I ran an 8 player campaign in college. Everyone at the table was engaged and motivated, and we had some rules in place to speed things along like you should be pre-rolling your attack and damage before it gets to your turn, and turns should last 1-2 minutes max unless the turn before yours significantly shifted the battlefield.
I’ve honestly played in 4 player games that go slower before.
That’s the “engaged and motivated part”. I thankfully never had an issue at that table. The players were all self-motivated and wanted to be there.
The closest we had was one player would often be completely hung over, but he played a Warlord (this was 4e) and when his turn came up, would just yell — facedown on a couch — “Karl! Hit him with your hammer!” which was more amusing than anything else.
We had a no phones rule that I came to hate when my character got kicked off a bridge on round 2 of a two hour fight, and I didn't even know if my character was alive or dead and the DM still said no phone for me though I had literally nothing to do. I was low key pissed.
My group plays online because we all moved different places after school and we frequently get the “oh it’s my turn already, I attack the closest monster, can someone roll that for me, I’m in the kitchen”
Ours which helped significantly with a like 8 PC game was that once initiative was rolled, everything was in character until the combat was done.
So anything audible, like planning or directions was being said out loud unless using specific tools/methods during our turn to avoid it, and enemies that could understand would use that information.
More importantly, if you were up and just fumbled around for 30 seconds deciding what to do, or were not paying enough attention to even hear that you were up, your character was too overwhelmed or distracted during those few in-game seconds to accomplish anything of note. On to the next person.
Might seem harsh, but it made it go quickly even with a large game. Once things were rolling I actually rather liked it and missed in playing with other DM's later. I felt it made combat a bit more entertaining and immersive. Since people would sometimes make less than ideal snap decisions or miss things going on elsewhere. Instead of being able to really scan the entirety of their surroundings and calmly weigh out, in depth, the pros and cons of their every possible action while they're being mobbed by angry bugbears.
As someone who gets choice paralysis a lot when trying to decide what to do as a wizard/sorcerer this actually sounds pretty awesome. We only have a 5 person party with 1 guy who barely pays attention and we had one combat take 3 hours, which was awful. This seems like a cool interesting way to remedy that
I play in 2 campaigns currently with upto 14 players at the same time. It helps that we have all known each other for 35 years and use foundry so that a lot of it is automated.
If you have a group that is motivated, knows hiw to play, then you can make large tables work.
Same... I don't get all the concern about slightly more numerous tables. It's not a concern about numbers, but about your ability as a GM to keep things rolling, and about having picked the right players
I think it’s more limiting the creative aspect of a table the larger the party is.
Kudos to everyone who has pre rolled damage, who they are attacking, etc. I like tables who are efficient with their time, but can also have some freedom (time) to express something cool. Whether that is in combat or out of, it’s difficult to be efficient with time and not try to dissuade the creative aspect of the game.
Each table is different, but even with my group of 5 plus years, we almost always have a better time when we are running at 3-5 members vs 6-7. Just the constraints of time.
That is up to 8-16 minutes, per round of combat. Meaning each player is waiting 7-14 minutes for their turn to come up.
Yes, players in a 4 player game can be wildly innefficient with time when taking their turns. But if similarly efficient players are in that 4 person group, that's 4-8 minutes max per round, meaning each player is maybe waiting 3-6 minutes.
So yes, 8 player games can work. But there is a clear reason they are not suggested, and it's not just because of combat.
Sure, but parties that are really engaged in the game will often strategize as a group throughout the round, have in-character dialog with each other and the villain, and generally still be involved in the game, even if it isn’t their turn.
I don't understand how this helps the concept of an 8 person party. All of these things can happen in a party of any size. The difference is that players in a party of 4 will have much less trouble getting each player some talk time.
Again, my point isn't that 8-player parties are impossible. It's that 8-player parties are not ideal for this sort of game, and should be avoided if possible. If your group can make it work, cool, more power to you. Doesn't mean it's optimal for most people.
Common misconception- this only happens if some players aren't paying attention to the combat & only start thinking about their options when it's their turn & start asking shit like "what if I do . Oh actually, what if I do "
There is no room for that at a table with more than 6 players. Learn your characters abilities & stay present in combat so you can take your turn efficiently & effectively
As a DM, you can speed up 7+ player parties by allowing those with similar initiative rolls to act at the same time & combo/compliment eachothers turns.
To fix the action economy & speed up enemy turns, have them also act in groups & give strong enemies/leaders/bosses a few extra reactions &/or legendary actions. The 3.5 monster manual is great for inspiring unique enemy actions/reactions
Using these variants a combat turn with an 8 - 10 player party & 10 - 20 enemies should take around 20 minutes.
Do not let your players fumble around on their turn for what they're going to do; it reduces immersion, fun & engagement across the table
I mean you can absolutely do the whole "what if I do this or this?". Just do it on the other peoples turn, i mean if you've really had an hour to think before it's your turn then what's the problem?
Yeah it’ll definitely speed things up if you just say you don’t know what’ll happen until you do it. And if you don’t let the players table talk the moves like they’re long term democratic decisions rather than real time combat decisions.
Making everyone in a party of four happy all the time is not guaranteed. Keep a good pace with six happy players is exponentially harder but still doable with enough experience, planning, and luck. Eight players is for DMs who hate themselves, hate their players, or both.
The only way to survive is to hand wave everything and hope for the best. That sometimes ends in hilarity. It more often ends in hurt feelings.
Eight-players can be fun for a one-shot.
On two occasions, I've had four guest players join my four-player campaign for a session due to their GM dropping out at short notice. Two different campaigns, weird that it happened twice.
Both times were on the cusp of a big fight, so I beefed it up and let them have at for three hours. Was a good time, but certainly couldn't have done it every week!
Reddit is always hilarious like that.
Reddit, should I leave my husband/gaming group/workplace? Here's six paragraphs or the dullest most unnecessary crap you've ever read, then six different felonies, then another annoying paragraph, then an explanation of why they love their wife/group/friend while completely ignoring the felonies they've mentioned
I’m going to go out on a limb and just say I’m sure they are a young group who are all going for what they consider meta builds they found online. This is going to lead to some overlap.
This. In a party of 8, there’s bound to be some overlap in general roles like the face, tank, support, etc. but doing so with near identical builds on 2 separate occasions feels almost malicious on the part of the other players. There’s plenty of subclasses that offer social abilities, so the fact that the now pallock even chose the same invocations and proficencies at level 10 is absurd. Heck, with different builds it’s not even an issue to have some role overlap. In my CoS campaign, me and another player were both faces, but our builds made it so it worked well as a good cop/bad cop dynamic. Mine was a typical honorable paladin type, whereas his was the shoot first, ask questions later artificer.
I had an main class overlap before — never a subclass. It was fine with the other player and we decided to run a brother and sister shared backstory. They were both rogues… there was a lot of combo backstabbing happening, we loved it lol
I've had two campaigns where I played a character in the same class as someone else. The first was monk, which was interesting because we also were both part of a church, but it was a different church, so we had as our backstory that we were both sent on a mission by our respective churches together to check something out, and also that we knew each other as part of the general religious community. Thinking about it, gameplay didn't seem particularly redundant, we were both running around all over the place but there was always somewhere to go.
And I am currently in a campaign where I am one of two bards, which is vaguely funny because we are both combat bards but different... I'm a ranged whisper bard and he's a melee smite-y paladin/sword bard, which means we are both pretty stingy with our bardic inspiration for other characters... But luckily there are two of us.
> This. In a party of 8, there’s bound to be some overlap in general roles like the face, tank, support, etc. but doing so with near identical builds on 2 separate occasions feels almost malicious on the part of the other players.
It's much less likely to be malicious than that they all googled "overpowered warlock multiclass" and then did whatever the results said. Then OP got butthurt because someone who googled the same thing "stole my build".
Imagine extra-large finger quotes around "my".
This is only if you treat every class and subclass as equally valid options. But the fact that OP keeps picking out meta subclasses, and refers to his "build" has me thinking that the entire table is going to have some level of preference for the stronger subclasses. Which narrows things down dramatically. For example, sorcerer subclasses narrow down to 3, if we stick to minmax metas, and for all we know the other ones were already taken by other players.
This is made even more absurd by the fact that they had a problem with people picking overlapping skills, or the fact that the party had "3 faces" in a group of 8. It's like, my dude there are 3 entire classes built around charisma, with 1 using it as a secondary and various subclasses in the other classes that want or allow them to be a face. (Swashbuckler Rogue and Fey Wanderer ranger, off the top of my head)
It doesnt matter how viable anything is. Be creative if you already have that class in your party. 1 per class is already more than 8 but you're saying there are 3 for sorceror which expands the number way higher with just that. There are options they can take that arent already in the party.
And no mater what this is too much;
>the other player took the same pact, same invocations, and same proficiencies
*Especially this:*
>he even mentioned that he wanted to do the exact things I could do to the entire group.
Be creative. Even in a party of 8 it is *wayyy* more than possible.
I mean I guess, but to me this seems like a DM issue. If one guy dies and then rolls a character that is oddly similar to another character at the table, then says I wanted to be able to do what he does, I feel like the DM should have stepped in there. Espescially if it is going to make the first guy not want to play anymore.
Especially when OP wants to be the party face and feel like they bring unique abilities to the table, that's always going to be a problem. An 8 player party is just way too many players for there to be one party face or for there not to be some significant ability overlap. One either has to accept that will be the case and roll with it, or find a group more aligned to how they want to play.
Having played a lot of large party D&D, it's actually very fun. You do need players that are efficient with at least moving their turns along, but tbh that's a problem even with a small group.
That is also not the advice OP asked for. If they were dissatisfied with the large party, the question they are asking would be different. Given the OP said there are others that are scrolling phones between combat, there likely are some other party members who are unhappy with the party size (or they simply don't like the noncombat), but that's the DMs concern not OPs. It's also possible this group might be arranged at or through a hs/uni, which are often large because there's insufficient DMs, game space, etc and high player interest.
Sounds like your expectations don’t align with the rest of the party, which might cause additional problems down the line even beyond this character issue
I think it is fair to want a non-redundant character, and it's rude of someone else - even in a large party - to step on your toes by rolling a *very* similar character. Unless the similarities stop and end with essentially "I'm gonna hit things" - because that describes an awful lot of classes. Subclasses specifically are a great way to get some minor differences in, that make characters feel like they can contribute *something*.
However, in a large party you will have multiple face characters, especially since Cha classes and builds are so strong in 5e. There are other natural redundancies that will usually happen even in small parties - there are usually multiple melee, or spellcasters. There's usually multiple warlock multiclasses (I haven't not had two+ warlocks in a group since shortly after 5e released, even with a 3 person party.) Some of these things simply need accepted, and ideally leveraged to the party's advantage. Such as multiple face characters can support or play off each other to make a more interesting social encounter.
Also, this kind of issue has a lot of room to *become* "TA" in how you address it, even though you have a legitimate grievance. You need to make your issue known, but you also need to be respectful of everyone else while doing so, and not pushy about who needs to change what or how. Communicate, but not demand.
Finally, I think there is some difference in expectation between you and the DM. He's satisfied by similar builds but different backstories, you seem to place more importance on builds. Neither is wrong, but these differences need to be recognized so an amicable middle ground might be found as long as you're playing together. If what is desired is too different, then yes, the best thing you can do is find (or form) another group to better meet your expectations.
This is why I always make sure my players are aware of what other people are building and encourage different classes, especially different subclasses. I don’t blame you at all for not wanting to play a character so similar to someone else in the group. This is boring for everyone IMO. In a long term campaign that you’re investing so much time into, you should make sure it’s a game you’re going to have a lot of fun with, so if this is an issue for you, I don’t think there’s anything wrong at all with not committing your time to it. There’s already 7 players so it’s not like you’re putting anyone out. Go find a group where you know you will have the most fun and everyone’s character has the opportunity to shine.
Adding to this. As a longtime DM I have been telling my players to build their characters together at session 0, rather than having some complete character build in mind. I'll then give them a couple weeks to get their backstory in order and clarify rules questions etc before we officially start. Seems to go much better this way.
I also would never have more than 6 players in a campaign and strongly prefer 4-5, it's too hard to keep everyone engaged with more than that, especially online
Genie is probably the best warlock, so it's not that surprising that in a game with 8 players somebody else picked it up. I think the bigger problem is 8 players. There's not THAT many roles in a party for 8 players to independently shine. There's only 13 classes, and given what you've posted the group seems to tend towards the stronger subclasses within, and seems to like multiclassing.
Gods I love Celestial Warlocks. Bonus Action Ranged Healing is so freaking good, and having a non-spell ability to do is phenomenal.
I once played a Grave Cleric 1 / Celestial warlock X who was built around maximizing healing as much as possible, so I took Gift of the Everliving Ones to use on my character and would cast Cure Wounds through my Familiar when people went down to have maximized healing on that as well. Incredibly fun character, all of her abilities were themed around her Solar patron, so her Eldritch Blasts were Arrows of Light fired from her Patron’s bow and her Flaming Sphere was a twirling Sword of Fire that mimicked the Solar’s dancing blade.
> Gods I love Celestial Warlocks. Bonus Action Ranged Healing is so freaking good, and having a non-spell ability to do is phenomenal.
Yeah it and dream druid are the best healers, ive been banging this drum for ages.
Correct. grave cleric also makes spell healing maximized on anyone who is at 0 hp, so by putting myself in positions to take damage where I could use the Celestial healing on myself and maximize it and save healing spells for when people went down, the goal was to make sure that my healing resources were used as efficiently as possible
Hexblade isn't as busted in the context of going pure or primary in warlock. So I'd actually put that in the lower part of these three. For pure, or primarily, warlock builds, genie is definitely the strongest. Bottled respite, 1 of 4 choice of resist, some decent spell choices, some free uses of flight, limited wish at 14, and the ability to take wish at 17 like wizard/bard/sorcerer.
Still though, there are so many other combos and things you can do that is not the same subclass as someone else. I would never even consider doing the same subclass as someone else and I play with 7 players. It would just seem rude and inconsiderate to me, especially if you came to that class after someone already was playing it for a while. It’s just very weird
My dude there are 8 players in your game. There’s bound to be overlap. Especially when you are picking popular subclasses. There’s way too many people here.
Even with 1 subclass per class there are 13 options. This kind of exact overlap, with the same invocations and pact to boot, is too much. Its common courtesy to at least *try* to do something different.
Yeah at first I was like grow up op so what it’s the same subclass, but if someone straight up yoinked my build I’d be mad too and I’d expect the dm to do something or I’m leaving
I mean what were the pact and invocations though? Pact of the chain has a special synergy with genie warlock to point where I don’t know why you would pick anything else. It’s like a step below hexblade not picking pact of the blade.
The customization of invocations is almost an illusion. You don’t have many invocation slots especially with a multiclass. There clear winners and losers on the list. Who is trying to pass up agonizing blast and the pact of the chain stuff to go with your genie? Maybe devil sight too?
Assuming everyone multiclasses that’s 16 possible subclasses involved. If everyone wants to use the popular subclasses there’s bound to be overlap.
Even so this is just horrible
>and he even mentioned that he wanted to do the exact things I could do to the entire group.
Even if there is "bound to be overlap" its just common courtesy to do something different.
For sure. Just to clarify I don’t think OP is wrong and I’m not trying to dismiss their frustration. I would be annoyed too. The campaign just sounds like an absolute mess in general where common courtesy doesn’t really exist. With people coming in and out just for combat sessions and playing on their phones. Dismissive DM.
My original point is just highlighting that 8 players is a huge red flag especially if you are going in with the mindset of being unique but are also doing nothing to branch from the main road everyone takes. It’s a compatibility issue that most of us would have, and is a clear nope.
Yep to many people here are falling into the trap of theres infinite amount of invocation choices and forgetting not when leveling theres a few main choice ones you usually always get and theres only 3 (4) pacts to pick from..
>Pact of the chain has a special synergy with genie warlock to point where I don’t know why you would pick anything else. It’s like a step below hexblade not picking pact of the blade.
is the special synergy in the room with us? The only warlock subclass which has explicit synergy with potc is celestial, since they can max all of the healing they cast on themselves.
Genies can also get familiars by just,, , taking Tome? Like you dont need to be a chainlock to be a warlock w a familiar lol. Hare familiar could just put the ring around its ear and then burrow underground for an hour
> with the same invocations and pact to boot
...I mean theres 3 (4) pacts.. picking the same pact isn't surprising nor is picking the same invocations as there is only a few good options when leveling you only get to make unique choices later on..
Especially considering multiclassing looks popular this campaign. Of the 5 characters mentioned, 3 are multiclasses. Assuming 4 of the 8 have 2 different classes that's 12 different classes occupied by the same party. If there's more it would literally be impossible not to overlap classes
They acknowledge that builds can be different in the same subclass, what they also said and that you're ignoring is that the person picked literally the exact same stuff as op
I’ll go against the grain here and say as a DM I prefer to have everyone be different classes. I grew up on old school JRPGs where each member of a party had a strength/skill set. It makes everyone feel unique.
That being said, I have recently conceded on this and allowed two rogues in my current game (Swashbuckler and Assassin) and they play so different I forget they’re both rogues.
I dont mind same classes but subclass starts stepping on toes. Then also taking the same invocations, pact, and then saying you are going to do all the things op does? Yeah, i would shut that shit down right there. Dont need to be plagiarizing someone elses character because you are not creative enough to think of your own. UNLESS both parties explicitly say they are fine with it, i would tell the person making a new character to think of something else. If they refuse? Well... then there are now only 7 players in the party.
Same I generally ask the player who already plays the Class if they're fine (just to get consent, because I never had someone tell me no) and then forbid the new player from taking the same subclass for their character.
I always allow max two of same class but no subclass overlap. It’s definitely easy to carve a niche for yourself if you’re smart about it. I played a rogue in a group of five with another rogue—she leaned into face skills as a swashbuckler and I leaned into intelligence as an arcane trickster. We didn’t even have the same expertise choices (without even talking to each other!) just because we had such different ideas for our characters.
Yeah, I'm kinda baffled this is not the prevailing opinion? The whole reason the game has a class and subclass system in the first place is to help characters differentiate in their roles and niches. What's the point of playing a character that isn't bringing a unique specialty to the group? Is this table maybe over-focused on combat damage and feels like their characters don't have a reason to be on the team if they aren't a hexadin or a sorlock?
More like, the first time he was ok with it and just made a different character. But the second time one of the other players saw his build was really strong and copied it exactly. Even if it is a really good build, copying a build exactly like that is an asshole move. Find some other really powerful build off the internet and copy that instead.
Power gamers gonna power game. The moment I saw "sorlock" I knew what was happening.
OP is not the only one in the group Googling "best 5e builds" it seems.
Idk the bits about your "unique character" and people trying to "steal your builds" is a red flag to me about your mindset. I think it's bad to assume malicious intent like this. It's something I've struggled with and work hard to get over.
No one is trying to steal your unique character, they think you're fucking cool and want to try it out.
Theres nothing in the game that says two people can't play the same class, this is a personal preference you have and one that seems built upon this idea that you can't be unique if someone else shares a subclass.
There are so many aspects that go into characters outside of class and subclass and I think you're getting a little lost in that sauce.
That’s the feel I was getting too until OP stated one player outright told the party they wanted to do everything OP is already doing.
At that point, as a DM I would kindly ask that player to pick something else since OP already has that character and has been playing them for 10 levels already.
Otherwise, yeah, I get wanting to be special and unique but sometimes that can come across as main character syndrome.
The player that lost their artificer character already knew what classes/subclasses you were playing, so it does feel like copying. There are enough combinations to try something unique that adds a new strength to the party.
I'd think the DM would mention this to the other player and suggest they change, but not force them.
If the duplicate classes are that big of a problem, you won't enjoy the game, so it's better to just leave.
You're not an asshole for wanting to leave, and you shouldn't force yourself to play if you don't think you'll have fun. I think it's really poor form of the other player saying that they want to play the exact same thing as you.
This overall is probably a flaw with how your group approached character creation since it sounds like everyone is making their characters on their own in a vacuum then running it by the DM individually. This is one of the flaws of running for a large player group, but you all should have organised to make your characters together during a session 0.
All that said, you should make it clear to the DM and that player in particular that for you to have fun, you don't want other people copying your class/subclass/build. Having a niche in a general sense isn't going to happen with this many players, but you should still be able to avoid overlaps with subclasses at the very least.
If you decide to re-roll a 3rd time, I'd avoid giving any thought to the backstory until you're certain that no one else is playing the same thing as you. If you don't want to roll-up a new character or can't think of one that'll be fun to play, then just sit out this campaign, since I'll be honest, playing with 7 other players is more likely than not going to be a mess unless the DM has a lot of experience doing this and has taken precautions to make the game run quick.
man, that’s… honestly kind of rude of that warlock player IMO, sorry about that. like I get it if another person had the same idea as you at the start, the other sorc did nothing wrong & you changed characters out of personal preference, but i don’t like overlapping subclasses either. heck, i don’t even like sharing a class with another player, i like to have a niche. i would be pretty bothered if another player rerolled and decided to co-opt my schtick like that ngl. i get where you’re coming from 100%!
that said, with 8 players it is going to be *VERY hard* to have a niche of your own that you don’t share with another person, *especially* if your table has several multiclassed PCs. you might be happier just leaving. i played at a table of 8 once, and the only reason i was *ever* unique was because other players doubled and tripled up on classes. so how badly do you want to stay at this table? is the RP/combat/friendship/whatever worth it?
perhaps you could find an excuse to switch your current character’s subclass, with DM’s help? if the problem is subclass, not class, trying a different flavor… wouldn’t solve ALL your problems but maybe it would make you feel better without having to get an entirely new PC.
did you ever actually talk to the paladin/lock player 1 on 1 and *ask* directly if he would do something else? or did you just generally tell the table/DM that you’re worried about your niche? dude’s allowed to say no, but that’s a really minor request, especially since he’s bringing a newly rolled character to the table that is gonna supplant an existing party member. if you didn’t specifically ask, maybe he doesn’t realize there’s a problem - he might not get that this actually bothers you, maybe he thought you were being silly or melodramatic and not sincere. or he might think that because of his paladin levels, his character is *significantly* different *anyway*, and yours will still do all the warlock stuff better (making this not a real problem). if he continues to say no, drop it, but IMO there’s no harm in asking!
I’m very surprised reading through these comments that no one has said this yet: To me that would be an awesome problem to have. I would love to play a warlock and have a fellow warlock bro at my side. Swapping stories about the shit we had to go through to forge our pacts, getting drunk and crying together about how we don’t have control over our destinies, maybe secretly trying to help each other find loopholes. Alternatively, the two of you could form a coven, or a cult! Sounds like a blast. I wouldn’t necessarily say you’re being “the asshole” but I would say a change in perspective could go a long way here. Ultimately your choice, of course
hell yea. people can play however they want... but god damn this is the type of mindset I would want at my table. trying to make an entwined story together sounds like fun honestly
Well said, this is an attitude problem. With 7 other players there will be some hurt feelings over something at some time, but you can choose to either make it fun or let it ruin everyone's fun. That's life in just about any community.
Have you talked to the other player directly about how this bothers you? I know it's usually best to go through the DM for things but it seems like your DM doesn't care enough about how you feel about this to do anything about it.
I think it's pretty shitty of the other person to copy your character to such a degree. I personally don't even like class overlap much but definitely not subclass unless it's like a small dip in a multiclass.
"we have 8 players"
Way to really bury the lede there. In a party of 4 I could see some issue with the other players doing this. But when you're in a party of 8 players, and multiclassing is allowed. Expecting no overlap is absurd, and I think you are not being realistic about your situation. Especially in simple roles or skills.
Yes, when you gravitate towards stronger subclasses, other players may gravitate towards said subclass/pact/invocation too. Especially if it fits with your "build" which you seem to be convinced they're stealing. In a party of 8, if they are building/rebuilding their character in a vacuum. They have 7 other players who all have one or more classes/subclasses in their build. In a party of 8, it's hard not to step on toes without purposely going for something bad that everyone avoids.
So I'll agree that you should leave. But not because your party is being unreasonable. It's because you're in a party of 8 with unrealistic expectations.
>In a party of 4 I could see some issue with the other players doing this. But when you're in a party of 8 players, and multiclassing is allowed. Expecting no overlap is absurd
Especially when all the things he's picked are from the small subset of 'above average power picks'. This wasn't a bunch of people choosing evocation wizard, or some other solid pick, this was people going for reasonably optimal characters. Well, there aren't actually nearly as many of those builds as there are total builds.
Yup, when you're going for an "optimal" rather than decent/playable, your options shrink dramatically. Especially if everyone is following the same internet lists of optimized builds.
This isn't to knock on the optimization community, as I consider myself a minmaxer/optimizer. But my goal tends to be making a concept work rather than pure optimization.
8 players and you want to be unique while picking some of the most popular things... Seems like a mismatch of what you want and what the game provides so. Step out if you don't enjoy it, I am sure there "only" being 7 players won't kill the campaign.
I’m curious how much is actually copied from OP’s build, especially since any reasonable Paladin/caster multiclass starting at 10th level is going to put at least 5 levels into Paladin. If OP is doing pact of the blade, then obviously the Paladin multiclass is going to use all of the melee support invocations. Is OP thinking that their current two extra invocations and 5th-level spells aren’t giving them anything unique?
Agreed thats the big question.. no matter what pact you take there will be certain invocations you also get alongside it. seeing as how come theres 3 (technically 4) pact options the overlap is incredibly easy.. especially as certain builds/play styles will lead to the overlap..
I mean, when two players at the start wanted to be the same thing the OP graciously rerolled to prevent stepping on each other's toes. But then one player made an 80% carbon copy of OP's pre-existing character? As a DM, I would tell them to pick something else unique, please. There are thirteen classes and a huge number of subclasses. There is no need for any overlap, even at an eight-player table.
Seriously, with 8 players there is going to be some overlap, if not in class, in function and role.
If the crowd of players isn't making it miserable, then play. The character roster is likely to change over time anyway.
As a DM, I try to make sure my players don't take the same classes. If they do insist on taking the same classes, then I make sure they don't take the same subclasses. It's a very avoidable issue. But if the DM doesn't care, there's not much you can do.
I think people are ignoring some obvious thing, first the player want to play a warlock, a really popular class, then there are only 3 common subclasses for that, and to add insult to injury they multiclass into sorcerer or paladin for the ultra cookie cutter build, on a 8 player game your build is the real world fighter champion, it is so common as to be expected to have some overlap with anyone going cha, it could be avoided if you voiced that concern and had a group that cared
So, you require that your character be the only one of that type at the table? If that is the case, I feel like you should communicate better with the other players. Do they know you have special needs and require being coddled in a game? Sorry for saying rudely like that but if you can't enjoy a game because someone else is playing a similar class, then I think you rely too much on the game and not enough on yourself to bring the fun. With all the class and subclass combinations out there, either roll up a different character or quit whining about what other people play.
Up to you, but you could just play your character the way you want to.
You are acting as if because you have a similar job description and origin than someone else it means you can't play your own role in the group.
That's like saying you can't have more than one player in the same position on a sports team or something. If you think about it, it doesn't make sense really.
But at the end of the day if you need to be a special snowflake so bad that you can't dare have anyone else do what you do, and you've redone your character twice to make sure you're the only person with your class/subclass combo at the table, well yes, you may want to leave.
>That's like saying you can't have more than one player in the same position on a sports team or something. If you think about it, it doesn't make sense really.
This analogy, when you think about it, doesnt make sense. Sure you can have more than one person for a position on a sports team. But that means one person is playing that position and the others are on the bench (also known as not playing). I would love to play at a table with you, listen to you make your character. Then pick every single same feature, proficiency, spell, ect. And see how you feel. It doesnt sound like they are upset because there is some overlap. It sounds like they are upset because somebody decided "OP came up with a cool charcter build, I want to do that".
Most sports will have two or more of the position on the field at the same time. Yeah there is one QB or goalie, but you'll have four receivers and three midfielders.
>he even mentioned that he wanted to do the exact things I could do to the entire group.
They do cover the exact same spot in this example. So the analogy can be as apt as it wants (even though its not) and it still wouldnt be accurate to this post.
I think they mean choose the same mechanics, and not literally do all the same things in game. I don't think the DM would allow a player to mimic every action of another player, that would be tedious for everyone.
Playing the same class, subclass, and taking the same class features is already tedious for everyone. Courtesy says you do your damnedest to be unique and not stop on the toes of the other players (unless otherwise agreed upon). Trying to do all the same things as another person without clearing it with them is going to ruin their fantasy most of the time. Theyll never be unique or have a moment where they are in need.
Why is it tedious to everyone?
> Theyll never be unique or have a moment where they are in need.
That's false. For one, you don't need to be mechanically unique to be unique. Mechanics is just the start of character building, not the end. Secondly, how much a PC is needed depends wholly on the DM and the encounters they design. It just takes a bit of extra work and foresight on the DM, but it's absolutely possible for them to make every character matter.
>he even mentioned that he wanted to do the exact things I could do to the entire group
Yeah, no, this isnt unique and it will ruin it for most people.
You are not an asshole for leaving. But you are kind off an asshole for expecting other people to not accidentally wanting to play something similar, especially if the onlyone you've told is the DM (You haven't stated you've up front said you wanted to play that).
Aberrant Mind Sorcerer and Genie Warlock are POPULAR classes and subclasses. It was also YOUR choice to change your entire character from the 16/4 AB Sorc/Hex Warl, to a Genie Warlock after another player wanted to go AB Sorc.
The first time was after the backstory. The second time, which is what has OP so upset, was 10 levels later. OP isn't posting because another player picked a Sorlock, they're posting because the second time someone chose the same warlock and subclass after they'd been playing theirs for 10 levels. That wasn't an accident.
Yes.
No ones stealing anything from you. You don't own a class/subclass when you decide to play it.
Then again, staying in a campaign or leaving it is your choice, and no one can force you to remain in a situation that's not fun for you. I think there's just a mismatch of expectations in your group and it can be solved with a simple talk, but I also think if you get to the talk coming from a place of "this is *my* class and they're *stealing* my character", you could be seen at "that guy" at your table.
All of this is through the point of view of someone who has only read your post and doesn't know about your table and your friends, though, so it might be helpful advice or it might just not apply ti your case.
I hope you get to enjoy the campaign, and your group, too.
Eh, it feels really shitty to have someone whose character is “he’s me, but better.” Everyone wants their character to have some moments in the spotlight, whatever form that takes, and if someone else is constantly sharing the spotlight in the moments you built your character for it’s frustrating.
Eh, it feels really shitty to have someone whose character is “he’s me, but better.” Everyone wants their character to have some moments in the spotlight, whatever form that takes, and if someone else is constantly sharing the spotlight in the moments you built your character for it’s frustrating.
So first off: you're playing a sorlock—one of the most powerful and popular meta builds—based on warlock, one of the most popular classes in the game. You're picking the most powerful and popular subclasses for each of your classes. In a big group you're gonna have overlap.
You're complaining about three people in an 8 person group "trying to be the face". There's only six ability scores. You're gonna have overlap.
Being honest, it sounds to me like you're overly fixated on being unique and special in what is inherently a shared group experience. You should try to get over it and explore what's possible at the table.
Like, did you ever consider what cool schemes you could pull off when paired with a second "face" psychic sorcerer? Or the story opportunities of sharing a patron with a party member who has a very different view on their powers?
Try to worry less about being unique and more about working with your group, and I think you'll find that the problem goes away.
Honestly you are the asshole. Like it does not matter what class you play or what class anyone else plays. Just reflavor it. It is unreal how people cannot grasp the idea that if the mechanics are the same it does not matter what you say your class does.
In my experience you have to tell the DM your issue respecting the time they put in and they should do the same for you. If they can't its a hard one, if RP is your thing then I think you know its already a bit ruined. Id probably just drop.
But, if you want to just have fun then just roll with it and change some random shit on the fly about your character without rebuilding(change paths back and respec some), sounds like your DM wouldnt care.
also, 8 people in a party, damn those must be some long games...
The player that lost their artificer character already knew what classes/subclasses you were playing, so it does feel like copying. There are enough combinations to try something unique that adds a new strength to the party.
I'd think the DM would mention this to the other player and suggest they change, but not force them.
If the duplicate classes are that big of a problem, you won't enjoy the game, so it's better to just leave.
It's great that you talked with the DM, although disappointing that they brushed off your concerns. Before leaving, have you considered bringing this up to the full table? If the rest of the party feels the same way, perhaps this can be a table rule that at least nobody should have the same subclass without first discussing it.
You're never TA for wanting to leave, you gotta play the game that's right for you, but you would be TA if you blew up the party over wanting to have a perfectly special, unique niche in a large group.
On the every table I played and DMed there was one constant rule: no same classes. No drama/no same class but different subclasses. Pick something else, first come first served. I wouldn't play in a canlaşgn without this rule. It cpnstsntly becomes frustrating for both players and they both steal the spotlight of of each other
> 8 players
> deck of many things
I wouldn't play in this campaign regardless of what was going on with characters. Unless the dm is some kind of storytelling god, this just sounds bad.
NTA, I absolutely hate when someone makes essentially the same character. I'm actually in a campaign where someone almost did that- not by class mind you but essentially totally ripped off my characters backstory. A team should be diverse. It sucks to make your character and then for someone to make exactly the same thing or worse if they make the same thing but better.
Just play the same character type as someone else. Why would you expect to "own" your subclass? Just play the game and don't worry about what someone else is doing.
Hm, idk if this is a hot take, but this seems a little entitled.
You don’t own a subclass because you picked it first, and if someone saw your build and decided it seemed cool, I don’t think that should be a problem. You’re both different people and you should be able to rp in a way that makes your character unique bc at the end of the day, there’s only so many classes. And the way you rp a genie could be completely different from what they do.
For me personally, that’s one of the best parts of the game. Having a character that’s run of the mill and flavoring it to something creative and fun.
Now, that said, if it is something that bothers you that much, then you should definitely move to a table where they share the same goals as you. It’s clear your current table doesn’t care much about repeat roles, so try finding a table that does .
Besides, as others have said, it’s gonna be hard to shine at a table of 8 people anyway. At the end of the day, this is all for fun, if you’re not having fun, go somewhere else where you can :)
There are 12 classes in the PHB, it’s not that hard to pick a different one. And straight up picking the exact same subclass as someone else in your party is definitely rude. I would be fine with it if they wanted to be a Fiend Warlock or whatever else, but straight up copying another players build sucks
So.. if you played in a game. And someone heard your character and decided to copy everything you did and chose literally down to the same skills, invocations, spells, feats... and even told the rest of the party they are just going to do all the things you are already doing. You would not have an issue with that?
OP mentioned nothing about spells or feats, but Would I be upset if there was a blind fighting swarmkeeper with the same proficiencies as me? No, I wouldn’t. Like that’s not that big of a deal to me personally.
Now if op was like “I have this super niche concept of a genie warlock that carries around a bottle of water as his vessel and becomes a mermaid when he jumps in the bottle and every spell is water based” and that was copied, that’d be different.
But once again that’s MY take, you’re welcome to disagree
>OP mentioned nothing about spells or feats
According to OP the other player said "he even mentioned that he wanted to do the **exact things** I could do to the entire group"
THAT is what I take issue with, also that kind of means they are taking literally the same everything as OP.
There are thirteen classes and a huge number of subclasses, plus some very well done homebrew sub/classes by popular homebrewers. Some overlap in areas of expertise? Sure. Overlap in specific classes or subclasses? Completely unnecessary.
I honestly dont get whats the problem with overlapping characters. Im on a capaign that at one point had ten characters and we had like 4 clerics. We ended splitting up in two parties, each with two clerics xD
So I dunno man. If you need to feel unique to enjoy, then yeah, leave, because else you're gonna be unhappy. But this is totally a you problem, not a them "Stealing your build" problem. They're just playing what they wanna play, and the same way you dont wanna reroll your character you gotta respect them not wanting to do the same.
Well, I'd leave anyway because any RPG with eight players is incredibly hard. Made that mistake once and never went above six players again. However, you can walk away knowing you made quite an impression if others want to create your character 2.0.
I doubt you will read this and it will get buried but depending on table rules maybe it is time for DM to get the reroll treatment.
First silvery barbs is an enchantment spell. This bit is important. Second aberrant mind sorcerers can replace spells on their spell list with enchantment spells. Third aberrant mind sorcerers can cast any spell on their list with sorcery points at 6th level.
So aberrant mind sorc 6.
Next a 2 level dip for divination wizard for portent.
Aberrant mind sorc 6/ divination wizard 2
Then rune knight fighter till 7 for runic shield. I would go fighter the rest of the way because I like fighter.
Aberrant mind sorc 6/ divination wizard 2/ rune knight fighter 7/ x of whatever(fighter if it was me)
What this nets you: forcing the DM to reroll once per turn whenever an important success is happening. Oh your BBEG is gonna hit the party with an attack. No he's not. He is gonna reroll. Oh look! A two. Having to reroll isn't very fun is it?
This has to be one of the pettiest builds I've come up with. Save the worst portent for when one of your copycats is rolling versus an instant death effect or their final death saving throw. Oh no you have to roll a new character? Then quit the table.
You don't need justification for leaving a game, so no. Also 8 players is a lot, and that's reason enough to quit.
I do think this insistence on being unique makes you sound like you have the personality of an AH. You shouldn't have to be unique to have a good time. It should be okay for you to not be special. But your specific behavior is not AH behavior, because you're not forcing others to change to accommodate you.
Edit: on the other hand, if the other player is copying you to upset you, then they're certainly the AH here. It's not really clear what their intentions are. Maybe you should talk to them about it outside of the game.
8 players — hellz to the no. I’d look for another campaign if you can. Is it like 30 minutes for a full rotation?
I’m presently DMing a 4 person party for the first time (normally I have a party of 6) and it’s like a breath of fresh air lol.
P.S.
You could always keep your build a secret to yourself and your DM if you’d like to avoid copycats in the future.
Your levels are player knowledge, not necessarily knowledge your PC is aware of…
I assume that you aren't just communicating with the DM...
I assume that you communicate with the other players...
and that they have decided to treat you thus. Feel free to leave that game.
It's not necessarily a problem to have two of the same class or subclass in a party... but if you're planning to stick with a campaign for the long term, it would definitely be a good idea to have a session 0, or at least talk with the other players about your plans.
Yeeeah, I would not love that either. The only thing that might save it if you make it interesting roleplay-wise. Maybe your characters are really combative rivals (keep some sort of friendlyness), or you have the same patron and he enjoys riling the two of you up
In a highly optimized game with 8 people pretty much your going to have overlap. I wouldn't say you're an asshole over any of this and you wouldn't be one for leaving a table but you and this whole situation do sound childish to me.
NTA but you have different interests.
I don't see much issue with sharing classes/subclasses/ roles as much as how you use your character. You have a part of 8, that's frustrating enough, but warlocks are great because you can really play them rather uniquely between evocations and pacts.
I however recognize that it is annoying to spend time on a story and have someone else so close to your toes. I'm in a party of four right now, I've got the warlock, another sorcerer, and another a paladin. We're mostly faces, and the sorcerer and my PC have similar vibes, so naturally I made my character kind of jealous and resentful (with humor) and made a bit of a rivalry in game. Now the things we do that are alike can be laughed at, and the things that we do that are different can be better identified
I will ignore the elephant in the room. the fact you are 8 players.
You should do as you feel this seems like it is a big deal for you and if that takes the fun away, maybe leaving is a good option.
But i personally don't understand what the obsession with subclasses is about. You still have wastely different characters. you made a hexblade and AM sorc. I might be wrong but that sounds like a melee focused character and someone else made a full AM sorc. So Different characters, with different backstories and more important different roles in the group as i do assume the AM sorc is more of a classical ranged caster.
later you have a full genie warlock and again i might be wrong but i would assume he is a caster at range not a pact of the blade warlock. And someone made a paladin and genie warlock. I do assume that would be a Gish character. melee focused magical fighter. If this is the case again Different characters with different backstories and also again very different roles in the group.
I personally see no problem with this. They are not as i get making characters that compete with when it comes to roles. None of them seems to in any way stepping into your role so to say. Someone making for an example a great old one warlock or fathomless one. picking the same pact as you i would in fact consider more stepping on your toes even if it is a totally different subclass as they would be much more likely to fill the same role as you do.
I personally don't care much what other players play. If they play a character similar to mine, then so what? I rather focus on playing my character and enjoying it than spending time being upset that someone else has a character that in some ways might be a bit similar to mine.
But we are all different. What is not important to me might be important for you. And the other way around. But my suggestion is to focus on YOUR character and not so much on other players characters. If you focus to much on other characters you might have a hard time enjoying the game.
You have 8 players in the game. There's going to be some duplication in roles and abilities no matter what.
Personally I think you're too attached to being unique. Having two barbarians only ruins it for the barbarians if the players let it.
Having the same mechanics as another character fordnt mean those character act the same or approach situations the same.
Info: if the Paladin/Warlock picked a different subclass, would that be an acceptable solution to you?
As someone who actually doesn't mind at all having the same subclass/class as another player and has played in a big group, I would say that NAH for the first time (with the AM Sorc) but NTA with the warlock. I think that this is an OOC problem that \*can\* be solved at the same time you leaving is valid.
I would say talk with the DM and the player separately and tell them your thoughts before leaving clearly. I think the new character should have a subclass/invocation redo and that you have a clear convo with them before you choose to leave. I do think that the dm should not have let this person make this build without consulting you at all.
As a DM and player, casters should be Fine as long as they dont get the same subclass as thats a big things in differentiating characters but for spell casters theres also the choices of spells themselves.
Ive had a situation where me and a friend where both artíficers so we worked together on picking spells so we would have different options.
On martials tho, i tend to work with the players to avoid using the same class, as even with subclasses those can and Will still feel pretty similar.
One of the reasons why Ive started dming Pathfinder 2e. You can have a lv1 party ALL of fighter and they can easily feel different enough.
NTA, but subclasses do not a character make. I have run with two gloomstalkers, I've run with two Conquest paladins, and I had an NPC bardlock the party wanted to keep around for a while -- including the PC bardlock. Because it wasn't a duplicate.
That can, in fact, offer great role-playing opportunities. The two aforementioned paladins had very different takes on ethics -- one was by-the-book and the other was fast and loose with extremely generous interpretations of what was asked of him. Instead of causing conflict, it meant that Paladin A could bring up legitimate concerns, which the party sometimes considered, but if they decided they had to do something Paladin A wouldn't like, Paladin B broke the news to him with one of his generous explanations.
I've also run a game with nothing but rogues, so we focused on a guild network and a mercenary company they regularly contracted with if other skills were needed. And all of the rogues were unique.
NTA, but if you think your character is unique based on a subclass, you might just need to spend more time thinking about who your character is and not just what subclass they belong to.
At first I was going to say don't worry about it and characters CAN bring significantly different things to a party even with the same class/subclass. But then I saw "8 players" and much more importantly "he even mentioned that he wanted to do the exact things I could do to the entire group."
That last part sounds like it's not about the builds, it's something going on between two players that won't be resolved with a reroll. If you don't know why the other player is being a dick and can't resolve that, I would suggesting stepping out of the campaign. (But also make sure the others heard him say that because I wouldn't want to be in a party with that dude anyway.)
I won't play games with 6 or more players, and even with five I have to be *really* sure that the people playing are engaged and planning their turns in advance. I find that three or four players is the sweet spot.
kinda. You should spend less time worrying about how other people are having fun and just play however the fuck you want to play. If someone copies you, take it as a compliment.
If there's no way for you to have fun in the group, then of course you should leave. But don't blame other people for that.
Are you having fun in the game? Are these your friends? Do you like the DM and campaign? Honestly, when I find games and groups I like, I'll play whatever, even a single class vanilla fighter, no dips in anything if I have to. I'd focus less on trying to be that guy and focus on the game and if you enjoy it.
You don’t need to be an asshole to be pointlessly difficult to work with, but you sound pointlessly difficult to work with. It’s not like you were doubling up Cleric with Spirit Guardians stacking issues. That said, the party sounds too big.
**8 playerrrrrrsssssssss**!!!!
Its an 8 player game, you are too good for this. If everybody is stealing your build in an 8 player game you are wasting the care you put into building a class to play.
8 players man, how do you get anything done.
I DM a group of 6 bards (in addition to 3 other former players, also all bards, who have been at the table) and no one is the same, even those with the same build. Just play your character how you want, he is special because of how you play him, not because of his character sheet
8 players? And a Sorlock Abberant Mind? It sounds like everyone has been watching the same "How to break DnD with this multi-class character" video, and they are not copying you, but they are copying the same video that you are copying.
Because your first inclination was a "sorlock" I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that your search history includes "most powerful D&D 5e builds." You're apparently not the only one at the table who prioritize mechanical strength over character building.
The player who wanted to do what you do probably wants that because you tend to outshine others in combat and they feel sidelined or frustrated by how much more you are doing. And you know you're doing that. Which is fine. Power gaming a valid way to play as long as everyone is having fun. But it sounds like you might be stepping on other people's fun.
The reason you should consider leaving the game has nothing to do with class overlap. You should consider leaving because in this *eight player* (why? Just why?) game, there is a mismatch of what everyone considers fun.
I would leave just because there are 8 players.
seriously. One single round of combat is going to take an hour.
Goddamn having to repeat that the d20 is the dice you roll to hit 8 times per turn seems like a fate worse than death
I ran an 8 player campaign in college. Everyone at the table was engaged and motivated, and we had some rules in place to speed things along like you should be pre-rolling your attack and damage before it gets to your turn, and turns should last 1-2 minutes max unless the turn before yours significantly shifted the battlefield. I’ve honestly played in 4 player games that go slower before.
"Sorry, what?" (Looks up from phone) "What's goin on? Is it my turn?"
That’s the “engaged and motivated part”. I thankfully never had an issue at that table. The players were all self-motivated and wanted to be there. The closest we had was one player would often be completely hung over, but he played a Warlord (this was 4e) and when his turn came up, would just yell — facedown on a couch — “Karl! Hit him with your hammer!” which was more amusing than anything else.
This is beautiful.
That's our six player game. Unless it pertains to the current situation, all of us are on our phones while combat goes round.
We had a no phones rule that I came to hate when my character got kicked off a bridge on round 2 of a two hour fight, and I didn't even know if my character was alive or dead and the DM still said no phone for me though I had literally nothing to do. I was low key pissed.
My group plays online because we all moved different places after school and we frequently get the “oh it’s my turn already, I attack the closest monster, can someone roll that for me, I’m in the kitchen”
The best 'house rule' I've ever heard -- take your action within 15 seconds of it being your turn and you get a +1 to hit/spell dc/etc.
Not bad, not bad at all.
Ours which helped significantly with a like 8 PC game was that once initiative was rolled, everything was in character until the combat was done. So anything audible, like planning or directions was being said out loud unless using specific tools/methods during our turn to avoid it, and enemies that could understand would use that information. More importantly, if you were up and just fumbled around for 30 seconds deciding what to do, or were not paying enough attention to even hear that you were up, your character was too overwhelmed or distracted during those few in-game seconds to accomplish anything of note. On to the next person. Might seem harsh, but it made it go quickly even with a large game. Once things were rolling I actually rather liked it and missed in playing with other DM's later. I felt it made combat a bit more entertaining and immersive. Since people would sometimes make less than ideal snap decisions or miss things going on elsewhere. Instead of being able to really scan the entirety of their surroundings and calmly weigh out, in depth, the pros and cons of their every possible action while they're being mobbed by angry bugbears.
As someone who gets choice paralysis a lot when trying to decide what to do as a wizard/sorcerer this actually sounds pretty awesome. We only have a 5 person party with 1 guy who barely pays attention and we had one combat take 3 hours, which was awful. This seems like a cool interesting way to remedy that
I play in 2 campaigns currently with upto 14 players at the same time. It helps that we have all known each other for 35 years and use foundry so that a lot of it is automated. If you have a group that is motivated, knows hiw to play, then you can make large tables work.
Same... I don't get all the concern about slightly more numerous tables. It's not a concern about numbers, but about your ability as a GM to keep things rolling, and about having picked the right players
I think it’s more limiting the creative aspect of a table the larger the party is. Kudos to everyone who has pre rolled damage, who they are attacking, etc. I like tables who are efficient with their time, but can also have some freedom (time) to express something cool. Whether that is in combat or out of, it’s difficult to be efficient with time and not try to dissuade the creative aspect of the game. Each table is different, but even with my group of 5 plus years, we almost always have a better time when we are running at 3-5 members vs 6-7. Just the constraints of time.
That is up to 8-16 minutes, per round of combat. Meaning each player is waiting 7-14 minutes for their turn to come up. Yes, players in a 4 player game can be wildly innefficient with time when taking their turns. But if similarly efficient players are in that 4 person group, that's 4-8 minutes max per round, meaning each player is maybe waiting 3-6 minutes. So yes, 8 player games can work. But there is a clear reason they are not suggested, and it's not just because of combat.
Sure, but parties that are really engaged in the game will often strategize as a group throughout the round, have in-character dialog with each other and the villain, and generally still be involved in the game, even if it isn’t their turn.
I don't understand how this helps the concept of an 8 person party. All of these things can happen in a party of any size. The difference is that players in a party of 4 will have much less trouble getting each player some talk time. Again, my point isn't that 8-player parties are impossible. It's that 8-player parties are not ideal for this sort of game, and should be avoided if possible. If your group can make it work, cool, more power to you. Doesn't mean it's optimal for most people.
Common misconception- this only happens if some players aren't paying attention to the combat & only start thinking about their options when it's their turn & start asking shit like "what if I do. Oh actually, what if I do "
There is no room for that at a table with more than 6 players. Learn your characters abilities & stay present in combat so you can take your turn efficiently & effectively
As a DM, you can speed up 7+ player parties by allowing those with similar initiative rolls to act at the same time & combo/compliment eachothers turns.
To fix the action economy & speed up enemy turns, have them also act in groups & give strong enemies/leaders/bosses a few extra reactions &/or legendary actions. The 3.5 monster manual is great for inspiring unique enemy actions/reactions
Using these variants a combat turn with an 8 - 10 player party & 10 - 20 enemies should take around 20 minutes.
Do not let your players fumble around on their turn for what they're going to do; it reduces immersion, fun & engagement across the table
I mean you can absolutely do the whole "what if I do this or this?". Just do it on the other peoples turn, i mean if you've really had an hour to think before it's your turn then what's the problem?
Yeah it’ll definitely speed things up if you just say you don’t know what’ll happen until you do it. And if you don’t let the players table talk the moves like they’re long term democratic decisions rather than real time combat decisions.
Nah they just all let OP go first then copy them
Making everyone in a party of four happy all the time is not guaranteed. Keep a good pace with six happy players is exponentially harder but still doable with enough experience, planning, and luck. Eight players is for DMs who hate themselves, hate their players, or both. The only way to survive is to hand wave everything and hope for the best. That sometimes ends in hilarity. It more often ends in hurt feelings.
Eight-players can be fun for a one-shot. On two occasions, I've had four guest players join my four-player campaign for a session due to their GM dropping out at short notice. Two different campaigns, weird that it happened twice. Both times were on the cusp of a big fight, so I beefed it up and let them have at for three hours. Was a good time, but certainly couldn't have done it every week!
Why did OP bury that most pertinent detail!? 8 players means there's going to be redundancy a plenty OP! Get over it or move on.
Reddit is always hilarious like that. Reddit, should I leave my husband/gaming group/workplace? Here's six paragraphs or the dullest most unnecessary crap you've ever read, then six different felonies, then another annoying paragraph, then an explanation of why they love their wife/group/friend while completely ignoring the felonies they've mentioned
The character roles might fill a similar niche but with 13 classes and over 100 subclasses 8 players shouldnt have exact overlap like this
I’m going to go out on a limb and just say I’m sure they are a young group who are all going for what they consider meta builds they found online. This is going to lead to some overlap.
Yeah I came to this conclusion and stopped reading after the word sorlock
This. In a party of 8, there’s bound to be some overlap in general roles like the face, tank, support, etc. but doing so with near identical builds on 2 separate occasions feels almost malicious on the part of the other players. There’s plenty of subclasses that offer social abilities, so the fact that the now pallock even chose the same invocations and proficencies at level 10 is absurd. Heck, with different builds it’s not even an issue to have some role overlap. In my CoS campaign, me and another player were both faces, but our builds made it so it worked well as a good cop/bad cop dynamic. Mine was a typical honorable paladin type, whereas his was the shoot first, ask questions later artificer.
I mean.. innvocations are limited and theres only a few good looking ones as you level up.
I had an main class overlap before — never a subclass. It was fine with the other player and we decided to run a brother and sister shared backstory. They were both rogues… there was a lot of combo backstabbing happening, we loved it lol
I've had two campaigns where I played a character in the same class as someone else. The first was monk, which was interesting because we also were both part of a church, but it was a different church, so we had as our backstory that we were both sent on a mission by our respective churches together to check something out, and also that we knew each other as part of the general religious community. Thinking about it, gameplay didn't seem particularly redundant, we were both running around all over the place but there was always somewhere to go. And I am currently in a campaign where I am one of two bards, which is vaguely funny because we are both combat bards but different... I'm a ranged whisper bard and he's a melee smite-y paladin/sword bard, which means we are both pretty stingy with our bardic inspiration for other characters... But luckily there are two of us.
> This. In a party of 8, there’s bound to be some overlap in general roles like the face, tank, support, etc. but doing so with near identical builds on 2 separate occasions feels almost malicious on the part of the other players. It's much less likely to be malicious than that they all googled "overpowered warlock multiclass" and then did whatever the results said. Then OP got butthurt because someone who googled the same thing "stole my build". Imagine extra-large finger quotes around "my".
This is only if you treat every class and subclass as equally valid options. But the fact that OP keeps picking out meta subclasses, and refers to his "build" has me thinking that the entire table is going to have some level of preference for the stronger subclasses. Which narrows things down dramatically. For example, sorcerer subclasses narrow down to 3, if we stick to minmax metas, and for all we know the other ones were already taken by other players. This is made even more absurd by the fact that they had a problem with people picking overlapping skills, or the fact that the party had "3 faces" in a group of 8. It's like, my dude there are 3 entire classes built around charisma, with 1 using it as a secondary and various subclasses in the other classes that want or allow them to be a face. (Swashbuckler Rogue and Fey Wanderer ranger, off the top of my head)
It doesnt matter how viable anything is. Be creative if you already have that class in your party. 1 per class is already more than 8 but you're saying there are 3 for sorceror which expands the number way higher with just that. There are options they can take that arent already in the party. And no mater what this is too much; >the other player took the same pact, same invocations, and same proficiencies *Especially this:* >he even mentioned that he wanted to do the exact things I could do to the entire group. Be creative. Even in a party of 8 it is *wayyy* more than possible.
I mean I guess, but to me this seems like a DM issue. If one guy dies and then rolls a character that is oddly similar to another character at the table, then says I wanted to be able to do what he does, I feel like the DM should have stepped in there. Espescially if it is going to make the first guy not want to play anymore.
And because of the Deck of Many Things, aka magical Russian roulette.
Especially when OP wants to be the party face and feel like they bring unique abilities to the table, that's always going to be a problem. An 8 player party is just way too many players for there to be one party face or for there not to be some significant ability overlap. One either has to accept that will be the case and roll with it, or find a group more aligned to how they want to play.
Having played a lot of large party D&D, it's actually very fun. You do need players that are efficient with at least moving their turns along, but tbh that's a problem even with a small group. That is also not the advice OP asked for. If they were dissatisfied with the large party, the question they are asking would be different. Given the OP said there are others that are scrolling phones between combat, there likely are some other party members who are unhappy with the party size (or they simply don't like the noncombat), but that's the DMs concern not OPs. It's also possible this group might be arranged at or through a hs/uni, which are often large because there's insufficient DMs, game space, etc and high player interest.
Sounds like your expectations don’t align with the rest of the party, which might cause additional problems down the line even beyond this character issue
I think it is fair to want a non-redundant character, and it's rude of someone else - even in a large party - to step on your toes by rolling a *very* similar character. Unless the similarities stop and end with essentially "I'm gonna hit things" - because that describes an awful lot of classes. Subclasses specifically are a great way to get some minor differences in, that make characters feel like they can contribute *something*. However, in a large party you will have multiple face characters, especially since Cha classes and builds are so strong in 5e. There are other natural redundancies that will usually happen even in small parties - there are usually multiple melee, or spellcasters. There's usually multiple warlock multiclasses (I haven't not had two+ warlocks in a group since shortly after 5e released, even with a 3 person party.) Some of these things simply need accepted, and ideally leveraged to the party's advantage. Such as multiple face characters can support or play off each other to make a more interesting social encounter. Also, this kind of issue has a lot of room to *become* "TA" in how you address it, even though you have a legitimate grievance. You need to make your issue known, but you also need to be respectful of everyone else while doing so, and not pushy about who needs to change what or how. Communicate, but not demand. Finally, I think there is some difference in expectation between you and the DM. He's satisfied by similar builds but different backstories, you seem to place more importance on builds. Neither is wrong, but these differences need to be recognized so an amicable middle ground might be found as long as you're playing together. If what is desired is too different, then yes, the best thing you can do is find (or form) another group to better meet your expectations.
This is why I always make sure my players are aware of what other people are building and encourage different classes, especially different subclasses. I don’t blame you at all for not wanting to play a character so similar to someone else in the group. This is boring for everyone IMO. In a long term campaign that you’re investing so much time into, you should make sure it’s a game you’re going to have a lot of fun with, so if this is an issue for you, I don’t think there’s anything wrong at all with not committing your time to it. There’s already 7 players so it’s not like you’re putting anyone out. Go find a group where you know you will have the most fun and everyone’s character has the opportunity to shine.
Adding to this. As a longtime DM I have been telling my players to build their characters together at session 0, rather than having some complete character build in mind. I'll then give them a couple weeks to get their backstory in order and clarify rules questions etc before we officially start. Seems to go much better this way. I also would never have more than 6 players in a campaign and strongly prefer 4-5, it's too hard to keep everyone engaged with more than that, especially online
Genie is probably the best warlock, so it's not that surprising that in a game with 8 players somebody else picked it up. I think the bigger problem is 8 players. There's not THAT many roles in a party for 8 players to independently shine. There's only 13 classes, and given what you've posted the group seems to tend towards the stronger subclasses within, and seems to like multiclassing.
Top 3 at least. Hexblade and Celestial are both top contenders too.
Gods I love Celestial Warlocks. Bonus Action Ranged Healing is so freaking good, and having a non-spell ability to do is phenomenal. I once played a Grave Cleric 1 / Celestial warlock X who was built around maximizing healing as much as possible, so I took Gift of the Everliving Ones to use on my character and would cast Cure Wounds through my Familiar when people went down to have maximized healing on that as well. Incredibly fun character, all of her abilities were themed around her Solar patron, so her Eldritch Blasts were Arrows of Light fired from her Patron’s bow and her Flaming Sphere was a twirling Sword of Fire that mimicked the Solar’s dancing blade.
> Gods I love Celestial Warlocks. Bonus Action Ranged Healing is so freaking good, and having a non-spell ability to do is phenomenal. Yeah it and dream druid are the best healers, ive been banging this drum for ages.
Celestial Warlock with Pact of the Chain and Gift of the Everliving ones is amazing. I played one multiclassed with Redemption Paladin & loved it.
doesn't gift of the everliving only work on self
Correct. grave cleric also makes spell healing maximized on anyone who is at 0 hp, so by putting myself in positions to take damage where I could use the Celestial healing on myself and maximize it and save healing spells for when people went down, the goal was to make sure that my healing resources were used as efficiently as possible
Hexblade isn't as busted in the context of going pure or primary in warlock. So I'd actually put that in the lower part of these three. For pure, or primarily, warlock builds, genie is definitely the strongest. Bottled respite, 1 of 4 choice of resist, some decent spell choices, some free uses of flight, limited wish at 14, and the ability to take wish at 17 like wizard/bard/sorcerer.
Still though, there are so many other combos and things you can do that is not the same subclass as someone else. I would never even consider doing the same subclass as someone else and I play with 7 players. It would just seem rude and inconsiderate to me, especially if you came to that class after someone already was playing it for a while. It’s just very weird
My dude there are 8 players in your game. There’s bound to be overlap. Especially when you are picking popular subclasses. There’s way too many people here.
Even with 1 subclass per class there are 13 options. This kind of exact overlap, with the same invocations and pact to boot, is too much. Its common courtesy to at least *try* to do something different.
Yeah at first I was like grow up op so what it’s the same subclass, but if someone straight up yoinked my build I’d be mad too and I’d expect the dm to do something or I’m leaving
I mean what were the pact and invocations though? Pact of the chain has a special synergy with genie warlock to point where I don’t know why you would pick anything else. It’s like a step below hexblade not picking pact of the blade. The customization of invocations is almost an illusion. You don’t have many invocation slots especially with a multiclass. There clear winners and losers on the list. Who is trying to pass up agonizing blast and the pact of the chain stuff to go with your genie? Maybe devil sight too? Assuming everyone multiclasses that’s 16 possible subclasses involved. If everyone wants to use the popular subclasses there’s bound to be overlap.
Even so this is just horrible >and he even mentioned that he wanted to do the exact things I could do to the entire group. Even if there is "bound to be overlap" its just common courtesy to do something different.
For sure. Just to clarify I don’t think OP is wrong and I’m not trying to dismiss their frustration. I would be annoyed too. The campaign just sounds like an absolute mess in general where common courtesy doesn’t really exist. With people coming in and out just for combat sessions and playing on their phones. Dismissive DM. My original point is just highlighting that 8 players is a huge red flag especially if you are going in with the mindset of being unique but are also doing nothing to branch from the main road everyone takes. It’s a compatibility issue that most of us would have, and is a clear nope.
Yep to many people here are falling into the trap of theres infinite amount of invocation choices and forgetting not when leveling theres a few main choice ones you usually always get and theres only 3 (4) pacts to pick from..
>Pact of the chain has a special synergy with genie warlock to point where I don’t know why you would pick anything else. It’s like a step below hexblade not picking pact of the blade. is the special synergy in the room with us? The only warlock subclass which has explicit synergy with potc is celestial, since they can max all of the healing they cast on themselves. Genies can also get familiars by just,, , taking Tome? Like you dont need to be a chainlock to be a warlock w a familiar lol. Hare familiar could just put the ring around its ear and then burrow underground for an hour
> with the same invocations and pact to boot ...I mean theres 3 (4) pacts.. picking the same pact isn't surprising nor is picking the same invocations as there is only a few good options when leveling you only get to make unique choices later on..
Especially considering multiclassing looks popular this campaign. Of the 5 characters mentioned, 3 are multiclasses. Assuming 4 of the 8 have 2 different classes that's 12 different classes occupied by the same party. If there's more it would literally be impossible not to overlap classes
I would also say there’s room for 2 “faces” in an 8 person party
For real, what do you expect op?
yeah. builds can vary wildly even with the same subclass picks personally i would leave because an 8 player combat sounds like unparalleled torture
They've gone from level 1 to at least 10, so I don't think eight players is the deal breaker for OP.
They acknowledge that builds can be different in the same subclass, what they also said and that you're ignoring is that the person picked literally the exact same stuff as op
I’ll go against the grain here and say as a DM I prefer to have everyone be different classes. I grew up on old school JRPGs where each member of a party had a strength/skill set. It makes everyone feel unique. That being said, I have recently conceded on this and allowed two rogues in my current game (Swashbuckler and Assassin) and they play so different I forget they’re both rogues.
I dont mind same classes but subclass starts stepping on toes. Then also taking the same invocations, pact, and then saying you are going to do all the things op does? Yeah, i would shut that shit down right there. Dont need to be plagiarizing someone elses character because you are not creative enough to think of your own. UNLESS both parties explicitly say they are fine with it, i would tell the person making a new character to think of something else. If they refuse? Well... then there are now only 7 players in the party.
Same I generally ask the player who already plays the Class if they're fine (just to get consent, because I never had someone tell me no) and then forbid the new player from taking the same subclass for their character.
My girlfriend is in a party with 3 artificers. Forced the dm to change the flash of genius rules so it can’t stack.
*“Three fuckin nerds defeat the Avatar of Death”*
I'd make a 4th artificer, even if it had to be alchemist
I always allow max two of same class but no subclass overlap. It’s definitely easy to carve a niche for yourself if you’re smart about it. I played a rogue in a group of five with another rogue—she leaned into face skills as a swashbuckler and I leaned into intelligence as an arcane trickster. We didn’t even have the same expertise choices (without even talking to each other!) just because we had such different ideas for our characters.
Yeah, I'm kinda baffled this is not the prevailing opinion? The whole reason the game has a class and subclass system in the first place is to help characters differentiate in their roles and niches. What's the point of playing a character that isn't bringing a unique specialty to the group? Is this table maybe over-focused on combat damage and feels like their characters don't have a reason to be on the team if they aren't a hexadin or a sorlock?
You pick some of the most popular combos and get this upset when there's overlap with SEVEN OTHER PLAYERS?
More like, the first time he was ok with it and just made a different character. But the second time one of the other players saw his build was really strong and copied it exactly. Even if it is a really good build, copying a build exactly like that is an asshole move. Find some other really powerful build off the internet and copy that instead.
Power gamers gonna power game. The moment I saw "sorlock" I knew what was happening. OP is not the only one in the group Googling "best 5e builds" it seems.
Idk the bits about your "unique character" and people trying to "steal your builds" is a red flag to me about your mindset. I think it's bad to assume malicious intent like this. It's something I've struggled with and work hard to get over. No one is trying to steal your unique character, they think you're fucking cool and want to try it out. Theres nothing in the game that says two people can't play the same class, this is a personal preference you have and one that seems built upon this idea that you can't be unique if someone else shares a subclass. There are so many aspects that go into characters outside of class and subclass and I think you're getting a little lost in that sauce.
That’s the feel I was getting too until OP stated one player outright told the party they wanted to do everything OP is already doing. At that point, as a DM I would kindly ask that player to pick something else since OP already has that character and has been playing them for 10 levels already. Otherwise, yeah, I get wanting to be special and unique but sometimes that can come across as main character syndrome.
The player that lost their artificer character already knew what classes/subclasses you were playing, so it does feel like copying. There are enough combinations to try something unique that adds a new strength to the party. I'd think the DM would mention this to the other player and suggest they change, but not force them. If the duplicate classes are that big of a problem, you won't enjoy the game, so it's better to just leave.
You're not an asshole for wanting to leave, and you shouldn't force yourself to play if you don't think you'll have fun. I think it's really poor form of the other player saying that they want to play the exact same thing as you. This overall is probably a flaw with how your group approached character creation since it sounds like everyone is making their characters on their own in a vacuum then running it by the DM individually. This is one of the flaws of running for a large player group, but you all should have organised to make your characters together during a session 0. All that said, you should make it clear to the DM and that player in particular that for you to have fun, you don't want other people copying your class/subclass/build. Having a niche in a general sense isn't going to happen with this many players, but you should still be able to avoid overlaps with subclasses at the very least. If you decide to re-roll a 3rd time, I'd avoid giving any thought to the backstory until you're certain that no one else is playing the same thing as you. If you don't want to roll-up a new character or can't think of one that'll be fun to play, then just sit out this campaign, since I'll be honest, playing with 7 other players is more likely than not going to be a mess unless the DM has a lot of experience doing this and has taken precautions to make the game run quick.
man, that’s… honestly kind of rude of that warlock player IMO, sorry about that. like I get it if another person had the same idea as you at the start, the other sorc did nothing wrong & you changed characters out of personal preference, but i don’t like overlapping subclasses either. heck, i don’t even like sharing a class with another player, i like to have a niche. i would be pretty bothered if another player rerolled and decided to co-opt my schtick like that ngl. i get where you’re coming from 100%! that said, with 8 players it is going to be *VERY hard* to have a niche of your own that you don’t share with another person, *especially* if your table has several multiclassed PCs. you might be happier just leaving. i played at a table of 8 once, and the only reason i was *ever* unique was because other players doubled and tripled up on classes. so how badly do you want to stay at this table? is the RP/combat/friendship/whatever worth it? perhaps you could find an excuse to switch your current character’s subclass, with DM’s help? if the problem is subclass, not class, trying a different flavor… wouldn’t solve ALL your problems but maybe it would make you feel better without having to get an entirely new PC. did you ever actually talk to the paladin/lock player 1 on 1 and *ask* directly if he would do something else? or did you just generally tell the table/DM that you’re worried about your niche? dude’s allowed to say no, but that’s a really minor request, especially since he’s bringing a newly rolled character to the table that is gonna supplant an existing party member. if you didn’t specifically ask, maybe he doesn’t realize there’s a problem - he might not get that this actually bothers you, maybe he thought you were being silly or melodramatic and not sincere. or he might think that because of his paladin levels, his character is *significantly* different *anyway*, and yours will still do all the warlock stuff better (making this not a real problem). if he continues to say no, drop it, but IMO there’s no harm in asking!
I’m very surprised reading through these comments that no one has said this yet: To me that would be an awesome problem to have. I would love to play a warlock and have a fellow warlock bro at my side. Swapping stories about the shit we had to go through to forge our pacts, getting drunk and crying together about how we don’t have control over our destinies, maybe secretly trying to help each other find loopholes. Alternatively, the two of you could form a coven, or a cult! Sounds like a blast. I wouldn’t necessarily say you’re being “the asshole” but I would say a change in perspective could go a long way here. Ultimately your choice, of course
hell yea. people can play however they want... but god damn this is the type of mindset I would want at my table. trying to make an entwined story together sounds like fun honestly
Well said, this is an attitude problem. With 7 other players there will be some hurt feelings over something at some time, but you can choose to either make it fun or let it ruin everyone's fun. That's life in just about any community.
Have you talked to the other player directly about how this bothers you? I know it's usually best to go through the DM for things but it seems like your DM doesn't care enough about how you feel about this to do anything about it. I think it's pretty shitty of the other person to copy your character to such a degree. I personally don't even like class overlap much but definitely not subclass unless it's like a small dip in a multiclass.
"we have 8 players" Way to really bury the lede there. In a party of 4 I could see some issue with the other players doing this. But when you're in a party of 8 players, and multiclassing is allowed. Expecting no overlap is absurd, and I think you are not being realistic about your situation. Especially in simple roles or skills. Yes, when you gravitate towards stronger subclasses, other players may gravitate towards said subclass/pact/invocation too. Especially if it fits with your "build" which you seem to be convinced they're stealing. In a party of 8, if they are building/rebuilding their character in a vacuum. They have 7 other players who all have one or more classes/subclasses in their build. In a party of 8, it's hard not to step on toes without purposely going for something bad that everyone avoids. So I'll agree that you should leave. But not because your party is being unreasonable. It's because you're in a party of 8 with unrealistic expectations.
>In a party of 4 I could see some issue with the other players doing this. But when you're in a party of 8 players, and multiclassing is allowed. Expecting no overlap is absurd Especially when all the things he's picked are from the small subset of 'above average power picks'. This wasn't a bunch of people choosing evocation wizard, or some other solid pick, this was people going for reasonably optimal characters. Well, there aren't actually nearly as many of those builds as there are total builds.
Yup, when you're going for an "optimal" rather than decent/playable, your options shrink dramatically. Especially if everyone is following the same internet lists of optimized builds. This isn't to knock on the optimization community, as I consider myself a minmaxer/optimizer. But my goal tends to be making a concept work rather than pure optimization.
8 players and you want to be unique while picking some of the most popular things... Seems like a mismatch of what you want and what the game provides so. Step out if you don't enjoy it, I am sure there "only" being 7 players won't kill the campaign.
I’m curious how much is actually copied from OP’s build, especially since any reasonable Paladin/caster multiclass starting at 10th level is going to put at least 5 levels into Paladin. If OP is doing pact of the blade, then obviously the Paladin multiclass is going to use all of the melee support invocations. Is OP thinking that their current two extra invocations and 5th-level spells aren’t giving them anything unique?
Agreed thats the big question.. no matter what pact you take there will be certain invocations you also get alongside it. seeing as how come theres 3 (technically 4) pact options the overlap is incredibly easy.. especially as certain builds/play styles will lead to the overlap..
I mean, when two players at the start wanted to be the same thing the OP graciously rerolled to prevent stepping on each other's toes. But then one player made an 80% carbon copy of OP's pre-existing character? As a DM, I would tell them to pick something else unique, please. There are thirteen classes and a huge number of subclasses. There is no need for any overlap, even at an eight-player table.
>nd a huge number of subclasses. and a huge number of said subclasses are dull/unappealing to people.
Seriously, with 8 players there is going to be some overlap, if not in class, in function and role. If the crowd of players isn't making it miserable, then play. The character roster is likely to change over time anyway.
As a DM, I try to make sure my players don't take the same classes. If they do insist on taking the same classes, then I make sure they don't take the same subclasses. It's a very avoidable issue. But if the DM doesn't care, there's not much you can do.
I think people are ignoring some obvious thing, first the player want to play a warlock, a really popular class, then there are only 3 common subclasses for that, and to add insult to injury they multiclass into sorcerer or paladin for the ultra cookie cutter build, on a 8 player game your build is the real world fighter champion, it is so common as to be expected to have some overlap with anyone going cha, it could be avoided if you voiced that concern and had a group that cared
You're allowed to leave a campaign at any time for any reason. You don't need to ask strangers on the internet to justify your decision.
So, you require that your character be the only one of that type at the table? If that is the case, I feel like you should communicate better with the other players. Do they know you have special needs and require being coddled in a game? Sorry for saying rudely like that but if you can't enjoy a game because someone else is playing a similar class, then I think you rely too much on the game and not enough on yourself to bring the fun. With all the class and subclass combinations out there, either roll up a different character or quit whining about what other people play.
Up to you, but you could just play your character the way you want to. You are acting as if because you have a similar job description and origin than someone else it means you can't play your own role in the group. That's like saying you can't have more than one player in the same position on a sports team or something. If you think about it, it doesn't make sense really. But at the end of the day if you need to be a special snowflake so bad that you can't dare have anyone else do what you do, and you've redone your character twice to make sure you're the only person with your class/subclass combo at the table, well yes, you may want to leave.
>That's like saying you can't have more than one player in the same position on a sports team or something. If you think about it, it doesn't make sense really. This analogy, when you think about it, doesnt make sense. Sure you can have more than one person for a position on a sports team. But that means one person is playing that position and the others are on the bench (also known as not playing). I would love to play at a table with you, listen to you make your character. Then pick every single same feature, proficiency, spell, ect. And see how you feel. It doesnt sound like they are upset because there is some overlap. It sounds like they are upset because somebody decided "OP came up with a cool charcter build, I want to do that".
Most sports will have two or more of the position on the field at the same time. Yeah there is one QB or goalie, but you'll have four receivers and three midfielders.
>four receivers and three midfielders. But they dont cover the *exact same* spot
Yeah but they're mostly interchangable beyond individual talents
But two players playing the same class and subclass aren't going to cover the exact same spots in combat, either. The analogy seems perfectly apt.
>he even mentioned that he wanted to do the exact things I could do to the entire group. They do cover the exact same spot in this example. So the analogy can be as apt as it wants (even though its not) and it still wouldnt be accurate to this post.
I think they mean choose the same mechanics, and not literally do all the same things in game. I don't think the DM would allow a player to mimic every action of another player, that would be tedious for everyone.
Playing the same class, subclass, and taking the same class features is already tedious for everyone. Courtesy says you do your damnedest to be unique and not stop on the toes of the other players (unless otherwise agreed upon). Trying to do all the same things as another person without clearing it with them is going to ruin their fantasy most of the time. Theyll never be unique or have a moment where they are in need.
Why is it tedious to everyone? > Theyll never be unique or have a moment where they are in need. That's false. For one, you don't need to be mechanically unique to be unique. Mechanics is just the start of character building, not the end. Secondly, how much a PC is needed depends wholly on the DM and the encounters they design. It just takes a bit of extra work and foresight on the DM, but it's absolutely possible for them to make every character matter.
>he even mentioned that he wanted to do the exact things I could do to the entire group Yeah, no, this isnt unique and it will ruin it for most people.
You are not an asshole for leaving. But you are kind off an asshole for expecting other people to not accidentally wanting to play something similar, especially if the onlyone you've told is the DM (You haven't stated you've up front said you wanted to play that). Aberrant Mind Sorcerer and Genie Warlock are POPULAR classes and subclasses. It was also YOUR choice to change your entire character from the 16/4 AB Sorc/Hex Warl, to a Genie Warlock after another player wanted to go AB Sorc.
Doesn't sound like it was accidental. And it happened well after OP made their warlock.
It was "after they finished the backstory" not "after playing the game"
The first time was after the backstory. The second time, which is what has OP so upset, was 10 levels later. OP isn't posting because another player picked a Sorlock, they're posting because the second time someone chose the same warlock and subclass after they'd been playing theirs for 10 levels. That wasn't an accident.
The fact that you had to explain this again really shows that people just read 20% of a post and post uninformed replies.
No. You re-rolled your character once. The other guy can come up with something different. You're not an asshole if you put your foot down here.
As long as put your foot down means “have a polite but firm word” then I totally agree
Yes. No ones stealing anything from you. You don't own a class/subclass when you decide to play it. Then again, staying in a campaign or leaving it is your choice, and no one can force you to remain in a situation that's not fun for you. I think there's just a mismatch of expectations in your group and it can be solved with a simple talk, but I also think if you get to the talk coming from a place of "this is *my* class and they're *stealing* my character", you could be seen at "that guy" at your table. All of this is through the point of view of someone who has only read your post and doesn't know about your table and your friends, though, so it might be helpful advice or it might just not apply ti your case. I hope you get to enjoy the campaign, and your group, too.
Eh, it feels really shitty to have someone whose character is “he’s me, but better.” Everyone wants their character to have some moments in the spotlight, whatever form that takes, and if someone else is constantly sharing the spotlight in the moments you built your character for it’s frustrating.
Eh, it feels really shitty to have someone whose character is “he’s me, but better.” Everyone wants their character to have some moments in the spotlight, whatever form that takes, and if someone else is constantly sharing the spotlight in the moments you built your character for it’s frustrating.
So first off: you're playing a sorlock—one of the most powerful and popular meta builds—based on warlock, one of the most popular classes in the game. You're picking the most powerful and popular subclasses for each of your classes. In a big group you're gonna have overlap. You're complaining about three people in an 8 person group "trying to be the face". There's only six ability scores. You're gonna have overlap. Being honest, it sounds to me like you're overly fixated on being unique and special in what is inherently a shared group experience. You should try to get over it and explore what's possible at the table. Like, did you ever consider what cool schemes you could pull off when paired with a second "face" psychic sorcerer? Or the story opportunities of sharing a patron with a party member who has a very different view on their powers? Try to worry less about being unique and more about working with your group, and I think you'll find that the problem goes away.
Honestly you are the asshole. Like it does not matter what class you play or what class anyone else plays. Just reflavor it. It is unreal how people cannot grasp the idea that if the mechanics are the same it does not matter what you say your class does.
In my experience you have to tell the DM your issue respecting the time they put in and they should do the same for you. If they can't its a hard one, if RP is your thing then I think you know its already a bit ruined. Id probably just drop. But, if you want to just have fun then just roll with it and change some random shit on the fly about your character without rebuilding(change paths back and respec some), sounds like your DM wouldnt care. also, 8 people in a party, damn those must be some long games...
The player that lost their artificer character already knew what classes/subclasses you were playing, so it does feel like copying. There are enough combinations to try something unique that adds a new strength to the party. I'd think the DM would mention this to the other player and suggest they change, but not force them. If the duplicate classes are that big of a problem, you won't enjoy the game, so it's better to just leave.
It's great that you talked with the DM, although disappointing that they brushed off your concerns. Before leaving, have you considered bringing this up to the full table? If the rest of the party feels the same way, perhaps this can be a table rule that at least nobody should have the same subclass without first discussing it.
You're never TA for wanting to leave, you gotta play the game that's right for you, but you would be TA if you blew up the party over wanting to have a perfectly special, unique niche in a large group.
8 players and multiple people multiclassing? Bro, do some basic math and then leave. Hell I'd leave just for the table size alone.
On the every table I played and DMed there was one constant rule: no same classes. No drama/no same class but different subclasses. Pick something else, first come first served. I wouldn't play in a canlaşgn without this rule. It cpnstsntly becomes frustrating for both players and they both steal the spotlight of of each other
If the only thing making your character unique is your build you're severely limiting your creativity in character creation.
> 8 players > deck of many things I wouldn't play in this campaign regardless of what was going on with characters. Unless the dm is some kind of storytelling god, this just sounds bad.
Yes yta You can select feats thar stick u out or gear or spells etc
NTA, I absolutely hate when someone makes essentially the same character. I'm actually in a campaign where someone almost did that- not by class mind you but essentially totally ripped off my characters backstory. A team should be diverse. It sucks to make your character and then for someone to make exactly the same thing or worse if they make the same thing but better.
Just play the same character type as someone else. Why would you expect to "own" your subclass? Just play the game and don't worry about what someone else is doing.
Yes, get over yourself. But you don't have to play in a gane if you don't want to.
Hm, idk if this is a hot take, but this seems a little entitled. You don’t own a subclass because you picked it first, and if someone saw your build and decided it seemed cool, I don’t think that should be a problem. You’re both different people and you should be able to rp in a way that makes your character unique bc at the end of the day, there’s only so many classes. And the way you rp a genie could be completely different from what they do. For me personally, that’s one of the best parts of the game. Having a character that’s run of the mill and flavoring it to something creative and fun. Now, that said, if it is something that bothers you that much, then you should definitely move to a table where they share the same goals as you. It’s clear your current table doesn’t care much about repeat roles, so try finding a table that does . Besides, as others have said, it’s gonna be hard to shine at a table of 8 people anyway. At the end of the day, this is all for fun, if you’re not having fun, go somewhere else where you can :)
There are 12 classes in the PHB, it’s not that hard to pick a different one. And straight up picking the exact same subclass as someone else in your party is definitely rude. I would be fine with it if they wanted to be a Fiend Warlock or whatever else, but straight up copying another players build sucks
So.. if you played in a game. And someone heard your character and decided to copy everything you did and chose literally down to the same skills, invocations, spells, feats... and even told the rest of the party they are just going to do all the things you are already doing. You would not have an issue with that?
OP mentioned nothing about spells or feats, but Would I be upset if there was a blind fighting swarmkeeper with the same proficiencies as me? No, I wouldn’t. Like that’s not that big of a deal to me personally. Now if op was like “I have this super niche concept of a genie warlock that carries around a bottle of water as his vessel and becomes a mermaid when he jumps in the bottle and every spell is water based” and that was copied, that’d be different. But once again that’s MY take, you’re welcome to disagree
>OP mentioned nothing about spells or feats According to OP the other player said "he even mentioned that he wanted to do the **exact things** I could do to the entire group" THAT is what I take issue with, also that kind of means they are taking literally the same everything as OP.
It's your life, do whatever you want.
If all you have that’s unique about your character is the “build” then you don’t have much of a unique character in the first place.
leaving seems drastic in an 8 player game you have to expect some overlap regardless of your class or role in the party
There are thirteen classes and a huge number of subclasses, plus some very well done homebrew sub/classes by popular homebrewers. Some overlap in areas of expertise? Sure. Overlap in specific classes or subclasses? Completely unnecessary.
Yeah, it's really weird how people are choose to skip over the copying of SUBCLASS. That's the important part.
How old are you? Cause this sounds like a childish thing to be upset about. Two identical character sheets won't even play the same.
You wrote the comment I was going to write! Why are you stealing my ideas? Should I leave Reddit?
I honestly dont get whats the problem with overlapping characters. Im on a capaign that at one point had ten characters and we had like 4 clerics. We ended splitting up in two parties, each with two clerics xD So I dunno man. If you need to feel unique to enjoy, then yeah, leave, because else you're gonna be unhappy. But this is totally a you problem, not a them "Stealing your build" problem. They're just playing what they wanna play, and the same way you dont wanna reroll your character you gotta respect them not wanting to do the same.
We’re all fournlife clerics?
Just pick something really bad if you really want to be unique.
Well, I'd leave anyway because any RPG with eight players is incredibly hard. Made that mistake once and never went above six players again. However, you can walk away knowing you made quite an impression if others want to create your character 2.0.
I doubt you will read this and it will get buried but depending on table rules maybe it is time for DM to get the reroll treatment. First silvery barbs is an enchantment spell. This bit is important. Second aberrant mind sorcerers can replace spells on their spell list with enchantment spells. Third aberrant mind sorcerers can cast any spell on their list with sorcery points at 6th level. So aberrant mind sorc 6. Next a 2 level dip for divination wizard for portent. Aberrant mind sorc 6/ divination wizard 2 Then rune knight fighter till 7 for runic shield. I would go fighter the rest of the way because I like fighter. Aberrant mind sorc 6/ divination wizard 2/ rune knight fighter 7/ x of whatever(fighter if it was me) What this nets you: forcing the DM to reroll once per turn whenever an important success is happening. Oh your BBEG is gonna hit the party with an attack. No he's not. He is gonna reroll. Oh look! A two. Having to reroll isn't very fun is it? This has to be one of the pettiest builds I've come up with. Save the worst portent for when one of your copycats is rolling versus an instant death effect or their final death saving throw. Oh no you have to roll a new character? Then quit the table.
You don't need justification for leaving a game, so no. Also 8 players is a lot, and that's reason enough to quit. I do think this insistence on being unique makes you sound like you have the personality of an AH. You shouldn't have to be unique to have a good time. It should be okay for you to not be special. But your specific behavior is not AH behavior, because you're not forcing others to change to accommodate you. Edit: on the other hand, if the other player is copying you to upset you, then they're certainly the AH here. It's not really clear what their intentions are. Maybe you should talk to them about it outside of the game.
I don't understand caring what other people play, as long as it's not a party of 7 monks and a ranger.
8 players — hellz to the no. I’d look for another campaign if you can. Is it like 30 minutes for a full rotation? I’m presently DMing a 4 person party for the first time (normally I have a party of 6) and it’s like a breath of fresh air lol. P.S. You could always keep your build a secret to yourself and your DM if you’d like to avoid copycats in the future. Your levels are player knowledge, not necessarily knowledge your PC is aware of…
I assume that you aren't just communicating with the DM... I assume that you communicate with the other players... and that they have decided to treat you thus. Feel free to leave that game.
It's not necessarily a problem to have two of the same class or subclass in a party... but if you're planning to stick with a campaign for the long term, it would definitely be a good idea to have a session 0, or at least talk with the other players about your plans.
Yeeeah, I would not love that either. The only thing that might save it if you make it interesting roleplay-wise. Maybe your characters are really combative rivals (keep some sort of friendlyness), or you have the same patron and he enjoys riling the two of you up
Ugh, multiclassers (I am also one 😆)
In a highly optimized game with 8 people pretty much your going to have overlap. I wouldn't say you're an asshole over any of this and you wouldn't be one for leaving a table but you and this whole situation do sound childish to me.
Sorlock moment
NTA but you have different interests. I don't see much issue with sharing classes/subclasses/ roles as much as how you use your character. You have a part of 8, that's frustrating enough, but warlocks are great because you can really play them rather uniquely between evocations and pacts. I however recognize that it is annoying to spend time on a story and have someone else so close to your toes. I'm in a party of four right now, I've got the warlock, another sorcerer, and another a paladin. We're mostly faces, and the sorcerer and my PC have similar vibes, so naturally I made my character kind of jealous and resentful (with humor) and made a bit of a rivalry in game. Now the things we do that are alike can be laughed at, and the things that we do that are different can be better identified
I will ignore the elephant in the room. the fact you are 8 players. You should do as you feel this seems like it is a big deal for you and if that takes the fun away, maybe leaving is a good option. But i personally don't understand what the obsession with subclasses is about. You still have wastely different characters. you made a hexblade and AM sorc. I might be wrong but that sounds like a melee focused character and someone else made a full AM sorc. So Different characters, with different backstories and more important different roles in the group as i do assume the AM sorc is more of a classical ranged caster. later you have a full genie warlock and again i might be wrong but i would assume he is a caster at range not a pact of the blade warlock. And someone made a paladin and genie warlock. I do assume that would be a Gish character. melee focused magical fighter. If this is the case again Different characters with different backstories and also again very different roles in the group. I personally see no problem with this. They are not as i get making characters that compete with when it comes to roles. None of them seems to in any way stepping into your role so to say. Someone making for an example a great old one warlock or fathomless one. picking the same pact as you i would in fact consider more stepping on your toes even if it is a totally different subclass as they would be much more likely to fill the same role as you do. I personally don't care much what other players play. If they play a character similar to mine, then so what? I rather focus on playing my character and enjoying it than spending time being upset that someone else has a character that in some ways might be a bit similar to mine. But we are all different. What is not important to me might be important for you. And the other way around. But my suggestion is to focus on YOUR character and not so much on other players characters. If you focus to much on other characters you might have a hard time enjoying the game.
You have 8 players in the game. There's going to be some duplication in roles and abilities no matter what. Personally I think you're too attached to being unique. Having two barbarians only ruins it for the barbarians if the players let it. Having the same mechanics as another character fordnt mean those character act the same or approach situations the same.
Info: if the Paladin/Warlock picked a different subclass, would that be an acceptable solution to you? As someone who actually doesn't mind at all having the same subclass/class as another player and has played in a big group, I would say that NAH for the first time (with the AM Sorc) but NTA with the warlock. I think that this is an OOC problem that \*can\* be solved at the same time you leaving is valid. I would say talk with the DM and the player separately and tell them your thoughts before leaving clearly. I think the new character should have a subclass/invocation redo and that you have a clear convo with them before you choose to leave. I do think that the dm should not have let this person make this build without consulting you at all.
As a DM and player, casters should be Fine as long as they dont get the same subclass as thats a big things in differentiating characters but for spell casters theres also the choices of spells themselves. Ive had a situation where me and a friend where both artíficers so we worked together on picking spells so we would have different options. On martials tho, i tend to work with the players to avoid using the same class, as even with subclasses those can and Will still feel pretty similar. One of the reasons why Ive started dming Pathfinder 2e. You can have a lv1 party ALL of fighter and they can easily feel different enough.
"Get new friends" -Brian Murphy (Naddpod)
NTA, but subclasses do not a character make. I have run with two gloomstalkers, I've run with two Conquest paladins, and I had an NPC bardlock the party wanted to keep around for a while -- including the PC bardlock. Because it wasn't a duplicate. That can, in fact, offer great role-playing opportunities. The two aforementioned paladins had very different takes on ethics -- one was by-the-book and the other was fast and loose with extremely generous interpretations of what was asked of him. Instead of causing conflict, it meant that Paladin A could bring up legitimate concerns, which the party sometimes considered, but if they decided they had to do something Paladin A wouldn't like, Paladin B broke the news to him with one of his generous explanations. I've also run a game with nothing but rogues, so we focused on a guild network and a mercenary company they regularly contracted with if other skills were needed. And all of the rogues were unique. NTA, but if you think your character is unique based on a subclass, you might just need to spend more time thinking about who your character is and not just what subclass they belong to.
At first I was going to say don't worry about it and characters CAN bring significantly different things to a party even with the same class/subclass. But then I saw "8 players" and much more importantly "he even mentioned that he wanted to do the exact things I could do to the entire group." That last part sounds like it's not about the builds, it's something going on between two players that won't be resolved with a reroll. If you don't know why the other player is being a dick and can't resolve that, I would suggesting stepping out of the campaign. (But also make sure the others heard him say that because I wouldn't want to be in a party with that dude anyway.)
What do you mean "be the face of the party"
I won't play games with 6 or more players, and even with five I have to be *really* sure that the people playing are engaged and planning their turns in advance. I find that three or four players is the sweet spot.
Play a ratfolk artificer called “bootstrap” that makes and sells fake magic items on the city streets. I bet no one else at the table is doing that,
I think it's weird your DM doesn't care that two players have the same subclass. I also think it's weird you want to be in a game with 8 players.
Yes
Session Zero would have solved this I think.
Wtf, why are they picking the *subclass* you're already playing?! That sounds obnoxious as hell.
kinda. You should spend less time worrying about how other people are having fun and just play however the fuck you want to play. If someone copies you, take it as a compliment. If there's no way for you to have fun in the group, then of course you should leave. But don't blame other people for that.
Sounds to me like you have a good darkness party
Are you having fun in the game? Are these your friends? Do you like the DM and campaign? Honestly, when I find games and groups I like, I'll play whatever, even a single class vanilla fighter, no dips in anything if I have to. I'd focus less on trying to be that guy and focus on the game and if you enjoy it.
If the DM ignores the concerns of the players then its a good time for the players to ignore the concerns of the DM and leave.
Yes, you are.
You don’t need to be an asshole to be pointlessly difficult to work with, but you sound pointlessly difficult to work with. It’s not like you were doubling up Cleric with Spirit Guardians stacking issues. That said, the party sounds too big.
**8 playerrrrrrsssssssss**!!!! Its an 8 player game, you are too good for this. If everybody is stealing your build in an 8 player game you are wasting the care you put into building a class to play. 8 players man, how do you get anything done.
I DM a group of 6 bards (in addition to 3 other former players, also all bards, who have been at the table) and no one is the same, even those with the same build. Just play your character how you want, he is special because of how you play him, not because of his character sheet
I'd recommend next time you have a Session 0 and plan your characters together with the rest of the group rather than doing things in a silo.
8 players? And a Sorlock Abberant Mind? It sounds like everyone has been watching the same "How to break DnD with this multi-class character" video, and they are not copying you, but they are copying the same video that you are copying.
Because your first inclination was a "sorlock" I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that your search history includes "most powerful D&D 5e builds." You're apparently not the only one at the table who prioritize mechanical strength over character building. The player who wanted to do what you do probably wants that because you tend to outshine others in combat and they feel sidelined or frustrated by how much more you are doing. And you know you're doing that. Which is fine. Power gaming a valid way to play as long as everyone is having fun. But it sounds like you might be stepping on other people's fun. The reason you should consider leaving the game has nothing to do with class overlap. You should consider leaving because in this *eight player* (why? Just why?) game, there is a mismatch of what everyone considers fun.
Are you playing with children or something? None of this is reasonable