[4E] I need help dealing with my brother.

[Lupy]

Hi guys, thanks ahead of time for the help.

My gaming group (I am the DM) consists of 4 good friends of mine (ages 14-18)... And my 11 year old brother. My brother originally played because we needed a fifth player, but now with college over for our Warlock, we have 5 again without him. I know he really likes playing though, so I'm not kicking him out, rather the issue is that when he first started, he picked the wrong class. He picked fighter, and hated it, so I told him that just once he could make a new character, but that he had to be a leader if he switched. He begged and begged, but I told him it was Leader or nothing, so he picked Warlord. A few months later I PHB2 came out, and I told the group that they can switch classes (even my brother) as long as:

A) No one else is already playing that class
B) Every role is filled

It seems fair to me. So anyways, today my brother was writing a new character bio, and when I asked him what he was doing, he said working on his new character. I reminded him that these aren't new characters, but rather new classes. He said "You promised I could make a new character!"

I never did, and told him so, and he ran upstairs and hasn't come down since.

Further notes: My brother is a rules lawyer and drives the other players crazy.

Should I kick him out?

[AstralFire]

May I ask your specific reasons for opposition to a character change? Are you trying to build a narrative with these characters?

[Kurald Galain]

He said "You promised I could make a new character!"

I never did, and told him so, and he ran upstairs and hasn't come down since.

Further notes: My brother is a rules lawyer and drives the other players crazy.

Should I kick him out?

How about you talk it out first? His reaction isn't particularly mature, but neither is kicking him out. Imho, it is quite a bit more excusable for an eleven-year-old to act immaturely, than for an eighteen-year-old.

[Tsotha-lanti]

He picked fighter, and hated it, so I told him that just once he could make a new character, but that he had to be a leader if he switched. He begged and begged, but I told him it was

Should I kick him out?

You'd be a massive ******* even if the player in question weren't your brother. You want to forbid creating new characters, and then want to force players to play certain roles? You need to stop that, or stop DMing.

And the idea that a D&D 4E party needs every role is BS. Let players play what they want. If someone else in the party decides they should have a Leader, let them play one.

[ghost_warlock]

How about you talk it out first? His reaction isn't particularly mature, but neither is kicking him out. Imho, it is quite a bit more excusable for an eleven-year-old to act immaturely, than for an eighteen-year-old.

Pst. Lupy's 14.

*snip*

Should I kick him out?

Unless it'd seriously derail the plot of the campaign, and so long as all the roles are filled by the other 5 players, I don't think I'd have a problem with just letting the kid create a new character. What harm can it do? After all, characters and campaigns come and go, but brothers are forever.

[valadil]

I can understand his confusion (at least based on the summary of events given). Telling someone they can try out a new class sounds a lot like a new character where I'm from. Did you explicitly tell them they could switch classes while keeping the same character? Or did you just assume they'd know to keep the character intact.

Why does it matter if he's switching characters? Do you have a reason, or is it a control thing? If the old character has plot, what if you just made him come in as an NPC and let your brother bring in a new unplotted character?

This doesn't really sound like a 4e problem but a communications one.

[Shadow_Elf]

I think what the OP is trying to say is that he wants the characters to remain the same but he is willing to allow their classes to change. I would assume the reason for this is that PCs are the center of the DM's narrative, and if they all disappear and become different people, he might as well start a new campaign, since none of the characters who knew about the quest(s) in the first place would be there to update any new additions to the party.

However! There is a simple solution to this.

First: What you are asking your players to do is comepletely unreasonable. They can change class, but their character must stay the same. It makes no sense for a Paladin to suddenly become a Druid, or for a Wizard to all-of-a-sudden be a Barbarian. It makes very little sense for a Warlock, who has a pact with an eldritch entity, to spontaneously break said unbreakable contract and become a totally non-magical, say, Archer Ranger, without major story repercussions. Their stats will change, which means their race should probably change too. If the party Wizard wants to be a barbarian, Tiefling or Eladrin is no longer a good choice, at all.

The solution: Find out which players (including your brother) WANT a class change. Then give them a character change, leaving those content with their current characters to fill the newbies in. Then, you find story reasons for the party reconstruction, add in your sixth player and voila, your story is back on track with a bunch of up-to-date adventurers. If no one wants to keep their characters, then you should either rescind your offer (which might make more than your brother angry), or try a new campaign with new characters. Alternatively, make their old characters into NPCs and have the new party continue their quest, be their rivals or kill them them and continue their quest or somesuch. As the DM, your job is to make thigns fun for your players, and as the players, their job is to make your job less difficult. If they demand that the campaign is canceled and a new one starts with new characters, then they're suddenly the ones being unreasonable.

EDIT: Also, not all he party roles must be filled.

No Defender? Throw fewer soldiers and brutes at them
No Leader? Throw fewer lurkers and artillery at them
No Striker? Be prepared for very long drawn-out sessions/encounters
No Controller? Throw fewer minions and elites/solos at them

[Comet]

I might just be confused here, but wouldn't creating a new character actually make more sense than just having the existing characters magically change their classes?

[Lupy]

See? I knew I could get a solution here.

I'll let him make a new character again I guess. (Everyone one else wants a storyline, which is difficult with one person playing musical characters...)

As for the issue of characters changing classes, the Wizard's switch to Sorcerer would have been relatively simple to reconcile, and he was the only other person switching.

[AstralFire]

You can do a storyline with one party member playing 'musical roles', so to speak. He's the special guest star, not a regular.

[Myrmex]

You'd be a massive ******* even if the player in question weren't your brother. You want to forbid creating new characters, and then want to force players to play certain roles? You need to stop that, or stop DMing.

And the idea that a D&D 4E party needs every role is BS. Let players play what they want. If someone else in the party decides they should have a Leader, let them play one.

+1


stuffstuffstuff

[Colmarr]

You can do a storyline with one party member playing 'musical roles', so to speak. He's the special guest star, not a regular.

QFT.

Having said that, I feel that a DM should in good conscience tell such a player that constant changing of characters will make it hard for the DM to tailor the campaign for the player's characters.

Good DMs can lay overarching plot levels (or whole tiers) in advance, and constantly switching out your characters stops the DM from including your character in that planning.

[Burley]

QFT.

Having said that, I feel that a DM should in good conscience tell such a player that constant changing of characters will make it hard for the DM to tailor the campaign for the player's characters.

Good DMs can lay overarching plot levels (or whole tiers) in advance, and constantly switching out your characters stops the DM from including your character in that planning.

Here, Here. Har, Har.

But... Also:

See? I knew I could get a solution here.

I'll let him make a new character again I guess. (Everyone one else wants a storyline, which is difficult with one person playing musical characters...)

As for the issue of characters changing classes, the Wizard's switch to Sorcerer would have been relatively simple to reconcile, and he was the only other person switching.

You'll see how easy it is to reconcile when you suddenly don't have a ritual caster. But, I digress.

The point of D&D is for everybody to have fun. Does your brother really like making new characters, or just making up backgrounds and stuff? Because I love making up new backgrounds, and fiddling with the rules, but I don't like actually changing what I'm playing.
See if you can convince your brother to help with your DMing work. Maybe he could help you build an interesting NPC. Or, each time there is an adventure hook, your brother could be that character that follows the party around to help out. Then, he could drop the character, and pick up a new one for the next adventure. But, it gives you control over what he plays, becuase it'll have to fit your story.

[Galdor Miriel]

One thing I do as a DM, which might be useful, is an adaptation to the wealth by level for new characters for any reason. Anybody can change or abandon a character at ant time, or due to character death, but when they start there new character, the new character is limited in wealth compared to the others.

Practically speaking we would limit as follows:

levels 1-2: to a single +1 item (the basic one with no power), with some cash maybe 200 to by non magical gear.
levels 3-4: 2 +1 items, 500 gp cash but not for weapons, armor, implements or amulets
levels 5-6: 3 +1 items 1000 gp cash but not for weapons, armor, implements or amulets
levels 7-8: 2 +2 items, 1 +1 item, 1500 gold as above.

And so on. ( I havenot checked againstmy actual table,but I think this is close.

The idea is that they cannot do the uber optimise thing with purchases which sometimes makes a new character better than a played character. They also actually will enjoy finding treasure, as they do not have any special magic items! This allows you to move away from the constant buying and selling of magic items in a weird magical bazaar and concentrate on kicking goblin butt.

Such a system does not break the game, as powers and feat choices are more important than items in 4E, and it gives the player a challenge to survive and catch up, which actually adds to the fun.

The same rules apply to the dm if he takes a break and steps in. Currently a friend will take over for a new levels and I rolled up a ranger assassin, Alacris the Bowman, who has hardly any gear compared to the artifact toting PCs, but I am very excited to start playing him, which will admittedly start off in very much a supporting roll.

As regards the problems with your brother, I would echo some of the earlier comments and encourage you to not be too much in charge. It is true that as the dm you control the world and the actions of the antagonists, but players often have an equal input into the rules on things like character creation. It makes for a happier game over all if they have some element of control for most people.

GM

[Burley]

One thing I do as a DM, which might be useful, is an adaptation to the wealth by level for new characters for any reason. Anybody can change or abandon a character at ant time, or due to character death, but when they start there new character, the new character is limited in wealth compared to the others.

Practically speaking we would limit as follows:

levels 1-2: to a single +1 item (the basic one with no power), with some cash maybe 200 to by non magical gear.
levels 3-4: 2 +1 items, 500 gp cash but not for weapons, armor, implements or amulets
levels 5-6: 3 +1 items 1000 gp cash but not for weapons, armor, implements or amulets
levels 7-8: 2 +2 items, 1 +1 item, 1500 gold as above.

*snip*

You do realize that, above 1st level, non-magical gear is free, right? All that "Cash for not..." stuff is apparently money that they don't need to spend. When a character starts above 1st level, they should have: an item of their level, an item one higher than their level, an item one lower than their level, and enough gold to buy an item of one level below their level. (I do gold to buy an item at their level, but I'm super nice to my players.)

[Fixer]

(Everyone one else wants a storyline, which is difficult with one person playing musical characters...)

Have your brother don the red shirt when he wishes to change characters. Thus, for plot and story sake, the red shirt dies and the new character enters to take his place.

Not hard at all.

[Galdor Miriel]

You do realize that, above 1st level, non-magical gear is free, right? All that "Cash for not..." stuff is apparently money that they don't need to spend. When a character starts above 1st level, they should have: an item of their level, an item one higher than their level, an item one lower than their level, and enough gold to buy an item of one level below their level. (I do gold to buy an item at their level, but I'm super nice to my players.)

Non magical gear should not be free, it isn't in our campaigns, but most of the money would go on potions and rituals anyway. Maybe a wondrous item.

[BigPapaSmurf]

I'm glad you're not my DM, minimising railroading is hard enough without forcing PCs to play something they dont want to play. If they want a group of 5 rouges, you should let them. The difficulty and change of flavor is what keeps people playing.

Changing characters every session is a bad idea of course but you should not force them to keep playing something they really dislike.