? Take the character in a new direction on level-up?


It depends on how long I expect the campaign to still last.
+ If we're at 75% of the campaign, I'd probably just accept that I'm bored of the mechanics of the character, and try to vary a little my playstyle, maybe ask for some little changes in my class features and skills, etc.
+ If we're at half of the campaign, I'd make some significant changes by talking with the GM. My current GM is more open to homebrew than to multiclassing, so last time it happened to me I've suggested a few homebrew to my class to make it more interesting, but otherwise I would have went multiclassing to completly change the direction of my character (and I would probably asked to retroactively change some of my previous choices to match better the new direction). I would also shut down the "cautious" part of my playstyle, since I won't feel that bad losing that character. That doesn't mean trying to kill my character, but I will actively look for situations like "HEAD my character gain this cool thing and is now interesting to play, TAIL my character die and I can build a new character interesting to play".
+ If we've just began the campaign, I would talk to my GM about changing of character.

[Sigreid]

At our table we have a rule that you can change your character around any time you want through level 5. It's better than you having a character that you don't like while letting you try a good run at something new.

Beyond that, there are rules for allowing the opportunity to gain new skills and feats to let the player round out there character outside of levelling. Absolutely offer similar opportunities to everyone else, but maybe the champion fighter is recognized by a powerful noble as a potential asset in the future and gets sent to charm school to smooth out those rough edges.

[CTurbo]

I would let them change their character. Swapping to Battlemaster or Eldritch Knight would quickly solve the "in combat" issue. Feats could be taken to solve the out of combat issue.

Skilled and Magic Initiate are the 2 obvious choices for more things to do out of combat. I love Ritual Caster too, but by RAW he has to have 13 Int or Wis to take it.

I'd grab Magic Initiate for Find Familiar plus 2 utility cantrips from the Wizard's list. Minor Illusion and Light maybe so he can see in the dark? Having a familiar automatically increases what he can do and how he interacts. Suddenly he's the party scout too.

His stats fit pretty well with a naked Barbarian if he wanted to drop the armor and take some Barbarian levels. Champion's expanded crit range works well with Reckless Attack.

He could drop +2 Wis at level 6 and then take 3 levels of Gloom Stalker Ranger which is incredibly front loaded and gives him darkvision. He could grab Archery Style and suddenly be great at ranged attacks too. Ranger adds a lot of utility as well.

Even 1 level of Cleric opens up a whole new world of options.

[Joe the Rat]

Draw a line through "Champion" and write in "Battlemaster" on the character sheet.

It is more mechanically complex (at both play time and build time), but it literally does everything narratively the Champion does better.

No need for a story justification even.

(You do need to ask the DM for permission, naturally).

Most other subclasses are best served with an in-game story justification.
Battle Master has an immediate punch, and there are a LOT of options, especially post-Tasha. There are even noncombat maneuvers. Samurai would be easy to swap as well. You could also switch to Psi Warrior with a little in-game awakening - it's not this is what you trained, but your psychic powers manifest after *vague handwave*.

But absolutely let them respec - if you need to justify larger shifts, arrange a little downtime to let them "learn the new stuff".

If they're really enjoying what Champ does do (it happens), then as others have pointed out the next Feat gives them an opportunity to grab some additional variations. Slasher isn't as much fun as Crusher, but it's there. Shield Master is fun and useful. I'd recommend a multiclass, but the ones I'd recommend require a bit more in the mental stat department. Instead, I'd look to one of the caster feats - Magic Initiate or Artificer Initiate for the xBlade cantrips (it's a lateral move in terms of action, but does give you a bit of flexibility. And at level 6, greenflame is still viable without the casting stat modifer), or one of the planetouched feats (I like Feytouched for misty step - even once a day, that's a big boost on mobility).

[paladinn]

Unlike many here, I am Not of the opinion that Battlemaster needs to be the "basic" fighter option. Not everyone wants to make D&D into a tactical exercise. Simplicity is a good thing, especially for beginning players.

That said, there are some Battlemaster maneuvers which are not overly tactical. I'm thinking Brace, Parry, Riposte, Precision Attack and Sweeping Attack. The last really reminds me of the Cleave feat, which was awesome for "plain fighters". I'd recommend taking a feat to get some of these; or I wouldn't think that swapping out L3 Improved Critical for only the L3 Combat Superiority would be game breaking. And 3 maneuvers and 4 superiority dice could make a big difference in a player's experience.

[Yakk]

Unlike many here, I am Not of the opinion that Battlemaster needs to be the "basic" fighter option. Not everyone wants to make D&D into a tactical exercise. Simplicity is a good thing, especially for beginning players.

That said, there are some Battlemaster maneuvers which are not overly tactical. I'm thinking Brace, Parry, Riposte, Precision Attack and Sweeping Attack. The last really reminds me of the Cleave feat, which was awesome for "plain fighters". I'd recommend taking a feat to get some of these; or I wouldn't think that swapping out L3 Improved Critical for only the L3 Combat Superiority would be game breaking. And 3 maneuvers and 4 superiority dice could make a big difference in a player's experience.
Sure, but the Champion player in question is bored of the character's mechanics.

BM adds more complicated mechanics and can keep the same story.

Brace/Riposte/Precision and a single one that deals extra damage on a hit (Distracting Strike isn't bad) is a complete set of damage moves. You don't need the full set.

If you use Brace/Riposte when you don't have disadvantage, and use Precision when you miss by 1 or 2, and the extra damage one only on a crit, you get a slightly more complex to play Champion that fights better. Only slightly!

From there you can swap in more tactically complex options and out-of-combat options.

[Lokishade]

New Player used the most vanilla class to learn the game and now wants to sink his teeth into something more consistent. Let him.

DnD 5e is basically a superhero game at this point, meaning any character you see in media can be roughly translated in the game. Find a cool concept with him that will stick longer.

But if he insists on making his S&B Champion Fighter work, don't be afraid to buff the class a little. Since the PHB, WotC clearly released more powerful options. If the Samurai subclass gets a Wis save at level 7, at least give the Champion a Dex save at that level.

Don't be afraid to allow New Player to respec as a Variant Human to get Shield Master if he doesn't have that. He'll feel dang cool when he shrugs off the many save-or-suck dex based attacks of the game or completely negate a freaking Fireball on his person.

I'd go as far as allowing the shove prone bonus attack with the shield before launching regular attacks. I mean, if you can swing with your right hand and bash with your left, you should do so in whatever order you see fit, right? Would it break the game that much? Especially post-Tasha?

What makes or breaks a Champion Fighter is the feats he takes. Healer can drastically alter New Player's role in the fight by making him a secondary support healer who can respond to emergencies in the thick of battle. Sentinel gives more battlefield control. Heavy Armor Master grants tons of durability against multiple small critter.

In the next 3 levels, a Fighter will get 2 ASIs. That's enough customization to make any class more interesting to play in combat.

[Mnemnosyne]

If a player is really not having fun, they should be able to change things. This should be worked on to be made as consistent as possible with current play, whether that be via retiring the existing character and bringing in a new one, or otherwise, but the player isn't having fun - something needs to change, this is absolutely always the case.

...except when it's not: some players like to keep switching characters repeatedly, to the point where the revolving door of characters gets problematic. There might be ways to actually work with this, though! If it can be worked in to where it's not disruptive, great. One possible example: The other players could have a contract with a mercenary company or something similar that sends the revolving door player along with them to fulfill their contract. New character just means the company sent a different person along. But if it is disruptive, and it usually will be, then that's problematic.

But even exceptions have exceptions, and new players are an exception. If the player is new to D&D and they're not having fun with their character, they need the opportunity to change to see if they can find something more fun, and they may have to go through several, very different characters, to find their playstyle. Someone who doesn't have years of experience doesn't really know what archetype they're actually going to enjoy playing; what they first imagine as 'the kind of character I want to play' may be wildly incorrect once they actually have some experience with the system, but they need to actually play a number of characters to figure out what they do want.

[JNAProductions]

I would just make a new charachter from scratch and talk to the DM on how to manage the switch in the campaign.
You play the game to have fun and if the game isnt fun, you change things.

This. Or something similar, at least-it's good to have narrative consistency and all that, but the game is meant to be fun. Focus on that.

Figure out what will be the most fun for the table, and do that.

[f5anor]

Which lead me to think about two questions:

1) What do you do in general if you get bored by a character (mechanically)? Do you just switch characters? Try to convince the DM to retroactively change class features, skills, feats? Take the character in a new direction on level-up?

2) What would you recommend to do in this case? How would you go on about "fixing" this problem? The main issue seems to be that they want to have more and more interesting options in combat than just whom to hit. Would you recommend to multiclass (their attributes at lvl 5 are STR 18, DEX 16; CON 16; INT 10; WIS 11; CHA 10)? Try to change class or subclass? Start over with a different character?!


Multi-class
Multi-class straight into Barbarian, or use your ASI to increase your Wisdom and them go for Cleric, Druid or Ranger.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

1) I'd let them largely guide the process. In saying that mostly when I'm done with a character I just want out completely, which doesn't seem like the case here. So I'd...

2a) Multiclass. Barbarian and Rogue work. Some of the Rogue classes would really work well and the player would have a lot of options to interact with the exploration aspect of the game.
2b) Multiclass with a little attribute manipulation. Int, Chr, or Wis likely needs to come up to go into a full caster class, and the character doesn't need high Dex and Str, so allow a little leeway. Ftr 5 is a good jumping off point for some solid gish builds.
2c) Change subclasses. Though, to me, this is the least believable as the player and character have already played a Champion.

[Kane0]

2) What would you recommend to do in this case? How would you go on about "fixing" this problem? The main issue seems to be that they want to have more and more interesting options in combat than just whom to hit. Would you recommend to multiclass (their attributes at lvl 5 are STR 18, DEX 16; CON 16; INT 10; WIS 11; CHA 10)? Try to change class or subclass? Start over with a different character?


Take a look at the DMG variant action options, and also take advantage of Tashas ability to swap out fighting styles. Fighters get extra ASIs so take a look at what feats look fun and interesting rather than most effective.

If the desire is more immediate, consider asking DM to swap subclass or race to variant human/tashas custom.

[LudicSavant]

Personally, I don't think the Champion's ideal niche is "new players." I think the Champion's ideal niche is "players who enjoy the eighth kind of fun on this list. (https://theangrygm.com/gaming-for-fun-part-1-eight-kinds-of-fun/)"

For a player who enjoys tactical depth, I would not recommend a Champion no matter how new they were... even if they also value simplicity. In my mind, the ideal character for such a player is one that starts simple and gradually introduces a variety of mechanics to the game at a comfortable pace (something the Champion doesn't really do, it never encourages you to expand your horizons), and also one that does not "lock in" early mistakes much (the Champion is actually not so hot in that regard, either).

[Thunderous Mojo]

If TCoE options are on the table, swapping out the Dueling Fighting Style for Interception of Superior Technique can help change their action patterns.

Does the Player use Grapples, Readied Actions or Disarm Actions?

If not a DM tutorial might be in order.

Also, dropping in a Magic Item might also help the Player do more things outside of combat.

In my own experience, a disinterested, Sword and Board, Champion Fighter whom was never interested in exploration, or going first...became quite keen to explore once they received a Sentinel Shield.

[Mastikator]

Another thing for your player is to let them change from standard human to variant human. There are a lot of feats to read but some of them do offer interesting mechanical interactions.

[JLandan]

As a DM, the goal is to make the game fun. If it's not fun for a PC or the whole group, you gotta fix what's broke.

Champion is a great learning class, but unless you're really into it, it's the easiest class to get bored with. Now that the player has learned, time to step up.

I would suggest retiring the character and making a new one. Maybe not something too complex, but something intermediate to learn more and maybe totally different to get even more experience playing. Then advance to a more advanced character the next time.

Kinda like when characters gain experience and advance.

[paladinn]

Makes one wonder how/why people played fighters in 0e, 1e and B/X. No subclasses, no real multiclassing (for humans), no real features beyond hitting better and harder.

[Mastikator]

Makes one wonder how/why people played fighters in 0e, 1e and B/X. No subclasses, no real multiclassing (for humans), no real features beyond hitting better and harder.

The alternative was Vancian spell casting. *shudders*

[Thunderous Mojo]

Makes one wonder how/why people played fighters in 0e, 1e and B/X. No subclasses, no real multiclassing (for humans), no real features beyond hitting better and harder.

There was concurrent multi-classing, and Unearthed Arcana introduced Weapon Specialisation....which granted 3 Attacks for every 2 rounds at 1st level for a single class Fighter.

High 18/01+ Strength could add +8 damage or more to each hit from the ability score modifier alone, and Hit Point totals were much lower.

A 18th level Wizard might only have 25 Hit Points, which a Fighter could deplete very quickly.

AD&D gave out loot....Sentient Magic Swords with spell like powers, Magic Armor, a Keep with a small army of Hirelings, all of these, (and more), were expected features for a Fighter around 9th+ Level.

[paladinn]

The alternative was Vancian spell casting. *shudders*

That's why I adapt 5e spellcasting even for OSR games

[Dienekes]

Makes one wonder how/why people played fighters in 0e, 1e and B/X. No subclasses, no real multiclassing (for humans), no real features beyond hitting better and harder.

I played casters.*

I mean hell. Even in 5e, aesthetically I vastly prefer warriors. But through my time playing the system my favorite time playing the game has been the Druid. There is very little about the classes fantasy I like. But mechanically? Pretty great.

* Also why there was a lot of often pretty terrible homebrew flying around that tried to add depth to the combat system.

[Chaos Jackal]

Wondering how people managed 1e fighter types is the same as wondering how people managed without the Internet. Or the TV. Or electricity in general.

They did because that's what they had. And many weren't happy about it, which is why they tried to homebrew stuff, or why eventually stuff was added.

Much smaller hobby, both in playerbase and options. Like, is the total number of 1e players back then bigger or smaller than the total number of players who used a Champion for more than five levels in 5e?

If all you have is a couple bad options, you take one of the two bad options and make better options yourself, or you wait for better options to be released. If you have a couple bad options and three or four much better ones, why would you not want to take one of the much better ones once you realize the first couple are bad?

And being bored by a Champion is natural. The class has nothing to distinguish it mechanically. Unless you were aware of a Champion's ability scores, the only way to tell someone's a Champion is if they double their damage dice on a 19. Otherwise, they roll attacks. They roll skills. They add numbers to those rolls. Then they repeat.

We're no longer in the era of 1e fighting types, and someone who expects more from a roleplaying game than the most basic interactions can luckily find things to do in that regard.

[Joe the Rat]

Makes one wonder how/why people played fighters in 0e, 1e and B/X. No subclasses, no real multiclassing (for humans), no real features beyond hitting better and harder.

Broadly?
- Best survivability (d8/d10 for hit points, best armor options, good save progression)
- reliable hitting when things go south (best attack matrix, more likely to have positive modifiers, best weapon arrays)
- Most likely to be in charge of combat hirelings; best combat followers.

But I am a more Thief-oriented.

Keep in mind that this was the era of use your head, try stuff, be smart. Not having a lot of fight options is fine if fighting is on the low end of game priorities - surviving with the loot is what gets you advancement

[Wasp]

Thank you everyone for the feedback! It's not a player in my game but I have talked to them about some of the things you all suggested (for example switching to Variant Human or a different Subclass and the feat options or just changing characters) and I will talk to them again over the weekend, maybe I'll have an update for you soon what they decided to do!

Again, thanks for all the different answers, very much appreciated!

[adb82]

Probably not for new players and not for big groups, but you can give them an helper, another pg (1/2/3 lv weaker, or whatever level you think is right, than their character). Of course this force the DM to change some combats and situations that he may already have prepared, but using a martial and a caster (for exemple) couple lv weaker should let they go out from boring mechanics.

[Easy e]

I am someone who plays a lot of mechanically simple martial characters. Here are some thoughts. If they enjoy role-playing the character, but are bored with their mechanics; then I recommend bringing more role-play to the game, and focus less on the mechanical parts of the game.

For example, champion fighters often are asked to just "Hit it with a stick". Instead, try to get creative with what you are trying to do with your attack such as called shots, entangling, knock downs, grappling, using the terrain, etc. What would the character do instead of just "merking" a foe? Would they try to scare them away with threats, over-awe them with a fancy maneuver, take mercy on a lesser foe, use terrain creatively, etc.

Also, this player should really get into how they interact with the objects and terrain around them for more "cinematic" action in their games. For example, use their acrobatics to roll over a table and attack, or something like that. Really look for ways to use their skills in combat that is innovative and interesting. Again, why would their character do something other than walk up to someone and hit them with a "big stick"? What would it look like in the movie version? If the DM doesn't have interesting settings for combat, make them up and proceed until halted.

Finally, the player should do everything they possibly can to avoid getting into mechanical situations, and instead focus on the part of the game they like; role-playing. Therefore, it they encounter a foe, do not attack; try to do something else like reason with it, bribe it, make friends with it, challenge it to a somersault contest, try to calm it with animal handling, etc. Make fighting only a single tool in your tool kit, and focus on role-play instead. It does not matter if you are bad at it, sometimes it is better if you ARE bad at it.

When they do get into mechanical interactions, they should bring role-play to their decision making and not always do the "Most efficient thing". It is their character, so they can have them do what they want to do; even if it is not always the "best" thing to do. Maybe instead of attacking twice with their sword, they will pull the rug out from under their foe first to get them prone, and then follow up by smashing a nearby chair over them instead? Much cooler and more fun than "I attack!".

Just some ideas that do not involve changing up the mechanics. Martials can be fun, but require a less mechanically focused mind set to them.

[Psyren]

Yeah as a Champion, I would definitely try to do more "skilly" stuff in combat that makes use of Remarkable Athlete (or Athletics/Acrobatics if I have both of those.)

But I also agree with the folks saying that if the player is starting to feel bored and wants to take the "training wheels" off, using Tasha's to swap out of Champion to something more complex like Battlemaster, Echo Knight or Rune Knight is perfectly valid.

[Dr.Samurai]

Hi everyone

I have recently talked to a relatively new player who said they were incredibly bored by their character mechanically, both inside and outside combat.

They are playing a Basic Human Outlander Background Champion Fighter (Duelist Fighting Style) at level 5 fighting with a longsword and shield. They like roleplaying the character (even though their character's family was killed by Orcs, but hey, that's a phase most people go through) but feel they can't really do interesting stuff in combat except hit things and outside combat they can't really contribute much when interacting with NPCs or explorig/investigating (their skills are Acrobatics, Animal Handling, Athletics and Survival)
To your player's concerns directly:

1. Sword and Shield can be tough because it is difficult to interact with things. Neither hand is free, so it limits what you can do apart from swing your longsword and bear your shield. I mostly mention this because Grappling can be a very fun way to interact with enemies. There are enemies that benefit from skirmishing type maneuvers, or from burrowing, or that do better at a distance, and if you can grab them and lock them down, you can have a big impact on the encounter.

2. For your part, consider using the variant combat options in the DMG. Allowing the fighter to cleave through enemies, overrun targets, shove them aside, disarm weapons, and climb onto larger enemies can open up your player's options and creativity each combat.

3. For your player, they are about to hit level 6, and can either boost an ability score or grab a feat. I'm not sure which books you all have access to, but there are plenty of feats out there can make combat and out of combat more interesting. Can you provide some more information on your game? Ability scores for the fighter, what the other players are playing, what books you have available, etc.

Which lead me to think about two questions:

1) What do you do in general if you get bored by a character (mechanically)? Do you just switch characters? Try to convince the DM to retroactively change class features, skills, feats? Take the character in a new direction on level-up?
I think having a conversation with the DM is definitely a must.

In my game, I looked at the upcoming levels for my barbarian and didn't like what I saw coming. My character has, in-game, been transforming from a simple hunter of the plainslands to a sort of avenger of those harmed by devils, and someone that now sees himself as a guardian of the mortal realm from fiendish manipulation. So I spoke with my DM and we both agreed that Paladin would not only fit character wise, but also give me some things to do when I'm not raging, and add some synergistic abilities as well.

2) What would you recommend to do in this case? How would you go on about "fixing" this problem? The main issue seems to be that they want to have more and more interesting options in combat than just whom to hit. Would you recommend to multiclass (their attributes at lvl 5 are STR 18, DEX 16; CON 16; INT 10; WIS 11; CHA 10)? Try to change class or subclass? Start over with a different character?

I would love to hear your opinions!
Whoops, just realized I was already answering this question above.

I think speak to the player about the variant options and see if that might make combat more interesting to them. Go over feats and see if anything calls out to them as well. Tasha's allows a variant rule for fighters to switch their Fighting Style whenever they gain an Ability Score Increase. So next level they can grab the Martial Adept feat and switch out their Fighting Style to Superior Technique for 3 Maneuvers known and 2 Superiority Dice that refresh on a short rest.

If the player is looking at other subclasses and feeling like they chose very underwhelming choice, then I would strongly consider letting them switch subclasses. If it is the class, I would allow that as well. In my game, the arcane caster started out as a sorcerer, and about three levels in, spoke with the DM and told him he just wasn't having fun with the character. He has since switched to a Bladesinging Wizard and loves it much more.

In-game, before the change happened, he started studying the scrolls and books we had been finding, and training in weapon combat with my barbarian. So he forsook hi natural arcane gifts and instead devoted himself to study.

I wouldn't be afraid to let this stuff happen; the reason to come to the table each session is to have fun.

[Magicspook]

Champion is so incredibly bland no-one will notice it's gone. It will probably feel like the player was stuck at level 2 for a while but now finally has a sibclass and has caught up with the party. Just let em switch man.

[Wasp]

So in conclusion: They are going to respec as an Eldritch Eldritch Knight, move from human to vhuman, jigger around attributes based on that a little and drop animal handling and acrobatics for perception and maybe a social/inestigation skill. They have discussed this with their DM and the two of them will work together to create some kind of "awakening" for the character in the next session.

Thanks a lot for all your feedback!

[Psyren]

So in conclusion: They are going to respec as an Eldritch Eldritch Knight, move from human to vhuman, jigger around attributes based on that a little and drop animal handling and acrobatics for perception and maybe a social/inestigation skill. They have discussed this with their DM and the two of them will work together to create some kind of "awakening" for the character in the next session.

Thanks a lot for all your feedback!

Excellent! Glad to hear it.

As EK is considerably more complex than Champion, I recommend the player check out a handbook or youtube guide to building one. Shield and Absorb Elements are great initial choices for example.

[KorvinStarmast]

Don't be afraid to allow New Player to respec as a Variant Human to get Shield Master if he doesn't have that. He'll feel dang cool when he shrugs off the many save-or-suck dex based attacks of the game or completely negate a freaking Fireball on his person. It worked that way for a while, Crawford's back pedal was pathetic, as was the chorus of martial haters who claimed that it was OP/bad/etc. As far as thematics, the whole point is to add a bonus action and to fight with as well as protect with that shield.

Also: This Is Sparta! :smallbiggrin: (Apologies to Gerard Butler)

[Ulsan Krow]

Who does allowing a new player to change their class hurt? What does not allowing the change benefit?

Being a stickler for the rules to the detriment of someone new is incredibly slack. 5e is intended to be an extremely flexible game anyway, and for this reason - outside of balance concerns (which itself is generally a concern because it reduces overall enjoyment for other players), being able to do cool and fun things to improve the enjoyment of the game should take precedence. Because it's a first time affair too, it's not as though even by principle this is somebody who made their bed and now has to lie in their crappy Champion adventure. Let them have a good time, and noone else is going to have an awful time in comparison if he gets to play something a little more interactive.

Subclass swap would probably be ideal as it wouldn't mess with the party composition and would take very little time to redo the whole Character Creation thing.



I would ask the player what kind of interactivity and flavor they'd want. Battlemaster and Champion flavor go pretty hand in hand to be honest, at the end of the day its more of a mechanical difference - thematically they're both 'fighters who fight even more good' and the difference is Champion is passive and Battlemaster is active.

If he just wants more active play - pick Battlemaster.

If he wants to dabble in magic - does he want a bit of access to the sort of magic as he's seen the spellcasters use? Eldritch Knight. Does he just want magical powers without the hassle of the spellcasting system? Rune Knight.

Cavalier, Samurai, Arcane Archer, PDK, Echo Knight I wouldn't recommend for various reasons. Cavalier, Samurai, PDK are just barely more interactive than Champion, and PDK is also terribly weak. Cavalier is better than the other two however. Arcane Archer doesn't mesh with Sword and Board + the options per rest are too few in number to sustain interest. Echo Knight takes a bit more existing game knowledge to understand + its pretty overpowered.

[Ulsan Krow]

I am someone who plays a lot of mechanically simple martial characters. Here are some thoughts. If they enjoy role-playing the character, but are bored with their mechanics; then I recommend bringing more role-play to the game, and focus less on the mechanical parts of the game.

For example, champion fighters often are asked to just "Hit it with a stick". Instead, try to get creative with what you are trying to do with your attack such as called shots, entangling, knock downs, grappling, using the terrain, etc. What would the character do instead of just "merking" a foe? Would they try to scare them away with threats, over-awe them with a fancy maneuver, take mercy on a lesser foe, use terrain creatively, etc.

Also, this player should really get into how they interact with the objects and terrain around them for more "cinematic" action in their games. For example, use their acrobatics to roll over a table and attack, or something like that. Really look for ways to use their skills in combat that is innovative and interesting. Again, why would their character do something other than walk up to someone and hit them with a "big stick"? What would it look like in the movie version? If the DM doesn't have interesting settings for combat, make them up and proceed until halted.

Finally, the player should do everything they possibly can to avoid getting into mechanical situations, and instead focus on the part of the game they like; role-playing. Therefore, it they encounter a foe, do not attack; try to do something else like reason with it, bribe it, make friends with it, challenge it to a somersault contest, try to calm it with animal handling, etc. Make fighting only a single tool in your tool kit, and focus on role-play instead. It does not matter if you are bad at it, sometimes it is better if you ARE bad at it.

When they do get into mechanical interactions, they should bring role-play to their decision making and not always do the "Most efficient thing". It is their character, so they can have them do what they want to do; even if it is not always the "best" thing to do. Maybe instead of attacking twice with their sword, they will pull the rug out from under their foe first to get them prone, and then follow up by smashing a nearby chair over them instead? Much cooler and more fun than "I attack!".

Just some ideas that do not involve changing up the mechanics. Martials can be fun, but require a less mechanically focused mind set to them.


Feels like this is kind of misrepresenting and skirting around the problem I believe OP's facing here.

The issue isn't that the new player inherently likes roleplaying and dislikes the mechanical experience of the game, its that the new player's mechanical options are so limited that its unenjoyable whereas at least roleplaying is not as limited by the codified features of his class and subclass.


Furthermore, the subclass and mechanics also go hand in hand with roleplaying elements. Being someone with experience in the game and intending and able to apply as much creativity as you can, to a mechanically colorless chassis is a partial remedy to a problem that can be rather easily rectified with an informed subclass switch.

Say the new players picks a rune knight. Now he has the flavor of rune magic, or giant magic if he wishes to tap into the specific background of the subclass, and he can utilise those runic passive features even outside of mechanical scenarios - the character can do interesting things or flavor himself with a penchant for Sleight of Hand and Deception based trickery with the Cloud Rune, or his mastery of tools with the Fire Rune.


Lastly, even if it was a problem of a player who dislikes mechanical gameplay rather than a player who cannot enjoy the mechanical gameplay of the subclass he/she is currently playing, a player choosing to avoid mechanical scenarios is almost always going to carry over to the experience of other players who do want to enjoy the mechanical experience. It'll avoid more hassle for the party in any scenario to give the player a chance to swap to something more fun.

[Easy e]

That could be it too.

I am emphasizing that the player liked RPing the character, but did not enjoy the mechanics of combat that the OP stated. Perhaps a different emphasize then you were looking at, and that's OK.

To me, this whole thread and the advice leans heavily into this boards bias', and sometimes looking at the issue with a different lens can be helpful to the OP. Other times, it isn't helpful.

[Ulsan Krow]

That could be it too.

I am emphasizing that the player liked RPing the character, but did not enjoy the mechanics of combat that the OP stated. Perhaps a different emphasize then you were looking at, and that's OK.

To me, this whole thread and the advice leans heavily into this boards bias', and sometimes looking at the issue with a different lens can be helpful to the OP. Other times, it isn't helpful.

Hmm, while I often agree, I don't feel as though the forum is being biased in this circumstance at all - because it feels rather clear to me that the issue is not one of perspective. See this OP text:


but feel they can't really do interesting stuff in combat except hit things and outside combat they can't really contribute much when interacting with NPCs or explorig/investigating

This is the issue the new player is having mechanically. Their opinion is that their current options are limited and few in combat, and noncontributive/weak outside of it. Not only is this not an issue of overall preference of RP over mechanical content, it also isn't a problem that can be solved by flavoring existing options while the mechanical output remains the same.

[kazaryu]

Hi everyone

I have recently talked to a relatively new player who said they were incredibly bored by their character mechanically, both inside and outside combat.

They are playing a Basic Human Outlander Background Champion Fighter (Duelist Fighting Style) at level 5 fighting with a longsword and shield. They like roleplaying the character (even though their character's family was killed by Orcs, but hey, that's a phase most people go through) but feel they can't really do interesting stuff in combat except hit things and outside combat they can't really contribute much when interacting with NPCs or explorig/investigating (their skills are Acrobatics, Animal Handling, Athletics and Survival)

Which lead me to think about two questions:

1) What do you do in general if you get bored by a character (mechanically)?
well, i would first try to identify what, mechanically, is making me unsatisfied, and why.

for example if the mechanics are mismatched with the roleplay: for example im playing a paladin, but find myself choosing to cast spells more often due to who the character is, i may look into switching to a caster, like a cleric or bard.

if the specific mechanics i chose simply don't do or feel like i expected them to (so like, if i wanted to lay an echo knight so i could effectively be 2 places on the battlefield at once, but then in actual gamelay the mechanics didn't match what i wanted them to feel like, i might redesign the character as a whole. change class/subclass altogether. try to find a mechanical niche i do enjoy (trying to start with as small of changes as possible. so like feats...subclass..class, etc.

point being, identify the problem: look for a solution to what the problem is. there's no real blanket solution IMO.



2) What would you recommend to do in this case? How would you go on about "fixing" this problem? The main issue seems to be that they want to have more and more interesting options in combat than just whom to hit. Would you recommend to multiclass (their attributes at lvl 5 are STR 18, DEX 16; CON 16; INT 10; WIS 11; CHA 10)? Try to change class or subclass? Start over with a different character?!

well, to me it sounds like there are 2 problems, and i'll address them individually.

in combat: i think the most straight forward choice would be to look at different fighter subclasses. battlemaster is great for straight up having different option to add on to the attac action. echoknight's area still suuuuper dependent on the attack action, but have the advantage of being able to mess with positioning to an extent, which might make combat feel more dynamic for him. eldritch knights have spell casting which...i mean for obvious reasons can give you options other than just attacking.

out of combat: first off it sounds like his expectations need managing. noone is going to have access to all skills. if he'd like a bit more to do in all pillars, i might swap a few skills so that i have at least one skill for every pillar. i.e. athletics (combat), perception (combat/explorations), survival (exploration), insight (social). the specifics he can take a look at for what match his character best, but its important that he no expect for his skills to always be relevant. however: just because he's not making a roll doesn't mean he can't be useful. its one of the traps of 5e, the...less than robust ruleset for non-combat encounters means that its easy to feel like only the rules that exist are useful. meaning if you don't have proficiency in a social skill...there's no point in trying to contribute to social encounters. the reality is that you can still contribute. if you want a mechanical way, the 'help' action is one that anyone can do, and provides advantage on a skill check. you don't need to be an expert liar in order to aid in a lie. you don't have to be a genius in order to lend credence to a persuasive argument. I think maybe reoganizing skills and a mentality shift *might* be enough to help in this regard (obviously the above is Super DM dependent. idk how you run your games/non-combat encounters so its entirely possible the above is entirely moot).

IF however, the above isn't something you believe to be viable, then there are changes you can make. multiclassing is tough, the only ones he qualifies for are rogue/barbarian (all others require a 13 in a mental score). but throwing some rogue levels on there is an immediate boost to out of combat engagement, and if he switches to rapier/shield he can still benefit from sneak attack (remember, you don't actually need to roll with dex to sneak attack, you just need to attack with a finesse weapon). and the second level of rogue gives cunning action, which can be a lot of fun to mess around with. However, he might also consider moving ability scores around. Many non-combat skills rely on mental scores anyway, so if he were to move the 16 in dex to...something else it could be a significant boost to his out of combat interactions by itself, while also opening up more multiclass options. like ranger (for ranger he'd need to reorganize a bit more since it needs a 13 in dex), paladin, or even bard. Alternatively, some smaller changes he could make would be to swap out his subclass: runeknights get some boosts to specific skills (imo not 100% sure on specifics, i just know that they do).

as far as what i'd do...i think i'd start with suggesting a subcalss switch to help the combat problem, and have a discussion with them about their expectations for out of combat. if that isn't viable i might suggest moving the 16 dex to cha so he could start taking levels in swords bard (on top of the subclass switch), if the 16 dex is important for the character than a rogue dip can also work.