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

[JoeGKushner]

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

I ask the player ahead of time if he wants his character RPed or not. If they're in a dungeon or other area where the character wouldn't just go 'poof' then well, that character is stuck there. It's a game, but I try to keep it 'real' to a certain point. I have run campaigns where the characters were agents of an old power and could be pulled back at an instance's notice though so that worked out well.

 

[farscapesg1]

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

But if the group has already decided this, then it shouldn't matter. We make sure that everyone knows if they miss a session and someone else runs their character, they are at just as much risk as the rest of us. If they choose not to place their character at that risk (fade into the background), then they don't get XP.

As I have the most experience in the group (besides the DM) I get the job of running these characters. They are not used as meat shields, are not put in unrealistic danger that they normally would not be in, etc. I run the character to the best of my ability, usually sacrificing my normal character's roleplaying aspect in the process. I work with the DM on any situations that I am not sure what the player would possibly do.

 

[ThirdWizard]

I find it amazing how many people think of XP as a player reward. That line of thought is completely anathema to me, and I cannot comprehend it. I'm also amazed by the idea that XP is earned in any real way by the player when in my eyes it is merely a marker that determines where in the campaign you are. To me XP and levels arn't anything special, earned or otherwise, they're merely where your character stands, a way to mark increase in power so you can move the campaign along.

Thus, reward or punishment is irrelevant. Not giving XP to a character whose player isn't present is equivalent to not allowing them to roll hp for their new level or giving a lesser point buy to a character.

Perhaps its a power thing. "You didn't show up to my game, so I'm going to make sure you feel bad about it." That seems like the most logical explaination. Next time show up if you want the coveted XP or you'll fall behind the other players and end up weak and pitiful. And, let him serve as an example to the rest of the players. Show up, or you'll end up behind.

 

[el-remmen]

Since, the way I give XP is to come up with a total number I want to award each character and then divide it by the number of sessions since the last time I gave XP and subtract one increment for every session missed, I have to say yes.

On the other hand, I allow people to make up for miss XP by note-taking when they are there, helping with the story hour, being encouraging to other players and extremely good role-playing, it all works out.

 

[Arravis]

Yeah, I think the lucky of us fall into that group.

I don't give XP for monsters, etc. I give out XP based on how fast I want the players to advance in power, etc. It's not meant as a "reward" to the players. I definately don't follow the standard rules when it comes to XP and my priorities aren't number-based. Our group is very heavy into role-playing, character development (the personality kind, not the level kind), story, etc. We've had many game sessions (ours usually run 8-12 hours) don't involve combat of any kind. What level they are is way down on our priority list.

 

[Mallus]

I've played a fair share of D&D --ah, the appeal to geezerhood--, and the lionshare of the campaigns have been no play = no XP (or at least no full share). And for the most part I had a blast playing that way.

In the game I'm currently running, there is only the party XP total. Whenever a player sits down to play, with what ever character, that PCh as that much XP. New join, replacement PC, alternate PC created out of player whim, old PC swapped back into play, etc.

Can't see myself ever going back to individual XP awards/totals. Unless the group I'm running for asked me to. Repeatedly. With bribes. Or threats.

Why?

For one, this system is a better fit now that my gaming friends are in there 30's. If my friend with the newborn misses half the sessions, do I really want to --effectively-- exclude him from the campaign?

The way I see it, I offer my players every incentive to play.

Is that fair? Well, its not like I hand out real currency at the end of every session. You want to feel like you earned something? Go start a successful business. Or volunteer at a homeless shelter. Or go for your grandmaster's rating in chess. Let's get something straight: nobody ever earned anything pretending to be an elf. And more to the point, there's no objective way to measure it. So while someone might talk about the XP they earned, another will talk about the XP given out, and its impossible to distinguish between the two.

Which leads to my last reason. I can't be objective. I instituated this full XP policy in part because I realized that I play favorites. Can't help it. I'm suitably impressed by the playstyles that resemble my own (and I laugh at the jokes I think are clever. In that way, like everyone else, I'm a tyrant). So instead of falling into a pattern of rewarding players for play the game my way, I try to average it all out and reward the group as a whole.

Except that it isn't really a reward at all. Just a way of quantifying an escalating series of challenges.

</rant>

 

[Arravis]

Amen, I definately agree 100% Mallus...
and count me in on that geezerhood (and all of my players). I've been playing for 22 years. Man, I'm getting old.

 

[Mallus]

Perhaps its a power thing. "You didn't show up to my game, so I'm going to make sure you feel bad about it."

It not neccessarily a power thing. Its an approach to the game that places greater value on competition (against each other and/or against the DM) than on ease-of-participation.

Some players just aren't going to have a good time without some formalized system that measures their performance, without a chance to beat someone else (at something). And that's fine.

 

[frankthedm]

From my experience, most things that come up are or stemmed from, a personal choice. Whether it is that family you wound up starting while carousing one night [carpenter*], the lousy job you have because you quit the last one [closet gamer*] or the signifigant other you chose to be with[Mr smokes*].

I run a very high challenge game, If soemone does not show, their PC is given the hide at camp/ flee back to last safe location treatment. No XP is given.

*code names for my actual players.

 

[Belen]

Perhaps its a power thing. "You didn't show up to my game, so I'm going to make sure you feel bad about it." That seems like the most logical explaination. Next time show up if you want the coveted XP or you'll fall behind the other players and end up weak and pitiful. And, let him serve as an example to the rest of the players. Show up, or you'll end up behind.

No, it is a manners thing. Everyone else made the effort to show up to the game. They took time out of their busy schedules because it mattered to them. By agreeing to be a member of the group, you have made a committment. If you cannot honor that committment, then you should not be placed on the same level as everyone else that could.

As I said before, exceptions can exist, but I would expect that person to work with me to make up the lost time.