Why punish a player if they can't come to the game?

[Crothian]

Well, there's another way to think about it that I haven't seen though I may have missed it.

DMing is all about punishing the players, why should those that skip on a session be safe from me?

 

[Grimstaff]

I dont really see how there can be an argument here.
1. Players dont get exps, characters do. Its a point measure of how they turn their actions into learning, which eventually lets them get better at what they do.
2. Only PC's get full exp. Characters without players are not PCs, they are NPCs.

Please dont be offended, but any DM who is giving exp to no-shows is either operating under some bizarre house rules, has an unusually hard time handling CR and EL, or just plain has a weak spine and cant tell his/her players "no". Obviously, there is nothing in the DMG about awarding exp for not actually doing anything.

I've said it before, if a player is missing games so much that his level gap with the other players is a problem, then there is a commitment issue that you as the DM need to discuss with your player.

Obviously, if someone is going to be a no-show for an extended period of time for a good reason (illness, family obligations, a term of school, crunch time at their business, etc) there's no reason why you shouldn't set up some special alternative for that player. A solo session, even if its play-by-post or something, is a good way to rack up fast exp. You could even have a player write a cool shortstory or something detailing what they've been doing with their "downtime" from the party, and award some catch-up exp accordingly. Both of these options not only let the player "catch up" but give them something cool to share with the group and make them feel special.

But why oh why would you dole out exp for nothing?! Thats so unfair to the other players, whether they vocalize having a problem with it or not.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Well, it is...as I see it there are 2 (or 3) goals to playing an RPG:

1) To tell a story
2) To gain new abilities in order to keep the game interesting and fight power powerful enemies
3) (optionally) To get together with friends

This could be a part of why I disagree with your opinion. As I see it there are 2 goals to playing an RPG:

1) To pretend to be an elf (or dwarf, or paladin as the case may be.)
2) To get together with friends.

Naturally, one can get together with friends without pretending to be an elf, so that can't be gaming's entire point, but it's a large part of it. Certainly nowhere in my mind is "to tell a story." I've never played in a game that was worthy of that moniker, or read one, save perhaps Sagiro's or Sepulchrave's. And even then, I wonder how much they are concentrating on "telling a story" as opposed to pretending to be an elf, with friends.

I suppose if I took the game a lot more seriously, I'd be offended by players missing a game, to the point where I'd want them to lose something, or in the vernacular some are arguing "not be rewarded" something. But in reality, it's still at its core just a game for me. And as such, I see no reason to dock xp to make it less fun.

Admittedly, to those of you who say you have less fun if you aren't docked xp for missing a session...we'd have to work something out. I wouldn't mind doing it, if that was what my players actually wanted.

 

[Crothian]

Please dont be offended, but any DM who is giving exp to no-shows is either operating under some bizarre house rules, has an unusually hard time handling CR and EL, or just plain has a weak spine and cant tell his/her players "no". Obviously, there is nothing in the DMG about awarding exp for not actually doing anything.

And how could people possible get offended to their rules being labeled as bizarre and also being told they can't handle the CR/EL system. :\

 

[Lord Pendragon]

And how could people possible get offended to their rules being labeled as bizarre and also being told they can't handle the CR/EL system. :\

I was going to reply to it, but then realized I'd better not. It takes two to start a flamewar, and this thread has been blissfully free of such thus far. I choose instead to ignore the post in its entirety.

 

[Grimstaff]

I have to wonder if the d20 ruleset doesn't contribute to the difficulty here. With so much emphasis on "balance" and challenge levels and such, does this just make it easier for some DM's to "bend" the rules to keep the party all at the same level, regardless of participation?

Cutting my teeth on 1E back in the day, it was normal for a party to have a wide range of levels among its members. I remember modules touting lines like "For levels 8-13". Each class had different exp goals to level, too, so being the same level was nearly impossible, no less.

I suppose its possible I just learned the game a different way and so different level PCs is not an issue for me. So maybe my intolerance for "absentee exp" is incomprehensible for a DM who has only run d20?

Just musing out loud...

 

[Grimstaff]

Lord Pendragon: "I was going to reply to it, but then realized I'd better not. It takes two to start a flamewar, and this thread has been blissfully free of such thus far. I choose instead to ignore the post in its entirety."

Hence the "spineless" part of my remark above. (Kidding! )

I certainly wasn't picking on anyone in particular or trying to start a "flamewar". Show me a rule in the DMG for absentee exp, and I'll certainly amend my comment. Otherwise, any exception is a house rule, whether I consider it bizarre or not.

 

[Dave Turner]

I believe there are better ways of doing that. Talk to the player, let him know it's a problem. If he continues being inconsiderate, ask him to leave the game. I don't see why a game-mechanic would be used to deal with what's essentially a personal problem between player and DM.

This is precisely right. This is the succinct heart of the matter. Nicely done, Arravis.

 

[Dave Turner]

But why oh why would you dole out exp for nothing?! Thats so unfair to the other players, whether they vocalize having a problem with it or not.

What if every player at your table told you that they didn't mind if absent players got full XP, regardless of the reason for the absence? Would you institute a "full XP regardless of presence" policy?

 

[Crothian]

I certainly wasn't picking on anyone in particular or trying to start a "flamewar". Show me a rule in the DMG for absentee exp, and I'll certainly amend my comment. Otherwise, any exception is a house rule, whether I consider it bizarre or not.

I wouldn't consider it a house rule, but a DMG blunder. They don't address the issue at all. They don't say that an absent player doesn't get full XP either, so its a house rule either way you cut it.