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

[Sundragon2012]

If the missing player's character is played by the DM or another player then I assume the character can die, suffer losses, etc. If this character can suffer the same fate as the other characters then he or she deserves the same XP.

I can't see it as anything but punative to deny XP to a character because the character's owner couldn't show due to serious and pressing commitments. In such cases, the player would be there if they could be but they honestly can't. XP is not the reward for showing up, it is the result of facing the challenges of the game. If the character is in the game he or she has experienced the challenges of the millieu in the same manner a DM controlled NPC does....in both instances a character is controlled by either a non-player or a player who is not their own and in both instances they share all risks and should share in all rewards......if the player was unable....not unwilling to come for the session.


Chris

 

[Pseudonym]

It is called manners. If everyone else makes the effort to come to the game, then it is not fair to give XP to the one person who could not be bothered to show up an participate.

I guess that's the crux of it, the asumption that if someone doesn't show for a session, its because they figured "Screw those guys, I'd rather play Halo." or some other reason.

 

[DonTadow]

It's punishing them because...

1. Player wasn't there. Earned XP. Why do I need to be here when my contribution is going to be awarded the same as if I was here or not here?

2. Player wasn't there. Earned XP. why do I need to be here when I can miss the game and still earn experience points?

Those are probably the two biggest arguements I've seen. The former from heavily intense role players who put a lot of effort into every game they're at, and the latter the casual player whose peeved that people are getting the same amount of xp for less than the same amount of work, when they could be the ones doing that lesser amount of work.

I can see your point of view only if you're talking about putting that player at equal risk of dying. Thats what I'd rather avoid, a person's character in npc form and someone playing him and then they make a mistake he dies and you have to tell a player why his character died while he wasn't there. Id rather avoid this. This was a long discussion in another thread a while ago

 

[Arravis]

Savage Wombat wrote: "If you think it's unfair to "dock exp" from an absent player, try killing that player's character and see how he takes it."
It's happened before and it's never been a problem. I've been running games since 1983, and like many people here, I've seen it all. The players know the risk when they can't come to the game, these things happen. I've never had a problem with it.

DonTadow wrote: "Its not as much as punishing players as much as it is rewarding the players who are there. You’re not really punishing anyone. You're not taking anything away. You're giving xp to people who play your game "
Am I not? You try playing a character that falls behind because of some real life event beyond your control. In the way D&D is set up, it IS a punishment. The player who fell behind due to circumstances is not even less happy, how is that better? What does it buy you? What's so great about it? The reward in my game isn't XP, it's the fun of being there.

Rvalle wrote: "To me having a person-less character there causes too many problems."
I usually run the player's characters unless I have too much going on, and when I do I'll ask for a volunteer. I've never had the other players be jerks about it; or play the character in an immature way. My players are all friends and that's not the way you treat a friend.

Flexor the Mighty!: "the players will tend to use that character as a...well a meatshield at times."
Sounds like the problem there is your players are being jerks, not a XP issue.

 

[Sundragon2012]

It's punishing them because...

1. Player wasn't there. Earned XP. Why do I need to be here when my contribution is going to be awarded the same as if I was here or not here?

2. Player wasn't there. Earned XP. why do I need to be here when I can miss the game and still earn experience points?

Those are probably the two biggest arguements I've seen. The former from heavily intense role players who put a lot of effort into every game they're at, and the latter the casual player whose peeved that people are getting the same amount of xp for less than the same amount of work, when they could be the ones doing that lesser amount of work.

Neither #1 or #2 is no problem with a group who actually wants to role-play their characters and not just level up like they are player Neverwinter Nights. I have never seen a player miss more sessions than is absolutely necessary to their commitments.

Most players are grateful for the understanding and realize that one day it might be them who will not be able to show up due to pressing commitments and therefore realize that my policy may not benefit them immediately but will certainly benefit them eventually.


Chris

 

[Belen]

I guess that's the crux of it, the asumption that if someone doesn't show for a session, its because they figured "Screw those guys, I'd rather play Halo." or some other reason.

Maybe you should read my full post. You would find that I mention a policy for people who have legitimate excuses for not coming.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

way. My players are all friends and that's not the way you treat a friend.

Flexor the Mighty!: "the players will tend to use that character as a...well a meatshield at times."
Sounds like the problem there is your players are being jerks, not a XP issue.

If it's something that I know is vastly out of character I will say no, but in most cases its something that they character might possibly do so what the heck I let them do it. How do I know the wizard wouldn't pull the door open or pick up the glowing crystal piece if he can't find any obvious danger?

 

[Pseudonym]

Maybe you should read my full post. You would find that I mention a policy for people who have legitimate excuses for not coming.

I did read your full post. The part I quoted seemed to sum up the attitude expressed by many in this thread that players who don't show to a session deserve no xp because they simply couldn't be bothered to show up, not that it was the sum total of your position.

 

[Belen]

I did read your full post. The part I quoted seemed to sum up the attitude expressed by many in this thread that players who don't show to a session deserve no xp because they simply couldn't be bothered to show up, not that it was the sum total of your position.

Fair enough.

 

[Arravis]

Well, I've come to a conclusion on the two different opinions presented.

One group of people have players that always show up to the games unless it's something VERY serious that has come up. The players all really enjoy the game and only miss for dire circumstances they can't controll. The players always call ahead of time, offer apologies, and try to be kind decent human beings about disrupting the game and everyone's valuable time. My group falls into the category.

Another group of people have players who are very blaise about their game. They don't show up simply cause they "didn't feel like it", weren't in the "mood", etc. They don't call ahead of time and they aren't considerate to the other players. They don't appreciate the amount of work the DM put's into the game or the good role-playing and gaming effort the other players put in as well. I've never had a group like this.

I feel damn lucky.

Probably helps that I go through the insanity of actually interviewing my players. I've always been extremely careful who I let in since I put so much time and effort into the game I run. I want to make sure everyone there fully appreciates the work being put forward.