Jump to content
warchild1x

XP for Missing Players?

Recommended Posts

By my reading the rules for assigning XP's do not permit the GM to give XP's to characters who are not there. Therefore everyone who does so is not using an unauthorized house rule. If that's what you want to do you go right ahead, but you should be aware of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2018 at 8:22 AM, themensch said:

Hey, don't let me stop you.  Now everyone can have 2000 XP!   Next we'll have to get funding from the Hugg* Cartels.

 

* like Hutts, but made of not-slimey plush materials.  Also quite lovable. 

I can haz one billion credits too, pleaze?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, pnewman15 said:

By my reading the rules for assigning XP's do not permit the GM to give XP's to characters who are not there. Therefore everyone who does so is not using an unauthorized house rule. If that's what you want to do you go right ahead, but you should be aware of this.

Quote that rule and prepare yourself for a RAW dogging!

I'm pretty sure the rules only cover who must be given XP and are likely silent on who must not be given XP.

Edited by HappyDaze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

Quote that rule and prepare yourself for a RAW dogging!

I'm pretty sure the rules only cover who must be given XP and are likely silent on who must not be given XP.

"Players receive additional experience as they play Edge of the Empire," EOTE pg 92. Therefore if you are not playing than you are not receiving additional experience.

Also
"During a campaign, players also receive additional experience for each session." EOTE pg 29.   _Players_ are people who are _playing_ this session, not people who played or will play some other session. Not there, No XP's.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, pnewman15 said:

"Players receive additional experience as they play Edge of the Empire," EOTE pg 92. Therefore if you are not playing than you are not receiving additional experience.

Also
"During a campaign, players also receive additional experience for each session." EOTE pg 29.   _Players_ are people who are _playing_ this session, not people who played or will play some other session. Not there, No XP's.

 

Again, that only tells when the GM must give XP. Show me where it says a GM cannot give XP at other times.

Also, you contend that a player that missed a session is no longer a player in the campaign.  RAW does not support this. 

Edited by HappyDaze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the rules say "Players receive additional experience as they play" than if they are not playing than they are not (or at least should not by the rules)  be receiving additional experience, because they have not met the prerequisite for awarding additional experience. It is 100% crystal clear.

Are you trolling?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, pnewman15 said:

Because the rules say "Players receive additional experience as they play" than if they are not playing than they are not (or at least should not by the rules)  be receiving additional experience, because they have not met the prerequisite for awarding additional experience. It is 100% crystal clear.

Are you trolling?

You should probably check out the box on page 288, the one that says "Fun first, rules second!". Actually a lot more people should check out that one.

 

In regards to receiving experience as they play. They're still playing as a part of the campaign. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, pnewman15 said:

Because the rules say "Players receive additional experience as they play" than if they are not playing than they are not (or at least should not by the rules)  be receiving additional experience, because they have not met the prerequisite for awarding additional experience. It is 100% crystal clear.

Are you trolling?

Keyword "additional".

When I'm sick and don't go to work I still get paid, but what I don't get is a bonus for having no sick days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, HappyDaze said:

Again, that only tells when the GM must give XP. Show me where it says a GM cannot give XP at other times.

Also, you contend that a player that missed a session is no longer a player in the campaign.  RAW does not support this. 

So if the rules explained how much damage a weapon does when it hits you would respond "Oh, but the rules do not say that the weapon does not do damage on a miss, so I'm going to have them do damage anyway (No, not by using advantage to Strain Minions, thus damaging them, that's fine.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Stan Fresh said:

Keyword "additional".

When I'm sick and don't go to work I still get paid, but what I don't get is a bonus for having no sick days.

"Additional" = more than they started with. That section is about experience, both starting and gained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Stan Fresh said:

Keyword "additional".

When I'm sick and don't go to work I still get paid, but what I don't get is a bonus for having no sick days.

But to get paid for that day of work that you missed, you have to tap into a different - finite - resource: the sick days you mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Darth Revenant said:

You should probably check out the box on page 288, the one that says "Fun first, rules second!". Actually a lot more people should check out that one.

 

In regards to receiving experience as they play. They're still playing as a part of the campaign. 

Yes, thank you for providing additional evidence for my statements. Doing it the way the rules specify prevents seething rage and resentment over unfairness when those who do not show up and who do nothing receive the same rewards as those who do show up and also prevent seething hatred of the cheating GM who has dared to alter the rules (at least without mentioning this before the campaign started). Thus it is clearly more fun.
 

Edited by pnewman15
clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

But to get paid for that day of work that you missed, you have to tap into a different - finite - resource: the sick days you mentioned.

Not in my country, no. :D The first 6 weeks are paid by the employer, and anything beyond that is covered by mandatory health insurance.

But that's not the point of the analogy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should I be giving my players PTO? As they game they accrue personal time off, and can exchange that to miss later sessions but still receive full rewards? Sounds pretty good to me. *tongue firmly placed in cheek*

 

In all seriousness, it's not surprising that this thread has lasted 6 pages. It is surprising how passionate some people are about handing out XP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, pnewman15 said:

Yes, thank you for providing additional evidence for my statements. Doing it the way the rules specify prevents seething rage and resentment over unfairness when those who do not show up and who do nothing receive the same rewards as those who do show up and also prevent seething hatred of the cheating GM who has dared to alter the rules (at least without mentioning this before the campaign started). Thus it is clearly more fun.
  

Huh, usually I see it the other way around. That and it prevents the seething hatred of me as a GM having to keep track of what XP people have and what they don't have because I need to keep track of when people have showed up and when they missed something. Weird how people have different definitions of fun, ain't it? Guess we will just have to agree that people at different tables do things differently and that different players have different tastes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Darth Revenant said:

Huh, usually I see it the other way around. That and it prevents the seething hatred of me as a GM having to keep track of what XP people have and what they don't have because I need to keep track of when people have showed up and when they missed something. Weird how people have different definitions of fun, ain't it? Guess we will just have to agree that people at different tables do things differently and that different players have different tastes.

OK. Agree that tastes differ.

What do you do about extra XP's from playing your Motivation? I'm not sure how you could do that if you were not there. Do you not give those out at all, or does everyone get that whether they role play it or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, kaosoe said:

Should I be giving my players PTO? As they game they accrue personal time off, and can exchange that to miss later sessions but still receive full rewards? Sounds pretty good to me. *tongue firmly placed in cheek*

 

In all seriousness, it's not surprising that this thread has lasted 6 pages. It is surprising how passionate some people are about handing out XP.

Well, I did float the idea pages back of letting a player who missed a session have that session’s XP at the cost of a Destiny point.... ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stan Fresh said:

Not in my country, no. :D The first 6 weeks are paid by the employer, and anything beyond that is covered by mandatory health insurance.

But that's not the point of the analogy.

Which is why I said earlier I avoided the paycheck analogy. ? Whether due to regional societal mechanisms or corporate policy, there’s usually a means of recouping missed pay when you have to miss time from work.

If we run with the analogy, though, are players “hourly” (as implied by the suggestion to award XP based on hours of play) or “salary” (get XP whether there or not)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nytwyng said:

Which is why I said earlier I avoided the paycheck analogy. ? Whether due to regional societal mechanisms or corporate policy, there’s usually a means of recouping missed pay when you have to miss time from work.

Like a 1 on 1 session or play by email. Though my viewpoint here is that everyone wants to play, so the missing player isn't making it up to the others, she and the GM are getting another chance to have fun.

1 minute ago, Nytwyng said:

If we run with the analogy, though, are players “hourly” (as implied by the suggestion to award XP based on hours of play) or “salary” (get XP whether there or not)?

Hm. If we include things like bouncing around ideas per chat, building characters, writing backgrounds, etc I would say salary. When I'm working, I get paid :P

And we're mostly joking around here, but I want to reiterate again that in no way do I see playing as work. That's not the point of the analogy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

Like a 1 on 1 session or play by email. Though my viewpoint here is that everyone wants to play, so the missing player isn't making it up to the others, she and the GM are getting another chance to have fun.

Hm. If we include things like bouncing around ideas per chat, building characters, writing backgrounds, etc I would say salary. When I'm working, I get paid :P

And we're mostly joking around here, but I want to reiterate again that in no way do I see playing as work. That's not the point of the analogy.

Oh, I don’t either.

It’s just an easy analogy to go to, because, on the surface, it appears to be the same: compensation for effort (for want of a better explanation). But - as with your “Miraluka blindfold” question in another thread, once you start actually examining the analogy as compared to the situation you’re applying it to, there are too many incongruities for it to really work.

Not only an easy analogy to go to...TOO easy an analogy to go to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pnewman15 said:

OK. Agree that tastes differ.

What do you do about extra XP's from playing your Motivation? I'm not sure how you could do that if you were not there. Do you not give those out at all, or does everyone get that whether they role play it or not?

I don't. Much like I don' hand out extra experiance for roleplaying and tend to stay away from objective based XP. It creates extra clutter in terms of book-keeping, makes for divisions in the group where people argue about whether or not they had a proper chance to play to their motivation or whether or not they were doing good roleplaying or not.

 

While I do enjoy it when my players engage in good RP and play to their motivations, I want that to happen because they feel comfortable with each other and because it makes the game more enjoyable. If they just do it to get a leg up on their team mates in the quest of being awesome, then it just breeds resentment towards each other and towards the GM who is clearly playing favorites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

Oh, I don’t either.

It’s just an easy analogy to go to, because, on the surface, it appears to be the same: compensation for effort (for want of a better explanation). But - as with your “Miraluka blindfold” question in another thread, once you start actually examining the analogy as compared to the situation you’re applying it to, there are too many incongruities for it to really work.

Not only an easy analogy to go to...TOO easy an analogy to go to.

I think it's the other way around. The analogies emphasize the deficiencies of the original situations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, pnewman15 said:

Yes, thank you for providing additional evidence for my statements. Doing it the way the rules specify prevents seething rage and resentment over unfairness when those who do not show up and who do nothing receive the same rewards as those who do show up and also prevent seething hatred of the cheating GM who has dared to alter the rules (at least without mentioning this before the campaign started). Thus it is clearly more fun.
 

Properly socialized grown adults are in charge of checking their own rage and resentment, not me the GM or the CRB.

Edited by 2P51

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kaosoe said:

Should I be giving my players PTO? As they game they accrue personal time off, and can exchange that to miss later sessions but still receive full rewards? Sounds pretty good to me. *tongue firmly placed in cheek*

 

In all seriousness, it's not surprising that this thread has lasted 6 pages. It is surprising how passionate some people are about handing out XP.

Do you have dental?......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, pnewman15 said:

By my reading the rules for assigning XP's do not permit the GM to give XP's to characters who are not there. Therefore everyone who does so is not using an unauthorized house rule. If that's what you want to do you go right ahead, but you should be aware of this.

Just out of curiosity, do you use any house rules? Also, can you tell me if you are you coming at this from a Gm or Player mindset (which do you do more often)? 

I don't give XP to absent players, so I am not really wondering about that issue as far as where you stand. I am wondering about when you would consider a house rule (if ever) to be ok and how must it be presented? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...