Absent Players

[Darth K'Trava]

In the game I am a player in, when someone can't make it, their PC is still present. The PC can carry things, stand watch, and that's about it. For this, the PC get's 1/4 XP and a 1/2 share of treasure.

In the games I DM, I run the missing persons PC, for which he gets 1/2 XP and 1/2 treasure. If more than one person can't show, we usually play something else or just scrub the gameday.

Our's don't get that much. They're made to watch the horses while everyone else is in combat. No treasure, no XP.

But with 3.5 rules, they can catch up fairly quickly in XP.

We're pretty lenient as far as excuses as the most we've had to deal with is work schedules (mine and one other), conventions (of which there are several and most of us are on committee for one of them) and any family emergencies. It's an understanding that if you're not there, DON'T expect to get any rewards from that particular session. Everyone knows that and agrees with it.

 

[Hypersmurf]

PCs played by other players also have a disturbingly high mortality rate.

"Yeah, I think Mike would try to wrestle that dire wolf if he were here."

Sounds like us, right there

If you're not there, your PC gets run by committee. And you have a tendency to volunteer for opening doors, purchasing mundane equipment and draft animals, and covering retreats.

A recent (and completely accidental) tradition seems to be that if Paul's not there, Quinn catches a disease... she's had Ghoul Fever and Devil Chills so far. We're assuming that next time Paul's absent, the party's gonna run into a Mummy...

-Hyp.

 

[scourger]

I've done it two ways. One, if the players isn't there then the PC isn't there. Two, the PC is there regardless of whether the player is there or not. Right now, I like option one better; and I'll likely structure my next game to account for it. Option one is less realistic than option two for some players in our group, but I hope option one will put more pressure on people to show up & play. With option two, why not skip (since you get XP & loot anyway)?

 

[frankthedm]

Players who do not show, are normally treated as occupied with “downtime” matters that earn them no XP and keeps them unavailable to the party, in essence they are retired for the session. If a previous session left off during a battle or similar cliffhanger, I run the character as an NPC’s according to the player’s playstyle with that PC. They gain their fair share of the XP [and fair risk of death] until the point they can believably head off for their one session retirement. If the other PCs leave the area where the missing character is staying, the absent player is responsible to track down the other party members upon his return.

 

[Anditch]

Howdy!

I know this has been discussed before on this site, but what do other GMs do about a player missing sessions?

Do you NPC them and grant them some portion of experience? No experience?

I ask because I have a player who is now constantly missing sessions in favor of another game that up until now ran about once every 3 months. My group consists of 7 players and I am looking for advice.

Thanks!

What our group has dabbled in is giving the PC the same XP as a NPC. We have also send them off to report or whatever so that they dont get killed whilst away. Asking someone else to control someone elses character slows the game down as the new person will not be familiar with the charater. This then slows the game and eventually all those that turn up get less xp. Another solution that no one has suggested is this. Either give them 1/2 xp of the highest PC player for that night or !/2 xp of the lowest PC. Also another suggesting is to give them 10-25% less xp than the lowest person. If they are dropping behind severely because of missed games for whatever the reason. If they dont have enough time and work or their family is getting in the way then its time to choose what they think is more important. A fantasy game or real life. If you die because you are 2 or 3 levels lower than the party live with it. Make a new character which is of level. If you want to it can be the exact same character that died even down to its name. Who is stopping you from playing your old characters twin brother. That a novel twist dont you think guys.

 

[National Acrobat]

Howdy!

I know this has been discussed before on this site, but what do other GMs do about a player missing sessions?

Do you NPC them and grant them some portion of experience? No experience?

When we start a group, we always have everyone decide who will play their character when they aren't around. The DM keeps the character sheets after each session, that way if someone isn't there, their sheet is. The player's character gets full shares of everything, since they are involved. We have 2 players that travel a lot for business, so they aren't always available.

Kinda like a buddy system.

 

[Fenes]

We do not use XP, but just level up the party as we see fit - all PCs have the same level all the time - so it is not possible to miss out on xp in my campaign.

Treasure is another non-issue - in my FR campaign magic items, but for scrolls and potions, are rare. What significant magic items are there were custom-made, with a backstory, and tend to evolve during game.

So, a player who misses a session just misses that - the adventure itself, the fun to be had.

The PC of the missing player gets played by the DM (me), and I aim to run the character as he or she was run by the player. Since I don't kill PCs unless the player desires it, there is no risk or unfair protection there.

In the case of a player absent for 6 months due to military duty we had his PC go on an extended voyage. Another player currently absent for 6 months due to final exams has his PC with the party, since that made more sense.

 

[Dexterward]

Currently I have a small group of four players and myself. Usually when someone can't make a session, I don't run the game for that week. It doesn't happen too often. Since we run one game per week, missing a game here or there isn't all that bad.

In the past I would run the PC as and NPC for the session and grant them 1/4 EXP and an equal share of the treasure. After a while this led to inconsistency problems. For example: in one campaign I ran, we had a player that wanted to play a druid. The problem was he really didn't know how to play the class effectively. In the first game session, the party, due to the foolish actions of the paladin, lost their horses and supplies to an orc patrol during a snow storm. The party stumbled across the wilderness for days lost (even with the druid in the party)! I am not the type of DM to tell players what their characters can do, but I kept offering advice to the druid player. He would listen to my suggestions, and then do the opposite. So the session ended with the party hopelessly lost without food in a blinding blizzard. The next session, the player of the druid could not make it. I played the druid as an NPC. Well, the running joke after that session was that the druid slipped on a chunk of ice and hit his head becoming "suddenly smart." I played the druid with the same personality, but because I made good uses of spells and personally know how to survive in the wilderness I was more effective as the druid than the player was. After that the players would try to talk the druid player into missing the game so I could run the character and the party would have the "smart" druid back.

I also personally hate having a character "present" yet not doing anything. I think it takes away from the gaming experience. I don't mind leaving a PC in a town or city, but usually when a player can't make it their characters are in the middle of the wilderness, dungeon, etc. with no really good way of the PC returning to the town. I like consistency in my games.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Well, the running joke after that session was that the druid slipped on a chunk of ice and hit his head becoming "suddenly smart."

Heh. That's similar to our paladin story.

We had three competent, generally sensible players, and three 'beer-and-pretzels' players.

One of the latter was playing a paladin, but not doing a great job of it. He was indecisive, cowardly, and didn't make sensible tactical decisions. (And this wasn't due to interesting characterisation... this was because the player was indecisive, cowardly, and didn't make sensible tactical decisions )

And then one session, the player wasn't there... and the three of us who knew what we were doing decided that the paladin had 'seen the light', and ran him by committee as a staunch paragon of righteous smitefulness.

That session ended with the paladin prone, on zero hit points, using his staggered standard-action-and-pass-out option to swing his greatsword at the bearded devil one last time... and he killed it.

It was awesome. If the original player had been there, we'd probably all have died

-Hyp.

 

[frankthedm]

Heh. That's similar to our paladin story.

We had three competent, generally sensible players, and three 'beer-and-pretzels' players.

One of the latter was playing a paladin, but not doing a great job of it. He was indecisive, cowardly, and didn't make sensible tactical decisions. (And this wasn't due to interesting characterisation... this was because the player was indecisive, cowardly, and didn't make sensible tactical decisions )

And then one session, the player wasn't there... and the three of us who knew what we were doing decided that the paladin had 'seen the light', and ran him by committee as a staunch paragon of righteous smitefulness.

That session ended with the paladin prone, on zero hit points, using his staggered standard-action-and-pass-out option to swing his greatsword at the bearded devil one last time... and he killed it.

It was awesome. If the original player had been there, we'd probably all have died

That FRIGHTENINGLY resembles my group excecpt i have 1d3-1 good players[0=host has headache too visious to think clearly] and 1d4 'beer n' pretzels' players