Player attendance problem and replacing her

[Piccolo]

I tried to explain to her that this is more than just a gaming group, it's a circle of friends. We don't just game together, we go to movies together, eat out, goof off with jokes, basically form friendships. See, my current group is a rare bunch that sticks together and doesn't argue with each other. For my part, I bought 7 different AP's to go through, we've finished one and are working on a second. I try really hard to ensure everyone's happy.

She couldn't seem to come up with a solution when I talked with her. I tried as well, and eventually came up with the idea that she runs NPC's occasionally if she wants to play. Gonna break it to the group once we game tomorrow. As for the new player, she can either play the orc Fighter tank or make herself a new PC.

As for "easy mode", for some unknown reason my dice keep nailing PC's to the wall, especially the Cleric. Last game session he almost died outright from being eaten by a giant gar fish. I fudged the dice results because I felt that the player hadn't done anything stupid to deserve being squished yet again. He'd already died once by charging into a situation with poor AC and instantly being flanked.

[Gurby]

Piccolo wrote:

The absentee player has also told me that her work schedule wildly varies, and it's likely she still won't be able to show up regularly.

My GM in my monthly(that is requires a digitally response about every 2 or 3 times a week) game has just sent out Attendance/ expectation of play Contracts. so expectations are in black and white..

We have 3 people that are issues with response timing.

[Buri Reborn]

I think "contracts" are taking it a bit too far. Simply stating expectations is much better. Best is the group, as a whole, determines its schedule.

[phantom1592]

Piccolo wrote:

I tried to explain to her that this is more than just a gaming group, it's a circle of friends. We don't just game together, we go to movies together, eat out, goof off with jokes, basically form friendships. See, my current group is a rare bunch that sticks together and doesn't argue with each other. For my part, I bought 7 different AP's to go through, we've finished one and are working on a second. I try really hard to ensure everyone's happy.

She couldn't seem to come up with a solution when I talked with her. I tried as well, and eventually came up with the idea that she runs NPC's occasionally if she wants to play. Gonna break it to the group once we game tomorrow. As for the new player, she can either play the orc Fighter tank or make herself a new PC.

As for "easy mode", for some unknown reason my dice keep nailing PC's to the wall, especially the Cleric. Last game session he almost died outright from being eaten by a giant gar fish. I fudged the dice results because I felt that the player hadn't done anything stupid to deserve being squished yet again. He'd already died once by charging into a situation with poor AC and instantly being flanked.

Out of curiosity... what is the difference between 'Run an NPC' occassionaly.... and 'Let her play her character and make it an NPC when she isn't there?'

Preferabbly without spoilers as we'll be starting Giantslayer ourselves in about a week... But why can't she just fade into the background when she isn't being played?

You'll still have the issue with 7 players if all show up...

I'm not sure I see why this is the line in the sand.

As for 'easy'... That's just based on the tradional 4 party group vs. 6 or 7... Our DM won't go past 5 since he claims it's too tough to make a challenge ... though I've been told that Giantslayer is brutal.

[Mark Thomas 66]

One bit of perspective. If I was the new player, reliable, ready and willing to play and kept being relegated to stand in because you want to stick to a limit of characters, one of who's player is practically never there, eventually I'd walk and find another group to game with.

You're pretty much telling that person, "you're awesome, but this person who kinda sucks was here first so there really isn't a true place at the table for you."

Kind of a slap in the face no? That "eff this" moment is coming.

[HeHateMe]

Speaking as someone who got married 7 months ago, it really does take up quite a bit of time. Did the player say that her attendance will improve after the wedding (and honeymoon)? Why make a decision now, if the group likes her, I would just wait till she comes back from her honeymoon and see how things go.

If her attendance continues to be spotty, then it's time to have the talk.

[Kobold Catgirl]

I think everyone is making this into more of a personal issue than it has to be. It's not a betrayal. It's not a slap in the face. It's not causing pain and anguish to anyone except, clearly, the GM.

The new player probably gets that it's hard to "kick someone out" to bring in a newbie. Likewise, the old player probably gets that she's being unreliable. Just sit down with the latter and go over expectations, like Buri said. You're friends. She'll probably forgive it.

Also, like others have said, if she only pops by occasionally, you could probably just have her play NPCs or a lower-level character. Or just adjust adventures slightly whenever she shows up (add an extra mook here and there). It's not that hard to accommodate an occasionally 7-player party. Suggest that to her and get her input. Just keep her posted instead of trying to work around her. That's rude and probably the most likely to lead to hurt feelings.

Don't act like you're committing a crime. That's not a great way to handle friendships.

[Deadalready]

As a player, I find it disappointing when members of my party drop in and out.
I can understand once or twice but when it becomes a common occurrence, it becomes a situation where I can no longer rely on that character for planning, support or role playing.

As it is *now* she is no longer a regular player, don't forget you're allowed to make a decision now and change it at a later date. As a GM you are governing for the group as a whole and making decisions that will give them the best GAME EXPERIENCE.

[M1k31]

I think the main thing different I might do as a GM in your situation would be to allow her to create(with guidelines) 3-5 NPC's that you can work in to the campaign quickly and enter it with the expectation they leave after that day, then each time she comes you can decide "would one of these return?" and if not she uses the next one, that way she is invested in the characters and you don't need to depend on other NPC's.

[Grond]

CrystalSeas wrote:

I think it's more Mean Girls syndrome

The GM's hidden agenda is this
Get rid of a player who doesn't play as often as he wants.
Keep her character
Give her character to someone else
Blame the group for the decision

And never let her have an honest conversation with the group about possible alternative solutions to her absences

This crosses into personal insult territory. Absolutely no need to try and take it there. If you don't agree with his decision list reasons why you disagree but don't attack someone's character.

[CrystalSeas]

Grond wrote:

This crosses into personal insult territory. Absolutely no need to try and take it there. If you don't agree with his decision list reasons why you disagree but don't attack someone's character.

I did not mean to attack anyone's character. My point is about the disconnect between his assertions and his behavior.

The disconnect is that the GM wants her to leave, but doesn't want to say that out loud. He's trying to find a way to do what he wants without feeling bad about it.

A GM has every right to kick out a player who doesn't follow his rules about attendance.
A GM has every right to add a new person to the group at any time
A GM has every right to keep the character sheets of people who have played in his games
A GM has every right to give that character to another person in the group.

The GM has every right to have the group discuss the person's behavior at a meeting the person cannot attend
The GM has every right to have the group ratify the GM's decision to kick out the player.
The GM has every right to tell the player it was a group decision.

And the GM does not need to allow the person to discuss the decision with the rest of the group.

But he needs to own those decisions and also own the pain that he's causing when he makes them. To have a group meeting to kick her out and take away her character simply shifts the burden off his shoulders

People vary greatly in how they deal with conflict. Some people try to avoid it all costs. But avoiding facing conflict carries its own costs and creates its own pain

[Bjørn Røyrvik]

We have this problem with one of our friends and what we have done for the last 10+ years is just have his characters be run by another player when he doesn't show up and run by him when he does (often a few hours late). We don't put the borrowed PC in undue danger and tend to target other PCs for bad effects unless it makes too much sense to target it over a PC with a present player. This has worked just fine.

Two kids, a job with lots of responsibility plus coaching the kids' sports, coupled with other friends and family affairs means he's really busy, yet he always makes an effort to show up and enjoys the game, and we enjoy seeing him when he does. Throwing him out would effectively be throwing away his friendship because we see him about once a year, maybe twice, on non-game related matters.
We think of it like this: we will enjoy his presence when we have it and accept that he's a grown man with more important responsibilities than game night.

On the subject of new players having unfortunate schedules and not showing up, for us that has always just sorted itself out with them just failing to show up at all.

[Piccolo]

Update

I told her, and she was ticked, but she understood where I was coming from. As for what she is going to do, that I don't know. I can only hope that once she gets married that her schedule will open up.