I found out today that my DM (in a D&D 5e game) made some tweaks to my character's backstory, specifically some of the formative parts of his 'creation'. These changes are on the border of myth and logic, which wouldn't be a problem except that she landed more on the myth side, which placed the soul in a 'death adjacent' position. My character is a twin-souls, a pair of infant twins who were gravely injured and before they died the Traveler intervened and bonded them together into a single being.
To quote my DM:
Yes but I have a system where, as [character] levels up the manifestations of his soul grow more powerful and he gets new abilities.
3rd Level: Beyond the Vale: Your eyes turn milky white and you can see through the eyes of your second soul (Ethereal Vision 10ft) 1/short or long rest.
6th Level: Ghostly Presence: You can activate this ability to make your body turn into that of a ghost (Just Appearance) and if in combat every creature that can see you must make a saving throw equal to 8 + Proficiency Bonus + Charisma Modifier. You should be dead – the Traveller is powerful but not powerful enough to remove all factors of a dead soul; the Raven Queen would never allow it.
The problem is that in my original backstory the character wasn't actually dead. Near death, but not dead. Saved from death by The Traveller. Her changes place this event within the realm of The Raven Queen, and result in the 'death adjacent' problem.
As a result I now have some problems. First, she started by telling me of two custom feats, neither of which make sense mechanically or for the character.
Second, with these changes the character's whole narrative raison d'etre doesn't make sense. This is already a crazy character, but with these changes it's just really bad and I can't play that. I predict he'll be unplayable by level 6.
Playing in character is kind of the point for me, and there are some characters that are just too unrealistic, even for D&D. A crazy teenager who enjoys stabbing things, eats lunch in random sewers, and travels just wherever, is plenty crazy enough. I don't need to be adding this whole demi-ethereal, death-adjacent, half-ghost edgelord mess.
I don't know if she's going to add the feat or force me to sub the feat for one that I would have taken. Either way it's adding nonsense to a character. She seems to think this is a really cool thing, so if I let it happen and just ignore it, she's going to be more insulted in the long term. So, I have to nip this in the bud, but as cleanly and nicely as possible.
How do I tell her this without insulting her?
Best Answer
Tell the DM how you feel using passive tone and I statements.
The goal here is to:
Passive tone in combination with I statements will avoid accusing or putting words in the mouth of the other person. Both of those frequently result in a defensive reaction.
I statements
Only make statements about your own observations, actions, and feelings.
Generally in the form of, "When X happned, I felt Y."
Use passive tone avoiding attribution.
When describing the situation that you are not enjoying, avoid assigning blame or attribution. Simply state observations about the things in the situation. For example, "the alterations to the character" instead of "the changes you made".
Express how you feel about the situation
"When the background of the the character was changed to have actually been dead, I felt bewildered initially. After reflecting upon the changes, I realized they did not sit well with me. When I think about the character being in the demense of the Raven Queen, I feel [insert your feeling here]."
Perhaps try "...demense of the Raven Queen, I feel less invested and interested in playing the character."
State an alternative you would like
Offer alternatives and ask for assistance
Appealing to a persons' expertise is a reasonable method for getting assistance in changing a situation such that it is palatable to both you and the DM.
"Could we work together to come up with a background that is inspiring, works mechanically, and fits in with the plot designs?"