So I had a strange question / idea. It sorta sprang up as an idea on how to handle death for a PC, if one were to happen.
My party has 6 PCs and for the current time they are all going to be able to make it to play every session. If one day one of them can't make it and they only have 5 people anyway what is stopping them from playing the other 5 rulers? Is this a completely terrible idea?
I would make the players write down a general idea of goals they would like to achieve if they let themselves be NPCs for a time being.
Should I randomly roll for each race and class?
Thanks in advance.
I think you have to clarify your post a little, since I have no idea what your idea actually is.
Basically, what I get from reading your post is: "If I have 6 players and one can't make it, what stops the other five from playing their roles?"
The answer is nothing. What to do with absent players is a thing every table has to decide to do with, as absences will be pretty common over the course of a long game.
So I had a strange question / idea. It sorta sprang up as an idea on how to handle death for a PC, if one were to happen.
My party has 6 PCs and for the current time they are all going to be able to make it to play every session. If one day one of them can't make it and they only have 5 people anyway what is stopping them from playing the other 5 rulers? Is this a completely terrible idea?
I would make the players write down a general idea of goals they would like to achieve if they let themselves be NPCs for a time being.
Should I randomly roll for each race and class?
Thanks in advance.I think you have to clarify your post a little, since I have no idea what your idea actually is.
Basically, what I get from reading your post is: "If I have 6 players and one can't make it, what stops the other five from playing their roles?"
The answer is nothing. What to do with absent players is a thing every table has to decide to do with, as absences will be pretty common over the course of a long game.
+1. This is something most long-running campaigns eventually have to deal with, particularly as people get older and have more RL commitments like spouses, kids and jobs. There are lots of diffeent ways to deal with it, ranging from having someone else play that character for the session(s) someone is missing, to having the DM take over that characyter, to having the character get "sick" or have a personal emergency that calls them away from the adventure. My group uses the first, largely because it is disruptive and illogical to have characters walking in and out of adventures at random moments, and I don't like to control PC characters. It helps a lot if someone has written up some roleplaying notes or guidelines about what they want their character to do in certain predicatable situations.
I also found your post difficult to understand. I am guessing english is not your native language.
So I had a strange question / idea. It sorta sprang up as an idea on how to handle death for a PC, if one were to happen.
My party has 6 PCs and for the current time they are all going to be able to make it to play every session. If one day one of them can't make it and they only have 5 people anyway what is stopping them from playing the other 5 rulers? Is this a completely terrible idea?
I would make the players write down a general idea of goals they would like to achieve if they let themselves be NPCs for a time being.
...
This appears to have been answered by the previous posters.
But what do you mean by this?
...Should I randomly roll for each race and class?
Thanks in advance.
What does random rolling for race and class have to do with running a PC as an NPC during a session the player can't attend?
That's much better.
Shouldn't you already know who the other rulers are?
I wouldn't MAKE them do it. Unless your players want to do this, I guess behind the barn it goes.
I still don't get it.
You have 6 PCs. Your PCs will select 5 NPC rulers to complete the ruling council.
One day, if one player can't attend the session...you want the rest of the players to set their characters aside too? Why?
Running an NPC "to get a feel for the problems that the NPC/position has to go through on a regular basis" might be interesting (if, as Valandil says, they want to try it). But it might also be terminally boring. "Oh, I get to play the Treasurer this session? Okay, I...balance the books."
Ah. Well, I can only report from my own experiences. I've played in games with secondary parties, or where we've taken over NPCs to accomplish a task in the game. (Usually, while our main group was away on a mission or somehow unable to deal with an immediate problem.) So, could this be done? Sure, it's fun.
Should it be done? That's up to you. First off, it would mean your entire kingdom leadership would be adventurers. At least, this is what I'm assuming, since if you force the PCs to play Experts and Aristocrats for more than one session, I'd have a real serious issue with your game as a player.
But there's no real downside, other than the fact that it's more work for the GM.