Player can't assist to session. What about XP and loot? [Please close this. Thx]

[Fenryr]

Hello! This is D&D but maybe it will work with other systems.

Today 'm gonna have an intense session. Lots of treasure and enemies for my players. But two of the players will be unable to join us. So, my question is, what happens with the XP and loot?

They're unable to come because A needs to study for exams and B has family business. I can't "punish" them. Like I said before, the session will be a lil' bit hardcore. It's ok if they fall behind in treasure and XP? Should I give the party treasure that must belong to A and B? A is a Gunslinger and B is a Wizard, obvious treasure is pretty obvious.

[Jeraa]

In my games, if you don't show up, you don't get experience or loot (unless the other players want to share the loot they got).

If the missing players want to, they can let their characters be controlled for that session by other players. That way, the characters still get loot/xp. Or if the missing players don't want others to control their characters, hold a second session for the missing players. While the rest of the party is off with your original adventure, what are the two missing members doing? Giving them their own seperate adventure will keep them in line with the parties wealth and experience level.

Or, simply play a different game this week. Or watch a movie. Continue the adventure while everyone is there. Just ask your players what they want to do.

[jindra34]

Let the other players decide how to distribute the treasure but leave it there. On XP unless someone else plays their character for them (which involves them not keeping their sheets) don't give them any, and even if another player does reduce it by maybe 5-10%. One session of this shouldn't make a difference but will if its repeat performance, in which case the loss of ability is fair.

[Geddoe]

We always give full exp to everybody in the group. Partly because it is easier to keep a running exp total that way, and partly because we realize that having real life stuff is no reason to punish somebody who can't make it.

The systems we are playing now don't really care that much about looting most of the time, but when we played D&D the person got a share too. Loot kind of retroactively came into being next time the person showed up.

My perspective is that if they aren't coming, they have 1 of 2 major reasons: 1. Real life stuff going on or 2. They just didn't feel like playing.

Punishing(and not giving them exp or loot while everybody else gets new powers and phat lewts is punishing) somebody for reason 1 isn't going to stop real life from happening in the future.

And if they start falling behind everybody else, people who might be a bit burnt out on your game are even more likely to get totally burnt out faster and just drop your game altogether.

[Shpadoinkle]

I usually go with the PCs of absent players get half XP for the session, and loot is distributed evenly (or however else the players decide to distribute it, but I encourage them to do that) but the players who are present get first pick when it comes to magic items.

[Anderlith]

You only get XP if you were there & you only get loot if the party lets you have it.

[Jeraa]

Punishing (and not giving them exp or loot while everybody else gets new powers and phat lewts is punishing)

I (and many others I'm sure) don't see it that way. Your not taking anything away that they rightfully earned - you're just not giving them anything for free. Yes real life takes precedence over the game, but getting in-game rewards (loot and experience) for doing nothing in-game isn't the answer.

Getting experience and loot isn't a right - its a reward for actions in the game. Which is why I suggested a seperate little adventure for the missing players sometime during the week. It still gives them their loot and XP, but they actually have to earn it. And it gives a reason why the characters wern't with the rest of the party for the main adventure.

[Medic!]

Games are played for funsies, when I DM and someone has to miss an occassional session I usually arrange for an off-stage mini-venture for them to participate in away from the party. It's usually just a "Hey you did this while the party did that and I'll find a logical way to re-insert you when you get back" and I give them some loot and full missed xp when they get back. The loot isn't always on par with what they would have gotten, usually it's a character-specific chosen thing of lesser value. Nobody likes falling behind just because they have other responsibilities, and it serves as a great way to grab an extra plot hook or accomplish something off-screen to make for a nice story twist/push.

[Defiant]

Gaming is supposed to be fun. D&D is supposed to be done "for fun" (and social). It's not something you work at to get rewards - that's completely the wrong attitude.

Sometimes life gets in the way understandably. Some things in life are more important than "fun", especially when they are pressing matters. Players should not be disadvantaged because they assign their life priorities properly.

A player who has less XP and less loot in the D&D game is disadvantaged from the others. This can make the game less for fun for them, and ruin the entire purpose of it. D&D is not about "working" at it. It's about having fun, and getting various rewards that are fun.

I mean, even the idea of "no xp or loot, but if their characters are controlled by someone else, then they get xp and loot" completely misses the point if you step back from the concept of this is a game you play for fun. What the character does in-game (whether it be absence or presence) should have no impact on the player's ability to have fun in the game.

I understand where it's coming from. It doesn't make sense for a character who isn't there to get XP and loot (and maybe it does if they're controlled by someone else). But step back for a bit, and this what makes best sense from a player perspective.

[Anderlith]

Yes, D&D is supposed to be fun, but look at your X-Box. Do you have anymore Achievements just because you wanted to play but couldn't?

[Defiant]

Yes, D&D is supposed to be fun, but look at your X-Box. Do you have anymore Achievements just because you wanted to play but couldn't?

Poor comparison. Again, missing the point. XboX, World of Warcraft, etc. are all made so that they keep you hooked. See here.

And it's not really an applicable comparison either. If you don't get XboX achievements, you're not all of a sudden disadvantaged compared to other players. If you don't level up your WoW character, you're not disadvantaged - you just play with other people of the same level while the ones you would have played with carry on to a higher level.

Not to mention that if the achievements are a great source of "unfun" - i.e. you play only for the achievements and if you have problems getting them you get frustrated and annoyed - then you really should stop playing, and try something else.

At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is that D&D is a game and it's for fun. Making it such that you have to "work" for the XP and loot as a principle, misses the entire point of playing it. Keep things fair, yes, as in players who constantly miss sessions don't have the greatest of items... but don't disadvantage players who can't attend as frequently.

If a DM came to me about XP and loot saying "well you didn't do any work for these, you didn't do anything to earn them, why should I just give them to you", I'll promptly point out that I'm here to have fun, not to work (and probably find a different DM who realizes why I'm playing).

[Jeraa]

If you don't level up your WoW character, you're not disadvantaged - you just play with other people of the same level while the ones you would have played with carry on to a higher level.

Only half true. Yes, you can play with other people. But if you prefer to play with a group of your friends, they can now go to higher level instances and quests then you. Sure, you can go with them, but you don't get credit for those quests, and you will have to do them again when you are the appropriate level. So, you are partially punished by not being there - you can still play, but you can't do all the same stuff as your friends.

And since when does more experience and more loot = more fun? The level of fun should have no connection to your experience level or loot.

[Howler Dagger]

And since when does more experience and more loot = more fun? The level of fun should have no connection to your experience level or loot.

I think it is a situation of less loot=less fun, expecially in the situation you described.

I prefer to give missing players experience and loot, and make a justifiable in game reason for it.

[Defiant]

Only half true. Yes, you can play with other people. But if you prefer to play with a group of your friends, they can now go to higher level instances and quests then you. Sure, you can go with them, but you don't get credit for those quests, and you will have to do them again when you are the appropriate level. So, you are partially punished by not being there - you can still play, but you can't do all the same stuff as your friends.

Again, I don't like using video games as good examples, because they're actually made to get you to keep playing and want to keep playing - whether or not you're having fun. You get the fun, but the thing that makes you do things that aren't fun (like grinding or farming) is usually the addictive nature of the game made so that you have to spend tedious time before you can have fun again.

And since when does more experience and more loot = more fun? The level of fun should have no connection to your experience level or loot.

Three ways:

1. Bonuses. The other players get to enjoy new levels and new items, lots of perks that can be pretty fun. You don't. Why? Because your girlfriend needed your help moving in. You didn't "work" at the game, and were working at something much more important (heavy lifting for your loved one) - you obviously don't deserve the same benefits, right?

2. Relative Power. The other players are one level higher and have better items or gold to buy items. You don't, and are thus a bit weaker than the other players (which might also lead to some frustration), and can't contribute to the team effort as much. Why? Your dad asked for your help painting your parents' new place, and you were happy to assist because of all the help they've given you, like all the money they spent putting you through college/university. You didn't "work" at the game, and were working at something much more important (helping your beloved parents) - you obviously shouldn't be on the same level as the other players, right?

3. Attitude. If you have to do other important things making you miss the session, you won't get the XP and loot. This attitude can be quite detrimental to the enjoyment of the game, since it makes it look like more of a competitive nature, more of a "work at it" nature, and less of a "let's have fun" concept. Knowing you're missing out on XP and loot if you're missing a session, on top of the fact that you're missing out having fun times with your friend, can really suck. Again, it's about having fun, not working at it to get "deserved" in-game rewards - they are there only to augment the fun. And if you get called in to work, and want to keep your job so that you can continue to pay the rent and buy food, and so you go in to do your shift, you shouldn't also have to think about the fact that you'll start getting in-game disadvantaged for not attending the D&D session.

[Defiant]

I guess I should probably also give a suggestion on how to proceed to Fenryr (and other interested parties).

Defiant's suggestion:

If the player is missing due to legitimate reasons, then proceed as I noted below. If the player keeps missing due to laziness or poor reasons, you should probably talk to them before starting to cut into their in-game characters. Ideally get a group of properly interested and motivated players, who want to be there.

XP: Award the same amount of XP for the player who is missing. If you like to maintain specific character XPs and they vary, then award the average, or the lowest-amount gained by a character for that session.

Loot: Ideally place the appropriate items on the bosses for the other players to loot. They'll go "hey, this gun would be perfect for our gunslinger!" Alternatively, give the same level of loot, but less flashy. If the fighter got The Excalibur (named) sword from the boss, and the wizard got Hat of Power from the boss's cohort, then maybe give the gunslinger Well-Built Musket that was picked up from one of the guards, that's still about on the same level of the others, but not so "flashy".

Note that if you start cutting in to the XP and loot of another player (like if you want to do that since they're missing sessions without good reason), then you'll probably foster resentment. Best thing is to try to talk it out, and ultimately get a dedicated player.

[DrBurr]

This is a problem I had just last night, one of my player's couldn't attend, usually we play a different campaign while hes absent but he agreed to let us continue this one without him simply because he knew this was essentially just a dungeon run and he wouldn't miss any plot. So what should we do about his character's experience and loot?

I kind of agree with Defiant, its not my friend's fault that he had class at that time and couldn't come. So I plan to give him a fair share of XP even though his character didn't fight during the session, but maybe instead he was protecting the groups caravan. This way his character doesn't fall behind and get slaughtered later on because he missed a couple dungeon runs.

As for loot though, the majority of treasure my players get is going to be gold and maybe some equipment off the bodies of their foes. Thats up to the player's at the table to decide how to divide up, if they decide to give him some great, if not he simply doesn't have as much gold.

Of course I plan to discuss this with my players next week to get their opinions on the situation because after all its their game too

[Anderlith]

If you were talking about board games I would agree with you. But we are talking about a game with multiple people. I've never seen a problem with Achievements. Also you took my example out of context. There is no singular game in question. You either contribute to completing them or you do not. X-box doesn't give everyone high gamer scores just because you feel left out. You did not contribute to making the cake so you do not get to eat it just because you were doing something else. Gaming is not work but it requires effort, effort that you did not put in. So no cake for you. If anyone can miss sessions & it not hamper game then why not just skip 5 or 5? Let someone else earn a few level ups & get cool stuff. Then you can show up & ask for it all to be given to you.

[Tengu_temp]

Let the party handle the loot among themselves - if they're good buddies, they will give the missing people their share. As for XP, either give the missing people full experience or give them more experience during the next several sessions until they even out with everyone else. Being weaker because you couldn't attend the game due to important RL reasons is no fun.

[Defiant]

You did not contribute to making the cake so you do not get to eat it just because you were doing something else. Gaming is not work but it requires effort, effort that you did not put in. So no cake for you. If anyone can miss sessions & it not hamper game then why not just skip 5 or 5? Let someone else earn a few level ups & get cool stuff. Then you can show up & ask for it all to be given to you.

This is a question of merit.

A person did not put in the "effort" into the game, because they were not there. They instead put effort into helping their girlfriend move, or helping their parents paint, or what have you. Does this mean the person does not deserve the "cake"? Just because this effort was placed into something far more real-life important (and likely far more effort and work) rather than the game itself?

If a player starts having the mentality of "hey, I'll level up and get cool stuff even if I'm not there - so I should stop being there as much because I can get away with less effort", then they have the completely wrong attitude. There are so many things wrong with that, that I can't even start to list them. It's the journey, not the destination. I mean, they could probably get 5 extra levels and double their wealth just by joining a different game that's starting at a different level - what's the point?

If I miss a session, I'll feel like I missed out on a lot of fun, even though I still get the XP and loot. The point of D&D is to have fun with your friends. If you want to play a game where all you're trying to do is make a number go up (or multiple numbers), play something like WoW, or XboX games for the gamerscore. [Or this game.]

D&D is not about getting XP or loot. Those are simply ways in which the game is played - but not they are not the game itself. A player who is happy with missing 5 sessions because they still get the XP and loot is missing the point of playing D&D. And ideally, you would not play with such players.

[Anderlith]

Effort to make a cake gets you cake. Effort to help your girlfriend move gets you admiration. Effort to make it to D&D gets you XP, fun & of course phat lootz. It's all about where you invest it.


From my experience, one missed game will not impact your character very much.

[Defiant]

Effort to make a cake gets you cake.

Nope. My dad does the cooking, while my mom does the baking. My dad puts no effort into making a cake, yet he gets the cake.

And I get the cake, even though all I do all day is study in university!

Merit can be transferable.

[Emmerask]

no loot (of course the other players can opt to give them what they have found)

full basic xp, however if you hand out roleplaying xp, puzzle xp or other situational xp boni these are of course for those participating in the game.

Being able to participate in a fun game instead of going to work, to the hospital etcetc is reward enough. There is no need to punish the player and decrease his incentive to even join the campaign again...

[Shadowknight12]

XP and loot belong to the characters, not to the players. If the characters went with the rest of the party (even if they were being NPC'd or didn't contribute at all), they get their share of XP and loot, as normal. If they're left behind in the town/HQ/secret lair, then it's something to discuss OOCly with the players themselves.

[HunterOfJello]

An extremely important rule of thumb for me as a DM is that loot distribution has absolutely nothing to do with the DM in any way shape or form. As a DM, it is a great idea to volunteer strategies to deal with things and encourage methods for deciding distribution like setting up a Party Contract that everyone can agree upon, but the actual distribution itself has absolutely nothing to do with you.

If a character or two stops participating in a quest, then the group may allow those characters to receive an equal portion in the total gp earned/found, but it's up to the party members who find magical items to decide what to do with them.

Easy Answer: Loot Distribution is both not your problem and completely outside your job as a DM.

~~~~


As for XP, only give it to participating characters. The XP system in D&D is designed to give lower level characters signifigantly more xp from an ecounter than higher level characters. If one party member falls behind in levels, they will quickly gain ground again.

[icefractal]

You did not contribute to making the cake so you do not get to eat it just because you were doing something else. Gaming is not work but it requires effort, effort that you did not put in. So no cake for you. If anyone can miss sessions & it not hamper game then why not just skip 5 or 5? Let someone else earn a few level ups & get cool stuff. Then you can show up & ask for it all to be given to you.

But what if a player shows up and half-asses it? Maybe they didn't bring much to the RP. Maybe they made stupid moves in combat. Do they get less XP? Generally, no, and certainly not zero. Let's be honest - a really good player can bring as much contribution to the game in a single session as a mediocre player does in five. But unless you want to start rating (and alienating) your friends, XP is not a good way to measure that.

So why pretend that people are really "earning" anything?
1) The actual players didn't face any danger or defeat any foes. They played a game that was presumably enjoyable. You wouldn't give an award for watching TV or eating a tasty meal, would you?
2) Why would all foes give consistent XP anyway? If we're trying to be "realistic", then one character might learn as much from one fight with an ogre as another did from facing a horde of demons. And what do XP measure, anyway? Learning? Accomplishment? Slaying Stuff? They're pretty damn arbitrary in most games.

So we have XP as a pacing mechanism, and/or a reward for certain behavior. In neither case does penalizing people for things they cannot (or should not) change make any sense.

[Anderlith]

You get xp for defeating monsters. If you didn't help slay it then you don't get it.

[Defiant]

You get xp for defeating monsters. If you didn't help slay it then you don't get it.

I've tried my best, but you keep missing the point.

A character's XP and wealth totals should be irrelevant of their gameplay contributions and session presence/absence.

[jindra34]

Just for the sake of example I'll explain how I handle (I run GURPS 4ed).

Loot is either distributed by jobs and everyone who aids in the job gets an even cut of the reward or loot is pretty much dropped and I let players distribute it.

Experience is 1 point for showing up and 1-3 points for good RP, meaning if you can come up with a good reason for why your character disappeared/didn't help you can still get the RP points, per session, with another 10-15 per arc (depending on arc) for everyone who meaningfully helped during the arc regardless of the number of sessions they showed up. In general it would take missing 2-3 sessions to meaningfully impact a characters power, and a pattern of missing to fall behind in overall capability at which point there should already be a discussion of absences.

[Fenryr]

Thanks for all the responses. I will take some measures if they miss more thay one session again (like fixing treasure or lowering the CR or some good posts here). Thanks again.

[Geddoe]

You get xp for defeating monsters. If you didn't help slay it then you don't get it.

So if I create a 3.5 Iaijutsu Master/ubercharger and always go first and one shot everything before anybody else moves, I don't need to split exp with others. I mean, they aren't actually helping right?

What if the battle starts and your character is affected by the monster's powerful area fear effect. You spend the rest of the fight cowering in the corner while your group fights the monster. You were there, but contributed nothing because you flubbed a resistance roll. Do you get exp?

P&P rpgs aren't Xbox rpgs, there is no real achievement. The GM can "win" at anytime, but chooses not to.