So one of our players haven't showed up for several sessions. His character is now 3 levels behind the rest, he is level 4, while we are all level 7.
The DM wants to "punish" the player by making him 3 levels behind, but I see that making a player weaker only makes the team weaker. He was going to be a pure class monk, and is right now a level 4 monk. I asked the DM to maybe give him 3 levels of warrior as a way to keep up with the party, and maybe replace them as we level normally if he actually keeps a current attendance. Since by hit dice and base attack alone, he is already starting to fall behind.
Is the DM right do this? Should he give something since the encounters we face are by no means easy as it is.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, yeah, punishment will make the game funner.
he%%, kick him out or kill of the character and make him roll a new one with mundane equipment.
Will
Well if the DM keeps the encounters at the same difficulty as he has been then you now have an extra lvl 4 character to help. If he increase the difficulty to accommodate the extra player you are going to be in trouble.
Adding 3 levels of warrior will straight suck this poor guys build.
Did he miss games because he's a flake or because his family got run over by a herd of reindeer? I'd be ok with lower level for flakiness but would comp him a couple levels if it was a serious issue.
Has he the right to do this? Sadly, yes
Is it right to do this? No
Will it help anyone with anything? Absolutly no.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So one of our players haven't showed up for several sessions. His character is now 3 levels behind the rest, he is level 4, while we are all level 7.
The DM wants to "punish" the player by making him 3 levels behind, but I see that making a player weaker only makes the team weaker. He was going to be a pure class monk, and is right now a level 4 monk. I asked the DM to maybe give him 3 levels of warrior as a way to keep up with the party, and maybe replace them as we level normally if he actually keeps a current attendance. Since by hit dice and base attack alone, he is already starting to fall behind.
Is the DM right do this? Should he give something since the encounters we face are by no means easy as it is.
What was the player's reason for missing? If it was something like he had to work, he was sick, or had family matters to attend to, then the DM is being a jerk. If it was more of a "I don't feel like playing this week" type of thing, then the DM is well within reason to keep the character a lower level. However, the DM should also adjust encounters accordingly, so that the rest of the group isn't suffering.
In the campaign I'm in, we all have the same experience total, whether we miss a game or not. But treasure is split among those who are present each session, so those that miss sessions tend to have less magic items.
Magic items tend to get replaced over time so this isn't a permanent disadvantage.
Well if the DM keeps the encounters at the same difficulty as he has been then you now have an extra lvl 4 character to help. If he increase the difficulty to accommodate the extra player you are going to be in trouble.
Adding 3 levels of warrior will straight suck this poor guys build.Did he miss games because he's a flake or because his family got run over by a herd of reindeer? I'd be ok with lower level for flakiness but would comp him a couple levels if it was a serious issue.
All of the above? If it is not one thing its another why he keeps missing out week after week. He does have family down, so he has to entertain them, but that was just recent. It was the other engagements happen to happen on saturday afternoons "imagine that" and so this is ussally the first thing dropped. He also is in a club/Organization, I don't know what you would call it. Where people hit each other with foam swords and pretend to be nights, its great exercise.
http://www.belegarth.com/
He seems to choose to do this every Saturday as appose to table tops. :p
Does the player want to be there every session? Does the player help make the game fun? Is the player a friend?
If the answers are mostly yes, then remember that life happens. People have lives outside of the game.
If the answers are mostly no, maybe gaming with your group is not a high priority for the player, and he or she should step away from the group.
Maybe it's time to just let him go as a player? If his commitment is limited and he will continually fall back, might not be the right game for him or for the rest of the players.
He has stated wanting to move it to Sunday, but I believe there was conflict with another player that day. Although I don't know why we don't run it during the week-day as no body does anything during the week.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For an informal home campaign, I don't subscribe to the philosophy that XP should be an individualized reward for attending game sessions. In a campaign, I view character levels as a way of representing a character's progression through a story.
So since his character is at the same point in the story as everyone else's, he should be at the same level.
Situations like this one are a consequence of treating XP as something like a personal score or a currency. I suppose it's quite possible for someone to enjoy a game like that, but I don't think I'd personally enjoy it much.
If you do feel that you need some sort of in-game reward system for session attendance, then I like Thac20's technique. Use loot as your reward currency, not XP levels.
As a GM, what I do when a player misses a session is DMPC that player's PC and last dibs on loot.
In your case, I would recommend letting the player be level 7, he is already behind in gear and that is punishment enough. Let him catch up in gear by puting specific treasure for him in the next chest and speaking with player about the reason of his absence.
We had a player who could only come one in 3 sessions, but was a good freind (and the parties main tank), so I used his PC when he was gone, we put him up to date with the campaing and then he played his character for the session. We used to joke that his character was bipolar, because I roleplay it diferently.
It's rarely a good idea to try solve outside of game problems with inside methods.
Humbly,
Yawar
For an informal home campaign, I don't subscribe to the philosophy that XP should be an individualized reward for attending game sessions. In a campaign, I view character levels as a way of representing a character's progression through a story.
So since his character is at the same point in the story as everyone else's, he should be at the same level.
Situations like this one are a consequence of treating XP as something like a personal score or a currency. I suppose it's quite possible for someone to enjoy a game like that, but I don't think I'd personally enjoy it much.
If you do feel that you need some sort of in-game reward system for session attendance, then I like Thac20's technique. Use loot as your reward currency, not XP levels.
That's why I don't give XP to my players anymore. I reward them with lvlups xD
For an informal home campaign, I don't subscribe to the philosophy that XP should be an individualized reward for attending game sessions. In a campaign, I view character levels as a way of representing a character's progression through a story.
As a GM, what I do when a player misses a session is DMPC that player's PC and last dibs on loot.
Both viable things to do, but not everyone runs it that way, and their choices are equally as viable, since the system allows for multiple translations of the experience and leveling mechanics. As a player you need to find a GM that runs the style you want. I personally have such large groups that running a character's PC would be next to impossible. I have enough on my agenda as it is.
As for the OP if it seriously just comes down to the tabletop game not being on his top 5 list of priorities, then it seems time for everyone to sit down and talk about the best option for all involved. As darkwarriorkarg says, don't handle out of game problems with in game solutions; it never works out well.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Our group has a house rule to accommodate players who miss sessions.
1. The player gains XP to keep u p with the group.
2. The player does not gain any money or loot, since he was not there to share in the finding.
3. The player can email or have a chat with the GM outside of the game and explain what his character was doing in the meantime while the rest of the group was off adventuring. If the Dm feels this is sufficient he can award the same money/loot as everyone else got.
We really like how this works out. Sometimes life gets in the way of gaming. That is how it goes. Punishing people for not being there seems like the wrong way to do things. This way people stay on tier with the group and don't drag them down with having to be protected all the time. It also encourages the player who missed out to put forth effort to make up the lost money/loot.
Maybe it's time to just let him go as a player? If his commitment is limited and he will continually fall back, might not be the right game for him or for the rest of the players.
This. Finding a new player who can show up isn't that hard. If a player can't be counted on to ever show up, he really isn't a player at the table. As a player and a DM I would not accept this. As a DM I'd explain that it does require a certain amount of time commitment to the group to show up on time and regularly. As a player he just drags down the rest of the group and upsets them when he doesn't show up. This isn't about punishment, this is about having fun. When players and a DM start a game they enter into a social contract whereas everyone agrees to show up on a set date/time and this isn't changed unless the whole group agrees on it. If it's only one player who can't do it, they shouldn't be in the game anyhow and that's when I recruit another friend or look to the internet to find another person interested in joining the group and can actually make the dates. It's that simple.
|
|
Better than skiping out until lvl 6 when his character concept starts to work....
I suggest you give him a "you actually showed up boon" providing until end of this session a + 3 to bab and AC,if you survive you can level up to equal level of the party after this session. Mostly since leveling suddenly is a pain and slows down things.
Some people enjoy their friends but not the game play/gm style, maybe help come up with an in game reason he is not there often.
the player still seems to want to game since he wants to move it to another day, gaming isn't a priority to the majority of people, something many people will find out when you grow up. don't be too hasty to drop a player for missing a few sessions, I find most groups eventually drop the exp progression since it doesn't motivate players to come back to the table at all when you are some levels lower.
A PC should never be more than 2 levels behind another PC, or you end up with cohorts being more awesome than him, so take the highest level exp player and substract two full levels if you want to punish him, CR wise it means he gets owned twice over on average and that is not even counting subpar wealth, the player should at least gain NPC wealth increase over the level ups, player in example would go from monk 3 to monk 5 and so would gain wealth like an npc from level 3 to 5 would gain, unless the PCs earned less.
The above is the harshest I'd go if you dont want to chase players away, I rather have players at the same level or up to one level difference between them to keep them more like equal partners, don't forget the wealth too though if encounters are adjusted downwards for having less players you weaken the party significantly, NPC wealth gain is a good option most of the time, just pretend he was there all along being unremarkable and allow him to go back to having fun.
Conversation with the group and the DM.
It makes everyone's life easier to just have him at the same level. If he is your firned and this is friends getting together and you would rather have him around than not, well, put him on the same level and move on with life. If you have gaming as the higher focus, it is probably a good idea about discussing time comittments and dropping him from the group.
For the campaign I DM. While it is game focused, friendships are pretty important, so if someone misses as session the following things happen:
1. There is a Glitch in the Matrix, they are watching the horses, etc. There existance is just gone and we move on with life. They "come back" whenever we get to a spot that is convient. Yeah, it ruins immersion, but it is easy and it was what my players wanted, so works for me.
2. Everyone is at the same level
3. When spoils are split up the people present determine how to split things.
|
Ive found with PCs that can't always make it for what ever reason the easiest method is giving their sheets to the DM or other responsible regular player and running them as an NPC when they aren't around. After of course if that's okay with them. Helps to justify their character gaining exp when they can't make it.
Also punishing someone for being flaky over a game they being flaky about playing is kind of a big pile of useless.
I do everything in my power as a GM to ensure that the players are on as equal footing as possible. If someone misses a session, I assume that is punishment enough. The last thing I want to do is give them more excuses to miss future games.
I also level by plot, not by XP, so if someone misses a session where they would have leveled, they level anyway.
Now, if someone is truly a problem and promising to show but doesn't, without a good reason. Then I might ask them to find another group. But that would take a lot of abuse.
What was the player's reason for missing? If it was something like he had to work, he was sick, or had family matters to attend to, then the DM is being a jerk. If it was more of a "I don't feel like playing this week" type of thing, then the DM is well within reason to keep the character a lower level. However, the DM should also adjust encounters accordingly, so that the rest of the group isn't suffering.
...which is what I would have asked.
All of the above? If it is not one thing its another why he keeps missing out week after week. He does have family down, so he has to entertain them, but that was just recent. It was the other engagements happen to happen on saturday afternoons "imagine that" and so this is ussally the first thing dropped. He also is in a club/Organization, I don't know what you would call it. Where people hit each other with foam swords and pretend to be nights, its great exercise.
Was he in this before the game started, or did it come along after?
He has stated wanting to move it to Sunday, but I believe there was conflict with another player that day. Although I don't know why we don't run it during the week-day as no body does anything during the week.
OK, so he has asked for it to be moved, so he wants to play. Now, do the rest of you want him to play and play regularly? If yes, level up his monk because giving him a level hit will only discourage him and reinforce poor attendance. If no, don't mess about with his character, just explain to him politely that if he can't make it regularly and isn't interested, it's best if he doesn't come.
Then arrange your game at a time and place that everyone can attend on.
instead of assuming he faded from existence. assume he might have done something else of importance to the groups objectives. like scouting ahead, running errands, establishing peaceful connections or whatever you feel is fitting for the character.
In my group, if the other player characters are all at 7th level, the DM would simply tell the player to advance his character to 6th level. That would put him slightly behind the players who showed up regularly, but not so far behind that he is at a serious disadvantage. He would catch up on equipment the next time the party gets treasure, as he would probably go for items that other party members no longer need or want.
|
|
ALL YOUR BASE SHEETS ARE BELONG TO I!
I always keep player sheets with the adventure log. They can do updates in their head or with me during the inbetween times if need be.
As far as this situation: I think getting raised to 7 with no gear update would work for me. But its up to the GM if they want to bother. Have "your little kid brother" tag along. Remember though, that as you need 18k xp to go from 7 to 8, that means a lvl 4 will be 6th (halfway to 7th). Your GM can just fast track them next adventure and they would be almost caught up by time you level.
4th level. Swap from Medium to Fast track (should still be 4th level, possibly fifth though). Do that level update if needed. Then when they get 18k they will be at 27k on the fast track... or 7th level by time the others are 8th. Do that til he catches up, then give him the XP for the Medium track for his fast-track level. All better.
Is Saturday afternoon the only time the group can get together? It seems like a prime time to have a lot of fun doing other things, especially with summer coming.
Maybe another night would work better? At least for the summer?
Punishing someone for not attending seems like a really bad idea. Very passive/aggressive and really annoying. Would you hangout with a friend who punished you for not hanging out with him some other time?
Also, if a new player joined the group, would they start out 3 levels lower or at the average party level? Keep that in mind.
Is that so difficult?
Just put him in the same level and give him as much gold and let's play.
When he's there and playing with you guys, just let him have the same fun that you do.
Nobody (GM, player, party) has to worry about playing/saving/protecting another squishy - just play.
That's the way we do it for some years now, as most of us have jobs and family, and we're even living about 250km apart. If we get at least 3 (of 5) players together, we play. Next time those who missed a session get the same xp and wealth the others had, so we're always even.
Personally i am generally against punishing players for lack of attendance if they give some form of notice, you can plan for it and its all good. I generally find that people put to much pressure on you have to attend every week and it tends to either work and form a long term group or start causing tension and fractures that never recover.
Our general rules that floated around were that players would be set back if they gave you same day notice. As a GM the only 2 players i have had the urge to set back was a pair who had to be tracked down 30 mins after session start time to get a generic funzie answer, such as 'Oh well Ii went to Whoevers's to play cards' or 'oh sorry i am playing Magica maby ill come later'.
Punishing casual players tends to make there commitments even weaker and has no gain in game or away from the table.
If the group was surviving just fine with him gone then there need be no worries that his low level will slow the group down or endanger anyone other than him when he shows up.
Is his character used during the times he is gone? Played by the GM or another player for example? If so then allow him to earn Exp just like any other NPC would. But just like an NPC he would get only what treasure the group tossed his way.
I have a house rule: When you are more than one level below the party then you earn +20% to all your Exp rewards. This allows people who fall behind to catch back up fairly fast.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The DM wants to "punish" the player....
I know that as a player, what I really want is a GM that uses the game to teach me life lessons.
The DM wants to "punish" the player....I know that as a player, what I really want is a GM that uses the game to teach me life lessons.
What?! Are you saying that's not part of my official capacity as a GM? Well flippernackle! C;
|
In the campaign I'm in, we all have the same experience total, whether we miss a game or not. But treasure is split among those who are present each session, so those that miss sessions tend to have less magic items.
Magic items tend to get replaced over time so this isn't a permanent disadvantage.
This is how I am currently running an AP. What is normal for our group is for the experience to be divided among the characters who actually show up. This can cause some characters to be behind. Eventually everyone evens out some because of the way Pathfinder's experience points are.
However, I am liking the group experience better. There are other ways to punish a player for not showing up - and yes, I think he should be punished somehow. He made a commitment to be in the game. Everyone else did, too. Some people need incentive to show up.
I have a house rule: When you are more than one level below the party then you earn +20% to all your Exp rewards. This allows people who fall behind to catch back up fairly fast.
This could also work well.
The DM wants to "punish" the player....I know that as a player, what I really want is a GM that uses the game to teach me life lessons.
I knew a DM that did this, so I say: be careful what you wish for. Several of that DM's players had to quit the game and go into therapy after the first year.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What?! Are you saying that's not part of my official capacity as a GM? Well flippernackle! C;The DM wants to "punish" the player....I know that as a player, what I really want is a GM that uses the game to teach me life lessons.
First of all, I'm totally adding flippernackle to my everyday vocabulary!!!!
Second, punishing the player for missing a session is just stupid and mean. If someone missed a pick-up game of basketball, would you make him wear shoes that were too small? If someone missed one of your BBQs, would you him only eat salad at the next one? If someone missed a game of Monopoly, would you only let him roll 1 die instead of 2? If they missed movie night, would you make them watch a lame rom-com as punishment?
|
Yeah, this is why I don't really use xp anymore; you level when it's the "right" time. Missing games results in a bit of peer pressure and missing out on loot, although if there's something really appropriate to your character, the party will probably hold it in reserve for you. You'd just better bring extra snacks when you come back. Or beer. We're all over 21, and beer often subs for soda.
@SmiloDan: with regards to movie night, that lame rom-com might be a blessing in my crew. I tend to hunt through this site for much of my movie night inspiration. I have a reputation to maintain!
Missing out on three levels worth of game? I'd assume he's no longer interested.
I'm assuming because this is an issue his absence has not been consecutive. The DM really should talk to this player rather than trying to conduct some kind of DM divine retribution scheme.
It sounds like this player sadly doesn't have a schedule that is doable for the game and may have to be let go. But this sounds like a scheduling issue to me.
Personally, I'd say a new character is in order; I'd also say if the player's missed enough sessions to put him three levels behind the party, I wouldn't put a whole lot of effort into suiting his needs. (That sounds worse than I mean it.) Any NPC that's accompanying the party would be perfect, but the Next playtest, with its lack of BAB and AC progression, has really reminded me how 3.5/PF really doesn't work with a very wide level discrepancy. I think a third level character in a seventh level party will be short lived at best.
Second, punishing the player for missing a session is just stupid and mean. If someone missed a pick-up game of basketball, would you make him wear shoes that were too small? If someone missed one of your BBQs, would you him only eat salad at the next one? If someone missed a game of Monopoly, would you only let him roll 1 die instead of 2? If they missed movie night, would you make them watch a lame rom-com as punishment?
Great analogies. I completely agree.
My only issue with the analogy is that one missed play session doesn't result in a game breaking level discrepancy. Well, unless you've got a Monty Haul, "Your cloudkill spell sinks and kills everything in the dungeon! One million XP for everyone!" style campaign.
|
So one of our players haven't showed up for several sessions. His character is now 3 levels behind the rest, he is level 4, while we are all level 7.
The DM wants to "punish" the player by making him 3 levels behind, but I see that making a player weaker only makes the team weaker. He was going to be a pure class monk, and is right now a level 4 monk. I asked the DM to maybe give him 3 levels of warrior as a way to keep up with the party, and maybe replace them as we level normally if he actually keeps a current attendance. Since by hit dice and base attack alone, he is already starting to fall behind.
Is the DM right do this? Should he give something since the encounters we face are by no means easy as it is.
Has the GM asked him why he's missing games? If the reason seems legit then tell the GM to ask the player to contact him when he's available to play. Sometimes players get burned out with the story/ game/ other players, etc... Players are easy to find.