When PCs Die When the Player's Not There

[ThirdWizard]

I am, to say the least, completely agast at the number of DMs here who would kill off an absent player's character! In 25 years of gaming I have never been in a gaming group where this would be tolerated, or even contemplated! I know that if such a thing happened to my character that would be the last time I played with that group.

Likewise, I am aghast at the thought that a DM would ever have to get permission from a player to kill their PC, and I couldn't play with a group like that. But, that doesn't mean anything bad about their style of play. Lots of people's play styles are incompatable. I suggest you don't worry too much about it, as it is just a game.

 

[sjmiller]

Likewise, I am aghast at the thought that a DM would ever have to get permission from a player to kill their PC, and I couldn't play with a group like that. But, that doesn't mean anything bad about their style of play. Lots of people's play styles are incompatable. I suggest you don't worry too much about it, as it is just a game.

I believe we are talking at mildly crossed purposes. I know I never said the DM needed the player's permission to kill a PC. I think I stated, fairly strongly, that the player should be at the game session if his character is killed. I was trying to think of something to compare it to, but I can't think of any other situation that would be that bad, or that unenjoyable for the player. I have had characters die in a game before. Heck, I had 3 of my own characters die in one night playing Traveller. I just can't fathom leaving a game session with my character alive and well, being unable to come to the next session, and discovering that through no fault of my own my character was killed. Why would anyone want to come back to a game like that?

 

[ThirdWizard]

Sorry, I wasn't implying that you wouldn't kill a PC without permission. Several people in this thread have stated it, however. I can accept that my viewpoint is different than most, just like theirs; I'm just stating it.

Thing is, when someone misses a session, their PC has to be there. When things go rough in my game, having one PC down is going to get others who are there killed. Period. I cannot change my encounters around this, it would take way too much effort. I stated in this thread already that I don't often have extremely deadly encounters, odds are if my players miss then there won't be any worries. But, when things go bad in my game, it can get deadly fast.

So what we have here are a few things. First of all, why should the players who made it have their PCs die and the one who missed the game is immune to death? That doesn't seem quite right to me. Now we're "punishing" the players who made it.

Secondly, I'm not squemish with death effects. You can get disintegrated. You might end up with a Power Word: Kill in a higher level game. The PCs are always potentially one saving throw (or none in the case of PW:K!) away from death. This is why I don't sweat the raise dead IMC. This isn't to say I use these abilities often, but when it makes sense for them to be used by the bad guys, then they get used. Again, I can't change my adventure every time someone misses a session. So what should I do? If you're there you get targetted with all the insta-kill affects and if you miss you don't?

Sometimes I don't even know when a situation will go deadly. I let my players have free reign. I don't really run "plots" exactly, I run NPCs and the players and I build the "plot" as we go along. If the PCs go somewhere that is deadly, then they go somewhere that is deadly; I don't hold their hands. I don't want to change playstyles whenever someone isn't present. "Harry's* missing, guess it'll be an easy night!" Bleh. Doesn't work for me.

The only solutions left are: PCs while missing are played or we don't play at all. Well, we only get to play once every two weeks and everyone loves the game, can't wait to see what happens next. The ones who can make it want to play. Just because Joe* can't make it doesn't mean we don't get to have some fun playing D&D.

You're entitled to your oppinion. You can say we're jerks for killing peoples' characters when they arn't there. But, really, it isn't going to happen often and even if it does, at least the person who can't play until their character is ressed isn't actually playing. Losing a level sucks, I admit. But, the 3.5 xp system really helps you catch back up.

*names have been changed to protect the innocent

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Your point there ThirdWizard is basically mine as well; the only difference is that I wield a dm-veto or even temporarily take control to ensure nothing ooc or foolhardy occurs.

As always the dice roll & all you can control is the probability.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Well, nobody makes people do things too out of character or stupidly steps on the way of danger when it could be avoided. However, if we have, say, two tanks, and one of them needs to rush to a dangerous position in order to try to save another PC or something that would be done in character by either player, the one whose player isn't present will do it. That way, if they die, the player who is still there still gets to play instead of the player who is there not getting to play their own character and the absent player's character running around being controlled by the other PCs.

Also, generally, unless a social skill is needed or it would end up with me roleplaying with myself, when a player isn't present, DM takes over their role and they are generally very quiet. If they have to make some Bluff or Diplomacy stuff and roleplaying is needed, another player takes over the character. Other players generally only take control of the character when rolls are needed.

 

[DonTadow]

Sorry, I wasn't implying that you wouldn't kill a PC without permission. Several people in this thread have stated it, however. I can accept that my viewpoint is different than most, just like theirs; I'm just stating it.

Thing is, when someone misses a session, their PC has to be there. When things go rough in my game, having one PC down is going to get others who are there killed. Period. I cannot change my encounters around this, it would take way too much effort. I stated in this thread already that I don't often have extremely deadly encounters, odds are if my players miss then there won't be any worries. But, when things go bad in my game, it can get deadly fast.

So what we have here are a few things. First of all, why should the players who made it have their PCs die and the one who missed the game is immune to death? That doesn't seem quite right to me. Now we're "punishing" the players who made it.

Secondly, I'm not squemish with death effects. You can get disintegrated. You might end up with a Power Word: Kill in a higher level game. The PCs are always potentially one saving throw (or none in the case of PW:K!) away from death. This is why I don't sweat the raise dead IMC. This isn't to say I use these abilities often, but when it makes sense for them to be used by the bad guys, then they get used. Again, I can't change my adventure every time someone misses a session. So what should I do? If you're there you get targetted with all the insta-kill affects and if you miss you don't?

Sometimes I don't even know when a situation will go deadly. I let my players have free reign. I don't really run "plots" exactly, I run NPCs and the players and I build the "plot" as we go along. If the PCs go somewhere that is deadly, then they go somewhere that is deadly; I don't hold their hands. I don't want to change playstyles whenever someone isn't present. "Harry's* missing, guess it'll be an easy night!" Bleh. Doesn't work for me.

The only solutions left are: PCs while missing are played or we don't play at all. Well, we only get to play once every two weeks and everyone loves the game, can't wait to see what happens next. The ones who can make it want to play. Just because Joe* can't make it doesn't mean we don't get to have some fun playing D&D.

You're entitled to your oppinion. You can say we're jerks for killing peoples' characters when they arn't there. But, really, it isn't going to happen often and even if it does, at least the person who can't play until their character is ressed isn't actually playing. Losing a level sucks, I admit. But, the 3.5 xp system really helps you catch back up.

*names have been changed to protect the innocent

But that's the thing, the pc doesn't have to be there. Unless the PC is the mystical child of light and your campaign is centered around that player (no no). Door's can be bashed instead of picked, wounds can be healed with potions instead of divine magic, and a well laid strategy with mages can be just as effective as a big brute.

I don't really think it takes much effort to reduce an encounter a cl or too. You take some hd away, reduce damage reduction, change an axe here to a sword there, limit the spell reduction, play the monsters a bit looser. There are ways to change up the encounter so that it is still challgening to the current players. Forgive me, but I think you just don't want to spend the extra 10 to 20 minutes it would take to do so. So it becomes much easier to tell a pc "Oh forget it I'll just have someone play your character, I don't want to spend any more time preparing. If he dies he dies".

I think if you tell the player the truth, that you could have scaled the encounter to fit the current makeup of the party and you didn't want to waist the time, he'd probably be a bit more irate. As experienced players and dms, i think most of us know that that is an available option and thus we are a bit angrier than your player who probably doesnt even know that's an option.

I have to agree with arandom that this seems to be a difference between younger players with no families and older players. Dming for a younger crowd and older crowd is too different things at time. I do spend a bit more time preparing because not everyone can be there every week so I find myself mid week tweaking things, which I like to think is my responsiblity as a DM to make the game as fun for all players there or not. I also spend time engaging the player whom will not be there outside of game so that he feels apart of the game when he's not there.

I feel so old. I want to say like some grandfather "you'll understand when you get a wife, child and fulltime job. : No disrespect intended but this feels like an age gap issue.

 

[Vraille Darkfang]

I feel so old. I want to say like some grandfather "you'll understand when you get a wife, child and fulltime job. : No disrespect intended but this feels like an age gap issue.

Probably.

From what I've seen the 'You gone, you lose' Camp falls into 2 groups.

1. It doesn't maek sense for a PC to just 'disappear' in the middle of a dungeon for a few hours, days, etc; then reappear.

Fine, I understand that. I just put a greater emphasis on 'Gaming' as a game as opposed to 'Gaming' as a coherent storyline. We get together every week (those who can make it) and have some fun. Players that can't make it know they'll miss out on a lot of fun, but don't have to worry about their characters being dead the next time we play.


2. "How can you have anything better to do than the GAME, man?" Seems to be the smaller of the 2 groups. I'll admit, in college, Running a weekly (sometimes daily) game session was easy, and players who missed usually had a lame excuse (overslept, hang-over, final exam). But now, I have problems making it every week & I run the darned thing. My players have wives, jobs, etc. They WON'T be able to make every session. Maybe knowing that allows me greater freedom in 'fading into the mists' since almost every PC will have to do it every now & again.

Speaking of Missing sessions;

Many people keep yapping about how if the missing PC has no threat of death, then he didn't really miss much. When my players miss a session, they're first question when they get back is: Whadda I miss?, What Happened? Wish I could have been there! While I don't claim to be the one Dungeon Master to Rule Them All, I run a pretty good game (though I've been slipping lately). Thus the worst punishment I had out to missing players is they miss the EXPERIENCE. That's right, my players really, really, regret missing a session because they didn't get a chance to game.

 

[Vraille Darkfang]

Part 2.

How I handle missing PC's.

Character fades into background. If possible, I have an in-game reason why they leave (i. e. has business to do in town before leaving with the party, etc). But, even in the middle of an adventure I let them just 'fade away'. The PC gets no XP for missed session (I give out both individual, bonus XP & use the 3.5 system where lower level characters get more XP, thus ensuring all PC's are within a level or two, but rarely are they ALL the same level).

But that's it. Unless one of the special quantifiers applies:

Missing PC is the only one with the needed spell/skill/item/etc. I'll play the PC just long enough to have them do what needs to be done, then they're gone again.

PC was the major Plot Hook for that Story Arc. I fly by the seat of my pants for awhile. For instance, I intened the new player (I mean new, he bought the PHB that day) to get a sentient sword as a means to help teach him the game. In the middle of that adventure, he has to leave for 2 sessions. I lenghten the adventure into a dungeon crawl & they don't find the sword until he gets back.

Middle of Combat: This does't happen anymore as I've gotten very good at clock management & always have combat wrapped up by the time the session ends. Even if combat isn't really 'over'. Random encounters suddenly get easier/run away, main battles, the villian does a tactical retreat to build up later. But, when I used to end a session in the middle of combat, here's what I did. I played the character to the bare minimum I could. An archer would do X points of damage a round, a wizard would cast Magic Missille, etc. I'd alwasy ensure the missing PC was in no threat of demise, yet wouldn't become IMORTAL MAN, capable of destroying all foes. Luckily I never had a player skip out just because he knew his character was dead meat next time.

 

[sniffles]

Probably.

From what I've seen the 'You gone, you lose' Camp falls into 2 groups.

1. It doesn't maek sense for a PC to just 'disappear' in the middle of a dungeon for a few hours, days, etc; then reappear.

Fine, I understand that. I just put a greater emphasis on 'Gaming' as a game as opposed to 'Gaming' as a coherent storyline. We get together every week (those who can make it) and have some fun. Players that can't make it know they'll miss out on a lot of fun, but don't have to worry about their characters being dead the next time we play.


2. "How can you have anything better to do than the GAME, man?" Seems to be the smaller of the 2 groups. I'll admit, in college, Running a weekly (sometimes daily) game session was easy, and players who missed usually had a lame excuse (overslept, hang-over, final exam). But now, I have problems making it every week & I run the darned thing. My players have wives, jobs, etc. They WON'T be able to make every session. Maybe knowing that allows me greater freedom in 'fading into the mists' since almost every PC will have to do it every now & again.

Speaking of Missing sessions;

Many people keep yapping about how if the missing PC has no threat of death, then he didn't really miss much. When my players miss a session, they're first question when they get back is: Whadda I miss?, What Happened? Wish I could have been there! While I don't claim to be the one Dungeon Master to Rule Them All, I run a pretty good game (though I've been slipping lately). Thus the worst punishment I had out to missing players is they miss the EXPERIENCE. That's right, my players really, really, regret missing a session because they didn't get a chance to game.

This totally sums up the opinion of my group too, I think. My only comment would be regarding PCs "disappearing" in mid-adventure, i.e. in a dungeon. In our group they don't suddenly fall down a pit or get left behind. They're present; they're just not doing much. They went suddenly quiet that day - remember Mark's character in "The Gamers"?.

Also, I know this will be seen as heresy, but in at least some of our campaigns PCs of absent players still get XP. In general the GMs I game with don't want to deal with PCs falling levels behind. Withholding XP seems like a punishment for something that was out of the player's control.

 

[ptolemy18]

I'm glad he took it well. And I hope that he rolls well on the reincarnation/gains some nice bonus XP for his unusual playstyle (to make up for the XP penalty for being raised).

I agree with people who say they think he was hosed. His character really didn't die, because he wasn't there.

Here's an update... Do you want to know the final outcome?

The final outcome was, the player decided to quit.

He called me up and said he'd considered making a new character (or getting reincarnated, or my other 'temporary character who accrues XP for you until the original character can get raised' option I'd proposed) but he decided that he was going to "cut his losses" and spend his Wednesday nights doing something else. And no hard feelings, he said. :/ During the phone conversation, I hinted "Well, part of me wants to just take it back..." but at this point he didn't take the bait and/or was already firm about quitting.

"Curses," I thought. So I e-mailed the whole group and sent them this e-mail (names deleted to protect the innocent):

******

Hello everybody,

Player A has told me that (despite what I previously reported) he can, in fact, make it to D&D tomorrow.

Unfortunately, as Players C & D already know, Player B has decided (with no animosity, at least not judging from his phone conversation with me) to leave the campaign. From now on, his Wednesday nights will be spent rehearsing in a trombone band.

I can't blame him, since having your character die when you're away is pretty indecent. I gave him several resurrection/new character options but, after briefly considering a new character, he ultimately decided that this would be a good time to cut his losses. Obviously this is the result of several errors of judgment on my part, which could've ensured that Character B wasn't an immediate target of murderous, non-punches-pulling, greataxe-wielding troglodytes while Player B was away. (If Player B was *present*, of course, the brutal 27-point critical death blow would've been *totally* fair game.... he'd have joined the ranks of Character G (fell off his horse), Character H (disemboweled by halberd, but got better) and Character J (eaten by caterpillars).)

I'm not necessarily committed to sticking to a rash decision merely because I made it -- the important thing is that everybody feels that they've been treated consistently and without favoritism -- but in any case, Player B has chosen to withdraw. I'll miss him, and I hope he gets lots of new points in his trombone skills.

If anyone has anybody they'd like to invite to the game, lemme know and feel free. Or if you'd like to e-mail me about anything else, feel free. On that note, I'll see y'all on Wednesday....

******

So, at this point, it seems to be too late to 'fix things' to get the guy whose character died back in the campaign. Frankly, the way I feel is, if all the players -- or even just a few, or even just the dead PC's player -- rose up en masse and e-mailed me and said "I think this is unfair..." then I'd probably go back and retcon the whole situation and put him at -9. But this hasn't happened, whether because (A) the other players don't really care what happened to this guy or (B) the players figure it's pointless to argue. (They have occasionally argued for more XP and things like that, and sometimes I've granted it.)

Anyway, it seems to be too late to offer to do this now, 'cause the player whose character died has already quit the game, without arguing about the ruling. I'm not gonna chase after him going "Yoo-hoo! I changed my mind! You can have your character back, just pleeeez don't quit! :/

I did privately e-mail a few of the players and ask what they felt about the situation, and these are the responses I got:

(A) allow him to be raised but not lose any XP
(B) "I don't have an answer to that"
(C) "normally when *I'm* DMing I have the monsters preferentially attack the players who are present, but after a certain point it becomes implausible that all the monsters would gang up on the people who are present and ignore the ones who aren't.... so, in my campaign people did die once or twice when they weren't there." (I didn't specifically ask him what he felt I should do in this particular situation.)

Oh, well. I feel bad, but it wasn't the first time that I'd made a rash decision in the heat of DMing. (Frankly, the whole reason I rolled the dice out in the open -- "Will the troglodyte attack the PC or the NPC? Odd or even" -- was because tactically, in that moment, it made much more sense for the troglodyte to attack the absent player rather than run 30' in the other direction to attack some NPC dude, but I wanted to leave a *chance* that the troglodyte would do something stupid just for the absent player's benefit.) If this ends the campaign, che sera, sera. I'd rather it didn't, of course, but at this point it seems to be too late for a retcon.

And now, on behalf of all the people on this thread who have said "You were a MEAN DM!", I'm going to "role-play" you and tell myself "I told you so!!!"

Jason