D&D 5E DM's: what do you do with players who miss time?

[Sunseeker]

Your character not earning xp for something they weren't involved in - no matter what the reason - isn't a punishment.
If I were punishing you, you'd earn less XP for the same stuff others gained a full share.

So how do we measure involvement? I wouldn't say a character gets no XP because he died in the fight, he still fought! And if he's ressed later, the death was no more of a failure than a failed on save against being charmed. Do you deduct players for getting charmed and fighting for the enemy? Or is that still involvement? Why is death then when their involvement ends? What if they drop for a couple rounds...then are brought back up? Do you deduct 2 rounds of XP?

There's no guideline for any of that, it's wholly DM discretion, and it is of course your table to run.

You were involved in the fight, even if your involvement was cut short by some good hits. Not rewarding you for something you were involved in is in your own words, a punishment.

 

[ccs]

All good questions, but I think a better question is, what does it matter? What if the character is brought back to life after 3 adventures, and receives the same level as the rest of the party? You say it doesn't make sense, but isn't the mechanical effect on the game more important?

How else would that character be able to work in the party, if all the players are of a much higher level? You'd have to bring that character up to the same level as the rest of the party anyway, or he/she would be a dead weight.

This is only a problem when the only thing that matters are the #s.
Fortunately I don't play in, or run, those types of games.

Additionally? In my favorite edition (1e) it's not at all uncommon to have a mix of lvs in a party - because each class has its own xp track & things like lv drain exist. Additionally, though rarer, are bonus lvs gained via magic items. Combibe all three of these & .....
Our current party consists of characters between 7th - 12th lv. Each of us is fully useful both mechanically & RP/story wise.

 

[Lanefan]

But this is a fiction, right? You as GM are not actually determining the results of all NPC-NPC interaction in the game world, surely? You must be fiating it at some level of abstraction. You as GM probably have not determined even the identities of the vast majority of fictional people inhabiting your game world.

Of course not, but that doesn't deny their existence.

Whereas IRL those off-stage teams really are playing each other.

IRL I don't know the identities of (or anything else about) 99.999999% of the people currently in or near Philadelphia PA, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.

This IMO is why rules-as-physics is a dangerous rabbit hole - it's never achievable, and attempts to do so take you farther and farther away from what should be a focus on what's best for the at table game.

It's not a rabbit hole at all; it's just plain and simple recognition that things work the same whether on stage or off.

Lan-"and I'm not at all sure about the other .000001%"-efan

 

[ccs]

Lan-"34th-player/31st-DM multiclass, eh? I sure don't feel any stronger for it...or smarter...or wiser...or..."-efan

CCS - 35th lv DM/33.5 lv player.
(I was made DM upon opening my Basic set Christmas Day back in '80. The rules said that one person had to be the DM. Since it was "my" book.... So by default I was expected to read it & then teach the game to my brother & cousin. I had several days over Xmas break to acomplish this.)
I am smarter & wiser for all that XP though. Especially the first few thousand pts worth.

 

[iserith]

Sure, but what happens off-stage follows the same mechanics as what happens on-stage; we just don't see it. We focus on the PCs, obviously; but they're still a part of a bigger world and as such have to mechanically and seamlessly fit in to said bigger world.

I don't see anything in the rules that necessarily supports this claim. The DM uses task or attack resolution mechanics as needed with some parity between PCs and NPCs, but for the most part, they don't really function the same, nor do the rules necessarily mandate anything about the physics of the game world.

I'm sure there are plenty of good reasons for handling XP the way you and others do - I just don't think this is a particularly good argument for it. And on that particular note, what is your goal with doling out XP as you do and how well does your method support that goal?

 

[Lanefan]

And on that particular note, what is your goal with doling out XP as you do and how well does your method support that goal?

My primary goal with the xp system I use is to keep advancement at a slow to very slow rate (so the campaign will last longer) while still rewarding characters for what they do. So far so good, I suppose, in the keep-it-going department: 3 major campaigns thus far of 10, 12 and 7+ years respectively. As for the rewarding, I could certainly fine-tune it far more than I do but life's too short; in a perfect world I'd go beyond simple participation in a combat or other encounter and fine-tune it to what that participation achieved based on the goals of the character and of the party, while also looking at what the character did both in relation to its established personality and in relation to what it in theory could have reasonably done (or attempted; e.g. a fighter who misses on all 6 swings she takes in a battle won't lose out vs. the fighter who hit on all 6 tries, it's the attempt that counts). But I ain't got the time during the game to make notes that detailed; so I just keep a list of characters in the party and tick off each time who got in on an encounter, and work it out later.

But even without the fine-tuning players still know that if they want to advance they'd better get involved somehow, and to some extent it discourages passengers.

That said, I also give out what we call "dungeon bonus", a varying amount of xp per adventure mostly for completion of the mission; the in-game rationale being that these are the xp that would otherwise be earned in little tiny dribs and drabs for doing minor things to keep the party going (finding campsites, keeping watch, tending the wounded, testing items, etc.) that I just can't be bothered to track. The meta-game rationale is these in a tiny way replace the old xp-for-g.p. in 1e as written. This dungeon bonus is usually less (sometimes quite a bit less) than a character's already earned just by going through the adventure, but it's something. Most of the time I just calculate each character's bonus by setting a fixed arbitrary number (let's say 4000 for this purpose) and giving a ratio of that based on the number of days a character was active during the adventure (so if the adventure took 10 days the bonus would be 400 xp per day).

If a particular adventure gave out unusually heavy or light amounts of xp I'll use the bonus to compensate a bit. For example the current group I'm running are in an adventure vs. Giants and are raking in the xp; so I'll tone the bonus down a bit for this one. Conversely, I've run adventures in the past that gave out very few xp yet the characters were successful in their mission, so the dungeon bonus here was relatively large. Bonus is smaller if for some reason the mission was a failure; and in one memorable case from years ago there was no bonus given at all: the party never found the dungeon after several weeks tromping around the wilderness looking for it and despite several hammer-sized hints.

Lan-"characters tend to do better working as a team than as a bunch of individuals but they need to learn this for themselves; I'm not going to enforce it"-efan

 

[ccs]

So how do we measure involvement? I wouldn't say a character gets no XP because he died in the fight, he still fought! And if he's ressed later, the death was no more of a failure than a failed on save against being charmed. Do you deduct players for getting charmed and fighting for the enemy? Or is that still involvement? Why is death then when their involvement ends? What if they drop for a couple rounds...then are brought back up? Do you deduct 2 rounds of XP?

There's no guideline for any of that, it's wholly DM discretion, and it is of course your table to run.

You were involved in the fight, even if your involvement was cut short by some good hits. Not rewarding you for something you were involved in is in your own words, a punishment.

To this last bit ^: you were involved in x % of the encounter before being killed. That is the % you will be rewarded for.
You are building UP to 100%, not starting at 100% & falling.

It's a % system.
It involves some note taking, post session math, & DM judgment (I know, that's a heretical concept if you want a purely mechanical system/answer...)
It's based upon what % of the xp generating encounter you're character was involved in.
Charmed? Still involved, just playing for the other team.
Victim of some immobilizing spell/condition- subject to DM discretion.
Unconcious - just like being dead. But easier to cure....
Dead? We've established the dead don't gain xp (or lose it btw) So if for example you made it 40% through a fight (that the party succeeded at), you'd gain 40% of the expected xp. Unsuccessful encounters don't yield xp.
Player not at game? No xp. Because nobody but you runs your character. Since the character isn't being played, they don't do anything.

Next we have two different types of present but not active in the encounter:
Ex #1: Tonight Alex spent 9/16 rounds serving as the parties rear guard as we engaged in a (surprisingly tough & lengthy) encounter to clear the mouth of our escape rout. We knew we were being pusued. (Still are) So Alex waited in ambush until we sent the signal late into the 9th round to get his rear up the tunnel. The time he spent on guard duty turned out to be 9 rounds of down time for him.
But Alex gets full XP because he was doing his job in the encounter, making choices/checks, etc. He could have been actively stabbing things on the front line. Or he could be making sure we weren't set upon from behind. He couldn't do both at once.

Ex#2: in our 5e game the party decides to take a short rest. The Rogue though declares that he's going to scout/explore ahead instead.
The rest of the party refuses to go with him.
The rogue received all the xp for the several encounters he succefully dealt with. The party? No XP for those encounters - but they're rested!

 

[Sunseeker]

To this last bit ^: you were involved in x % of the encounter before being killed. That is the % you will be rewarded for.
You are building UP to 100%, not starting at 100% & falling.

It's a % system.
It involves some note taking, post session math, & DM judgment (I know, that's a heretical concept if you want a purely mechanical system/answer...)
It's based upon what % of the xp generating encounter you're character was involved in.
Charmed? Still involved, just playing for the other team.
Victim of some immobilizing spell/condition- subject to DM discretion.
Unconcious - just like being dead. But easier to cure....
Dead? We've established the dead don't gain xp (or lose it btw) So if for example you made it 40% through a fight (that the party succeeded at), you'd gain 40% of the expected xp. Unsuccessful encounters don't yield xp.
Player not at game? No xp. Because nobody but you runs your character. Since the character isn't being played, they don't do anything.

Next we have two different types of present but not active in the encounter:
Ex #1: Tonight Alex spent 9/16 rounds serving as the parties rear guard as we engaged in a (surprisingly tough & lengthy) encounter to clear the mouth of our escape rout. We knew we were being pusued. (Still are) So Alex waited in ambush until we sent the signal late into the 9th round to get his rear up the tunnel. The time he spent on guard duty turned out to be 9 rounds of down time for him.
But Alex gets full XP because he was doing his job in the encounter, making choices/checks, etc. He could have been actively stabbing things on the front line. Or he could be making sure we weren't set upon from behind. He couldn't do both at once.

Ex#2: in our 5e game the party decides to take a short rest. The Rogue though declares that he's going to scout/explore ahead instead.
The rest of the party refuses to go with him.
The rogue received all the xp for the several encounters he succefully dealt with. The party? No XP for those encounters - but they're rested!

While I do typically have faith in the DM to fairly adjudicate things, I am inherently suspect of systems that are neither written nor trackable. Your system IMO relies too much on things that only you are accounting for. I likely wouldn't be comfortable playing with such a system, I like to know the rules by which I am being graded and your system doesn't provide that. But hey I'm just some guy on the internet.

 

[Imaculata]

Here's how I determine xp:

The party receives xp for any encounter they've beaten. Whether it is enemies defeated in combat, or enemies who surrendered, or enemies that were overcome in some other original way. Enemies do not need to be dead in order to receive exp for them. In fact, I will award bonus exp to the party, if they are exceptionally clever at overcoming an encounter in a none-combat way.
The party receives completion exp for any quest they've completed, and bonus exp if they also completed bonus objectives. These bonus objectives aren't always known to them. For example, a quest about ridding a tomb of undead, might have a side objective of laying a spirit to rest.
The party receives role playing exp for any great role playing moments. These are usually the things that got a response from the entire table. If one player does something really funny, really clever, really cool, or just really fitting his character, then the whole group is rewarded. I reward both the moments that everyone agrees on, and moments that I personally thought were really good. I also let my players know what actions earned them extra exp. I try to be as transparent as possible about how exp is calculated.

 

[S'mon]

it's just plain and simple recognition that things work the same whether on stage or off.

So you have a world where XP are real, hit points are real, the rules determine the physics
of the universe even off-stage? No one in the universe gets broken bones or lingering injuries in combat if the combat rules don't give those effects?