Who controls your character when you are absent?

[Si-on]

I am going on holiday with my family in a couple of weeks and will miss at least one game session, maybe two. I am not particularly happy letting any of the other players run my character. Its not that I doubt their abilities to run him correctly its just that with groups I have played with in the past an absent players character tended to become a joke.
Does anyone else feel this way?

[Thurbane]

In my group, we're usually pretty laid back about this. We let another player, who feels confident with understanding the character, run it in the players absence.

Hasn't really caused any issues.

[Kallisti]

Usually in my groups, unless someone gave express permission for another player to control their character, a character fades into the background if the player is absent.

That said, I've given and accepted such permission on several occasions, and thus far no problems. I suppose it depends on the group and the tone of the game.

[KillianHawkeye]

In my groups, one of two things usually happens. Either the character is not used at all, becoming "invisible and bulletproof" as one friend likes to say. Or else somebody else at the table runs the character during combats only. Which of those options gets used tends to vary by game and by DM, but we've never really had any problems with it.

Oh yeah, almost forgot. I do have this one GM who likes to kidnap characters when the player isn't here (to give them an in-game excuse to be absent). The result is that we usually have to spend the next session rescuing them.

[big teej]

any group I DM has 2 (and occaisinoally 3) ways of handling absent players

in order of DM (me) preference

1) player offers in game explanation for his character's absence.
example from recent session:
player had to leave because his 3 year old daughter woke up, he had to leave for the night. thankfully we were at a point in the story where he could leave without causing discontinuity.
solution: costain (human paladin) is called away on church buisness for this adventure

2) player does not have explanation, or doesn't care.
solution: a black tear opens up in the space time continueum at -character-'s feet. they fall in, and the tear seals, without a trace.
-player returns-
a black tear in the multiverse opens up, spewing forth -character- completely unharmed

3) player cannot accomplish item 1 and does not like item 2
character becomes 'faceless' and/or 'background'
cross reference Mark The Red from the dead gentlemen's production "the gamers"

IE: character is physically present, but the party, the plot, and the bad guys, ignore him..... unless we need a trapfinder/speedbump for the enemies, in which case they are thrown at the bad guys while the present players think of a plan.

[KenderWizard]

Yeah, we do Fade Into Background. If possible, a reasonable excuse is offered, like they stayed behind with the villagers we were protecting while the rest of the PCs went to scout, but if we're halfway through a dungeon, they just get ignored and don't do anything.

It's not ideal, I've often thought there must be a more elegant solution. We don't offer to run one another's characters. Maybe we should try it...

[Snake-Aes]

Yeah, we do Fade Into Background. If possible, a reasonable excuse is offered, like they stayed behind with the villagers we were protecting while the rest of the PCs went to scout, but if we're halfway through a dungeon, they just get ignored and don't do anything.

It's not ideal, I've often thought there must be a more elegant solution. We don't offer to run one another's characters. Maybe we should try it...

We run mostly on this too. If there's an excuse for the absentee to stay where we stopped, he stays. This often melds with prestige classes or investigative quests. This way they remain useful in that they are advancing part of the plot.
Otherwise they fade. If the plot demands action on their behalf, we gather and decide what the player would decide overall.

[Katana_Geldar]

If a character needs to be controlled by another player during an absence, it is up to the player themselves who controls their character.

But whether your character needs to be controlled like this it depends on how important your they are to the party.

Take for example the cleric, who needs to be at every session regardless. The player has been absent from A LOT of sessions so another player controlled them. Now, that player who runs the cleric for the other player is going to be absent, so the player who has the cleric as their character chooses someone else who will be there to play as them.

Same goes for the Dragonborn pally with an AC of 30, need her to take damage.

That player who was running two characters, he's the rogue and though it's ToH we have other strikers and other trap detectors. So, it's background controlled and they still get the XP.

[Drakevarg]

I put my players into Limbo. It's heavily implied that they're there the whole time, but they're completely ignored by all present even when logic would dictate otherwise. (For example, if the building the PCs were in collapsed and killed everyone, those present would qualify as dead and need to roll new characters while the absentee players would inexplicably survive the incident unharmed.) This is because when somebody can't make it, it's because of circumstances beyond their control, and it isn't really fair to punish them for an incident they weren't there to do anything about.

One player has already survived a TPK through exactly this method. :smalltongue:

[Gensh]

I put my players into Limbo. It's heavily implied that they're there the whole time, but they're completely ignored by all present even when logic would dictate otherwise. (For example, if the building the PCs were in collapsed and killed everyone, those present would qualify as dead and need to roll new characters while the absentee players would inexplicably survive the incident unharmed.) This is because when somebody can't make it, it's because of circumstances beyond their control, and it isn't really fair to punish them for an incident they weren't there to do anything about.

One player has already survived a TPK through exactly this method. :smalltongue:

This is what happened with my old group, even including surviving a TPK twice. The only thing that was different is the monk had the cleric on speed dial and would actually call him in the middle of combat and put him on speakerphone so that he could cast cures.

[Katana_Geldar]

Some games are better at absent players than others. Take for example Star Wars and the players have a ship, absent players are simply back on the ship.

[Doomboy911]

Everyone in my group has a character so when one of them goes DM we simply say they're sleeping somewhere. So when we're in the middle of a gauntlet with blades swinging everywhere one of us decides to take a nap.

[Vemynal]

its a bit different, but my friends wife has a tendency to fall asleep towards the end of our game meet ups (midnight/1am...we usually dont start til 8 or 9)

So whenever she falls asleep we have her faint or get knocked unconscious and she gets carried around in a make shift sack a character carries

[Abies]

In my experience, in any situation where a player can not attend a session where their character's absence can not be explained by plot reasons, the DM controls the character.

They also get full xp, and full treasure.

Someone missing a session is rare though, we usually postpone or cancel in such an event. Often for months or years... Perhaps this is not the best model, then again we're old with families and careers and such. So D&D on a regular basis is not so much on the top of the priority list.

[Thurbane]

...our group is DM plus six players. If one (or even two) can't make a particular session, we generally have them nominate who they would like to play their character (another player or the DM), or if the adventure permits, have them sit out the session.

Once two or more can't make a session, we usually postpone the game.

[Si-on]

We are currently in a combat heavy dungeon crawl. The last two sessions have been one long encounter with no break in between. We will be continuing the epic battle next session and possibly for one or two more. The dm wont just have my character fade into the background. If we dont get the fight finished next session then my character will be in it regardless of whether I am there or not. I will have to trust one of the other players to run my character unless we can finish the quest we are on quickly.

[Lady Moreta]

We only have four players in our group - if one person is away, we just ignore them and they fade into the background. If more than one can't be there, we postpone.

Once or twice the DM will retcon an explanation as to why a character wasn't there. For instance, we got sucked onto the Shadow Plane at one point. The fifth member of our group never turned up for any of the sessions that we played on the plane. Once we got off, DM decided to rule that he had simply never gotten sucked into the plane in the first place. Actually worked out quite well.

The question of someone controlling my character specifically has never actually come up - simply because I've never missed a game (being the DM's wife has some advantages after all). :smallsmile:

[Kaww]

Four ways in my group:

1) The Gamers version - you are a zombie on standby.

2) Player chooses his substitution.

3) We roll dice to see who plays him if the player has no wish to be a zombie, and doesn't give a darn who plays him.

4) We all play a schizophrenic character. (The fun way to do it)

[DarkEternal]

I usually make some excuse of why he is not here which would be in character with the player.

"What, a cleric of Gond won't be joining us? Well, it just happens that the place where you left off has some interesting technological advancements, so he'll stay and study them for a few days".

Makes sense for the character, makes sense for me. I would never control, or give control to someone else in the party of the character that doesn't belong to them except if I have to do certain stuff that would make it plausible why he stayed out of the way.

[Kiero]

We don't play if someone is absent.

[ryzouken]

Fade into background approach. Pretty standard in my group.

When I run, I try to use situations when they organically show up, but also will fall back on the "So-and-so wanders off in search of something in this direction the party isn't going."

I also apply a stiff penalty for missing games. 50% xp of whatever the group earned if you called or otherwise indicated your absence up til the last minute of the game on game day. If I don't hear from you, not one of the group members, but you what the deal is? No xp. It's common courtesy, plain and simple, to let someone know if you aren't able to make it to a prearranged meeting. Obviously, I cut breaks to folks who were at the hospital/mortuary/morgue/etc. but if your arse isn't incapacitated by pain or grief? No xp for you. Miss 3 in a row? I'll ask the players to vote whether I kick you or not. Miss 4? You're gone.

Treasure is and always has been at the behest of the players. I give the stuff out, it's not my job to make sure it's evenly spread across the party. If you miss a session? Take up your treasure share with them, not me.

[FelixG]

Two options, GM handles the PC, this is the preferable option as the GM probably wont play the character in an idiotic fashion for the luls, and the party isn't really screwed because they are used to having player Xs abilities at the table.

Option two: If the player doesn't want their character in harms way for the event they are whisked away (likely against their will) to an outsiders grand banquet, no one is quite sure why this person was the guest of honor and no one who did know would tell them.

[Halaster]

I prefer to handle such situations in advance, mostly by having a very regular schedule for games, which allows everyone to adjust in time and signal when they don't have time. In most cases players know beforehand when they can't make it (holidays, birthdays, etc.) and we can just reschedule. If we can't, which is rare, we skip that session, no matter who is missing, and just play board games or one-shot adventures. Only when we play a system like Pendragon, where explanations for a players absence are easy ("Sir Robin is questing in another part of Britain") and lost experience is easily made up for (solo adventures), do we go ahead and play with a player missing.

Has its disadvantages of course. At the low frequency of most games I play in (1/month) a lot of time can pass between sessions.

[Farlion]

We handle it pretty easily. The character of the absent player is "invisible and bulletproof", not present in combat but if one of his abilities are absolutely required to continue the adventure, the DM handwaves that the absent player's character uses that ability (which of course, should not lead to said characters death ;-P).

When the player comes back, the character steps forth from behind a tree/rock/next corner and is back in the game.

Personally I don't like this solution, but everything else is always quite an effort on my (the DMs) part, so I just run with it.

Cheers,
Farlion

PS: What I forgot, all our characters always have the same amount of XP, no matter how often they miss games. It just makes bookkeeping alot easier and I can be sure that all the characters are somewhat on par. (Yes, this also means that scribing scrolls for example doesn't cost XP. Since none of my players abuse this mechanic, I don't have a problem with it)

[Psyx]

Normally, it's fade-into-background and no xp awarded. No risk, no attendance, no XP.

One GM I play under tends to sometimes hand off a player to another player who doesn't already have a lot to handle. This is especially true if the absentee is the healbot, or otherwise utterly essential. Then they get full XP and if they die, then the player responsible has to be the one to break it to them.

[Aotrs Commander]

For our groups - which meet weekly, but only for 2-3 hours sessions - the fading to the background would generate all kinds of issues, not least being that we rarely get everyone every session. So it has always been standard practice (along with the DM keeping hold of all the character sheets) that one of the players simply volenteers to control the absentee.

In fact, as things have gone on, we have more than once found a player more-or-less adopting a character for a player whose not able to come anymore. There's two or three of us players who are now so used to playing two or more characters at once it doesn't even phase us anymore! (I've probably spent nearly as much time playing two characters as I have playing one over the years; not including when I'm DMing!)

If something bad happens while you're away, well, them's the breaks. I've lost a couple of characters that way over the years; though generally we try and not getted people killed when the player's not there, it happens sometimes. (Though in my games death tends to be merely a minor setback by the time it crops up.)

[Badgerish]

If there is a decent excuse for the PC to not be there (like they have a personal thing to do, or something needs guarding), they do that and can catchup later.

Otherwise, the GM plays the PC out-of-combat ('combat' includes any other stressful time-sensitive context) and one of the other players runs the PC in-combat.

[kladams707]

Our DM usually writes us out for the game. Then again, he goes by the "xp? we don't need no stinkin' xp," method.

[prufock]

If the story is at a "rest point," I will write them out for the adventure, absolutely. I prefer not to have characters run by players who aren't their owners, and I'd prefer not to have others run MY characters. They can't know how the character would act in a given situation, and they can't roleplay another person's character genuinely. I always try to make this write-out rational because I appreciate continuity in my games.

If the story is at an "action point," I will generally run that character as an NPC until after the climax, at which point, see above. The now-NPC takes a supportive role, doing whatever it is he/she does best. They never get the kill shot. A second option is to use them as a hook. They're being set upon by a dragon? The now-NPC might notice an escape route, a second (less threatening) foe, a particular item in its horde, or a hatching egg.

[Clovis]

Another player.

The players with spellcasters (wiz / cle) play each other's characters when either is absent. Full XP and exposure to danger. We've had characters die when other players have handled them and no ill feelings. However, we do tend to play with other players' characters with less abandon than with our own characters.

For instance, last night we finally came to the final of a looong campaign (about 18 years IRL time) and the cleric's player was absent; I took it over. She was best qualified to use the artifact that we needed to destroy the Bell of Doom so she was very active indeed; however, I did not make her to face the Big Bad Demon since the player was absent so she didn't die. My own wizard did... But we did manage to save the world :smallsmile: -- and the wizard was rezzed :smallbiggrin:

[Il_Vec]

Usually in our group absent players get temporarily NPCfied, being controlled by the DM in according to the character's usual behavior.
And the other players tend to comment also things like "But would he do X? That time in place Y, he did Z."

[Telonius]

I DM for my group. Normally the other players collectively take charge of a character during combat, and I control the character out of combat.

There's only a minimum of mocking the absent person. We use minis, and I have a small figurine of Ned Flanders that's just perfectly sized for a D&D square. Anyone missing a session must live with the shame of knowing they were represented by Ned instead of their normal mini. (This did backfire once when a player had an Exalted Deeds character ...)

[Socko525]

We typically let another player take over, although that has lead to the ranger getting turned to stone and left for dead(she ended up dropping out anyway so she didn't care).

In a campaign I played a few years back we had one player who only came every few sessions, so when he wasn't there we'd beat him up, take his gear and sell it. Then when he came around again he would spend the whole session getting it back, and then we'd do it again....good times

[Ruinix]

in my group is the DM who run the PC of of the abscent player, but just 1 abscent player is allowed, if 2 can't play that session then we all screw and wait for the next session to continue.

and yes. is part of the jokes, cause for example if we have a fight the abscent player recieve several SMSs describing various form in wich his player die XD

[bokodasu]

In our group, if you don't show up, your character isn't there. On the plus side, it avoids things like "what do you mean I'm dead?!" and on the downside, well, we haven't had a rogue in months, and if you wind up with a party that's two fighters, a monk, and a barbarian, good luck with that.

Absent characters also get half xp - its assumed they were doing something all that time. Since it's not difficult to earn 150-200% xp if you actually show up, nobody falls too far behind and it all stays friendly.

Of course, this doesn't work in small groups playing heavily plotted games. But somehow whenever I get in groups like that, they wind up meeting once a year since that's the only time everyone can get together, so I prefer the more artificial method above even if I don't think it's great storywise. (Also, keep your paws off my charsheet. Ick! You got cooties all over Elfstar!)

[doc*sk]

I have a core of three players that show up pretty consistently. As for the others, we say they are in a "perpetual state of sleep." I recognize that this can throw off the illusion of reality, but in our group it works the best. No one is forced to take on another person's character and face any grief from hurting that character.

It's worked for us. :smallsmile:

[Elfin]

(Also, keep your paws off my charsheet. Ick! You got cooties all over Elfstar!)

I don't want to be Elfstar anymore!

Ahem.

Anyway; we tend to just have the absentee nominate another player to run their character for the session, and we find that it works out just fine.
Unless the story is at a good breaking point; then we'll tend to just have the absent character stay behind for some reason, and rejoin the party later.

There are up to eight or even nine players at every session, so absences are more frequent than I'd like...but hey, you can't have everything.