rpg

3959 readers

29 users here now

This community is for meaningful discussions of tabletop/pen & paper RPGs

Rules (wip):

Do not distribute pirate content
Do not incite arguments/flamewars/gatekeeping.
Do not submit video game content unless the game is based on a tabletop RPG property and is newsworthy.
Image and video links MUST be TTRPG related and should be shared as self posts/text with context or discussion unless they fall under our specific case rules.
Do not submit posts looking for players, groups or games.
Do not advertise for livestreams
Limit Self-promotions. Active members may promote their own content once per week. Crowdfunding posts are limited to one announcement and one reminder across all users.
Comment respectfully. Refrain from personal attacks and discriminatory (racist, homophobic, transphobic, etc.) comments. Comments deemed abusive may be removed by moderators.
No Zak S content.
Off-Topic: Book trade, Boardgames, wargames, video games are generally off-topic.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Avogadro@ttrpg.network

sirblastalot@ttrpg.network

TripHammer@ttrpg.network

Primarch@ttrpg.network

BrentTaylor@ttrpg.network

GMs - What are your methods to mitigate no-shows? (lemmy.today)

submitted 1 day ago by Fletcher@lemmy.today to c/rpg@ttrpg.network

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

When I write as a GM, I incorporate all of my players into the story and evolve the narrative around their characters' backgrounds, actions, etc. So, when a player doesn't show up regularly, it has a tendency to disrupt or even halt the game's progress. The smaller the group, the more serious this issue becomes. I've had gaming groups implode over this.

So what sorts of rules or understandings does your group have in place to offset the void left when a player doesn't show up to the game? Does the absent player become an NPC under the GM's control? Do you just ignore the fact that the PC carrying the magical Orb of Whatsit is off on holiday when the king demands the Orb to save the kingdom?

Obviously, we all have real-life stuff that crops up from time to time that can prevent us from playing, but if I can commit to writing and running the game each week (barring life's little emergencies), I don't feel I'm being unfair to expect the same from my players.

So, GMs...what are your thoughts?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

In session 0 we set a quorum. "We play if there are at least 2 of 4 players here," for example.

During a session, if some players don't make it, we'll decide on the spot what to do. This is typically either "They take care of some of their own business" or "we play them by committee". Rarely, it's "the GM plays them."

In a recent game of mine, one of the PCs bailed. His character backstory said he owned a small business, and since the session started in a low tension scene, we said he had to go take care of that.

In a game where we picked up in the middle of a fight, we decided to play the wizard by committee. It was a little slower than normal, but it worked. After the fight was over, they didn't do much other than a few committee approved skill checks. I wouldn't typically make big story decisions or put the character in serious danger when the player was absent.

It's also important to set attendance rules. Are you okay with people showing up whenever? Or do you want to set an expectation that people will be there every week barring emergencies? Those are two different, valid, modes. For a game that's trying to have an arc, and not just monster of the week or a dungeon crawl, having players frequently missing can be disruptive. I typically bring that up in session 0, and say that if someone repeatedly misses sessions it might not be the game for them at this time.

[–] Fletcher@lemmy.today 4 points 1 day ago

This makes sense to me. I like the idea of playing the absent player's character by committee. I don't usually run the kinds of games where just anyone can hop in or hop out of the game (I always have story arcs), so having the group take over an absent player's character seems like a logical method to mitigate their absence. Thanks so much for sharing!