I am a new DM and am about to start my first campaign. The party is comprised of mostly new players and several, as well as myself, manage chronic illnesses. As such, I want to be welcoming and understanding when it comes to eventual scheduling conflicts. At the same time I want the player's to feel the satisfaction of having earned their levels and experience their characters as much as possible. I fail to see how I could avoid party members leveling up unevenly. Would that be bad? If not, what are things I need to know or take in consideration moving forward once that starts happening?
Do any of you have experience dealing with a similar scenario? Any pointers?
Uneven leveling is prone to a death spiral effect, where someone misses some sessions, winds up behind, and then when they return they have trouble having fun in the game, because they're underpowered for the challenges. This makes them less likely to want to come to game, and thus they wind up even further behind, until eventually they just drop out.
That is what I was thinking as well but though I could mitigate that by running a one on one session with the player to get them up to speed. I know this would mean a bigger time commitment on my part and the player in question may not want or be able to.
As much as I would like every one to level together, it does also feel a bit unfair for those who did the work. It's the balancing act of being fair and, also understanding of events outside of their control.
As much as I would like every one to level together, it does also feel a bit unfair for those who did the work. It's the balancing act of being fair and, also understanding of events outside of their control.
The way I handle this is to ask for players to suspend disbelief a little as we all assume that the character went off and did their own thing. In some cases it's even sparked inspiration in my players. One player came back to the table with the idea that in the woodland they'd seen what looked like an Owlbear nest. They explained that it was a danger to a nearby encampment and with the encampment's help they'd tamed the Owlbear. A lovely little story, but it's a bit like TV and film. We don't always see what the characters are up to 24/7. So, when a player is absent we can assume the player's character is off doing their own thing.
At least that's how I 'explain' the even XP across the party.
Like Plague I don't like level disparities as either a player or DM. As a player I feel like I'm being punished for missing sessions (which would feel even worse if it was due to health reasons) and as a DM it makes planning encounters harder because what is a reasonable challenge for one person might end up deadly for someone who missed a couple. That's why I use milestone levelling and if someone can't make it we all pretend their character just stood at the back and didn't say anything.
Running side sessions for players who missed out is a nice idea but it'll be a bigger work load for you as DM and as you said you've also got a chronic illness it's worth looking realistically at what you can manage and manage consistently
I don't use milestone leveling b/c it only works on campaigns where DMs railroad their players. If the players are chosing their destiny and their challenges the best approach is to switch to awarding XP, giving bonuses for outstanding play and heroic deeds. This drives players to engage and push themselves for greater challenges. And yes, some players will fall behind when they miss games. My solution to this issue is to have my lowest level characters level up to one level below our most advanced character before the start of our next session. I can deal with a difference of only one level. It has not been an issue -- and it does compel my players to attend my sessions.
That is what I was thinking as well but though I could mitigate that by running a one on one session with the player to get them up to speed. I know this would mean a bigger time commitment on my part and the player in question may not want or be able to.
We usually just narrate what the character is doing when the player isn't there, but you could run a middle ground through emails/chat where you have them do a few skill rolls or something to give them a little more interaction without doing a full-on session with them.
I don't use milestone leveling b/c it only works on campaigns where DMs railroad their players.
I think you might have some misconceptions about how milestone leveling works. It doesn't need to be set in stone where the party only levels when they do the thing the DM expected them to do. You can do it much more organically where you just let them level up when it makes sense within the narrative. It doesn't involve any more railroading than any other technique. And there are plenty of other incentives you can provide to encourage desired behavior: inspiration, consumable magic items, gaining allies, etc.
As a DM, I'd rather focus my time on making engaging NPCs, cool encounters, and interesting storylines. For me XP is more work than it's worth.
I too use milestone leveling these days. I allow the party to level up when it makes sense for the story and the progression the party is going through. This might coincide with specific narrative accomplishments or story beats ... but it might not. There is no requirement except the DM saying to the players "You can level up your characters for the next session."
The problem with disparate leveling is that it only typically gets worse. Some folks really enjoy playing, have few commitments and work hard to show up. Others might have real life commitments - family, friends, work, illness etc - that may prevent them from attending every session. The problem is that the roles don't often reverse so the regular attendees just move farther and farther ahead due to regular attendance. The ones who don't just get discouraged and may eventually quit - they also feel a conflict pressure between real life and the game because they suffer consequences when they can't make it .. as a result, either their real life suffers as they don't do things they should in order to make it to the game or they just fall father behind and eventually quit. It really isn't fun for anyone. I'd also mention that trying to schedule 1:1 sessions to catch people up isn't a great solution either since the person is busy in real life and might not have time for extra sessions AND it puts additional pressure on the DM. Overall, not worth it in my opinion.
In terms of what to do with someone's character when they don't make it to a session ... the character can either be absent (and dealt with narratively - in one game I played, the character had some bad fish tacos and had to rest for the day) or be played as an NPC, usually by someone else in the party, who decides what actions they will take in combat or at other times but the character is usually relegated to the back line and likely won't die unless the party is TPK'ed.
Including the character as an NPC justifies the character leveling up at the same time as everyone else. However, even with the narrative solution, you could simply say the character was off doing their own thing and gained experience that way (which oddly enough is equivalent to the amount earned by the party) ... this was the approach tables I played at typically used when running AD&D because falling behind is NOT fun.
However, as mentioned, a lot of this is avoided by using milestone leveling instead of XP since the characters can then level with the story at a reasonable rate and there is no requirement to send them on a long string of random encounters just because they happen to need a few thousand xp for another level in order to deal with the next chapter of the story. With milestone leveling - level the entire party up when appropriate to the story.
Our extended group uses a mixture of what has been said. We do not use milestone xp. In the one and only campaign were we did use milestone xp, there were so many quests and side-quests that we frequently started multiples before finishing any, which led to us being under-levelled at important points in the story (because we didn't hit the milestones on the designer's schedule - Dragon Heist/Mad Mage - we frequently hopped up and down thru the levels of the dungeon without finishing each level first).
We use xp, and our rule is... if your character is at the game (and exposed to the risk), then they earn the xp. If you miss a game, you have three choices. 1. have your character miss out on the xp and we find a reason to write them out of that particular game, 2. meet privately with the DM for a solo adventure to earn the same xp that they missed from the primary game, 3. have another player who is at the game, play your character for you so it can receive xp (exposed to the same risk as everyone else).
We have found that if people are given xp even if they don't show up to the game, some people try to game that to their advantage - miss certain games where they think the risk will be highest.
One thing I use, for players that have to miss a lot of games, is to treat them as a special guest appearance, instead of a primary player. In that case, I set their level to be whatever the rest of the group is at the time that they can play. I had a player who lived on the other side of the continent, joined remotely, and was only available every 3rd game.
If xp is the reward for accepting risk (we play in low magic campaigns, and frequently money can be hard to come by or if plentiful - there's simply no place to spend it which often means xp is the only real reward) - then rewarding those not exposed to that risk results in grumblings from those that are exposed to the risk. In one current campaign, our characters have been at sea or in uncivilized lands for the better part of the past year of games - there simply is no place to buy/sell/trade.
In most of our campaigns, if someone really must miss a game, the DM will make a solo adventure for them to account for their time away, and to keep the xp totals similar. But if someone misses a game, does not let their character be used, and does not do a solo adventure to make up for it - then they play at the lower xp total, even if that means a lower level for a game or two.
treat them as a special guest appearance, instead of a primary player.
I like that idea. We will have to see if the health gods of the affected players are in a good mood or not. If they are struggling, I would much rather have them come in as guest appearances when they can and not have the shame/guilt that often plagues us chronically ill folks when we can stick to a schedule. I already know one will likely have to be the case since we just learned they are waiting for a surgery date. Playing can be a good distraction but it shouldn't make you feel shitty when you can play.
The first two campaigns of Critical Role are a pretty good example of how to have a player who is basically a guest star. Ashley Johnson was filming in New York while CR is filmed in LA so there was a lot of her characters ducking out on their own quests and popping back up often unexpectedly to help the party
We have found that if people are given xp even if they don't show up to the game, some people try to game that to their advantage - miss certain games where they think the risk will be highest.
I've never seen that as an issue, but I guess each group varies. IME the primary reward for RPGs is not exp, or wealth, but the Glory of Victory, and where the risk is greatest, the glory is also greatest.
However, for people who will be frequently absent, 'special guest star' is a useful concept because, whether or not you keep level parity between PCs, it's hard to keep PCs who are frequently absent included in the main story.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi
I am a new DM and am about to start my first campaign. The party is comprised of mostly new players and several, as well as myself, manage chronic illnesses. As such, I want to be welcoming and understanding when it comes to eventual scheduling conflicts. At the same time I want the player's to feel the satisfaction of having earned their levels and experience their characters as much as possible. I fail to see how I could avoid party members leveling up unevenly. Would that be bad? If not, what are things I need to know or take in consideration moving forward once that starts happening?
Do any of you have experience dealing with a similar scenario? Any pointers?
Both as player and DM i'm not fond of level disparity among party and much prefer when milestone is used to level up everyone together.
IMHO someone often missing a session or performing action on its own isn't enought to seperate from the group power-wise for better or worse.
Uneven leveling is prone to a death spiral effect, where someone misses some sessions, winds up behind, and then when they return they have trouble having fun in the game, because they're underpowered for the challenges. This makes them less likely to want to come to game, and thus they wind up even further behind, until eventually they just drop out.
That is what I was thinking as well but though I could mitigate that by running a one on one session with the player to get them up to speed. I know this would mean a bigger time commitment on my part and the player in question may not want or be able to.
As much as I would like every one to level together, it does also feel a bit unfair for those who did the work. It's the balancing act of being fair and, also understanding of events outside of their control.
The way I handle this is to ask for players to suspend disbelief a little as we all assume that the character went off and did their own thing. In some cases it's even sparked inspiration in my players. One player came back to the table with the idea that in the woodland they'd seen what looked like an Owlbear nest. They explained that it was a danger to a nearby encampment and with the encampment's help they'd tamed the Owlbear. A lovely little story, but it's a bit like TV and film. We don't always see what the characters are up to 24/7. So, when a player is absent we can assume the player's character is off doing their own thing.
At least that's how I 'explain' the even XP across the party.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
That makes a whole lot of sense, actually. Thanks!
Like Plague I don't like level disparities as either a player or DM. As a player I feel like I'm being punished for missing sessions (which would feel even worse if it was due to health reasons) and as a DM it makes planning encounters harder because what is a reasonable challenge for one person might end up deadly for someone who missed a couple. That's why I use milestone levelling and if someone can't make it we all pretend their character just stood at the back and didn't say anything.
Running side sessions for players who missed out is a nice idea but it'll be a bigger work load for you as DM and as you said you've also got a chronic illness it's worth looking realistically at what you can manage and manage consistently
I don't use milestone leveling b/c it only works on campaigns where DMs railroad their players. If the players are chosing their destiny and their challenges the best approach is to switch to awarding XP, giving bonuses for outstanding play and heroic deeds. This drives players to engage and push themselves for greater challenges. And yes, some players will fall behind when they miss games. My solution to this issue is to have my lowest level characters level up to one level below our most advanced character before the start of our next session. I can deal with a difference of only one level. It has not been an issue -- and it does compel my players to attend my sessions.
We usually just narrate what the character is doing when the player isn't there, but you could run a middle ground through emails/chat where you have them do a few skill rolls or something to give them a little more interaction without doing a full-on session with them.
I think you might have some misconceptions about how milestone leveling works. It doesn't need to be set in stone where the party only levels when they do the thing the DM expected them to do. You can do it much more organically where you just let them level up when it makes sense within the narrative. It doesn't involve any more railroading than any other technique. And there are plenty of other incentives you can provide to encourage desired behavior: inspiration, consumable magic items, gaining allies, etc.
As a DM, I'd rather focus my time on making engaging NPCs, cool encounters, and interesting storylines. For me XP is more work than it's worth.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I too use milestone leveling these days. I allow the party to level up when it makes sense for the story and the progression the party is going through. This might coincide with specific narrative accomplishments or story beats ... but it might not. There is no requirement except the DM saying to the players "You can level up your characters for the next session."
The problem with disparate leveling is that it only typically gets worse. Some folks really enjoy playing, have few commitments and work hard to show up. Others might have real life commitments - family, friends, work, illness etc - that may prevent them from attending every session. The problem is that the roles don't often reverse so the regular attendees just move farther and farther ahead due to regular attendance. The ones who don't just get discouraged and may eventually quit - they also feel a conflict pressure between real life and the game because they suffer consequences when they can't make it .. as a result, either their real life suffers as they don't do things they should in order to make it to the game or they just fall father behind and eventually quit. It really isn't fun for anyone. I'd also mention that trying to schedule 1:1 sessions to catch people up isn't a great solution either since the person is busy in real life and might not have time for extra sessions AND it puts additional pressure on the DM. Overall, not worth it in my opinion.
In terms of what to do with someone's character when they don't make it to a session ... the character can either be absent (and dealt with narratively - in one game I played, the character had some bad fish tacos and had to rest for the day) or be played as an NPC, usually by someone else in the party, who decides what actions they will take in combat or at other times but the character is usually relegated to the back line and likely won't die unless the party is TPK'ed.
Including the character as an NPC justifies the character leveling up at the same time as everyone else. However, even with the narrative solution, you could simply say the character was off doing their own thing and gained experience that way (which oddly enough is equivalent to the amount earned by the party) ... this was the approach tables I played at typically used when running AD&D because falling behind is NOT fun.
However, as mentioned, a lot of this is avoided by using milestone leveling instead of XP since the characters can then level with the story at a reasonable rate and there is no requirement to send them on a long string of random encounters just because they happen to need a few thousand xp for another level in order to deal with the next chapter of the story. With milestone leveling - level the entire party up when appropriate to the story.
Our extended group uses a mixture of what has been said. We do not use milestone xp. In the one and only campaign were we did use milestone xp, there were so many quests and side-quests that we frequently started multiples before finishing any, which led to us being under-levelled at important points in the story (because we didn't hit the milestones on the designer's schedule - Dragon Heist/Mad Mage - we frequently hopped up and down thru the levels of the dungeon without finishing each level first).
We use xp, and our rule is... if your character is at the game (and exposed to the risk), then they earn the xp. If you miss a game, you have three choices. 1. have your character miss out on the xp and we find a reason to write them out of that particular game, 2. meet privately with the DM for a solo adventure to earn the same xp that they missed from the primary game, 3. have another player who is at the game, play your character for you so it can receive xp (exposed to the same risk as everyone else).
We have found that if people are given xp even if they don't show up to the game, some people try to game that to their advantage - miss certain games where they think the risk will be highest.
One thing I use, for players that have to miss a lot of games, is to treat them as a special guest appearance, instead of a primary player. In that case, I set their level to be whatever the rest of the group is at the time that they can play. I had a player who lived on the other side of the continent, joined remotely, and was only available every 3rd game.
If xp is the reward for accepting risk (we play in low magic campaigns, and frequently money can be hard to come by or if plentiful - there's simply no place to spend it which often means xp is the only real reward) - then rewarding those not exposed to that risk results in grumblings from those that are exposed to the risk. In one current campaign, our characters have been at sea or in uncivilized lands for the better part of the past year of games - there simply is no place to buy/sell/trade.
In most of our campaigns, if someone really must miss a game, the DM will make a solo adventure for them to account for their time away, and to keep the xp totals similar. But if someone misses a game, does not let their character be used, and does not do a solo adventure to make up for it - then they play at the lower xp total, even if that means a lower level for a game or two.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
I like that idea. We will have to see if the health gods of the affected players are in a good mood or not. If they are struggling, I would much rather have them come in as guest appearances when they can and not have the shame/guilt that often plagues us chronically ill folks when we can stick to a schedule. I already know one will likely have to be the case since we just learned they are waiting for a surgery date. Playing can be a good distraction but it shouldn't make you feel shitty when you can play.
The first two campaigns of Critical Role are a pretty good example of how to have a player who is basically a guest star. Ashley Johnson was filming in New York while CR is filmed in LA so there was a lot of her characters ducking out on their own quests and popping back up often unexpectedly to help the party
I've never seen that as an issue, but I guess each group varies. IME the primary reward for RPGs is not exp, or wealth, but the Glory of Victory, and where the risk is greatest, the glory is also greatest.
However, for people who will be frequently absent, 'special guest star' is a useful concept because, whether or not you keep level parity between PCs, it's hard to keep PCs who are frequently absent included in the main story.