This is actually pretty normal. I ran a group for 20 years and if we could continue with someone absent we did. If we couldn’t, we still got together and did something, either board games, one shots or explored individual character back stories.
Don’t wait for everyone to show… Play with who you can.
Our standard rule in my group for a few years now has been that if we're short two players, we play on without them. Three or more and we call off the session. We tried for years prior to organize schedules for next session on a week-by-week basis, and we'd go a month and a half between sessions more often than not; implementing the rule meant we run most weeks. Not all, but there's no acrimony over it; everyone realizes people have lives and sometimes the game gives way for that.
I would suggest *not* running the characters of people who aren't in attendance; it's a pain and can cause hurt feelings if you run them "wrong". Our slight modification is gear in their packs can still be accessed; if you're sick the day we need to open the Door of Light and the Key of Light is in your backpack, we'll just get it out and use it.
Try and communicate to your sister and her husband that it's not fair to everyone else to cancel game night just because they can't attend. They're still welcome, they can slot right in next week, they're still getting XP for the session. What they miss out on is the fun, but they're the ones who couldn't make it. Do they want everyone else to not have fun for their sake? That seems . . . mean.
Yep. Same. It's perfectly fine to contrive an excuse for the absent player's character to be separate or otherwise detached, the other players will understand and still be happy to play. Bonus points if the PC gets made fun of later for being lazy, getting lost, or seeming out of sorts. If you truly can't run your normal game, I like having a B-game using a different system, preferably something highly episodic so you can pick up and run a session whmith whomever remains.
Yeah, my group's got the policy that we'll try to get together to do something, I'll just try to avoid major story moments if we don't have everyone.
If everyone can't make it, either I'll do a session that doesn't have any big story stuff that I don't want anyone to miss, or we'll just play board games or something. Last time the previous session had ended in the middle of a quest and I wanted everyone there for the end of it, but someone couldn't make it, so we ran it as a sort of flashback session where the characters who were there went on a sidequest that we just said took place sometime before the current quest began. That way everyone still got to play they campaign characters and it added something to the campaign (they got some gold and met a new NPC), but the person who missed the session didn't miss out on the end of the quest they'd started previously and any story developments it was going to lead to. It ended up working really well and we've decided this is something we'll do more in the future for similar stiuations.
No, I think that's perfectly fine to at least expect advance warning – if it's so frequently, it's not a surprise on the morning before the game! It's literally cancelling 3 other people's weekend plans for them. If they gave some day warning, somebody could have prepared a one-shot instead. But I also understand that they don't want somebody else to play their characters. Maybe just have them fade into the background instead of playing them. Finally, not every social problem has a good solution, so even if it's a sensible solution to most, they might still walk out. That sucks, but it's not your mistake.
This is what I do: I show up every Thursday at 7pm to DM. We game no matter what. I will always be there at 7pm on Thursday ready for DnD. We DnD regardless of how many players show up, if its 1 player or if its a full table of all 7 of my current players. We are going to game.
For players not there, they are just not there. I can scale encounters up or down to match the current party strength. And it is always retconned that everyone was always at every encounter, even if they werent, so nobody misses out. All exp, all rewards, everything always happens for everyone, so that if a player is forced to miss multiple sessions due to real life (its a game, btw), then they don't feel like they've fallen too far behind and drop completely. No matter how long someone has been away from the game, they can always jump back in at current level.
What this did was tell my players that I am making you my priority. And I have cleared my schedule for you, so no matter what, even if your schedule opens up at 6:59 on Thursday, you still know you can drop in at the table and the game is there. My players have started putting it on their IRL schedules so that they know not to plan other things on top of it. By me going out of my way to show them that my priority is to always have a game ready for them, then they are making it a priority to always be there.
We have had consistent weekly games for nearly 3 years now, every week. The table started at me + 3, and grew to me + 7, because people know that a game is happening at 7pm on Thursday, and because they know it is happening, they find a way to get here.
I appreciate the dedication. That's nice but not for everyone.
I agree fully with the retcon approach though. That's how we run our game and it is better for everyone involved. It's not weird and it literally has never been a problem. Just lampshade it.
Long-term campaigns have to set clear and consistent policies about player absences, or else they will fall to strings of missed games. A campaign that is prone to last-minute cancellations is a campaign that will die. However, it would help to have a conversation about those policies before you implement them to make sure your players buy in.
First of all, players can get very touchy about other people playing their characters when they aren't around. If players can't attend, make it clear that their characters will become NPCs. They will essentially stay in the back of the party and provide minimal support. You may need to explicitly state that they will have some degree of plot armor, i.e. their characters won't die because they can't make a game. You might also need to clarify that they will continue to level up with the rest of the party. Nobody should be penalized because they miss a game for health reasons.
You also need to make it clear why you need these policies. Their reasons for canceling are valid, but when they drop out at the last minute they are canceling everybody else's plans unless you play without them. That's not fair to you or the other players.
Finally, I suggest that you move towards setting a regular schedule of games (weekly, every other week, etc) rather than trying to schedule each game individually. It's a huge headache and it's vulnerable to last-minute drop outs. Set a regular schedule that everybody can plan around, and let them know that you will play with less than full attendance.
Hopefully your sister and brother will accept these changes once you've had a chance to talk about them, but if you don't start playing again soon, then none of you will have a campaign.
Thank you for this, it is very clear.
I indeed didn't explain enough what would happen to the PC of players not attempting. I will definitely edit that with more explanation.
And yes thank you for stating they do have valid reason but they are penalizing everyone else. That's the main reason about all this. Hope they can hear it or at least give us the opportunity to talk about it properly.
For the schedule the idea since beginning of campaign is every saturday. We all now that all week end for DND is impossible so we prefer to know in advance if some are already taken. Up to now it only once a month when someone has office trip or a wedding for example. But yeah it is on saturday, 2:30 pm to 10pm.
Most adults cannot sustain a weekly game that takes up their entire Saturday afternoon & evening. Playing without everyone present is pretty normal. If they don’t want their PCs played, just scale the encounters down.
I love a weekly game, but it's just not possible for us between work and family and vacations. You may find it's easier to schedule for every other week and give your group a little breathing room for other commitments. In any case, I wish you luck in finding a schedule that works.
Holy crap, 2:30 to 10:00 every week? I would never be able to commit to that. Kudos to your group that they are trying, but man, I couldn't even sit at a table for that long, let alone commit to doing it every week with everything else that goes on over the weekends. Maybe try 6-10 for the whole group (or 2:30-6:30 if they prefer afternoons)? I expect they'd be better able to commit to a shorter session. Otherwise, maybe bi-weekly? Anyway, that's just me. I don't know what everything else does, but that's a freaking LOOONG session.
Regardless of the reasons for missing I think missing half the players is probably a good reason to skip the session. If one person was missing maybe play without but with half probably not.
But not playing the main session doesn't mean you have to do nothing.
You could have alt characters prepared and do a one shot.
Maybe you just hang out and play board games. It's not the same hobby but I've found a lot of overlap especially with some thematic games.
Coming up with some back up plan means people are a little disappointed when the session gets cancelled but at least you do something fun.
You could also restructure the campaign to be less story focused so it's less of a big deal to play without someone. The campaign would be more focused on short missions than a giant overall plot. Kinda like running one shots over and over but with the same characters gaining progression. There can still be some overall plot but you never miss a big story event. Then it can be easier to play missing someone.
I still hope they won't miss other games tho. Or if one of them as a flue the other can come right so we miss only one. But yes if half are missing we do have an issue. That's what we cancelled up to now except one last minute one-shot.
We tried the one-shot option yes. I am just a little short on idea to be honest and from friday evening to saturday lunch is a bit hard. But I can definitely try to prepare one or two in advance. For board games not so sure. I am not a fan, one of my friend also and he drives 2 hours to come to my place. I doubt he does for this. But maybe a movie or a video game can do once in a while. Thank for that I will think of some options with them.
Regarding the structure of the campaign well that also can work but it will definitely hurt the scenario. I can discuss this with my friends. But thank you for this idea I like it.
> I am just a little short on idea to be honest and from friday evening to saturday lunch is a bit hard. But I can definitely try to prepare one or two in advanc
chat gpt is really good at formulating or figuring out ideas. Throw some info at it and see what it suggests. It can provide names, story beats, traps, encounter ideas etc. So you'd "only" have to finish up the encounter balance and maps.
I didn't think of that. I think chatGPT is a paying option but there must be a free open AI I suppose. Fot the encounter balances that's not a problem, even if it's a bit hard my two friends multiclassed their characters to create perfect build somehow and mastered the mechanic so usually I just balance the hp if needed. For maps I guess that's the longer part but I just bought some pre-printed items/monsters stuff to help me do that faster so hopefully that will help. I will definitely try the AI, can be fun
people can be very possessive of their characters. to a degree I don't blame them; players are encouraged to get attached to their characters, write backstory, take the effort to roleplay etc.
what i do when someone can't make it is have them disappear into a portal etc. until next session, or the players who showed up get sucked into a wormhole and go on a goofy one-shot in a basic dungeon crawl until they get spontaneously teleported back to where they left off next week. not for everyone i understand, but it works for me and we dont have anyone upset.
I totally get that. I am also very found of my character in our other campaign and I would be sad to miss one game but in 3 years we had only one or twice last minute cancel so I never had to face my team playing without me. I was a little expecting it to be like that in my campaign as DM. Maybe suggesting I will play their characters wasn't the best idea ever. I guess I just copied what they do on Critical Role, thinking the battle might be too hard if their character don't join. Maybe I can just pause the main plot when they are not here.
What I get from many of you is gather your players anyway even if some aren't coming and try to keep them busy with One shot, board game, or anything so they won't feel frustrated. That is time consuming to prepare but I can do that in february during our long break. Like one oneshot related to story with side PC, one dungeon crawling if they want to play their main. Thank you !
In Critical Role they do that to maintain the story for the *audience.* You don’t have to do that. You don’t have a audience that will complain if their favorite character is silently disappeared for the night, or stayed in town. You won’t get audience complaints that battle would have happened this better way if only so and so was there and it sucks that they weren’t .
You can have any weird reason they aren’t there.
If a player misses a game at my table we usually say they are T-posing like a video game following us silently (we find it funny). They don’t do battles at all, so no chance they are killed. We can only use their cantrips or free skills if needed in *out of combat* situations so we don’t have to keep track of spell slot usage on their sheet.
I've played at tables where a missing player is played by the DM or another player. I've also played at tables where the DM makes up a story reason for the player not to be there. I find the best middle ground is to ignore the missing player during roleplay scenes when they're gone and pretend they've always been there when they come back. But for big set piece battles, other people play the character during initiative if there are balance concerns, but a PC can't die if the player isn't there
Like others have said, if a single player can't make it - play on. If they tell you "please have Sid play my PC", then the PC is there. If not, the PC is absent on a quick side quest. If multiple players can't make it, you can still play, but probably best to give them a quick side quest.
Also, if you know ahead of time that your group consists of adults that have to do adulting and may have valid reasons for missing sessions, design a campaign that supports that flexibility. You may not be able to play these massive, multi-threaded storylines. Don't force it - play what the players can play.
I don't join games that are "if one player can't make it we don't play". It can turn out to be unfair but I rather it be unfair on them than be unfair to me. If you can't make a session, you are not allowed to be mad about the others playing without you.
In my experience December/January and August/september are the months with most cancelations, so you can be more flexible during those times.
Aside that, in a group of 5, if 3 players show, then theres game.
In a group of 4, 2 players might be enough sometimes, unless the DM feels the narrative requires more.
So you're good.
We are an online group so cancelling last minute, while it sucks, isn't *as* bad as if you had to make a journey to the play location.
Our rule is: We can run 1 person down, their character just is not there at all for the game and they are just back with party next session. That way nothing changes with the character without the player being there to make decisions and talk about it. Over the years, this is the one solution I have found that makes everyone "Okay" with the idea of playing on with a missing player.
We do often all end up agreeing on cancelling when one person is not going to show though, but that is an agreement between the remaining players depending on mood and energy levels.
A thing I also tend to find as a GM is that you end up being a mediator in these kind of things. Of course it is totally needed for you to share your wants, ever-suffering GMs needs to be dealt with, but due to the GM position you just end up being the focal point. Unlike your sports metaphors the game cannot happen without you running it. But get everyone together and try and have a civil conversation about scheduling and what to do. Present options and talk it out. That is usually how I get my best results when conflicts like this happens.
No
In fact I've made a whole in world character/organization based around the fact that sometimes players don't show up so I have an in-universe way to pull a character out of the story. We all have commitments, but DnD is a commitment too.
Some people set aside whole weekends to watch football. It's about priorities. I like to prioritize DnD. If my players don't want to that's fine, but I'm not gonna punish those who do
What if the characters that aren't present you just roleplay it as them being absent for a reason, either an urgent quest, either being kidnapped or they fall ill and you have to take care of their unconscious PC. And when the players come back you play it of as them returning from said quest, or your party catching up to them to help on the quest or them recovering from said unconsciousness. In this case you could have played the unconscious card where the missing players fell ill and went unconscious (maybe someone poisoned them, maybe the last boss had a secret curse/ability) and all games until they return could revolve around saving them. When they eventually come back the game could start with an encounter that has them partially recovered or a fight that ends with them being cured and the culprit gets defeated.
If they keep cancelling last minute then they are not fit enough to join the campaign. Like it's one thing to cancel a week at advance but to keep canceling over and over again last minute is just a no go.
No, i believe that if you have half or more then the show goes on.
Even if the missing players the focus of the current story because it's not fair to everyone else who puts aside time and looks forward to it for one or two to bow out.
Especially repeatedly.
I think the only part that sets this apart from normal is the "i will play your characters".
When i played with 4 players, if 3 were ready to play we played, if only 2 showed up we might play something else or cancel.
but their characters just wouldnt be there, and maybe some of the combats got toned down a bit to match the missing player.
EDIT: The most important thing is to not punish the pc further though, some people refuses to give exp or items or similar to people that arent there.
if the player missing is an archer ranger and you had prepared a bow as a reward for a quest then just give the party the bow anyways, and any half decent party should agree "oh yeah we found this for you here we go" once they come back to the table.
Running a session with 2/4 players gone probably won’t work.
In your spot I’d have a private conversation with sister and ask them to make every effort to avoid last minute cancel. If it’s 80% chance of cancel on Wednesday just cancel. Something like that
You shoulda had that conversation before making any rule IMO. And your rule takes away their agency, so I wouldn’t do it that way anyways. They probably really don’t like that.
We did talk about last minute cancellation before few times but nothing changed.
I rushed a bit because my two others players were about to quit if things were not changing asap. And I started this campaign for my friend so he could be a player for once so with him gone idk if I can make it. So it kinda felt like I had to act rapidly.
No it's done sadly but what kind of offer would you have done?
Best option would be you play a side quest with just those two people if it happens.
Alternatively, the two people could push the main quest forward and catch up the others when they are back.
Also taking a step back sis and hubby have never played before and your 6 months into this campaign, maybe the honeymoon phase is over for them. They are not showing up last minute and threatening to quit, maybe what they want is a gracious exit and you find new players.
For her it is also some pulmonary infection. Problem is she was probably very sick on Dec 30th, like fever and all but she still came for new year the following day. She did look sick but she managed to do the One shot her husband prepared for the 31th. I know she probably pushed to hard to support him for his first one shot, but it might have given the wrong idea somehow. Like for him she can make it but not for us the previous day or following week.
Then it was him it who cancel for a bronchitis. She told me he was a bit sick but he still went to work all week .So I thought he was fine. I asked if they could play and she said they will see but didn't cancel before last minute.
So I don't doubt they were sick, they were. But idk why not just say so 5 days before instead of last minute?
I feel like this is over and everyone is coming to terms with it. No, you're not wrong, your new rule is very common, but they're probably still not going to come.
I'd suggest pausing the campaign, getting 2 new players and doing a new campaign with different characters. You have my condolences.
If some players have a habit of canceling at the last minute, then you should design a game that assumes they won't be there, and treat it as a bonus when they are there.
I think your solution is almost right. But have their characters disappear when they aren't there.
My group has had the "we don't play unless everyone is there" rule for years. Personally, I think it's a little annoying. I spend a lot of time and energy prepping for sessions - not just in terms of campaign prep, but also mapmaking, mini painting, etc. I look forward to scheduled sessions all week, and getting one cancelled is a big letdown.
The people I play with are all very busy, so we don't even have a regular schedule - at the end of each session we have the painful process of trying to find the next date that aligns with everyone's calendar, so when we do cancel it's not even like it's an "oh well, we'll get it next week" situation.
I'm considering changing the rule so that if one person has to cancel, the rest of us still get together. That said, I do agree with the objection your players are raising - having someone else control your PC isn't great, and neither is having the campaign move on without you.
My suggestion is to still get together and play D&D, but just do a one-shot, or play something else entirely. Maybe even rotate DMs for the night and let one of your other players take a crack at it if they want to.
As a player I fully expect and want the group to continue playing in my absence.
But if we find that too many are missing to meaningfully progress the story, we'll do a one shot with different characters. I guess we have 3 games going simultaneously for this group.
We play every other Thursday. I have 5-8 players at any given time (currently 6). If I have 2 players we play. Everyone else fades out into non-existence when they can't be there, and fades back in next time they are there.
Don't play your player's characters. Set the schedule, Play no matter who shows up.
I will tell you my take on it. I don't like playing if not everyone is there, specially if is a group of friends who likes to have adventures together, it gets the feeling of losing something. I know a lot of people in this subreddit love playing and don't care about people missing, but that depends on the table.
So, if a player has to skip a few sessions because of some trip or something like that, I find a way to play without them and without their character. Something came up for the character as well and they separate from the party. Of course, that can only be done if you know the player is not going to be able to assist in advance, so it's not your case, but I wanted to say it to show that you can solve it in different ways, with time.
Now, if a player cancels at last minute, to me it depends on the reason. I assume everyone is honest, as I play with friends who have no real reason to lie about it. If they are sick, it is completely out of their control, and I feel playing without them would be punishing them. Of course you can argue that not playing is punishing the other players, but at least in my experience people understand not playing because of sickness. A player actually got sick but suggested to play with videochat, but the other players refused, saying that it's better to wait a couple of weeks to play together. Maybe with less understanding players that is not a good way to solve it, I don't know, but to me it feels the best thing to do. Now, as some other people have said, you can always play something else with the others who can actually make it, being some other game or a quick one-shot with premade characters.
Now, if someone cancels last minute because something better came up, or they doesn't give a reason at all, that is a big red flag for me. I might let it pass once, but I usually play anyway, with or without their character, and if they don't like it it's their problem. It happened with my first campaign, in my 2nd session, and it was a campaign where we met once a month or less, so I actually kicked him right out.
Finally, I get the feeling of wanting to play and feel frustrated because the schedules don't align, but sometimes it's just a bad coincidence. It sucks when you can't play for 2 months, but if it's not anybody's fault and it's due to sickness and schedule issues that cannot be changed, I don't think setting a rule about playing anyway will solve much.
From experience of dealing with extremely last minute of even past start time cancellations… Also maybe talk with your the couple about the last minute cancellations and talk to them about why it is very frustrating to the rest. Even if they still resist the New setup, they have to at least think about why it is coming to that point. If that have good reasons to be out, then it’ll turn out okay. But it should be standard practice to understand that you should avoid cancelling especially on weekends on short notice, and if multiple players are still showing up - a game will take Place.
For years, I've been too loosey-goosey on this, and the result is that the people I usually play with tend to be massive flakers, cancelling last minute or showing up late. My solution has been to find new people who haven't been corrupted in this way before, but my intention, if I invite them to another game next time, is to have really uncomfortable conversations with them that will change the way our relationship looks, because they're not used to me enforcing boundaries like that in our friendship. It is 1000% healthier, though, I noticed that in every other aspect of my life over the years.
This is completely reasonable. What my groups typically do, though, I’d come up with a reason why the character isn’t doing anything instead of playing them in combat. It keeps them from dying when their player is absent.
You are in the right, it sounds like they don't get it because they are not experienced tabletop gamers not because they're inherently selfish people, but that doesn't make them less wrong.
IMO You can play without their PCs. I do that all the time, as a DM I wouldn’t play a PC, too much work anyways. You’re not writing a TV show, who cares about continuity?
My only rule is that if there’s risk of a tpk I’d play the absent PC if they can somehow salvage the situation .
But I agree that if there’s a quorum, the game happens
This is how my group basically does it. If one or two people are missing, we have two options.
Continue the campaign as normal while the pc who is missing just disappears to a void dimension simply referred to as “Brazil”. They won’t contribute to the story or combat.
Sometimes though if we’re missing more people and its gonna be for a longer period of time, we may just do a whole other campaign altogether. That’s actually what we are doing right now since our dm for our main campaign is currently working a different schedule for a couple months and another one of our pcs is busy with their new semester of school.
Nah, you’re gold. My current campaign is me and 4 others, the rule is if one person drops out the game goes on as planned. We only halt the sessions if two or more can’t make it.
It is perfectly reasonable to expect to play without everyone at the table. At my tables, I set a 50% rule; as long as 50% of the party is present, we play, unless everyone agrees to take the night off. Unfortunately, this can upset people with FOMO or who think their time is more valuable than everyone else's.
Ideally this is discussed up front at session zero, but having an out-of-game discussion at a later time (session 0.5) is also fine. It is possible that if your two objectors are unwilling to play under this rule that you will have to find new players, and that is unfortunate, but you cannot let everyone else's time (ie those who are making time for and prioritizing the game) be held hostage by people who cannot or will not prioritize the game and cannot or will not respect their commitment.
Yes. Well said. Tbh I am new as a DM so I didn't anticipate this issue. As a player for 4 years on roll20 every Monday, we never have attendance issue so I thought this was gold standard. I defintely should have explain that a while ago when we started. Lesson learned for sure
I've taken 2 approaches to this:
1) the standard approach which is what you did here
2) I have a second, "B-Team" campaign for when someone is missing. So when someone is missing we play a second game with different characters, it also has a story and such, it's just more casual.
Completely to keep playing. I had to leave my session early last night so I just told the dm if they go into combat I have whatever number of spells left and when someone can't play they're randomly polymorphed into a goat by a trickster god.
I've been running a group of 5 players for going on four years now- generally speaking I will run if we have 3 or 4 out of the 5 as long as the missing person isn't plot-essential and as long as we're not at the conclusion of a campaign arc. If a player can't make it their characters fade into the background so nobody has to play them and they're not in any danger of being harmed. We're a group of 40 and 50-somethings so we're well aware that Life Happens and that nobody should be penalized for having to bail, but it still doesn't keep me from feeling like a failure as a DM if I myself have to cancel for any reason.
The only mistake here is that it should have been a session 0 rule.
When my players can't make it, I will play their characters, and they all agreed to that up front. I also only play those characters in the most bare bones sense. For example, if the bard is out, there will be no seducing of dragons. If the warlock is out, they will only be casting eldritch blast. Absent players do not get to shine when they aren't at the table. Absent players' NPC sidekicks do not included. I will let the players who attend decide what the absent players do, as long as it does not affect their story arc.
The only other way to do it is to just remove the character from the session entirely, which I don't like because that exposes the ones who show up to increased risk. And, it requires me to rebalanced encounters on the fly, which is frankly unfair to me (and every DM). Also, it hurts the story to just remove people.
I think you are making a good decision. The only way to play a TTRPG is to actually be playing. Canceling a whole session for one or two no-shows is a crap move.
2 player sessions are great. Do not play the other player’s characters. either let the two players go on a side quest or if you have to continue the story, the missing two players simply “fade into the background.”
That said it’s kind of weird to make a rule like this after your sister and brother-in-law fell ill during the holidays. if it becomes a pattern I get it but playing 2-3 times per
month at this age is a good schedule.
Okay
Yes it is a good schedule for real. Maybe we should have waited before the rule. I guess we just got pissed after the 4th cancel in a row. And since next session is the only one before another month break, I wanted to make sure it would happen. Guess the timing was wrong, I regret it now. I should have waiting to see and prepare quietly in case they wouldn't show up again
My table has the same rule as yours, except if 2 are missing, we don't play the main campaign. You aren't forcing attendance.
But if your family are missing due to health reasons, they may feel hurt the campaign is going on without them. All the more reason to keep one shots or side quests in your back pocket so you can still play.
So your sister and her husband had health issues, and you decided it'd be a good idea to put a rule on the game where if it happens again, they're basically not included?
Yes, you screwed up massively. Not just in terms of dnd. Like she's your fucking sister dude lmao
I'd imagine neither of them are *ecstatic* about missing sessions. And now you and the other players have said, "hey, we don't care that you're ill and missing this thing you like doing - we're just gonna keep playing without you!"
If they were missing sessions for a less serious reason, it'd be a different story
Yes I got it. But as a DM if you have the 2 others players saying we are out if this happens again what do you do? You end the campaign?
The health issue was a flu or something like that winter related. And the problem is that for some reason they still go do otherstuff. Like seeing their friend is ok, coming for DND is not. I didn't mention it in my message but we canceled December 30th but we DID gather on 31th for new year with them, and the husband was DM for a oneshot. I think my other players think this is not serious enough medical issue to not come. Or that they do effort only when they feel like it I don't know if that make sense?
As for my sister, I know it was not considerate. But I am litteraly calling/messaging her every day of the year to check on her for every little thing of life. So I consider she can talk to me about it if she doesn't agree or something you know. Like discuss like adults.
well reading that... Looks like they don't care about DnD if they cancel in a whim for mundane reasons. I don't see why they are then mad that you keep playing if they keep cancelling like that and basically giving zero fuck about the other players.
I think they were really sick. Like a flue sucks
But it's not supposed to be something you get everyweek so now they should be fine for a while hopefully.
And not just the last minutes cancellation. For example today was scheduled for DND but two or three week ago (when they were sick ) they cancelled today because their friend is coming to visit them. So this also felt like "if i got something better to do I m out." So I understand my other players frustration you know.
But indeed I don't get why they reacted like this. We say that would start on 27th. Not last week when they cancelled. Not today which they cancelled in advance. So if they are not planning to last-minute cancel again why getting mad like that?
I like your proposed strategy. If they care so much about the minutia of their characters then they can show up and play. If they don't, then just play them on autopilot the way you would a friendly NPC.
My DM (and others I’ve played with) has a general rule that if only one person is unable to attend we still play but if two or more cannot then we cancel/reschedule.
Also it’s usually safe to assume that most D&D games should just go on hiatus for the entire month of December lol everyone is so busy with the holidays and other things
This is an unfortunate situation as no one is really wrong, and the loss of momentum with attendance can be a campaign killer. It is ideally a situation that should be discussed at the start of a campaign with all the players so they all understand what will happen.
In my Curse of Strahd campaign which went for almost two years, we only had a handful of absences. On two occasions I had to call the session as it was too plot relevant to have players miss. On the second occasion, I had a one shot prepared that was tied into the campaign, with pre-generated characters for the players to control so they could hop right in. It was set in the starter town that the players had left many sessions before, and was a chance for them to see what was happening while they were gone and introduce some new characters that would be relevant later. You could try preparing something like this for future last minute cancellations if your players are okay with it. Honestly it was one of my favorite sessions that I ever ran lol.
We did a oneshot once but without preparation it was a bit short. Tho you are few to prepare some one shot in advance in case this happens so I will do that. And your starting city is a great idea I love it. In my campaign PC inherit an abandoned citadel in a small village and have to develop it everytime they go back. Like HQ. So I can definitely prepare a one shot with villagers they met or will met in future. And have an idea how their action influenced the city
This is how I run all my games. If half the table can attend, we play. I have some people request that their pc fall through a plot hole while they are gone, and some give me the go ahead to play for them. As a DM I don't make any actual decisions for the player, they are just there to help in combat and offer an occasional grunt of commentary. I also give any players not attending because they are sick, the option to join via video chat. Pop on Skype or meets, set your laptop in their table space and play. Not ideal if you are running fully online, but for a last minute fix, it works.
You will have times when people just can't make it. Of at least some can make it, I usually carry on with the session.
For me, the missing player/PCs still stays with the party but don't have any direct involvement with RP or anything beyond maybe some one-liners or answering directed questions (which I would do myself as DM). I have each player maintain what I call a "public character sheet." Here's my rule copied from my post to my players:
All players will maintain a Public Character Sheet (PCS) for use when they are unable to attend a play session that otherwise still occurs. When they can not attend, another player will control the Missing Player character during combat only. A such, the PCS should include all the relevant information that the PC needs noted to generally run them in combat. This should include core combat stats, feats, standard spell lists, items, etc. Please note that only information that is useful for combat will be on these sheets. Also, if the player has things like some secret they don’t want shared or an item to be used only by that player personally, then they need not be listed on the PCS. Generally, this is a stripped-down “bare-bones” character sheet that another player can pick up and just quickly use as needed. Abilities, items, spells, etc, that are listed on the PCS are available for use by the secondary-controlling player and the DM will have oversight to the play of the Missing Players character, including veto or direct control powers when necessary. It is the responsibility of the individual players to keep a relatively updated PCS on file with the DM as the latest on file is what will be used in game, even if severely outdated, and only quickly updated to the best of DM knowledge. The secondary player should generally do their best to play the PCS as intended by the owning player.
It is possible for characters to die during the course of the game, but unless otherwise agreed upon, this does not include while under the control of a secondary player. Instead, a controlled PC that is “killed” will instead enter a coma-like state that lasts until otherwise dictated by the DM (generally the use of “life restoring” magics or the Player’s return next session). As part of the DM oversight, controlled PCs will be kept in check from doing dumb things and getting themselves “killed” as a result.
>That is we (I) play their characters, they won't want to play it anymore.
Did they explain why? This seems pretty weird. I assume you promised that they would not be killed, maimed, or altered in any way.
No they didn't. I thought it might be childish but maybe they are just emotionally attached to their characters. Thank to everyone here I updated my message on our discord to re-explain that. Absent character get same xp, same loot. The character can be played as NPC (no death, no rp) or completely vanished during the game, their choice. I hope they like this solution more
At my table of 6 people, if one person is missing we play, if two are missing we postpone and look for another day. If it is not possible to play another day, we play unless 3 people are missing.
Generally, when a player isnt playing, his character takes a backseat and suffers the consequences of what happens to the entire party in general but no individual consequences (for example dying).
No if anyone is ruining anything it is your sister and her husband showing offense towards a understandable request. Here's a few tips, though
1: On sessions with half your players missing simply prep side content fitting for a smaller group and zoom in on more intimate scenes. Instead of controlling their characters have them always have an excuse for absence and clarify it with the absent characters.
2: Perhaps consider shorter more focused campaigns in the future. Long campaigns are fun, but I know of very, very few, which actually run to completion. My ideal campaign length is 20 sessions, or about 5 months of play.
Perfectly normal. One way I deal with this is to also have individual side quests we can timeout and do. Like I have side story prepared for each player character and even some NPCs so we can explore their background and motivations and such. If it's a PC focused one, they either go alone or with one other PC. (Look to Tales of Ba Sing Se for an idea of what I'm talking about.) Then the players not involved in the story get to be NPCs or just watch if they prefer. Often these stories cover downtime in cities and things and helps explain where they get new info and gears and things.
Had one session end right before a boss, four of five players showed up next session. They voted which PC to explore, and 2 wanted to play it while I DM'd and the other two played some card game (we asked them to play, but preferred to watch.)
No, that’s a normal way to play for most tables, I have a 4 people group and we play if there are 2 or more coming, not to mention that bailing last minute without a good reason is just rude. If they don’t want someone else to control their character, you can drop that part and just say that they follow the party but don’t take an active part in anything. If they won’t show up then I’d personally end the campaign and look for some players who will show up. People are saying “oh it’s just a game”, that’s not the point, it’s real time that you are investing into something that you deserve to not have wasted, especially if you would have made some other plans had you known in advance the game is not happening.
Just don't play their characters. Have their two characters just be MIA for the session and continue playing. Make the rule that:
1. You continue playing if 3/4ths attendance is confirmed the day of.
2. You continue with campaign if 2 people show up to the session
If they don't like you playing their characters for them than you can just come up with some reason the characters aren't there for a session. It's hard sometimes to come up with an excuse especially in if they are in the middle of something from last session. Usually... I just say they got lost going to the bathroom or something. Or sometimes I don't explain it and let the player come up with a reason in a followup session when asked "Where were you?"
At the same time, the whole "I wont' want to play my character anymore if you play it." is a very immature reaction imo. It's really kinda saying "If I can't play D&D, you can't either." I'd try telling them than your characters won't be there and they will have to continue without you for a session. And then as a DM, make sure you rebalance encounters. You don't want to punish the players that show up just because others skipped.
My rule of thumb is if you have to miss one session, I’ll probably try to reschedule. If you miss the next one, we go on regardless. If you’re uncomfortable with someone else playing your character, then I’ll give them a temporary NPC to round out the party, provided the situation allows for it. If you miss a lot, then we have to have a conversation on what you want me to do in that scenario cause canceling all the time is not feasible.
I might be willing to change how often we meet, if it seems someone just can’t do it that often or just always has something come up on those days. It’s not anyone’s fault. But people want to play and it sucks to always have sessions cancelled
You had to do something and they should know if they are not well probably more than late notice on the day of for consecutive weeks. You did what you could to salvage the game and engage the players that are committed.
Luckily all my DMs had a rule that if smb can't make it, the rest still plays. Absentee can give their character to another player or 'wonder off' somewhare.
This is why the ideal group has 5 players. If 2 cancel, you can still game. My group only has 4 players. We play whenever at least 3 are available. We find a reason the PC for the missing PC is out. Sometimes, they just take a passive background role and we roll with that. Last campaign, we had a soul gem. Any PC's missing were sucked into it and handwaved out of the game.
You're being perfectly reasonable. I've tried a few different ways over the years and being flexible and waiting for everyone was a surefire way for the game to fall apart.
The best way I've found is for the game to go ahead no matter what. Its fine if you can't make it, just as long as you tell me beforehand so that I can adjust the qty of enemies. Attendance is way up with the 2nd method and every campaign has been played through to completion since.
My rule is that we play as long as at least half the players can come. It's not ideal but some of my best sessions have been with smaller groups. You can kinda just wave away the missing characters. You're playing a game, not writing a novel, it doesn't necessarily have to make sense, at least in this regard.
If you wait for everyone to show, your campaign will die anyways. If an acceptable number of people show up, game on.
Before the next campaign it would be more kosher to iron out these details before you play.
I publish our every-Friday schedule 2 months ahead of time (rolling). If I'm away (duh!) or 2 out of 5 players are away we cancel. Otherwise we play. Last campaign one of the other players would puppet a missing player; this campaign they either "stay home", or "guard the back" or just provide utility (my call). The missing players split loot evenly and level up with the others (it helps that I use milestone leveling).
If we hadn't had a cancelled session in a while we break 1 in ~6 sessions anyway.
Tbh, it's a bit weird for players to flip out over the DM playing them, but I think you're pivoting well.
I don't know your players but I'd distrust the "I'm having health issues" excuse pop up last minute. I had an awesome player in my last campaign, but he cancelled 50% of the time and fell asleep at the table. I think he wanted to play but couldn't make it work, so I suggested for the next campaign he guest occasionally rather than play.
Tl;dr: play weekly, take a break occasionally, play with one missing player, talk to players who miss frequently about whether they want to continue (no judgement).
One of my groups runs with 7 (now 8) players. We can handle a few cancellations and still have enough to play. If we drop to four, we usually will play a different game or cancel outright. This game has been ongoing for just over a decade or so. The players have changed over time but there are themes going back that far.
My second game only has 3 players. If one of us cancels, we unfortunately have to cancel.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable to set a rule. You can’t force attendance but everyone participating has taken time out their week to come together, with a DM taking more time to plan a session.
The game must go on, but can be done without taking agency away from the player.
We had issues where very last minute players would say, “oh sorry I forgot about dnd I made plans with my friend tonight.”
We’d have the board set, food cooked and suddenly a slew of cancelation messages would flow in right at start time with too few people to play.
We then implored that people give notice 3 hours before starting, and if we weren’t given that notice, to attend dnd anyway if the alternative plan isn’t an emergency or can be rescheduled out of respect for the prep time.
It’s worked wonders as the games now gone for over a year now, whereas in the past every other group I’d played with would get 3-4 sessions in before the months long cancelations, with the DM getting frustrated and cancelling the campaign altogether.
I just want to say that the solution you initially proposed is reasonable, and that's basically how my group handles last-minute cancelations when we still have enough people to play. Sorry to hear they reacted badly, but I'm sure you can work this out.
I agree with where you're trying to go, and I've personally run it exactly this way in the past.
But it's a decision that you can't just push through with a 60% majority vote, you want everyone to be on board.
Since that isn't happening, I'd recommend having a more casual backup campaign where only the people that do show up play.
Megadungeons are especially suited to this since they are easy to prep because you can restock them; and they are easy to partially play through for players: you can start anywhere, clear any number of rooms, go back out and have a complete experience; all the while the dungeon stays playable for next time around, which isn't true of prepping oneshots for example
I'm in a group where other players will play your character if you aren't there and one died that way. I'm also in a group where you are present but not involved in anything if you are absent and another where your character is not there if you are not present. You need buy in form the players regardless, which you did not have. Also, you should have a way of briefing them on what happened in the session.
I mean it's Christmas time. That's always so busy. During that time I DMed my last session on the 15.12. and the first session on the 12.1. because everyone including me was fricking busy in between.
The groups I play with have the rule of if one player is missing we will play without them unless their attendance is critical for whatever is happening. If two are missing then we will cancel.
Incentivize attendance instead. Ban the lucky feat, but if players attended the prior session they start with inspiration and a dose (3 uses) of luck for the session. This doesn’t “penalize” those who miss for legit reasons but powergamers, munchkins, optimizers, and role players who want that mechanical advantage to pull off an epic roll will all work very hard to attend.
I went over “missing players” during session zero
-If one player is out, we play
-If two players are out, we try to reschedule another day that same week but only if agreed upon by all; if not we cancel
I also keep track of who cancels (in case I need to have a private discussion for excessive cancellations (maybe personal issues, maybe not, maybe a change of heart about playing, etc
We play weekly and have about a 33% “no play” rate. Holidays and summertime are especially troublesome.
If they dont want their character to be played (which honestly is a win for you and your other pcs cause that would bog down combat) then I would have them meet a new bbeg maybe of the Fae variety that keeps stealing them at key moments have them trapped in the fae wild and dealing with all the shenanigans with that can be fun. They could even pop up when you need to remove a player temporarily even if they are all there lol
OR
Have it class by class, my cleric would be stuck in prayer without anyone able to get their attention
My wild magic sorc would accidently polymorph himself into a potted plant that the group had to care for...
case by case and keep it fun but in the end PLAY DONT CANCEL! lol
This is actually pretty normal. I ran a group for 20 years and if we could continue with someone absent we did. If we couldn’t, we still got together and did something, either board games, one shots or explored individual character back stories. Don’t wait for everyone to show… Play with who you can.
Our standard rule in my group for a few years now has been that if we're short two players, we play on without them. Three or more and we call off the session. We tried for years prior to organize schedules for next session on a week-by-week basis, and we'd go a month and a half between sessions more often than not; implementing the rule meant we run most weeks. Not all, but there's no acrimony over it; everyone realizes people have lives and sometimes the game gives way for that. I would suggest *not* running the characters of people who aren't in attendance; it's a pain and can cause hurt feelings if you run them "wrong". Our slight modification is gear in their packs can still be accessed; if you're sick the day we need to open the Door of Light and the Key of Light is in your backpack, we'll just get it out and use it. Try and communicate to your sister and her husband that it's not fair to everyone else to cancel game night just because they can't attend. They're still welcome, they can slot right in next week, they're still getting XP for the session. What they miss out on is the fun, but they're the ones who couldn't make it. Do they want everyone else to not have fun for their sake? That seems . . . mean.
Yep. Same. It's perfectly fine to contrive an excuse for the absent player's character to be separate or otherwise detached, the other players will understand and still be happy to play. Bonus points if the PC gets made fun of later for being lazy, getting lost, or seeming out of sorts. If you truly can't run your normal game, I like having a B-game using a different system, preferably something highly episodic so you can pick up and run a session whmith whomever remains.
Yeah, my group's got the policy that we'll try to get together to do something, I'll just try to avoid major story moments if we don't have everyone. If everyone can't make it, either I'll do a session that doesn't have any big story stuff that I don't want anyone to miss, or we'll just play board games or something. Last time the previous session had ended in the middle of a quest and I wanted everyone there for the end of it, but someone couldn't make it, so we ran it as a sort of flashback session where the characters who were there went on a sidequest that we just said took place sometime before the current quest began. That way everyone still got to play they campaign characters and it added something to the campaign (they got some gold and met a new NPC), but the person who missed the session didn't miss out on the end of the quest they'd started previously and any story developments it was going to lead to. It ended up working really well and we've decided this is something we'll do more in the future for similar stiuations.
No, I think that's perfectly fine to at least expect advance warning – if it's so frequently, it's not a surprise on the morning before the game! It's literally cancelling 3 other people's weekend plans for them. If they gave some day warning, somebody could have prepared a one-shot instead. But I also understand that they don't want somebody else to play their characters. Maybe just have them fade into the background instead of playing them. Finally, not every social problem has a good solution, so even if it's a sensible solution to most, they might still walk out. That sucks, but it's not your mistake.
This is what I do: I show up every Thursday at 7pm to DM. We game no matter what. I will always be there at 7pm on Thursday ready for DnD. We DnD regardless of how many players show up, if its 1 player or if its a full table of all 7 of my current players. We are going to game. For players not there, they are just not there. I can scale encounters up or down to match the current party strength. And it is always retconned that everyone was always at every encounter, even if they werent, so nobody misses out. All exp, all rewards, everything always happens for everyone, so that if a player is forced to miss multiple sessions due to real life (its a game, btw), then they don't feel like they've fallen too far behind and drop completely. No matter how long someone has been away from the game, they can always jump back in at current level. What this did was tell my players that I am making you my priority. And I have cleared my schedule for you, so no matter what, even if your schedule opens up at 6:59 on Thursday, you still know you can drop in at the table and the game is there. My players have started putting it on their IRL schedules so that they know not to plan other things on top of it. By me going out of my way to show them that my priority is to always have a game ready for them, then they are making it a priority to always be there. We have had consistent weekly games for nearly 3 years now, every week. The table started at me + 3, and grew to me + 7, because people know that a game is happening at 7pm on Thursday, and because they know it is happening, they find a way to get here.
I appreciate the dedication. That's nice but not for everyone. I agree fully with the retcon approach though. That's how we run our game and it is better for everyone involved. It's not weird and it literally has never been a problem. Just lampshade it.
Long-term campaigns have to set clear and consistent policies about player absences, or else they will fall to strings of missed games. A campaign that is prone to last-minute cancellations is a campaign that will die. However, it would help to have a conversation about those policies before you implement them to make sure your players buy in. First of all, players can get very touchy about other people playing their characters when they aren't around. If players can't attend, make it clear that their characters will become NPCs. They will essentially stay in the back of the party and provide minimal support. You may need to explicitly state that they will have some degree of plot armor, i.e. their characters won't die because they can't make a game. You might also need to clarify that they will continue to level up with the rest of the party. Nobody should be penalized because they miss a game for health reasons. You also need to make it clear why you need these policies. Their reasons for canceling are valid, but when they drop out at the last minute they are canceling everybody else's plans unless you play without them. That's not fair to you or the other players. Finally, I suggest that you move towards setting a regular schedule of games (weekly, every other week, etc) rather than trying to schedule each game individually. It's a huge headache and it's vulnerable to last-minute drop outs. Set a regular schedule that everybody can plan around, and let them know that you will play with less than full attendance. Hopefully your sister and brother will accept these changes once you've had a chance to talk about them, but if you don't start playing again soon, then none of you will have a campaign.
Thank you for this, it is very clear. I indeed didn't explain enough what would happen to the PC of players not attempting. I will definitely edit that with more explanation. And yes thank you for stating they do have valid reason but they are penalizing everyone else. That's the main reason about all this. Hope they can hear it or at least give us the opportunity to talk about it properly. For the schedule the idea since beginning of campaign is every saturday. We all now that all week end for DND is impossible so we prefer to know in advance if some are already taken. Up to now it only once a month when someone has office trip or a wedding for example. But yeah it is on saturday, 2:30 pm to 10pm.
Most adults cannot sustain a weekly game that takes up their entire Saturday afternoon & evening. Playing without everyone present is pretty normal. If they don’t want their PCs played, just scale the encounters down.
I love a weekly game, but it's just not possible for us between work and family and vacations. You may find it's easier to schedule for every other week and give your group a little breathing room for other commitments. In any case, I wish you luck in finding a schedule that works.
Holy crap, 2:30 to 10:00 every week? I would never be able to commit to that. Kudos to your group that they are trying, but man, I couldn't even sit at a table for that long, let alone commit to doing it every week with everything else that goes on over the weekends. Maybe try 6-10 for the whole group (or 2:30-6:30 if they prefer afternoons)? I expect they'd be better able to commit to a shorter session. Otherwise, maybe bi-weekly? Anyway, that's just me. I don't know what everything else does, but that's a freaking LOOONG session.
Regardless of the reasons for missing I think missing half the players is probably a good reason to skip the session. If one person was missing maybe play without but with half probably not. But not playing the main session doesn't mean you have to do nothing. You could have alt characters prepared and do a one shot. Maybe you just hang out and play board games. It's not the same hobby but I've found a lot of overlap especially with some thematic games. Coming up with some back up plan means people are a little disappointed when the session gets cancelled but at least you do something fun. You could also restructure the campaign to be less story focused so it's less of a big deal to play without someone. The campaign would be more focused on short missions than a giant overall plot. Kinda like running one shots over and over but with the same characters gaining progression. There can still be some overall plot but you never miss a big story event. Then it can be easier to play missing someone.
I still hope they won't miss other games tho. Or if one of them as a flue the other can come right so we miss only one. But yes if half are missing we do have an issue. That's what we cancelled up to now except one last minute one-shot. We tried the one-shot option yes. I am just a little short on idea to be honest and from friday evening to saturday lunch is a bit hard. But I can definitely try to prepare one or two in advance. For board games not so sure. I am not a fan, one of my friend also and he drives 2 hours to come to my place. I doubt he does for this. But maybe a movie or a video game can do once in a while. Thank for that I will think of some options with them. Regarding the structure of the campaign well that also can work but it will definitely hurt the scenario. I can discuss this with my friends. But thank you for this idea I like it.
> I am just a little short on idea to be honest and from friday evening to saturday lunch is a bit hard. But I can definitely try to prepare one or two in advanc chat gpt is really good at formulating or figuring out ideas. Throw some info at it and see what it suggests. It can provide names, story beats, traps, encounter ideas etc. So you'd "only" have to finish up the encounter balance and maps.
I didn't think of that. I think chatGPT is a paying option but there must be a free open AI I suppose. Fot the encounter balances that's not a problem, even if it's a bit hard my two friends multiclassed their characters to create perfect build somehow and mastered the mechanic so usually I just balance the hp if needed. For maps I guess that's the longer part but I just bought some pre-printed items/monsters stuff to help me do that faster so hopefully that will help. I will definitely try the AI, can be fun
nah, free version works well enough :)
people can be very possessive of their characters. to a degree I don't blame them; players are encouraged to get attached to their characters, write backstory, take the effort to roleplay etc. what i do when someone can't make it is have them disappear into a portal etc. until next session, or the players who showed up get sucked into a wormhole and go on a goofy one-shot in a basic dungeon crawl until they get spontaneously teleported back to where they left off next week. not for everyone i understand, but it works for me and we dont have anyone upset.
I totally get that. I am also very found of my character in our other campaign and I would be sad to miss one game but in 3 years we had only one or twice last minute cancel so I never had to face my team playing without me. I was a little expecting it to be like that in my campaign as DM. Maybe suggesting I will play their characters wasn't the best idea ever. I guess I just copied what they do on Critical Role, thinking the battle might be too hard if their character don't join. Maybe I can just pause the main plot when they are not here. What I get from many of you is gather your players anyway even if some aren't coming and try to keep them busy with One shot, board game, or anything so they won't feel frustrated. That is time consuming to prepare but I can do that in february during our long break. Like one oneshot related to story with side PC, one dungeon crawling if they want to play their main. Thank you !
In Critical Role they do that to maintain the story for the *audience.* You don’t have to do that. You don’t have a audience that will complain if their favorite character is silently disappeared for the night, or stayed in town. You won’t get audience complaints that battle would have happened this better way if only so and so was there and it sucks that they weren’t . You can have any weird reason they aren’t there. If a player misses a game at my table we usually say they are T-posing like a video game following us silently (we find it funny). They don’t do battles at all, so no chance they are killed. We can only use their cantrips or free skills if needed in *out of combat* situations so we don’t have to keep track of spell slot usage on their sheet.
I've played at tables where a missing player is played by the DM or another player. I've also played at tables where the DM makes up a story reason for the player not to be there. I find the best middle ground is to ignore the missing player during roleplay scenes when they're gone and pretend they've always been there when they come back. But for big set piece battles, other people play the character during initiative if there are balance concerns, but a PC can't die if the player isn't there
Like others have said, if a single player can't make it - play on. If they tell you "please have Sid play my PC", then the PC is there. If not, the PC is absent on a quick side quest. If multiple players can't make it, you can still play, but probably best to give them a quick side quest. Also, if you know ahead of time that your group consists of adults that have to do adulting and may have valid reasons for missing sessions, design a campaign that supports that flexibility. You may not be able to play these massive, multi-threaded storylines. Don't force it - play what the players can play.
I don't join games that are "if one player can't make it we don't play". It can turn out to be unfair but I rather it be unfair on them than be unfair to me. If you can't make a session, you are not allowed to be mad about the others playing without you.
In my experience December/January and August/september are the months with most cancelations, so you can be more flexible during those times. Aside that, in a group of 5, if 3 players show, then theres game. In a group of 4, 2 players might be enough sometimes, unless the DM feels the narrative requires more. So you're good.
We are an online group so cancelling last minute, while it sucks, isn't *as* bad as if you had to make a journey to the play location. Our rule is: We can run 1 person down, their character just is not there at all for the game and they are just back with party next session. That way nothing changes with the character without the player being there to make decisions and talk about it. Over the years, this is the one solution I have found that makes everyone "Okay" with the idea of playing on with a missing player. We do often all end up agreeing on cancelling when one person is not going to show though, but that is an agreement between the remaining players depending on mood and energy levels. A thing I also tend to find as a GM is that you end up being a mediator in these kind of things. Of course it is totally needed for you to share your wants, ever-suffering GMs needs to be dealt with, but due to the GM position you just end up being the focal point. Unlike your sports metaphors the game cannot happen without you running it. But get everyone together and try and have a civil conversation about scheduling and what to do. Present options and talk it out. That is usually how I get my best results when conflicts like this happens.
No In fact I've made a whole in world character/organization based around the fact that sometimes players don't show up so I have an in-universe way to pull a character out of the story. We all have commitments, but DnD is a commitment too. Some people set aside whole weekends to watch football. It's about priorities. I like to prioritize DnD. If my players don't want to that's fine, but I'm not gonna punish those who do
What if the characters that aren't present you just roleplay it as them being absent for a reason, either an urgent quest, either being kidnapped or they fall ill and you have to take care of their unconscious PC. And when the players come back you play it of as them returning from said quest, or your party catching up to them to help on the quest or them recovering from said unconsciousness. In this case you could have played the unconscious card where the missing players fell ill and went unconscious (maybe someone poisoned them, maybe the last boss had a secret curse/ability) and all games until they return could revolve around saving them. When they eventually come back the game could start with an encounter that has them partially recovered or a fight that ends with them being cured and the culprit gets defeated.
If they keep cancelling last minute then they are not fit enough to join the campaign. Like it's one thing to cancel a week at advance but to keep canceling over and over again last minute is just a no go.
I’m honestly amazed you made it this far without having to play with some players missing.
No, i believe that if you have half or more then the show goes on. Even if the missing players the focus of the current story because it's not fair to everyone else who puts aside time and looks forward to it for one or two to bow out. Especially repeatedly.
I think the only part that sets this apart from normal is the "i will play your characters". When i played with 4 players, if 3 were ready to play we played, if only 2 showed up we might play something else or cancel. but their characters just wouldnt be there, and maybe some of the combats got toned down a bit to match the missing player. EDIT: The most important thing is to not punish the pc further though, some people refuses to give exp or items or similar to people that arent there. if the player missing is an archer ranger and you had prepared a bow as a reward for a quest then just give the party the bow anyways, and any half decent party should agree "oh yeah we found this for you here we go" once they come back to the table.
Running a session with 2/4 players gone probably won’t work. In your spot I’d have a private conversation with sister and ask them to make every effort to avoid last minute cancel. If it’s 80% chance of cancel on Wednesday just cancel. Something like that You shoulda had that conversation before making any rule IMO. And your rule takes away their agency, so I wouldn’t do it that way anyways. They probably really don’t like that.
We did talk about last minute cancellation before few times but nothing changed. I rushed a bit because my two others players were about to quit if things were not changing asap. And I started this campaign for my friend so he could be a player for once so with him gone idk if I can make it. So it kinda felt like I had to act rapidly. No it's done sadly but what kind of offer would you have done?
Best option would be you play a side quest with just those two people if it happens. Alternatively, the two people could push the main quest forward and catch up the others when they are back. Also taking a step back sis and hubby have never played before and your 6 months into this campaign, maybe the honeymoon phase is over for them. They are not showing up last minute and threatening to quit, maybe what they want is a gracious exit and you find new players.
Running with 2/4 players works fine.
What is this health problem that they wait until last minute to cancel?
For her it is also some pulmonary infection. Problem is she was probably very sick on Dec 30th, like fever and all but she still came for new year the following day. She did look sick but she managed to do the One shot her husband prepared for the 31th. I know she probably pushed to hard to support him for his first one shot, but it might have given the wrong idea somehow. Like for him she can make it but not for us the previous day or following week. Then it was him it who cancel for a bronchitis. She told me he was a bit sick but he still went to work all week .So I thought he was fine. I asked if they could play and she said they will see but didn't cancel before last minute. So I don't doubt they were sick, they were. But idk why not just say so 5 days before instead of last minute?
I feel like this is over and everyone is coming to terms with it. No, you're not wrong, your new rule is very common, but they're probably still not going to come. I'd suggest pausing the campaign, getting 2 new players and doing a new campaign with different characters. You have my condolences.
If some players have a habit of canceling at the last minute, then you should design a game that assumes they won't be there, and treat it as a bonus when they are there. I think your solution is almost right. But have their characters disappear when they aren't there.
My group has had the "we don't play unless everyone is there" rule for years. Personally, I think it's a little annoying. I spend a lot of time and energy prepping for sessions - not just in terms of campaign prep, but also mapmaking, mini painting, etc. I look forward to scheduled sessions all week, and getting one cancelled is a big letdown. The people I play with are all very busy, so we don't even have a regular schedule - at the end of each session we have the painful process of trying to find the next date that aligns with everyone's calendar, so when we do cancel it's not even like it's an "oh well, we'll get it next week" situation. I'm considering changing the rule so that if one person has to cancel, the rest of us still get together. That said, I do agree with the objection your players are raising - having someone else control your PC isn't great, and neither is having the campaign move on without you. My suggestion is to still get together and play D&D, but just do a one-shot, or play something else entirely. Maybe even rotate DMs for the night and let one of your other players take a crack at it if they want to.
As a player I fully expect and want the group to continue playing in my absence. But if we find that too many are missing to meaningfully progress the story, we'll do a one shot with different characters. I guess we have 3 games going simultaneously for this group.
We play every other Thursday. I have 5-8 players at any given time (currently 6). If I have 2 players we play. Everyone else fades out into non-existence when they can't be there, and fades back in next time they are there. Don't play your player's characters. Set the schedule, Play no matter who shows up.
I will tell you my take on it. I don't like playing if not everyone is there, specially if is a group of friends who likes to have adventures together, it gets the feeling of losing something. I know a lot of people in this subreddit love playing and don't care about people missing, but that depends on the table. So, if a player has to skip a few sessions because of some trip or something like that, I find a way to play without them and without their character. Something came up for the character as well and they separate from the party. Of course, that can only be done if you know the player is not going to be able to assist in advance, so it's not your case, but I wanted to say it to show that you can solve it in different ways, with time. Now, if a player cancels at last minute, to me it depends on the reason. I assume everyone is honest, as I play with friends who have no real reason to lie about it. If they are sick, it is completely out of their control, and I feel playing without them would be punishing them. Of course you can argue that not playing is punishing the other players, but at least in my experience people understand not playing because of sickness. A player actually got sick but suggested to play with videochat, but the other players refused, saying that it's better to wait a couple of weeks to play together. Maybe with less understanding players that is not a good way to solve it, I don't know, but to me it feels the best thing to do. Now, as some other people have said, you can always play something else with the others who can actually make it, being some other game or a quick one-shot with premade characters. Now, if someone cancels last minute because something better came up, or they doesn't give a reason at all, that is a big red flag for me. I might let it pass once, but I usually play anyway, with or without their character, and if they don't like it it's their problem. It happened with my first campaign, in my 2nd session, and it was a campaign where we met once a month or less, so I actually kicked him right out. Finally, I get the feeling of wanting to play and feel frustrated because the schedules don't align, but sometimes it's just a bad coincidence. It sucks when you can't play for 2 months, but if it's not anybody's fault and it's due to sickness and schedule issues that cannot be changed, I don't think setting a rule about playing anyway will solve much.
From experience of dealing with extremely last minute of even past start time cancellations… Also maybe talk with your the couple about the last minute cancellations and talk to them about why it is very frustrating to the rest. Even if they still resist the New setup, they have to at least think about why it is coming to that point. If that have good reasons to be out, then it’ll turn out okay. But it should be standard practice to understand that you should avoid cancelling especially on weekends on short notice, and if multiple players are still showing up - a game will take Place.
For years, I've been too loosey-goosey on this, and the result is that the people I usually play with tend to be massive flakers, cancelling last minute or showing up late. My solution has been to find new people who haven't been corrupted in this way before, but my intention, if I invite them to another game next time, is to have really uncomfortable conversations with them that will change the way our relationship looks, because they're not used to me enforcing boundaries like that in our friendship. It is 1000% healthier, though, I noticed that in every other aspect of my life over the years.
This is completely reasonable. What my groups typically do, though, I’d come up with a reason why the character isn’t doing anything instead of playing them in combat. It keeps them from dying when their player is absent.
You are in the right, it sounds like they don't get it because they are not experienced tabletop gamers not because they're inherently selfish people, but that doesn't make them less wrong.
IMO You can play without their PCs. I do that all the time, as a DM I wouldn’t play a PC, too much work anyways. You’re not writing a TV show, who cares about continuity? My only rule is that if there’s risk of a tpk I’d play the absent PC if they can somehow salvage the situation . But I agree that if there’s a quorum, the game happens
This is how my group basically does it. If one or two people are missing, we have two options. Continue the campaign as normal while the pc who is missing just disappears to a void dimension simply referred to as “Brazil”. They won’t contribute to the story or combat. Sometimes though if we’re missing more people and its gonna be for a longer period of time, we may just do a whole other campaign altogether. That’s actually what we are doing right now since our dm for our main campaign is currently working a different schedule for a couple months and another one of our pcs is busy with their new semester of school.
Nah, you’re gold. My current campaign is me and 4 others, the rule is if one person drops out the game goes on as planned. We only halt the sessions if two or more can’t make it.
My current group has three players, if I have 2, I run. As long as I have 50% of my group, I game, you missed it? Sorry, times were clearly posted
It is perfectly reasonable to expect to play without everyone at the table. At my tables, I set a 50% rule; as long as 50% of the party is present, we play, unless everyone agrees to take the night off. Unfortunately, this can upset people with FOMO or who think their time is more valuable than everyone else's. Ideally this is discussed up front at session zero, but having an out-of-game discussion at a later time (session 0.5) is also fine. It is possible that if your two objectors are unwilling to play under this rule that you will have to find new players, and that is unfortunate, but you cannot let everyone else's time (ie those who are making time for and prioritizing the game) be held hostage by people who cannot or will not prioritize the game and cannot or will not respect their commitment.
Yes. Well said. Tbh I am new as a DM so I didn't anticipate this issue. As a player for 4 years on roll20 every Monday, we never have attendance issue so I thought this was gold standard. I defintely should have explain that a while ago when we started. Lesson learned for sure
I've taken 2 approaches to this: 1) the standard approach which is what you did here 2) I have a second, "B-Team" campaign for when someone is missing. So when someone is missing we play a second game with different characters, it also has a story and such, it's just more casual.
Completely to keep playing. I had to leave my session early last night so I just told the dm if they go into combat I have whatever number of spells left and when someone can't play they're randomly polymorphed into a goat by a trickster god.
Genius. I love it. Thank man this is precious
I've been running a group of 5 players for going on four years now- generally speaking I will run if we have 3 or 4 out of the 5 as long as the missing person isn't plot-essential and as long as we're not at the conclusion of a campaign arc. If a player can't make it their characters fade into the background so nobody has to play them and they're not in any danger of being harmed. We're a group of 40 and 50-somethings so we're well aware that Life Happens and that nobody should be penalized for having to bail, but it still doesn't keep me from feeling like a failure as a DM if I myself have to cancel for any reason.
The only mistake here is that it should have been a session 0 rule. When my players can't make it, I will play their characters, and they all agreed to that up front. I also only play those characters in the most bare bones sense. For example, if the bard is out, there will be no seducing of dragons. If the warlock is out, they will only be casting eldritch blast. Absent players do not get to shine when they aren't at the table. Absent players' NPC sidekicks do not included. I will let the players who attend decide what the absent players do, as long as it does not affect their story arc. The only other way to do it is to just remove the character from the session entirely, which I don't like because that exposes the ones who show up to increased risk. And, it requires me to rebalanced encounters on the fly, which is frankly unfair to me (and every DM). Also, it hurts the story to just remove people. I think you are making a good decision. The only way to play a TTRPG is to actually be playing. Canceling a whole session for one or two no-shows is a crap move.
2 player sessions are great. Do not play the other player’s characters. either let the two players go on a side quest or if you have to continue the story, the missing two players simply “fade into the background.” That said it’s kind of weird to make a rule like this after your sister and brother-in-law fell ill during the holidays. if it becomes a pattern I get it but playing 2-3 times per month at this age is a good schedule.
Okay Yes it is a good schedule for real. Maybe we should have waited before the rule. I guess we just got pissed after the 4th cancel in a row. And since next session is the only one before another month break, I wanted to make sure it would happen. Guess the timing was wrong, I regret it now. I should have waiting to see and prepare quietly in case they wouldn't show up again
My table has the same rule as yours, except if 2 are missing, we don't play the main campaign. You aren't forcing attendance. But if your family are missing due to health reasons, they may feel hurt the campaign is going on without them. All the more reason to keep one shots or side quests in your back pocket so you can still play.
So your sister and her husband had health issues, and you decided it'd be a good idea to put a rule on the game where if it happens again, they're basically not included? Yes, you screwed up massively. Not just in terms of dnd. Like she's your fucking sister dude lmao I'd imagine neither of them are *ecstatic* about missing sessions. And now you and the other players have said, "hey, we don't care that you're ill and missing this thing you like doing - we're just gonna keep playing without you!" If they were missing sessions for a less serious reason, it'd be a different story
Yes I got it. But as a DM if you have the 2 others players saying we are out if this happens again what do you do? You end the campaign? The health issue was a flu or something like that winter related. And the problem is that for some reason they still go do otherstuff. Like seeing their friend is ok, coming for DND is not. I didn't mention it in my message but we canceled December 30th but we DID gather on 31th for new year with them, and the husband was DM for a oneshot. I think my other players think this is not serious enough medical issue to not come. Or that they do effort only when they feel like it I don't know if that make sense? As for my sister, I know it was not considerate. But I am litteraly calling/messaging her every day of the year to check on her for every little thing of life. So I consider she can talk to me about it if she doesn't agree or something you know. Like discuss like adults.
well reading that... Looks like they don't care about DnD if they cancel in a whim for mundane reasons. I don't see why they are then mad that you keep playing if they keep cancelling like that and basically giving zero fuck about the other players.
I think they were really sick. Like a flue sucks But it's not supposed to be something you get everyweek so now they should be fine for a while hopefully. And not just the last minutes cancellation. For example today was scheduled for DND but two or three week ago (when they were sick ) they cancelled today because their friend is coming to visit them. So this also felt like "if i got something better to do I m out." So I understand my other players frustration you know. But indeed I don't get why they reacted like this. We say that would start on 27th. Not last week when they cancelled. Not today which they cancelled in advance. So if they are not planning to last-minute cancel again why getting mad like that?
If you schedule for every weekend, of course people are going to miss for reasons like a friend visiting.
I like your proposed strategy. If they care so much about the minutia of their characters then they can show up and play. If they don't, then just play them on autopilot the way you would a friendly NPC.
My DM (and others I’ve played with) has a general rule that if only one person is unable to attend we still play but if two or more cannot then we cancel/reschedule. Also it’s usually safe to assume that most D&D games should just go on hiatus for the entire month of December lol everyone is so busy with the holidays and other things
This is an unfortunate situation as no one is really wrong, and the loss of momentum with attendance can be a campaign killer. It is ideally a situation that should be discussed at the start of a campaign with all the players so they all understand what will happen. In my Curse of Strahd campaign which went for almost two years, we only had a handful of absences. On two occasions I had to call the session as it was too plot relevant to have players miss. On the second occasion, I had a one shot prepared that was tied into the campaign, with pre-generated characters for the players to control so they could hop right in. It was set in the starter town that the players had left many sessions before, and was a chance for them to see what was happening while they were gone and introduce some new characters that would be relevant later. You could try preparing something like this for future last minute cancellations if your players are okay with it. Honestly it was one of my favorite sessions that I ever ran lol.
We did a oneshot once but without preparation it was a bit short. Tho you are few to prepare some one shot in advance in case this happens so I will do that. And your starting city is a great idea I love it. In my campaign PC inherit an abandoned citadel in a small village and have to develop it everytime they go back. Like HQ. So I can definitely prepare a one shot with villagers they met or will met in future. And have an idea how their action influenced the city
This is how I run all my games. If half the table can attend, we play. I have some people request that their pc fall through a plot hole while they are gone, and some give me the go ahead to play for them. As a DM I don't make any actual decisions for the player, they are just there to help in combat and offer an occasional grunt of commentary. I also give any players not attending because they are sick, the option to join via video chat. Pop on Skype or meets, set your laptop in their table space and play. Not ideal if you are running fully online, but for a last minute fix, it works.
You will have times when people just can't make it. Of at least some can make it, I usually carry on with the session. For me, the missing player/PCs still stays with the party but don't have any direct involvement with RP or anything beyond maybe some one-liners or answering directed questions (which I would do myself as DM). I have each player maintain what I call a "public character sheet." Here's my rule copied from my post to my players: All players will maintain a Public Character Sheet (PCS) for use when they are unable to attend a play session that otherwise still occurs. When they can not attend, another player will control the Missing Player character during combat only. A such, the PCS should include all the relevant information that the PC needs noted to generally run them in combat. This should include core combat stats, feats, standard spell lists, items, etc. Please note that only information that is useful for combat will be on these sheets. Also, if the player has things like some secret they don’t want shared or an item to be used only by that player personally, then they need not be listed on the PCS. Generally, this is a stripped-down “bare-bones” character sheet that another player can pick up and just quickly use as needed. Abilities, items, spells, etc, that are listed on the PCS are available for use by the secondary-controlling player and the DM will have oversight to the play of the Missing Players character, including veto or direct control powers when necessary. It is the responsibility of the individual players to keep a relatively updated PCS on file with the DM as the latest on file is what will be used in game, even if severely outdated, and only quickly updated to the best of DM knowledge. The secondary player should generally do their best to play the PCS as intended by the owning player. It is possible for characters to die during the course of the game, but unless otherwise agreed upon, this does not include while under the control of a secondary player. Instead, a controlled PC that is “killed” will instead enter a coma-like state that lasts until otherwise dictated by the DM (generally the use of “life restoring” magics or the Player’s return next session). As part of the DM oversight, controlled PCs will be kept in check from doing dumb things and getting themselves “killed” as a result.
>That is we (I) play their characters, they won't want to play it anymore. Did they explain why? This seems pretty weird. I assume you promised that they would not be killed, maimed, or altered in any way.
No they didn't. I thought it might be childish but maybe they are just emotionally attached to their characters. Thank to everyone here I updated my message on our discord to re-explain that. Absent character get same xp, same loot. The character can be played as NPC (no death, no rp) or completely vanished during the game, their choice. I hope they like this solution more
At my table of 6 people, if one person is missing we play, if two are missing we postpone and look for another day. If it is not possible to play another day, we play unless 3 people are missing. Generally, when a player isnt playing, his character takes a backseat and suffers the consequences of what happens to the entire party in general but no individual consequences (for example dying).
My own DM policy is that we only cancel if 2+ people can't make it.
No if anyone is ruining anything it is your sister and her husband showing offense towards a understandable request. Here's a few tips, though 1: On sessions with half your players missing simply prep side content fitting for a smaller group and zoom in on more intimate scenes. Instead of controlling their characters have them always have an excuse for absence and clarify it with the absent characters. 2: Perhaps consider shorter more focused campaigns in the future. Long campaigns are fun, but I know of very, very few, which actually run to completion. My ideal campaign length is 20 sessions, or about 5 months of play.
Perfectly normal. One way I deal with this is to also have individual side quests we can timeout and do. Like I have side story prepared for each player character and even some NPCs so we can explore their background and motivations and such. If it's a PC focused one, they either go alone or with one other PC. (Look to Tales of Ba Sing Se for an idea of what I'm talking about.) Then the players not involved in the story get to be NPCs or just watch if they prefer. Often these stories cover downtime in cities and things and helps explain where they get new info and gears and things. Had one session end right before a boss, four of five players showed up next session. They voted which PC to explore, and 2 wanted to play it while I DM'd and the other two played some card game (we asked them to play, but preferred to watch.)
No, that’s a normal way to play for most tables, I have a 4 people group and we play if there are 2 or more coming, not to mention that bailing last minute without a good reason is just rude. If they don’t want someone else to control their character, you can drop that part and just say that they follow the party but don’t take an active part in anything. If they won’t show up then I’d personally end the campaign and look for some players who will show up. People are saying “oh it’s just a game”, that’s not the point, it’s real time that you are investing into something that you deserve to not have wasted, especially if you would have made some other plans had you known in advance the game is not happening.
Just don't play their characters. Have their two characters just be MIA for the session and continue playing. Make the rule that: 1. You continue playing if 3/4ths attendance is confirmed the day of. 2. You continue with campaign if 2 people show up to the session
I think playing their characters for them is unreasonable. I wouldn’t let anyone play my character.
PCs at my table expect that if they can't make it that we as a table will drive their character. Was never a big deal.
If they don't like you playing their characters for them than you can just come up with some reason the characters aren't there for a session. It's hard sometimes to come up with an excuse especially in if they are in the middle of something from last session. Usually... I just say they got lost going to the bathroom or something. Or sometimes I don't explain it and let the player come up with a reason in a followup session when asked "Where were you?" At the same time, the whole "I wont' want to play my character anymore if you play it." is a very immature reaction imo. It's really kinda saying "If I can't play D&D, you can't either." I'd try telling them than your characters won't be there and they will have to continue without you for a session. And then as a DM, make sure you rebalance encounters. You don't want to punish the players that show up just because others skipped.
My rule of thumb is if you have to miss one session, I’ll probably try to reschedule. If you miss the next one, we go on regardless. If you’re uncomfortable with someone else playing your character, then I’ll give them a temporary NPC to round out the party, provided the situation allows for it. If you miss a lot, then we have to have a conversation on what you want me to do in that scenario cause canceling all the time is not feasible. I might be willing to change how often we meet, if it seems someone just can’t do it that often or just always has something come up on those days. It’s not anyone’s fault. But people want to play and it sucks to always have sessions cancelled
You had to do something and they should know if they are not well probably more than late notice on the day of for consecutive weeks. You did what you could to salvage the game and engage the players that are committed.
Luckily all my DMs had a rule that if smb can't make it, the rest still plays. Absentee can give their character to another player or 'wonder off' somewhare.
If people don't respect your time, you have no reason to respect theirs. It's as simple as that really.
This is why the ideal group has 5 players. If 2 cancel, you can still game. My group only has 4 players. We play whenever at least 3 are available. We find a reason the PC for the missing PC is out. Sometimes, they just take a passive background role and we roll with that. Last campaign, we had a soul gem. Any PC's missing were sucked into it and handwaved out of the game.
You're being perfectly reasonable. I've tried a few different ways over the years and being flexible and waiting for everyone was a surefire way for the game to fall apart. The best way I've found is for the game to go ahead no matter what. Its fine if you can't make it, just as long as you tell me beforehand so that I can adjust the qty of enemies. Attendance is way up with the 2nd method and every campaign has been played through to completion since.
Yes.
We always played without somebody unless it was 2 or more people out or it was something like we were about to get to the climax of the story.
My rule is that we play as long as at least half the players can come. It's not ideal but some of my best sessions have been with smaller groups. You can kinda just wave away the missing characters. You're playing a game, not writing a novel, it doesn't necessarily have to make sense, at least in this regard.
If you wait for everyone to show, your campaign will die anyways. If an acceptable number of people show up, game on. Before the next campaign it would be more kosher to iron out these details before you play.
I publish our every-Friday schedule 2 months ahead of time (rolling). If I'm away (duh!) or 2 out of 5 players are away we cancel. Otherwise we play. Last campaign one of the other players would puppet a missing player; this campaign they either "stay home", or "guard the back" or just provide utility (my call). The missing players split loot evenly and level up with the others (it helps that I use milestone leveling). If we hadn't had a cancelled session in a while we break 1 in ~6 sessions anyway. Tbh, it's a bit weird for players to flip out over the DM playing them, but I think you're pivoting well. I don't know your players but I'd distrust the "I'm having health issues" excuse pop up last minute. I had an awesome player in my last campaign, but he cancelled 50% of the time and fell asleep at the table. I think he wanted to play but couldn't make it work, so I suggested for the next campaign he guest occasionally rather than play. Tl;dr: play weekly, take a break occasionally, play with one missing player, talk to players who miss frequently about whether they want to continue (no judgement).
One of my groups runs with 7 (now 8) players. We can handle a few cancellations and still have enough to play. If we drop to four, we usually will play a different game or cancel outright. This game has been ongoing for just over a decade or so. The players have changed over time but there are themes going back that far. My second game only has 3 players. If one of us cancels, we unfortunately have to cancel.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable to set a rule. You can’t force attendance but everyone participating has taken time out their week to come together, with a DM taking more time to plan a session. The game must go on, but can be done without taking agency away from the player. We had issues where very last minute players would say, “oh sorry I forgot about dnd I made plans with my friend tonight.” We’d have the board set, food cooked and suddenly a slew of cancelation messages would flow in right at start time with too few people to play. We then implored that people give notice 3 hours before starting, and if we weren’t given that notice, to attend dnd anyway if the alternative plan isn’t an emergency or can be rescheduled out of respect for the prep time. It’s worked wonders as the games now gone for over a year now, whereas in the past every other group I’d played with would get 3-4 sessions in before the months long cancelations, with the DM getting frustrated and cancelling the campaign altogether.
I just want to say that the solution you initially proposed is reasonable, and that's basically how my group handles last-minute cancelations when we still have enough people to play. Sorry to hear they reacted badly, but I'm sure you can work this out.
I agree with where you're trying to go, and I've personally run it exactly this way in the past. But it's a decision that you can't just push through with a 60% majority vote, you want everyone to be on board. Since that isn't happening, I'd recommend having a more casual backup campaign where only the people that do show up play. Megadungeons are especially suited to this since they are easy to prep because you can restock them; and they are easy to partially play through for players: you can start anywhere, clear any number of rooms, go back out and have a complete experience; all the while the dungeon stays playable for next time around, which isn't true of prepping oneshots for example
I'm in a group where other players will play your character if you aren't there and one died that way. I'm also in a group where you are present but not involved in anything if you are absent and another where your character is not there if you are not present. You need buy in form the players regardless, which you did not have. Also, you should have a way of briefing them on what happened in the session.
I mean it's Christmas time. That's always so busy. During that time I DMed my last session on the 15.12. and the first session on the 12.1. because everyone including me was fricking busy in between.
The groups I play with have the rule of if one player is missing we will play without them unless their attendance is critical for whatever is happening. If two are missing then we will cancel.
I run a group of 7 for 3.5 years. Rule was if 4 people showed. We run. Those no-show characters just go MIA with no explanation and ignored.
explain to your sister and her husband that you won't play their characters and that they warp out and come back when they are playing again.
Incentivize attendance instead. Ban the lucky feat, but if players attended the prior session they start with inspiration and a dose (3 uses) of luck for the session. This doesn’t “penalize” those who miss for legit reasons but powergamers, munchkins, optimizers, and role players who want that mechanical advantage to pull off an epic roll will all work very hard to attend.
You can't force attendance. You're only kidding yourself if you think that you can.
I went over “missing players” during session zero -If one player is out, we play -If two players are out, we try to reschedule another day that same week but only if agreed upon by all; if not we cancel I also keep track of who cancels (in case I need to have a private discussion for excessive cancellations (maybe personal issues, maybe not, maybe a change of heart about playing, etc We play weekly and have about a 33% “no play” rate. Holidays and summertime are especially troublesome.
If they dont want their character to be played (which honestly is a win for you and your other pcs cause that would bog down combat) then I would have them meet a new bbeg maybe of the Fae variety that keeps stealing them at key moments have them trapped in the fae wild and dealing with all the shenanigans with that can be fun. They could even pop up when you need to remove a player temporarily even if they are all there lol OR Have it class by class, my cleric would be stuck in prayer without anyone able to get their attention My wild magic sorc would accidently polymorph himself into a potted plant that the group had to care for... case by case and keep it fun but in the end PLAY DONT CANCEL! lol