D&D 5E How Do You Reward Attendance and Participation?

[Sadras]

I have tried various methods over the years - XPs, milestones, session-based XPs, training monkey for extras, XP penalties for latecomers...etc

Experience has shown that none of that works for my table. I do not have an attendance issue, my players would play every week if I could manage it, sadly life & wife.

But there are other ways though to reward players (should you wish to):
1) The ability to earn Renown, Faith and/or Sanity Points;
2) Gaining allies, quest leads and more spotlight even expanding networks;
3) Obtaining specialised equipment, vehicles, rare familiars, lore, and magical items;
4) Bonus inspiration points
5) Minor plot points

 

[Iry]

I reward attendance and participation by running the game.
If someone misses my game, they lose out on the fun of playing that day.
If someone misses MANY games, I talk to them about it outside of the game.

If you are upset that your players avoid side-quests, I would suggest structuring your main quests such that they allow time to pursue side quests, littering your side-quests with clues and advantages they can use in the main-quest, or checking to see if your players are totally cool skipping side-quests and you just have a mild mismatch of expectations (and then talking to them about it outside of the game).

 

[Jd Smith1]

Your coach sounds like a terrible coach.

We took State. He was a great coach.

My point was, there are different outlooks, and different ways to enjoy the hobby.

My players are results-oriented. They show up every week, year in, year out, because of that.

 

[Coroc]

In my current campaign I did award individual XP because I did explicitely test the BA concept and to my experience it works fine. The maximum level difference was 2. Id did not hurt. As the most high level players are now 7 I set the threshold to 5 if someone joins the game though.
Every player gets a starting magic item now at 5, nothing special, the equivalent to a +1 weapon or a ring granting elemental resistance of one kind or such. But other loot only goes to the people attending.
I enforce a quasi bind to character on pickup rule, in many cases, not in all the players find items which will turn out useful for their particular class if not instant then later on in the campaign.
I rule this as e.g. the fighter going for the sword looking like it could be magic whereas the wizard would check on the scroll first if there is a pile of loot, so it is not unrealistic to me.
To inherit something from another character, I would decide on that case by case.
I am not shy to proclaim: No your character will not let go of this to give the item (thought bubble of me: "which I clearly intended for you") to his comrade.

 

[Li Shenron]

Or should I go with XP awards and not give XP to those who miss?

I always do this. But anyway I do not understand your players "apathy". To me the opportunity to play the game IS the reward. If they skip some parts, just change the adventures so that they don't have too much of those, maybe they simply prefer to focus on ONE main quest and do no like to multitask.

 

[dave2008]

I don't use milestone. It encourages slackness.

I think that is a player / group issue if that is your experience. I have used milestone advancement since the early 90's and have not had any issue with slackness. If the players and DM trust each other and have a fun, mature, cooperative gaming environment I can't see how milestone advancement could encourage slackness (depending on how you want to define that term).

Of course, all of us have a sports background, so playing without a score is unthinkable.

Interesting idea, but again I don't think that holds water. Of my original gaming group two of us had strong sports backgrounds (soccer, tennis, lacrosse, track) and of my 2nd gaming group all of us have sports backgrounds (in addition to soccer, judo, & jiu jitsu, there is a D1 wrestler and D1 rower in that group). We all seem to have no trouble playing D&D without a "score." I actually think the team first mentality preached in the sports I've played and coached is antithetical to keeping individual XP scores. What matters most is team success, not individual goals.

EDIT: Group #1 is all in their mid 40s and group 2 is me (DM) and my teenage son's and their friends.

 

[Jd Smith1]

I always do this. But anyway I do not understand your players "apathy". To me the opportunity to play the game IS the reward. If they skip some parts, just change the adventures so that they don't have too much of those, maybe they simply prefer to focus on ONE main quest and do no like to multitask.

I think you have hit upon a point: is there a pattern to what they are skipping?

Every GM has their own style, and he or she needs players who are compatible with that style. So the question should be: are these players uncommitted and need to be booted, or is the GM not delivering the style of gaming that they desire?

If the latter, the GM needs to decide whether he or she should compromise and change the nature of the game, or boot the malcontents and seek more compatible players.

 

[dave2008]

That's kind of the point of sports, of which I'm not a devotee, to win. Sports is a team activity where you try to win, and crush the enemy team.

As a side note, I know someone who plays rugby passionately, and she does not just "enjoy the experience".

That is a point of sports, but it is not the only point of sports and it varies with different types of sports (and players). I've played and coached sports my entire life (sometimes with elite athletes). Personally, though it is a great feeling to win with your teammates, I get a hell of a lot out for the social endeavor of playing with and for my fellow teammates whether we win or lose, are good or bad (and I have played on both teams). The ability to work and grow together is as much a part of sports to me, if not more, than crushing my enemies is.

A side note: this apparently rubbed off on one of my sons as he decided to stop playing soccer because it was becoming to goal oriented (and he just wanted to have fun) and joined a crew team because it was more social. I guess it worked as it helped get him into one of the best universities in the states - so that is a win for the social benefits of sports!

 

[NaturalZero]

I only run games with milestones anymore because it feels like an unnecessary and completely arbitrary chore to track XP. I've never had an issue with people showing regularly unless the game was at the point where it completely fell apart because of scheduling issues. On the other hand, I've played in games that were XP based and people would regularly skip and i suspect it was more an issue with the campaign being less compelling than it could be.

The last time I DMed it was a one-shot for a group of friends, half of which I hadn't gamed with in 15 years. The session was 6 hours straight, with only a 20 minute break, because the guys were so hooked on the story. They didn't need XP, or tokens, or handouts to stay interested in the game. They stayed to play because they actually enjoyed the experience.

When I run an ongoing game though, in-game rewards make a lot more sense to me. XP is this weird metagaming thing that doesn't necessarily make sense as far as narrative flow and I find that magic items are a much more natural incentive. If you want the magic sword from the dragon's hoard, you have to show up to the session. If you miss out, you've still be at the same point as everyone else in the storyline (level), but you don't get the one-time only loot.

 

[Lanefan]

But what do you think about the fiancée's complaint that random encounters and side quests hamper milestone / story advancement?

First: fiancee's point is valid - which is one of many reasons I'd never ever use any sort of milestone or story-based levelling: it does discourage going off-mission.

It's the side quests and off-cycle encounters that give a campaign depth, and show that there's more to the setting than just the one-story AP they happen to be playing through.

Second: to respond to the original question: participation is its own reward for attendance. Experience points are something earned by what the character does, not the player; and if the character isn't involved in something it doesn't get xp for it.

Further, a character doesn't need a player present in order to earn xp, but the flip side is that said character is at the same amount of risk as it would be if its player was present.

And third: can one 'win' an RPG? I say that to some extent yes you can. As a group you can win by surviving, by completing the mission or AP or whatever, and by gaining whatever in-fiction rewardss come with that. As an individual you can win when it's your PC that saves the party or pulls off the spectacular play, by being the character the party look to for guidance or leadership or whatever you want to call it, and-or by playing the character (or being the player!) whose entertainment value keeps other players coming back every week.

Finally: if you're just starting a new campaign, that's the time to reshuffle the player list by inviting in those you want at the table and not inviting those you don't - with the disinvited including, were it me, the consistent no-shows.