Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Quickbeam" data-source="post: 207586" data-attributes="member: 635">Reprisal:We have begun discussing this problem as a group, and are considering turning these player's PCs into NPCs, or providing them with other NPCs relevant to the campaign when they're able to attend.&nbsp; No one intends to be rash or hasty (despite my username <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />) since we're all friends, but we want to retain some continuity in the group.&nbsp; Certainly I agree that making any of our storylines hinge on these characters is a bad move.Ulrick:We are sorta using a 75% ratio for participation by default right now.&nbsp; During the summer we only game once every two weeks, and simply ask that players attempt not to miss more than one out of every four sessions.&nbsp; It's just that the pattern of absence has increased for a couple of players despite these accomodations.hong:I don't think any of us had considered the idea of co-oping the bad guys, but I'll toss that concept out before our next session.Maldur:We'd happily revert to this system if there was a viable in-game means of allowing characters to pop into and out of our current locations.&nbsp; How do you handle this, or does your group not concern itself with the logistics of character appearance and disappearance?Thanks for the replies thus far, please keep 'em coming <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Quickbeam, post: 207586, member: 635"] Reprisal: We have begun discussing this problem as a group, and are considering turning these player's PCs into NPCs, or providing them with other NPCs relevant to the campaign when they're able to attend. No one intends to be rash or hasty (despite my username ;)) since we're all friends, but we want to retain some continuity in the group. Certainly I agree that making any of our storylines hinge on these characters is a bad move. Ulrick: We are sorta using a 75% ratio for participation by default right now. During the summer we only game once every two weeks, and simply ask that players attempt not to miss more than one out of every four sessions. It's just that the pattern of absence has increased for a couple of players despite these accomodations. hong: I don't think any of us had considered the idea of co-oping the bad guys, but I'll toss that concept out before our next session. Maldur: We'd happily revert to this system if there was a viable in-game means of allowing characters to pop into and out of our current locations. How do you handle this, or does your group not concern itself with the logistics of character appearance and disappearance? Thanks for the replies thus far, please keep 'em coming :). [/QUOTE]

Verification