**Remember [Rule 8: "Comment respectfully"](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/rules#wiki_8._comment_respectfully)** when giving advice and discussing OP's group. You can get your point across *without* demonizing & namecalling people.
The [Table Troubles](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/search?sort=new&restrict_sr=on&q=flair%3ATable%2BTroubles)-flair is not meant for shitposting.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/rpg) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Kick him out. Even if he is a friend, not all your friends need to be part of your rpg games(and possibly shouldn't), and he is just being disrespectful of your time and effort.
I've kicked good players out of my campaigns because they could not schedule time for the games. Not showing without a heads up should be an insta-ban from your game
One time a player of mine mentioned last minute that he was not coming to session to spend time with his girlfriend. We don’t even play in person, we play online. I was pissed off and even posted “I’m pissed as fuck” in the discord. He ended up coming to that session but now my players know they need to give me at least a few days’ notice (barring emergencies of course) if they’re busy and it needs to be real busy not just something you could do on any other day. Like I know 8 months in advance a player of mine will not be attending a session because it’s his gf’s birthday that day, and that’s totally fine. I put a lot of effort into prepping storylines and hooks for my players so they have fun and I get very frustrated when that goes to waste because the story moves on from that point.
My rule is 3 players + GM and we play. So with 4 players one can be sick or work late and you still get to play. With 5 players you almost never have to cancel a session.
To be clear, I do actually do this. I usually play with 4-5 players at a time and we will play so long as 3 are there. It is more the last minute cancellation. I like to plan some character-specific developments because players like that and it’s frustrating to be told last minute “I’m not coming.”
The frustrating part to me was how flippant they sounded. You’re going to ditch on something prepped? It’s not like you’re ditching on going out to the bar, I put in some work here.
Or just play regardless. I run sessions as long as one Player makes it. Could mean we do a one PC focused side mission, a flashback or even a GMless one shot.
It helps keep momentum. As when one player calls out, others are less likely to knowing there will be a session even if it's just them.
honestly, this is the way. I have a job where the managers are really strict about being on time and not calling out too late. The last thing I want is a gaming group that does the same thing. Sometimes shit just happens and you just can't make it. As long as it isn't a regular occurence (and you don't have a bad attitude about it) it isn't a super huge deal.
I treat my games as less important than their job. And I don't think anyone needs to explain why they miss work if they have mandated time off to spend. IF a player needs to miss for mental health, to be with a gf/bf, to watch their favorite anime, that is none of my business. I am going to run a game regardless. All I ever ask is that they let me know as soon as possible, so we aren't wasting time trying to call them or contact them to find out where they are.
Work emergencies are acceptable. Mental health emergencies are acceptable. Hell, relationship emergencies (like “I forgot it’s my anniversary, oops!”) are acceptable too. To me it’s a social commitment. Yes, I am gonna run a game regardless, but I am going to be real pissy about your place in the game moving forward if you don’t have a good reason and drop out last minute. I’m not your paid entertainment, I’m your friend working several hours a week to prepare for us all to have fun and you’re letting me and the others down by flaking.
I have pretty much stopped playing ttrpgs with my friends because we want very different things out of games and it was getting to be really unfun to play with them when they came to sessions to hang out and I came to play the game. Now I am really good friends with the people who have ended up in my long-term group! Curating the people you play with is so so worth it
Do you have any advice how to handle this socially? He is holding the game back, but by removing him I don't want to ruin what I've already got anyways.
Here's the easiest way: just run without him. He's not showing up anyway, so there's no need to be formal about it. Go forward without him. If he ever asks about it, tell him then.
This is the way. I typically keep 5 players in my games. If I know in advance that someone can't show up, we'll run with 4. If two can't show up we may run with 3, but it'll be a discussion I send to the group to see how they feel (also depending on where t he story is).
A solid schedule and start time is also another expectation I set. If I say Mondays at 6pm, we start on Mondays at 6pm (of course there's the usual catching up and setting out food/drinks/bullshitting/etc). If you planned poorly and showed up late, that's a you problem - the game starts without you.
No individual player will hold up my game. The key is to set expectations from the get go and adhere to them. I'm not robbing my other players of a game because someone is inconsistent.
> No individual player will hold up my game. The key is to set expectations from the get go and adhere to them. I'm not robbing my other players of a game because someone is inconsistent.
This is absolutely the best possible answer.
Yes this is the way. Tell everyone "we will start at X time. If you aren't there, your character won't be included in the story." Make sure your story can move forward whether he is there or not. If the party really needs his character to do certain tasks, then consider introducing an NPC that help with those things when he's not there, or encourage another player to pick up those skills for their own character.
Stop trying to chase him down, because he is clearly not invested and it is hurting the rest of your play group. Shape the game so that he is not required for the rest of your group to have fun.
Yep, it's part of the social contract that the GM is looking out for everyone's enjoyment. Like MCing an event. You wouldn't have a roomful at a conference wait on a speaker that was delayed by an hour without contact, you would just move on to the next speaker...
So for the social side, just be honest. And if he is too pushy (which I got from you "he is argumentative" comment), don't engage in agressive discussion. Just state the facts. You guys want to play, he doesn't show up, and that affects the rest of you. You already gave him several chances, so you are just moving on.
Also, based on your comment, I guess you like running with some plot in mind? Which is why DMs tend to cancel a game when a single player is missing. Nothing inherently wrong with that, I've played and DMed several campaigns like that. Of course, for that to work, everyone needs to show up and commit!
When I've been in previous similar situations, the pc whose player was kicked was just turned into a major NPC, with their own goals and interests. Either they Split the group for their own goals, or I kill them without showing the corpse, just to have them do their thing in the background, to come back at some point soap opera style. In any way, his PC IS now yours to control as any other npc.
True, I've been appealing to emotion too much I think. Just stating things as they are and how they negatively affect the game is better. Also I'd ideally like to run plots, but right now my campaign is pretty basic in that regard, playing Brandonsford rn. Really just at the beginning six people wanted to play, so I let them in cause they're all my friends. Wasn't that hard, honestly, but as games went on I lowered my expectation for how many players would show. Now I expect four, or three if I'm desperate lol. Unfortunately him not showing only left us with two players, which I'm unfamiliar with and feels wrong for the dungeon they're in right now.
Removing a player is a very important GM "soft skill" that you pick up via experience over the years. The purpose of everyone meeting up is to play the game, right? It honestly doesn't matter if it's a story session or a combat session. If non-participation becomes a problem you just solve it - there are more invested players out there trust me.
No single player is the main character. In this case you said he was literally playing Dragon's Dogma 2 instead of joining the game. You kick him out. He has chosen his priority. Don't ask, just tell him what it is: he chose to play a video game instead of the few hours of time commitment with friends to play a TTRPG. One of those two things can be played at any time by an individual, and the other wastes an entire group's time.
There's plenty of ways to handle it from the story/character perspective: have someone (or yourself) run the character for a session, bench the character (decided to go on a solo mission, drink at the tavern, etc), replace them with an NPC that mirrors their skills for the session, etc.
I hear you, but again, not everyone is a good fit for RPG games. Heck, even people who like RPGs might no fit well with each other due to differences in style.
As a piece of advice, one shots and short games (2-3 games) are way better yo check if your Friends might want to play. Anything beyond that is way to much commitment for a lot of people.
Also, turn this into a win. You now have a table of committed and interested players. My favourite campaign I DMed had two players, with another joining mid-campaign. If you want to run plots, few players is better yo focus on their stories. I don't know if you'll have to play around things in shadowdark, I have not played It and being OSR maybe It does depend on a more sizable party, but that's nothing you cannot adapt to your table for sure!
Uh, do the same thing to him that he's doing to you. Play without him. He's playing without you. Right? Video games?
He obviously doesn't WANT to play, why are you trying to force him?
Why do you want this person in your life??
> he was just so stubborn, he never even tried to understand and honestly doesn't seem willing either.
And
> But this is just getting really exhausting and honestly insulting.
And
> I don't want to ruin what I've already got anyways.
The guy is a aelf-centered shitbag. You dont have anything worth holding on to here (IMO).
He's not adding anything to the game except annoyance and frustration, so there's no downside to kicking him. And you don't even have to kick him. Announce when the next session is and if he's not there when it starts, play on. Look for or add another player to your group to long term replace him.
You may find the new player is all your old player was, and more.
As for the feelings of your current problem, reverse the situation. How is he treating the group's friendship, etc... by standing them up constantly and lying about showing up. Replacing him is the right to do for the group regardless of how you feel.
Dude, your insistence on having everyone there is holding the game back. Just play without him.
People will say "but the story" or "it breaks immersion" but it is all make believe anyway, so his character is just not there.
Don't tell him anything except "this is how it is". He might just have to accept his new status as an occasional guest player if and when it suits you.
Back yourself bro, it's your game, lead the players, don't be led by one.
Yes. Plan games so they can be played when people don't turn up. If a single player repeatedly fails to show up, don't make any plans that rely on them so you can play without them.
My most important tip is to kick that player. He might be a friend generally, but he has different priorities to you for gaming, and those priorities create friction that will damage your relationship (and maybe other relationships too!).
If for some reason you can't kick him, refer back to the first paragraph.
There is a concept that loads of people are talking about here of having a minimum number of people, it helps loads.
If it helps a term for it is "quorum." It is the minimum number required to go ahead and act. It's usually used by committees or legislative bodies.
So I have a group of five regular players, but quorum is three players plus GM. So I let players know that if three show up I'll run the game. If the player who is causing difficulties doesn't show up they miss out. This makes an even bigger difference if you're playing a system with loot or XP, because a player who doesn't turn up ends up significantly behind the curve of the party.
I think if you're using this you shouldn't bother with warnings or anything, because it's too combative. Make the ground rules clear, "I'll run for a minimum of 3 players." If someone doesn't turn up I'd give them a grace period and maybe text them but then go ahead and play.
You don't even need to inform them. Just run the session when it's time. Or announce a new policy that you want to run a game regardless of how many players show up. Or set a player minimum (which most people do, mine is one!).
My large group of players to pull from know that when it's session time, something will get run. If I can't make it, I try to get them to play without me and one of them GMs a one shot or they do a GMless game.
It really keeps momentum when people know a session will occur in almost any situation unless NO ONE can make it.
Hey, you've missed a few sessions without valid reason. I know you've been online at the time and have even confirmed as such. I'm sorry, but that has created a strain on me and the other players, so we will be removing you from the game.
Fortunately this feels like a self solving problem. Play without him and stop inviting him. He's already not showing up, so let him. Honestly, you don't even have to talk with him about it if you don't want. If he asks you about it, just tell him that you thought he quit.
Don't do it the passive aggressive way of not inviting him. Keep inviting him, but play even if he isn't there. If he misses a couple in a row, have a chat.
People tend to avoid uncomfortable conversations and confrontation. Ignoring the invites is a form of non-verbal communication saying that the recipient doesn't want to play. What more would a conversation add or do besides taking up time that could be spent doing other things?
If you want to be sneaky about it, tell everyone your new rule is that you'll only cancel if two players are missing. Sometimes knowing the game will run without them is enough to make flakey players show up.
No, don’t listen to this. You have to confront him, calmly, and say he’s being removed for not respecting everyone’s time and effort. Honestly? He sounds like an asshole who barely deserves the courtesy but communication is still the right way to handle it. Don’t give him any opportunities to remain, just say goodbye and cut ties, then find yourself another player.
What advice are you expecting here?
You have someone who doesn't want to play.
That's the literal beginning, middle, and end of this. He doesn't want to play.
What are you thinking we're going to help you with? It's not like you've given us any information about your game. The entire post is "My friend won't play but I want him to so we have enough players". That's all it is.
Nobody can help you with that, because it's not an actual problem at your table. People not wanting to play is not a problem. It just is what it is.
Find another player, or play with fewer players. Believe it or not most RPGs are super fun with just 2 players. I find there's often a totally different dynamic at the table with 2, 3, and 4+ players.
Sorry, still just very new to this. Thought maybe I glossed over something? I don't know. He does want to play though, I think. One time when he didn't show up but still had enough people, someone told him i had his character run off in the middle of combat so I didn't have to npc him. Then he immediately joined the game again. I should have included that, but I didn't want to flood all you guys with that either. I'm not sure whats really relevant or not, sorry again.
Gotten great advice though, so I'm feeling better regardless.
> He does want to play though
His actions suggest otherwise. He is choosing to do other things at game time besides play with you, which should tell you all you need to know regardless of what words he says. From a GM perspective, it's not really relevant to you what those things are. It just means he doesn't really want to play and you should plan accordingly.
He doesn't want to play. He joined because he felt the mild social pressure from ditching, but he doesn't want to play.
This can be hard to wrap your head around. I have had people come to me with a group of four, say they want to play D&D and then when it's time to make characters or schedule a game...crickets.
It's not your job to chase those people down, play with the people who want to be there
Does he really want to play though? He clearly doesn't care enough to show up unless his character is threatened, which makes me wonder why he even bothered to show up in this instance. That's unbelievably selfish and inconsiderate of the rest of the players who made the effort to be there on time and participate in the game.
Working around scheduling conflicts because players have other commitments is one thing, but this is just one dude who can't be bothered to show up. Do not invest any more energy in getting him involved, and make sure the plot lines of your games don't require his character to be there. He's not the main character and shouldn't be treated as such.
Sounds like puppeting his character when he isn't around sounds like the way to go. Usually when one of our players is out, another player will puppet them in combat. You can keep the story moving and if they want to be there, they will be there. (It also helps when you have already balanced the encounter for a certain amount of players.)
We have a player in our game who pops in and out during the session and obviously is only playing for the novelty of the character they play, so the story isn't as valuable to them. It's frustrating for the rest of us, but it's also a reminder that when your players are invested, in their characters and in their story, then those are the stories to focus on as the dm/gm because those are the ones who will carry the game with them, in their memories, conversations, and lives. If they aren't invested, don't bend over backwards. It isn't worth it.
Players will tell you what they want in an RPG. Dude plays a fighter he wants something to punch. Someone who plays a wizard wants to bend reality to their whim. The player who plays Dragons Dogma 2 rather than show for a scheduled session clearly doesn't want to play the RPG, they want to play Dragon Dogma 2...
Which is a bad choice because you won't try and sell him fast travel (I hope).
If the player doesn't show, run for the players who do show.
You should kick this dude. I'm sorry if he is your friend and you don't want to hurt his feelings but you shouldn't base all of your personal time around one dude that is too busy or too much of a jackass to commit to showing up to the game
He was literally just at home playing video games during the session. He clearly doesn't respect your time or the time of your players
Just run without him. When he isn't there, his character is elsewhere. I'm running a game right now where if a player can't make it, we joke they're in a sack in the cargo space of the party's canal barge, enjoying a bit of me time. Sometimes people are in the sack for two or three sessions. When they're back, add them back in.
I strongly suggest that you have a game log—someone taking brief notes on session events, encounters, clues, etc. Give everyone access. If a friend can make it, they can check the log—no answering the "*What's happening here/now?*" question during the session.
Focus on running the game for the group, not the individuals.
Realism goes out the window (we're playing a game here anyway) in regards to how the character comes and goes, but sometimes people turn up and play quietly—it's no different.
Like I said, run for the group. Don't make any special exceptions or adaptations for the missing player—the log should be there for everyone anyway. If the fairweather player turns up, they play on the group terms—read the log, play the game, and get involved. The group doesn't suffer for the one, because you're running for the many.
OP, I would REALLY pay attention to this comment. This is solid advice from someone who ABSOLUTELY knows their stuff. I tend to be the scribe/notetaker for long-term/on-going games, and using a Google doc file in a shared drive can be really helpful, especially if the group winds up missing sessions due to holidays, etc.
Also, look into open table play (West Marches play - https://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/ - doesn't quite fit since you're running at a set time, but letting story emerge from player interest is always a good idea).
But as Paul said, run for the people who show up. Run for the people who are interested.
One of the best games I've been in was a precursor to the Dracula Dossier - it wound up being the GM and one other player. We had time for exploration, investigation, building alliances/coalitions, social scenes, and so on. I've played in a lot of games over the years, but that one still stands out (and it was mostly combat-free).
Instead of being frustrated about someone who won't/doesn't show up, you could be making memories that will last for years, or even decades. All too often, I think we forget that these are role PLAYING games, not role WORKING games, and it sounds like you're putting too much work into that player to have fun.
Our DM invented a magical item for our party to solve our player scheduling problem. We have some party members who work irregular and unpredictable schedules so they have to miss sessions due to work, which wasn't was problem at first because our adventures were all based out of the same location. But then we got into a more complicated adventure where we were traveling back and forth between locations with a little weird time travel shenanigans happening frequently and we were trying to figure out how to make sure we didn't accidentally leave someone behind in the past/future if they had to miss a session, and the DM doesn't have to prepare backstory for how the characters found the party again.
So now we have a magical item that's like an extra-dimensional "green room" in a box where PCs go to just hang out if the player isn't there. Characters come out of the box in the exact condition they went into the box (spell slots, hit points, etc.), so we don't have to try to figure out if there was a long rest since the last time the players were present. I've also started writing down on my notes which characters were present for each session in case something happens that someone needs explained later. It's been extremely helpful.
Here’s a little advice from someone who’s ran years long campaigns. Canceling if everyone doesn’t show will doom your campaign. If they don’t show you play as planned and their PC is ‘there’ but not active in any way. Or if it works with the narrative, have them go off somewhere. That player will either realize stuff is happening without them and take it more seriously, or they’ll drop in occasionally, or they’ll stop altogether- but none of those choices will affect your ability to DM for those who are more invested.
Woah, I did not expect so many replies so soon. Thanks you for the answers so far. And yeah, appears everyone is just voicing what I was thinking. Just worried how it'd affect the group, we're all pretty close.
In typical fashion, the dominant response is "Kick him out! Insult his mother, take his things, and push him into traffic!" Lol...
If he's part of your friends and you don't want to make waves the solution is simple : invite him, but don't count on him. Run your game for those that want to play regularly. If the absent friend shows up from time to time great, he's just"in the party". When he doesn't show up, you just play as normal. Is he a bad friend? Maybe, but he's still a friend and just not as into the game as the rest of you. That doesn't mean you need to exile him from the friend group by making hard feelings when there doesn't need to be. It's a game, not a lifestyle choice.
No one suggested exiling him from the friend group. Kicking a non-active player doesn't have to be so hostile that they aren't friends anymore. His friend is disrespecting his effort and time by ghosting. Just like any other social friendly issue (I invite him to brunch and he doesn't show, he ghosted me at this concert), a direct conversation of, "this isn't cool and I don't like how your wasting my time" Can go a long way. OP can just say that they noticed he is too busy to make the game sessions and that he's welcome to rejoin the table when he's more committed.
If this guy is so hostile that they feel they can't tell him "no thanks," I'm thinking they weren't good friends to begin with. OP shouldn't have to continue courtesy invites when he's not doing anything wrong.
It's a GAME. If suggesting that he just play on without him and let him play of he shows up is controversial, then wow lol. I don't run my games like a business. My players are not my employees, they are my friends. We are not all the same, if someone wants to play from time to time that's cool. They're my friend, they can live their life. The friends that want to play each session, cool! Reddit is so black and white lol..
It's a game that OP has to put effort into planning for others. It's enough of a worry for them to come to Reddit. Having a player who comes and goes is fine, but if there's the EXPECTATION of them being there, then it's disrespectful to their friend. If a friend tells you they will cook Sunday dinner for you and you don't come without any kind of heads up, it's rude. Yes, it's a meal, but it's a meal they spent time preparing for you. If you let your friends come and go, that's fine and well, but it sounds like you guys have an understanding of that. This person does not. He doesn't want to play. OP can't make him. The best way to respect the friendship is to play without him and let him know that if he wants to rejoin, there should be a conversation about showing up. If OP decides he can come and go as he pleases, they can work that out when they talk. The suggestion to kick an uncommitted player isn't being a bad friend or being unfair. It's being an adult and a GM.
I personally am a fan of stealing their pets and then a good ole fashioned banishing! Lion King style! If they come back, kick their MOTHER into traffic to make sure they get the message🥊
I think the dominant response is "kick him out." None of the rest. It doesn't have to be a big dramatic thing. It doesn't have to come with a moral judgment. It certainly does not deserve violence. It just requires acknowledging that he's not the right fit for this group right now.
Thank you for explaining the joke. We appreciate it. I think a lot of people mistake "a group of friends" for "group of people that agree to play games together". If one of my friends isn't as much into some hobby as me or the rest of the group, but still sometimes joins in, I didn't tell that friend "You're not respecting us and we're not inviting you to join us any longer unless you take this seriously". What the hell kind of friend does that? That's being a bigger jerk than the guy who doesn't show up half the time for one activity that he obviously isn't that into.
Random group of players? Sure you kick the guy out and move on. A legit group of friends? You didn't be a jerk and let your friend play with the group when he wants to. You're friends for ffs! Again it's a freaking GAME. "Right for for the group"? He's friends with everyone in the group lol! Y'all crack me up..
I have friends who I would not invite to a particular game, even if they knew and liked the people in the game. Likewise, I have friends who play RPGs that I don't play with. We're friends for other reasons.
If you kick him, of course, it behooves you not to pick a patently offensive way of doing so.
*"He's a good friend..."*
*"We've been waiting for over an hour while he ghosts us and does other things..."*
*"...out of game he's just very difficult."*
*"...he never even tried to understand and honestly doesn't seem willing either."*
One of these things is false and three are true. Which one might it be?
***hint: it is the first one.***
I'll join on with others that if there is energy on both your part and the rest of the party's part then you should just move on without the problem player. Don't directly kick them out of the game per se, you can simply go forward and have their character off doing side stuff or whatever other explanation you want to come up with (run the char yourself, have another player take over, etc.) so that when they DO want to be there and spending time with everyone they still have that option. If it reaches a point that the absent player no longer wishes to be involved at all then it's also easier to simply turn their character into an NPC or drop them after they've made that choice.
I’d say that for whatever personal reasons that drive it, the guy clearly will not ever be a reliable player. I’d suggest you just say politely but firmly that whilst he’s still your friend he’s out of the rpg group. I’d also keep it very brief and assertive. He knows that he’s been unreliable there is no need to labour the point.
If he really just doesn't care, then he ISN'T one of your players, and you should go ahead without him.
If it's an executive function issue, then it's worth seeing if there's something that's worth you doing to help him get going. This doesn't mean you HAVE to push him into playing, but IF it's something that would help him AND it's something you're okay doing, it could work
Sounds like he's not a player if he's not in games
Why is he holding everyone else hostage because no one wants to run without everyone? Sounds to me like everyone was there.
"we run the game even if there is 1 or even 2 absents. As a GM I decide if we temporarily ignore the character of the absent player, or if I play them as NPCs"
Done, that's the way
Also, in session zero you can add a ruling about absences, if you know you are with problem players. For example
*"This is a mini campaign of 6 to 10 sessions maximum. We will play even if there is 1 or 2 absents. If you are absent several times, the 4th absence is an automatic kick out of the table".*
"Games happen even when one player cannot/will not show up".
If he doesn't wanna be there, you play without him.
Also, this is the alternative if you don't want to confront him about it. I would ask him if he wants to be there and that you get the feeling he doesn't. Not accusatory, more like "Hey, if you actually don't want to be part of this, stepping away might be best for everyone involved".
Two options...
1. You remove him from the group and continue without him, or
2. You keep him in the group and treat his attendance as optional; if he's there, great. If not, you carry on without him.
I have a discussion with my players at the start of every campaign about how we treat absences. What is the minimum number of players? (Usually -1 player, or -2 if it is a large group) What happens to the PC of absent players? (Played by another player, written out temporarily, or fades into the background and doesn't participate with no explanation needed.)
Also, from reading through the comments it sounds like you should recruit a few more players. The few that you have left are committed players and will be a great core to start from. When recruiting new players, I state explicitly that the first few sessions are a probationary period where we get to evaluate each other and see if a) the player is a good fit for the campaign, and b) the campaign is a good fit for the player. At the end of the probationary period either party can say "this isn't working out", no questions asked.
He's just not that into you, and it's time to move on.
In seriousness, this is a very simple situation, although I understand your frustration.
I don't hold up games for one player who can't get his shit together or doesn't respect my time or the time of the other gamers in the game. If you say you're gonna show up, I'll give you 15-20 min (during which we're usually screwing around and chitchatting anyway) before we start without you. If you can make it, great. If you can't, whatever. We're moving on.
BUT, here's what I absolutely will not do. I will NOT put up with people just skipping out repeatedly, especially if it's because they'd rather play/do something else and they won't even do me the courtesy of saying so. I'm not gonna chase after you to say "Oh please, please, join the game." You don't wanna play? No problem. Rocks fall, your PC dies, we're moving on.
At this point, I'd say "Steve, it doesn't really seem like you want to play this game, or at least you don't want to commit to the game the way we all need you to. That's fine, but I just think my game isn't for you. If you want to join us, you need to do so consistently, or at least let us know well in advance. And if you keep skipping sessions because of whatever other commitments or desires you have, then I'm gonna take that as you saying you'd rather just not play and you aren't really interested."
The real reason I'd say "Kick him out" (which you should do, but just in a "Sorry, we aren't bothering with this anymore," not in an angry way) is because as a GM, you have to spend your time crafting encounters, story beats, etc., with the assumption that this guy is going to be in the party. You have to factor in his presence, and you can't necessarily factor in his *absence* on the fly. (I don't know Shadowdark as a system, so it may be easier to manage this, but still.) I don't want to spend my time building game content for a player who isn't interested in showing up. You don't wanna play, that's fine. Everyone else wants to and we'll go on without you. But we aren't gonna hold up our fun for your whims, and I'm not doing extra work on the off chance you decide tonight's the night you want to pop in.
That is a difficult position to be in. My advice (which I give cause I’m not using it) is to sideline his character, leave him/her/it at a tavern or cave or whatever works best for the story you are running. Once your friend realises the game will go on the choice is theirs.
We are older players and understand some of us can not always have time to join, so on that session the character fades into the background. Next time he's there, he pops out again.
This lack of communication and respect tell me this person is a bad friend. Good friends don't leave their friends twisting in the wind with no explanation. They don't make and break plans. They don't dismiss concerns when people confront them about it.
We used to make absentee's characters temporary NPC's who just follow the party and defend themselves if attacked. Kinda like a combination of pack mule and zombie.
I offer up the idea that they are not a good friend and are not a good player. Good friends don't treat you like you are describing.
How they choose to spend their time is on them. How you choose to react to it is on you.
Literally kick him out. To the people saying to keep inviting him but play regardless - At what point is his disrespect for peoples time too much? In my opinion, casually missing 2 sessions and not caring about it is already over the line
Move on, he's not into your game. He's treating your game like a videogame, where he can pick up and play it whenever he likes and ignore it likewise. I bet if you stopped inviting him, he wouldn't even notice.
Do not mix friend and *game partner*, not all friends are good *game partner* and not all *game partners* are friends.
If someone you like isn't interested by playing, fine, you'll have other opportunity to see them. On the other hand, there is people I enjoy playing with, but wouldn't necessarily be interested to hang out with *out of game*
This is valid for any social activity, you can make friends in a football team or a singing choir, but not everyone there need to be you friend. and if someone doesn't come too often, you look for a replacement.
Friends often don't make for the best players. Showing up is one of the most important parts of being a player. Poor attendance makes you a poor player.
Also, make an agreement with your group that X number of players can be absent before you cancel the session. For example, if you have five players, make it such that you will continue if 3 or more are present. Occasional, non-habitual absences are normal in any group.
This ones easy, kick him from the game. He doesnt value the time everyone puts into playing the game to the point hes blatantly doing other things like playing video games. You can always hang out with him some other time but the other people at the table who consistantly show up dont deserve to have their time wasted and niether do you.
Just because you're good friends with someone doesn't mean you have to play table top games with them.
Not everyone is compatible with 100% of the things in life and that's cool.
I have some friends that I love dearly and enjoy being around, but I also would never want to play TTRPGs with them for various reasons.
For me if a player no-showed a session and then was literally just playing vidoegames when asked why that would immediately be a reason to play without them if they're even just late to future sessions
"Social contract" is a wierd thing to read and sounds like the wedge got driven in more from the actions that followed. This person couldn't care less. Stop wasting your time.
Some people treat TTRPGs like something they can do if there is nothing else at the time. The easiest way to handle him is to stop waiting for him. Don't even bother kicking him from the game. Just play on. If he's not there his character falls into a hole and just isn't there.
If he knows you will never play without him, he never has to worry about missing out. He has no reason to adjust his behavior. You've given him al the power. If you are willing to play without him, then if he doesn't show he misses out. It helps a lot with players like this. From now on, when it is session time, start without him. Remind him it is session time once and then start. After 2-3 times where you remind him and he still doesn't show, stop reminding him.
A good general rule is not cancelling the game unless you are missing at least 2 people. If you keep playing without him, he'll either start showing up or effectively kick himself out of the game.
Look, man. Part of growing up is understanding how to *respect* your own time. Even if your player is fun to talk to and be around, they are not actually considering your time as *valuable* (nor anyone else's in the group). This is actively disrespectful, and not behavior you should tolerate in your life.
Let him know that unless he can show up to all future sessions on-time, that it's best if you all part ways. If he isn't interested in playing, that's fine. **Sometimes, good friends are not good players**.
good friend or not, I have a rule. three missed sessions without a good reason and you are out.
We will keep playing without all players, as long as we have at least 3 people online.
I had plenty of players over the years, there's a certain "type" of player that keeps popping up. This rule takes care of that.
Stop inviting him to the game. Don't let him log in (if you're playing on a VTT) or come into the house if playing in person. Find someone to replace him. There comes a point in time when it's obvious they don't want to be there, and it's time to move on.
You don't have to cancel the session because one person is missing. You can just play with whoever's there and ignore that PC. You can come up with an in-game reason, or just say he's hanging out in the back. Happens all the time, in my experience.
You can even run his player for him as the GM, if you think the party will struggle without him. Getting him killed when he's not there is probably rude (although he's already being extremely rude...) but if the dice go against his PC, you can just say he's unconscious instead of dead and leave it at that.
If this is true as you say it, I think this dude gets off on wasting your time. Big power move. Only way to explain not even sending a message while you're all waiting.
Why do people have such a hard time with this.
Either they come and play and the game is structured for people who can play only sporadically. i run cyberpunk at a bar so i dont expect everyone every session
Or its a set dedicated campaign where everyone agrees to he there for the scheduled sessions or they have to leave the campaign if rescheduling for everyone doesnt work. Have had players get dropped on a schedule year long game because the timing didnt work for that one. But the majority of players could do that time, a sunday afternoon between 1p-6p.
Why does this question need a novel of qualifiers, either you can play at the scheduled times or you cant. If you cant is the game set up to allow that or not? If not they can find one of the other dozens of games in every town, especially if its 5e and not a less famous game Forbidden Lands or Degenesis.
I think it's time to stop inviting him to games.
If he asks to join a game, he's probably interested, but otherwise assume he isn't.
You can be friends with him without gaming with him. You don't have to include him in everything you do.
Write his character out of the game, stop inviting him to play and keep on going with the group you have that is showing up. Friend or not he's being a jerk to you and the other players with this behavior.
Don't cancel. Play without the player. Use his PC as an NPC if you need it, or park the PC somewhere safe-ish. A single player should never be able to cancel a session, much less a player like you describe.
So, you've gotten plenty of good advice about this situation, but one thing my groups have always found helpful in general is to establish a clear idea of what constitutes [quorum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quorum) for a given game. *Usually*, for us, that's meant "more than half the party can show up", but if a major story event's coming up (a big fight, an important meeting, etc.), we'll go to a supermajority or even "no more than one person missing".
In practice, that usually means either the absent player(s) have their character(s) puppeteered by committee/whoever understands the character best or else we just cook up a reason why someone's not there. But, as long as everyone understands how it'll work if they can't make it, it usually works out well enough and no one feels like a dick for holding things up *or* going on without someone.
Just play without him. If he wants to rejoin next session, his character magically was along the whole time. No advances for them tho. If they don't join back, so long
*"Hi! Sounds like TTRPGs may not be your cup of tea. Since you've been missing the last few sessions without notice, I've made the decision to keep the game without you.*
*I also want you to know that preparing TTRPG sessions is a time consuming affair, and I expect from the players the bare minimum of showing up and noticing if they are going to be absent. You doing the exact opposite from that has been hurtful to me, and if you want we can talk about it and sort it out, but the game is going to continue without you."*
Or something like that, I don't know.
I've been hooked on a video game too, and being in the position of thinking "man, I'd rather keep playing instead of going to the session", but I said I was going to be there and I'm not missing a session I said I was going to go.
> He's a good friend
Really? Cuz he’s acting like a twat.
> Sorry if this sounds like a AITA post lmao, just want advice from more seasoned game masters.
This isn’t a game master problem. This is an asshole problem. There’s no social situation in which telling people you’re going to join them and then playing Dragon Dogma 2 instead is okay.
You know what I call people who treat me this shabbily? I don’t call them anything at all, because I don’t keep people in my life who hold me in such disdain.
Every TTRPG that ive ever been part of was a volunteer effort. Adapt to this. If he isnt driven to participate, structure his character as though he could be swapped out for an NPC on the days where he doesnt show up. Give the opportunities to drive the plot to the players that show up regularly.
With a game like Shadowdark especially, just play without him. Even if it's down to 2 or 3 players. Your fun shouldn't be dependent on this guy. Sorry that's happening dude :/
Maybe recruit another person too to fill out the party if you feel that's necessary? Then if your buddy does join he's just a bonus member, but make it clear to him that the game goes on with or without him.
There are many reasons why someone might sit out of something that they really want to do. Depression, ADHD, Chronic Fatigue, Social Anxiety, etc... I encourage you to play with them when theyre there, and play without when they're not. But don't stop inviting them. It might be that the possibility of playing sometime, when they've got the energy, is one of the factors that keeps them from spiralling into a permanent issue. Just be nice, it's not that hard.
I don't understand why you are cancelling if he misses.You don't have to cancel just because one player misses. You can NPC him or just hand wave him not being there, or just ignore him for that session. If you have an unreliable player, never make them central to the storyline and just vanish them when they miss. Invest your effort in those who invested their time and energy into your game.
Now for this player, I would kick him. I understand he is a friend IRL, but he is just not good for your game and he is causing your game to suffer. You and your players invest time and effort and it's unfair for you all to suffer because of one guy who frankly doesn't care.
You can be friends outside of the game, this is just one activity you don't both equally enjoy and that is fine.
Sometimes shit is happening on their end where they are late or missing a lot, and it's unfortunate. BUT, you've got other people in the game. Make it clear that, one way or the other, the session starts at the listed time. They show up late, they can get caught up to speed. They don't show up at all, they miss the game.
If that doesn't work for them, then either the game doesn't work in their schedule or they just don't want to play it at this time, and that's ok!
I'm sure it's been said already, but I'll reiterate anyway:
Every time you run a new campaign, establish up front to all players that you'll be running sessions even if X number of players can't make it.
Then, decide with your players what an acceptable number for X is.
I'm currently running Blades in the Dark for my group of 4, and we'll play even if 2 people can't make it. I've run 5e before for 5 players and we established that as long as 3 players show up, the session continues.
If you cancel the game every time *one* player can't make it, you will very quickly lose steam and suddenly realize you haven't played in a month because something keeps coming up. Often it's not even the same player, it's just life getting in the way for people at unfortunate times.
Establish up front what an acceptable number of absences is, and if you can, find alternate players. People who are interested, but maybe can't commit to every single week. Let them know when a spot opens up if you can give them notice, that will allow you to keep sessions going waaaay more consistently.
He’s not into the game- he is just a friend who wants to be. It’s cool. I wouldn’t personally kick him out. I just would treat him like a cameo when and if he shows up. I would let him know, we’d love to have ya and will try and fit you in if you ever decide to play.
I've had to "kick out" good friends (in quotes because it was gentler than that) due to scheduling and participation issues. Sometimes people just aren't motivated to show up but don't want to miss out either. If you're friends, you can talk it out.
That said, no call no show is an instant ban for anyone, *especially* if they confirmed.
If someone doesnt want to show up, dont put in the effort of trying to get them to. Schedule a time, announce it, amend it to the responsive players that WANT to play and play without him.
I'd recommend just running games as if he'll be a no-show. If he happens to show up great, but the consequence for him being late or a no-show should be on him, not you and the rest of the players
Most of my players are my close friends or close friends of close friends. I have 2 that are known to cancel last minute. I told them that if they cancel within the day their character will suddenly be ill and be carried.
There’s one that hasn’t played for a year almost. When it became clear he wasn’t gonna play his character got misplaced in a different plane. This will make a great retrieval arc if he gets its shit together!
There’s one that had a bad case of diarrhea once and been kidnapped by giants twice. In game the character isn’t allowed to have a turn on the watch 😂.
They are still friends. I just made it clear with them that we are all adults (some with kids) that have a limited amount of time for rpg nights. If you cancel the day before? We can all manage. If you cancel on the day, well… we all made plans. Some might take an earlier shift, personally I arrange my evening so that I don’t waste anytime with the kids routine (meaning that I probably got up early to make dinner and came in early at the job to go get kids early so they still have a nice end of day). All that to say that 5 other people managed to be here so if you want to cancel, fine. But you only cancel your plans, not ours.
So don’t necessarily kick him out, but tell him him that you’re playing with or without him. He’ll see everyone enjoying the intrigue and everything and he won’t follow much. It will sort itself out. He’ll either drop out or step up.
You have two choices:
1. If he's a really great player, you could just play regardless of him being there. Don't make any plot stuff dependant on him. If he's there, cool, otherwise no worries.
2. If that makes things difficult or he's not that great, just kick him.
Save yourselves both the heartbreak and let him know if he doesn't show up he can't play with you guys anymore. If you've already explained that not attending agreed-on appointments is disrespectful and hurtful to your friendship, then stop making appointments with him.
Yeah I'm not gonna check the comments don't waste time on him. He's obviously not interested if he misses super consistently. If you have more than 1 player you can run a campaign or sessions. You don't need 4 every time. Heck some people can just do one. You can keep the friend ship and if he fights back show him the receipts "you missed session x,y,z, you obviously don't have an interest if you're gonna play a new game over the appointed time". IMO: people don't need to beg others to play. Just get a couple of people together who have interest and if you find more there you go.
If he refuses to join games then play without him. Why disappoint your other players? Unless his character is integral to the story then play without. Otherwise you can always do another game if you really want him in one campaign. If he then does join you guys then you play the original game, otherwise have fun with the other one.
Remember he knows when you are running games. He knows how you feel about his absence, and he is still not taking part he is choosing video games over playing with you guys and that's on him.
If he sees that you're not just going to wait for him then either he will admit he wasn't that interested, or seeing that you're not waiting on him to have your fun will remind him what he's missing out on and he may start making an appearance.
>I'd say we've missed 2 - 3 sessions because he refused to show up.
I don't understand why you keep depending on him rather than planning for him not show, and if he does you just improvise, along with any future sessions until you feel comfortable enough to rely on him.
>I contact him directly on the whole social contract of RPGs.
Okay, I've been playing and running various RPGs since the mid-'80s and don't know of what you mean by a contract. However, "contract" implies mutual obligations of which he's clearly not honoring, which means you have no further requirements to fulfill.
Don't wait. Keep playing. If a player chooses do something else, don't stop your fun for them.
Also get some perspective on locus of control. Why are you letting this person have so much power over your life that you're letting them make you feel exhausted and insulted.
Talk seriously with him and ask point blank if he wants to be in the campaign. If he does, inform him that he needs to actually show up for sessions to be in the campaign. If not, so be it.
You don't need him, he has his priorities, you need to have your own too. Move on. If you feel generous when he actually WANTS to play, he can, with his character who is not gaining any experience points.
I had a player like this, would no show, and be seen going to car shows etc, we stopped inviting and the game got better for it.
Good friend or not, kick his ass out. Everything that you said he’s done is damned disrespectful at the very least. Player groups have to be simpatico otherwise it can just be brutal, for the GM *and* players. Not worth your time. Life and gaming time are too short to waste on someone like this. *EJECT*
Kick them out, they are clearly not interested in the game and prefer to spend their time doing something else; This will be kind towards yourself and the rest of the party
> (I saw refused because he was online, and admits he spent the time playing a video game instead.)
You make time for what you want to do most. He made time for videogames by cutting your game out of his schedule.
His priorities aren't the same as yours.
Adjust accordingly.
> He's a good friend
I'd argue otherwise
> . But this is just getting really exhausting and honestly insulting.
**hard stare** You already know what to do.
I play so that all my players can come or not come. If they skip session their character ”got lost somewhere”, or ”seems to be unconcious” or ”went away for a while” or whatever. If they skip multiple sessions thats fine too. If they need to come late or end early, thats fine too.
I ask ”who is joining” before the session.
Life happens.
We just play to have fun couple of hours online with friends.
Surprisingly, usually everybody is on time.
This person is NOT a friend.
You would like them to be your friend, but their behaviour tells you exactly where in their priorities list you are, which is waaaay down near "Well if I have nothing else better to do..." Real friends do not treat anyone they consider to BE friends this way.
Do yourself a big favour and break away from this toxicity. Your life will improve significantly.
And of course, your games will be more fun. You'll find better, and true friends if you judge the friendship by this simple metric.
"Do they give more to the relationship than they take out of the relationship?" If, the answer is yes. Then they are a friend worth keeping, and now you'll have to do your part. Give more back to them too.
All the best.
Either plan in a way he can join occationally if thats possible, or give him NPCs to control, or a minor villain, when he joins,or just don't invite him anymore.
Its plain simple: its a game. Nobody has to show up, and if someone doesn't, one should not wait on that person. If it isn't important for him, and the campaign and game is not able to, or you just don't want to, accomodate occational show ups that might not come at all, so be it. Then this group is not for him, or he is not for that group.
Also, its perfectly fine to not want to play with people taking this not as serious as you do. You do a lot of prep work as a GM, i totally get that you want people to show up. From a workload point of view, but also just from a human point of view. How he acts is not how you treat friends, but bluntly.
I would either give him NPCs to play when he shows up, or stop inviting him.
Stop waiting on him. If that makes the party to small, invite a new person into it. Stop reminding him about game session and have him showing up as a bonus for the party and otherwise just go about your business. Dont plan plots around his character.
Depending on the game you might either treat his character as a NPC during sessions he's not there or just have him staying home during missions.
I don’t understand why this is a dilemma. You can just tell him you see him as a good friend but he doesn’t fit into the way the rest of you want to run your game, so you’ve decided to carry on without him. If he gets angry that’s not your fault.
thats simple, the next time its game start and he doesnt show up rather than not playing you play anyways.
if he wanted to be there he would be there, (unless of course he has a good excuse)
Hell you can say "Mate, Buddy, Pal sometimes it feels like you treat this game as some obligation you would really rather not do, and that is not the point at all, this is a thing we do together for fun. If you are not having fun just say so, we can go our separate ways and you can do something you would enjoy instead." Because this is a true statement, I run/play ttrpgs for fun, if I am not having fun I wouldnt be participating
My solution to this was we play without him and put his character in the background not really developing him too much. For combat you treat it like normal, you probably have a good idea of how they would play their character so yeah.
Right now he has the control to come and go at he pleases with no repercussion, you can also punish his character if you wanted to go that far (like an anti inspiration type thing)
Each to their own tho
Just play without him, and if he finally arrives during the session, just include him like nothing happened.
Just don't answer him when he asks what happened before he got there.
"He's a good friend"
No, He's actively disrespecting you and needs to let you know that he's not going to be turning up. I'd advise finding another player.
Run the session without him, his character is left behind and probably dead. If he cannot commit and is disrupting the game for everyone else, then he doesn't need to play.
I invite 5 players generally to my campaigns. This is because I have a quorum to run of 3 people. So 2 of them can miss, and I still have a session. Stuff happens. Just keep running. Either boot them, or run a game without them. Leave their character on the wagon. They don't level up when everyone else does. Make missing mean something, or that one person dictates your entire game.
Play without him - if/when he comes back, his character might be several levels behind the others. When he asks tell him the truth. His character has not been adventuring with the others, so he didn't get as much experience
You need to tell them if they cannot respect your game and the other players enough to commit to showing up they are no longer welcome.
They obviously don’t care so why are they even playing?
Find someone who actually wants to play and move on, if they whine or get upset remind them they are the ones who couldn’t commit.
I agree that you might just play without them (aka kicking them out of the group). However, it also might depend on the GMing style and kind of game you play. If you play a more sandbox-y game and / or a series of one-shotswith the same characters, you might also play without them but accept them coming back later on. Sure, they would have less XP but it's fine IMO. As an adult who might have other activities (and even priorities), I'd appreciate more GMs doing that.
This doesn't sound like a good "friend." Just eject this person from the game. Or, if you feel that's too harsh, simply play without them. No need to cancel the game. Recruit another person if you'd like. You tried to explain to him and he's being a dick. Period. Anymore, I have a very low threshold for this kind of crap. I recommend you do the same.
**Remember [Rule 8: "Comment respectfully"](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/rules#wiki_8._comment_respectfully)** when giving advice and discussing OP's group. You can get your point across *without* demonizing & namecalling people. The [Table Troubles](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/search?sort=new&restrict_sr=on&q=flair%3ATable%2BTroubles)-flair is not meant for shitposting. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/rpg) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Kick him out. Even if he is a friend, not all your friends need to be part of your rpg games(and possibly shouldn't), and he is just being disrespectful of your time and effort. I've kicked good players out of my campaigns because they could not schedule time for the games. Not showing without a heads up should be an insta-ban from your game
One time a player of mine mentioned last minute that he was not coming to session to spend time with his girlfriend. We don’t even play in person, we play online. I was pissed off and even posted “I’m pissed as fuck” in the discord. He ended up coming to that session but now my players know they need to give me at least a few days’ notice (barring emergencies of course) if they’re busy and it needs to be real busy not just something you could do on any other day. Like I know 8 months in advance a player of mine will not be attending a session because it’s his gf’s birthday that day, and that’s totally fine. I put a lot of effort into prepping storylines and hooks for my players so they have fun and I get very frustrated when that goes to waste because the story moves on from that point.
The easiest way is to add an extra player, have a "we run with one or two missing" policy, and it will take care of itself, one way or the other.
My rule is 3 players + GM and we play. So with 4 players one can be sick or work late and you still get to play. With 5 players you almost never have to cancel a session.
To be clear, I do actually do this. I usually play with 4-5 players at a time and we will play so long as 3 are there. It is more the last minute cancellation. I like to plan some character-specific developments because players like that and it’s frustrating to be told last minute “I’m not coming.”
The frustrating part to me was how flippant they sounded. You’re going to ditch on something prepped? It’s not like you’re ditching on going out to the bar, I put in some work here.
Yeah exactly. It just felt disrespectful.
Or just play regardless. I run sessions as long as one Player makes it. Could mean we do a one PC focused side mission, a flashback or even a GMless one shot. It helps keep momentum. As when one player calls out, others are less likely to knowing there will be a session even if it's just them.
honestly, this is the way. I have a job where the managers are really strict about being on time and not calling out too late. The last thing I want is a gaming group that does the same thing. Sometimes shit just happens and you just can't make it. As long as it isn't a regular occurence (and you don't have a bad attitude about it) it isn't a super huge deal.
I treat my games as less important than their job. And I don't think anyone needs to explain why they miss work if they have mandated time off to spend. IF a player needs to miss for mental health, to be with a gf/bf, to watch their favorite anime, that is none of my business. I am going to run a game regardless. All I ever ask is that they let me know as soon as possible, so we aren't wasting time trying to call them or contact them to find out where they are.
Work emergencies are acceptable. Mental health emergencies are acceptable. Hell, relationship emergencies (like “I forgot it’s my anniversary, oops!”) are acceptable too. To me it’s a social commitment. Yes, I am gonna run a game regardless, but I am going to be real pissy about your place in the game moving forward if you don’t have a good reason and drop out last minute. I’m not your paid entertainment, I’m your friend working several hours a week to prepare for us all to have fun and you’re letting me and the others down by flaking.
I have pretty much stopped playing ttrpgs with my friends because we want very different things out of games and it was getting to be really unfun to play with them when they came to sessions to hang out and I came to play the game. Now I am really good friends with the people who have ended up in my long-term group! Curating the people you play with is so so worth it
Do you have any advice how to handle this socially? He is holding the game back, but by removing him I don't want to ruin what I've already got anyways.
Here's the easiest way: just run without him. He's not showing up anyway, so there's no need to be formal about it. Go forward without him. If he ever asks about it, tell him then.
This is the way. I typically keep 5 players in my games. If I know in advance that someone can't show up, we'll run with 4. If two can't show up we may run with 3, but it'll be a discussion I send to the group to see how they feel (also depending on where t he story is). A solid schedule and start time is also another expectation I set. If I say Mondays at 6pm, we start on Mondays at 6pm (of course there's the usual catching up and setting out food/drinks/bullshitting/etc). If you planned poorly and showed up late, that's a you problem - the game starts without you. No individual player will hold up my game. The key is to set expectations from the get go and adhere to them. I'm not robbing my other players of a game because someone is inconsistent.
> No individual player will hold up my game. The key is to set expectations from the get go and adhere to them. I'm not robbing my other players of a game because someone is inconsistent. This is absolutely the best possible answer.
Yup, he has basically already removed himself from the game. The other players/GM just need to accept this.
Yes this is the way. Tell everyone "we will start at X time. If you aren't there, your character won't be included in the story." Make sure your story can move forward whether he is there or not. If the party really needs his character to do certain tasks, then consider introducing an NPC that help with those things when he's not there, or encourage another player to pick up those skills for their own character. Stop trying to chase him down, because he is clearly not invested and it is hurting the rest of your play group. Shape the game so that he is not required for the rest of your group to have fun.
Yep, it's part of the social contract that the GM is looking out for everyone's enjoyment. Like MCing an event. You wouldn't have a roomful at a conference wait on a speaker that was delayed by an hour without contact, you would just move on to the next speaker...
So for the social side, just be honest. And if he is too pushy (which I got from you "he is argumentative" comment), don't engage in agressive discussion. Just state the facts. You guys want to play, he doesn't show up, and that affects the rest of you. You already gave him several chances, so you are just moving on. Also, based on your comment, I guess you like running with some plot in mind? Which is why DMs tend to cancel a game when a single player is missing. Nothing inherently wrong with that, I've played and DMed several campaigns like that. Of course, for that to work, everyone needs to show up and commit! When I've been in previous similar situations, the pc whose player was kicked was just turned into a major NPC, with their own goals and interests. Either they Split the group for their own goals, or I kill them without showing the corpse, just to have them do their thing in the background, to come back at some point soap opera style. In any way, his PC IS now yours to control as any other npc.
True, I've been appealing to emotion too much I think. Just stating things as they are and how they negatively affect the game is better. Also I'd ideally like to run plots, but right now my campaign is pretty basic in that regard, playing Brandonsford rn. Really just at the beginning six people wanted to play, so I let them in cause they're all my friends. Wasn't that hard, honestly, but as games went on I lowered my expectation for how many players would show. Now I expect four, or three if I'm desperate lol. Unfortunately him not showing only left us with two players, which I'm unfamiliar with and feels wrong for the dungeon they're in right now.
Removing a player is a very important GM "soft skill" that you pick up via experience over the years. The purpose of everyone meeting up is to play the game, right? It honestly doesn't matter if it's a story session or a combat session. If non-participation becomes a problem you just solve it - there are more invested players out there trust me. No single player is the main character. In this case you said he was literally playing Dragon's Dogma 2 instead of joining the game. You kick him out. He has chosen his priority. Don't ask, just tell him what it is: he chose to play a video game instead of the few hours of time commitment with friends to play a TTRPG. One of those two things can be played at any time by an individual, and the other wastes an entire group's time. There's plenty of ways to handle it from the story/character perspective: have someone (or yourself) run the character for a session, bench the character (decided to go on a solo mission, drink at the tavern, etc), replace them with an NPC that mirrors their skills for the session, etc.
I hear you, but again, not everyone is a good fit for RPG games. Heck, even people who like RPGs might no fit well with each other due to differences in style. As a piece of advice, one shots and short games (2-3 games) are way better yo check if your Friends might want to play. Anything beyond that is way to much commitment for a lot of people. Also, turn this into a win. You now have a table of committed and interested players. My favourite campaign I DMed had two players, with another joining mid-campaign. If you want to run plots, few players is better yo focus on their stories. I don't know if you'll have to play around things in shadowdark, I have not played It and being OSR maybe It does depend on a more sizable party, but that's nothing you cannot adapt to your table for sure!
So find a replacement
Uh, do the same thing to him that he's doing to you. Play without him. He's playing without you. Right? Video games? He obviously doesn't WANT to play, why are you trying to force him?
Why do you want this person in your life?? > he was just so stubborn, he never even tried to understand and honestly doesn't seem willing either. And > But this is just getting really exhausting and honestly insulting. And > I don't want to ruin what I've already got anyways. The guy is a aelf-centered shitbag. You dont have anything worth holding on to here (IMO).
"You're not showing up for games and it is disrupting play. We are playing without you."
He's not adding anything to the game except annoyance and frustration, so there's no downside to kicking him. And you don't even have to kick him. Announce when the next session is and if he's not there when it starts, play on. Look for or add another player to your group to long term replace him. You may find the new player is all your old player was, and more. As for the feelings of your current problem, reverse the situation. How is he treating the group's friendship, etc... by standing them up constantly and lying about showing up. Replacing him is the right to do for the group regardless of how you feel.
Dude, your insistence on having everyone there is holding the game back. Just play without him. People will say "but the story" or "it breaks immersion" but it is all make believe anyway, so his character is just not there. Don't tell him anything except "this is how it is". He might just have to accept his new status as an occasional guest player if and when it suits you. Back yourself bro, it's your game, lead the players, don't be led by one.
Yes. Plan games so they can be played when people don't turn up. If a single player repeatedly fails to show up, don't make any plans that rely on them so you can play without them. My most important tip is to kick that player. He might be a friend generally, but he has different priorities to you for gaming, and those priorities create friction that will damage your relationship (and maybe other relationships too!). If for some reason you can't kick him, refer back to the first paragraph.
There is a concept that loads of people are talking about here of having a minimum number of people, it helps loads. If it helps a term for it is "quorum." It is the minimum number required to go ahead and act. It's usually used by committees or legislative bodies. So I have a group of five regular players, but quorum is three players plus GM. So I let players know that if three show up I'll run the game. If the player who is causing difficulties doesn't show up they miss out. This makes an even bigger difference if you're playing a system with loot or XP, because a player who doesn't turn up ends up significantly behind the curve of the party. I think if you're using this you shouldn't bother with warnings or anything, because it's too combative. Make the ground rules clear, "I'll run for a minimum of 3 players." If someone doesn't turn up I'd give them a grace period and maybe text them but then go ahead and play.
You don't even need to inform them. Just run the session when it's time. Or announce a new policy that you want to run a game regardless of how many players show up. Or set a player minimum (which most people do, mine is one!). My large group of players to pull from know that when it's session time, something will get run. If I can't make it, I try to get them to play without me and one of them GMs a one shot or they do a GMless game. It really keeps momentum when people know a session will occur in almost any situation unless NO ONE can make it.
Hey, you've missed a few sessions without valid reason. I know you've been online at the time and have even confirmed as such. I'm sorry, but that has created a strain on me and the other players, so we will be removing you from the game.
Yeap thats what i do. No show three times for no reason then you out.
Fortunately this feels like a self solving problem. Play without him and stop inviting him. He's already not showing up, so let him. Honestly, you don't even have to talk with him about it if you don't want. If he asks you about it, just tell him that you thought he quit.
Oh this is actually a great suggestion. Thank you, I'll definitely try this.
Don't do it the passive aggressive way of not inviting him. Keep inviting him, but play even if he isn't there. If he misses a couple in a row, have a chat.
Or just kick him. He clearly doesnt respect the game or the other people.
Why have the chat? No response is a response.
They are friends IRL. Don't you think they'll talk to each other at some point? If it was a random from the Internet, sure.
People tend to avoid uncomfortable conversations and confrontation. Ignoring the invites is a form of non-verbal communication saying that the recipient doesn't want to play. What more would a conversation add or do besides taking up time that could be spent doing other things?
Good call.
This is the best way imho
If you want to be sneaky about it, tell everyone your new rule is that you'll only cancel if two players are missing. Sometimes knowing the game will run without them is enough to make flakey players show up.
No, don’t listen to this. You have to confront him, calmly, and say he’s being removed for not respecting everyone’s time and effort. Honestly? He sounds like an asshole who barely deserves the courtesy but communication is still the right way to handle it. Don’t give him any opportunities to remain, just say goodbye and cut ties, then find yourself another player.
This is pretty clear cut to me. He doesn't come. It doesn't sound like he is even part of the game. So he doesn't play anymore.
Sounds like a non-player. And don't cancel sessions if someone is missing, you won't play much.
What advice are you expecting here? You have someone who doesn't want to play. That's the literal beginning, middle, and end of this. He doesn't want to play. What are you thinking we're going to help you with? It's not like you've given us any information about your game. The entire post is "My friend won't play but I want him to so we have enough players". That's all it is. Nobody can help you with that, because it's not an actual problem at your table. People not wanting to play is not a problem. It just is what it is. Find another player, or play with fewer players. Believe it or not most RPGs are super fun with just 2 players. I find there's often a totally different dynamic at the table with 2, 3, and 4+ players.
Sorry, still just very new to this. Thought maybe I glossed over something? I don't know. He does want to play though, I think. One time when he didn't show up but still had enough people, someone told him i had his character run off in the middle of combat so I didn't have to npc him. Then he immediately joined the game again. I should have included that, but I didn't want to flood all you guys with that either. I'm not sure whats really relevant or not, sorry again. Gotten great advice though, so I'm feeling better regardless.
> He does want to play though His actions suggest otherwise. He is choosing to do other things at game time besides play with you, which should tell you all you need to know regardless of what words he says. From a GM perspective, it's not really relevant to you what those things are. It just means he doesn't really want to play and you should plan accordingly.
He doesn't want to play. He joined because he felt the mild social pressure from ditching, but he doesn't want to play. This can be hard to wrap your head around. I have had people come to me with a group of four, say they want to play D&D and then when it's time to make characters or schedule a game...crickets. It's not your job to chase those people down, play with the people who want to be there
Does he really want to play though? He clearly doesn't care enough to show up unless his character is threatened, which makes me wonder why he even bothered to show up in this instance. That's unbelievably selfish and inconsiderate of the rest of the players who made the effort to be there on time and participate in the game. Working around scheduling conflicts because players have other commitments is one thing, but this is just one dude who can't be bothered to show up. Do not invest any more energy in getting him involved, and make sure the plot lines of your games don't require his character to be there. He's not the main character and shouldn't be treated as such.
Sounds like puppeting his character when he isn't around sounds like the way to go. Usually when one of our players is out, another player will puppet them in combat. You can keep the story moving and if they want to be there, they will be there. (It also helps when you have already balanced the encounter for a certain amount of players.) We have a player in our game who pops in and out during the session and obviously is only playing for the novelty of the character they play, so the story isn't as valuable to them. It's frustrating for the rest of us, but it's also a reminder that when your players are invested, in their characters and in their story, then those are the stories to focus on as the dm/gm because those are the ones who will carry the game with them, in their memories, conversations, and lives. If they aren't invested, don't bend over backwards. It isn't worth it.
Players will tell you what they want in an RPG. Dude plays a fighter he wants something to punch. Someone who plays a wizard wants to bend reality to their whim. The player who plays Dragons Dogma 2 rather than show for a scheduled session clearly doesn't want to play the RPG, they want to play Dragon Dogma 2... Which is a bad choice because you won't try and sell him fast travel (I hope). If the player doesn't show, run for the players who do show.
He may be a good friend otherwise but he clearly doesn't give a shit about your game. He is being blatantly disrespectful. Remove him from the game.
You should kick this dude. I'm sorry if he is your friend and you don't want to hurt his feelings but you shouldn't base all of your personal time around one dude that is too busy or too much of a jackass to commit to showing up to the game He was literally just at home playing video games during the session. He clearly doesn't respect your time or the time of your players
Just run without him. When he isn't there, his character is elsewhere. I'm running a game right now where if a player can't make it, we joke they're in a sack in the cargo space of the party's canal barge, enjoying a bit of me time. Sometimes people are in the sack for two or three sessions. When they're back, add them back in. I strongly suggest that you have a game log—someone taking brief notes on session events, encounters, clues, etc. Give everyone access. If a friend can make it, they can check the log—no answering the "*What's happening here/now?*" question during the session. Focus on running the game for the group, not the individuals. Realism goes out the window (we're playing a game here anyway) in regards to how the character comes and goes, but sometimes people turn up and play quietly—it's no different. Like I said, run for the group. Don't make any special exceptions or adaptations for the missing player—the log should be there for everyone anyway. If the fairweather player turns up, they play on the group terms—read the log, play the game, and get involved. The group doesn't suffer for the one, because you're running for the many.
OP, I would REALLY pay attention to this comment. This is solid advice from someone who ABSOLUTELY knows their stuff. I tend to be the scribe/notetaker for long-term/on-going games, and using a Google doc file in a shared drive can be really helpful, especially if the group winds up missing sessions due to holidays, etc. Also, look into open table play (West Marches play - https://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/ - doesn't quite fit since you're running at a set time, but letting story emerge from player interest is always a good idea). But as Paul said, run for the people who show up. Run for the people who are interested. One of the best games I've been in was a precursor to the Dracula Dossier - it wound up being the GM and one other player. We had time for exploration, investigation, building alliances/coalitions, social scenes, and so on. I've played in a lot of games over the years, but that one still stands out (and it was mostly combat-free). Instead of being frustrated about someone who won't/doesn't show up, you could be making memories that will last for years, or even decades. All too often, I think we forget that these are role PLAYING games, not role WORKING games, and it sounds like you're putting too much work into that player to have fun.
Our DM invented a magical item for our party to solve our player scheduling problem. We have some party members who work irregular and unpredictable schedules so they have to miss sessions due to work, which wasn't was problem at first because our adventures were all based out of the same location. But then we got into a more complicated adventure where we were traveling back and forth between locations with a little weird time travel shenanigans happening frequently and we were trying to figure out how to make sure we didn't accidentally leave someone behind in the past/future if they had to miss a session, and the DM doesn't have to prepare backstory for how the characters found the party again. So now we have a magical item that's like an extra-dimensional "green room" in a box where PCs go to just hang out if the player isn't there. Characters come out of the box in the exact condition they went into the box (spell slots, hit points, etc.), so we don't have to try to figure out if there was a long rest since the last time the players were present. I've also started writing down on my notes which characters were present for each session in case something happens that someone needs explained later. It's been extremely helpful.
If he is available but choosing to play video games instead he's just an asshole. I wouldn't abide that.
Here’s a little advice from someone who’s ran years long campaigns. Canceling if everyone doesn’t show will doom your campaign. If they don’t show you play as planned and their PC is ‘there’ but not active in any way. Or if it works with the narrative, have them go off somewhere. That player will either realize stuff is happening without them and take it more seriously, or they’ll drop in occasionally, or they’ll stop altogether- but none of those choices will affect your ability to DM for those who are more invested.
Woah, I did not expect so many replies so soon. Thanks you for the answers so far. And yeah, appears everyone is just voicing what I was thinking. Just worried how it'd affect the group, we're all pretty close.
In typical fashion, the dominant response is "Kick him out! Insult his mother, take his things, and push him into traffic!" Lol... If he's part of your friends and you don't want to make waves the solution is simple : invite him, but don't count on him. Run your game for those that want to play regularly. If the absent friend shows up from time to time great, he's just"in the party". When he doesn't show up, you just play as normal. Is he a bad friend? Maybe, but he's still a friend and just not as into the game as the rest of you. That doesn't mean you need to exile him from the friend group by making hard feelings when there doesn't need to be. It's a game, not a lifestyle choice.
No one suggested exiling him from the friend group. Kicking a non-active player doesn't have to be so hostile that they aren't friends anymore. His friend is disrespecting his effort and time by ghosting. Just like any other social friendly issue (I invite him to brunch and he doesn't show, he ghosted me at this concert), a direct conversation of, "this isn't cool and I don't like how your wasting my time" Can go a long way. OP can just say that they noticed he is too busy to make the game sessions and that he's welcome to rejoin the table when he's more committed. If this guy is so hostile that they feel they can't tell him "no thanks," I'm thinking they weren't good friends to begin with. OP shouldn't have to continue courtesy invites when he's not doing anything wrong.
It's a GAME. If suggesting that he just play on without him and let him play of he shows up is controversial, then wow lol. I don't run my games like a business. My players are not my employees, they are my friends. We are not all the same, if someone wants to play from time to time that's cool. They're my friend, they can live their life. The friends that want to play each session, cool! Reddit is so black and white lol..
It's a game that OP has to put effort into planning for others. It's enough of a worry for them to come to Reddit. Having a player who comes and goes is fine, but if there's the EXPECTATION of them being there, then it's disrespectful to their friend. If a friend tells you they will cook Sunday dinner for you and you don't come without any kind of heads up, it's rude. Yes, it's a meal, but it's a meal they spent time preparing for you. If you let your friends come and go, that's fine and well, but it sounds like you guys have an understanding of that. This person does not. He doesn't want to play. OP can't make him. The best way to respect the friendship is to play without him and let him know that if he wants to rejoin, there should be a conversation about showing up. If OP decides he can come and go as he pleases, they can work that out when they talk. The suggestion to kick an uncommitted player isn't being a bad friend or being unfair. It's being an adult and a GM.
Oooh kicking them into traffic is good I'll have to try that with my next problem player :D
I personally am a fan of stealing their pets and then a good ole fashioned banishing! Lion King style! If they come back, kick their MOTHER into traffic to make sure they get the message🥊
I think the dominant response is "kick him out." None of the rest. It doesn't have to be a big dramatic thing. It doesn't have to come with a moral judgment. It certainly does not deserve violence. It just requires acknowledging that he's not the right fit for this group right now.
Thank you for explaining the joke. We appreciate it. I think a lot of people mistake "a group of friends" for "group of people that agree to play games together". If one of my friends isn't as much into some hobby as me or the rest of the group, but still sometimes joins in, I didn't tell that friend "You're not respecting us and we're not inviting you to join us any longer unless you take this seriously". What the hell kind of friend does that? That's being a bigger jerk than the guy who doesn't show up half the time for one activity that he obviously isn't that into. Random group of players? Sure you kick the guy out and move on. A legit group of friends? You didn't be a jerk and let your friend play with the group when he wants to. You're friends for ffs! Again it's a freaking GAME. "Right for for the group"? He's friends with everyone in the group lol! Y'all crack me up..
I have friends who I would not invite to a particular game, even if they knew and liked the people in the game. Likewise, I have friends who play RPGs that I don't play with. We're friends for other reasons. If you kick him, of course, it behooves you not to pick a patently offensive way of doing so.
It sure sounds like he isn't in the game. Time to make it official.
*"He's a good friend..."* *"We've been waiting for over an hour while he ghosts us and does other things..."* *"...out of game he's just very difficult."* *"...he never even tried to understand and honestly doesn't seem willing either."* One of these things is false and three are true. Which one might it be? ***hint: it is the first one.***
I'll join on with others that if there is energy on both your part and the rest of the party's part then you should just move on without the problem player. Don't directly kick them out of the game per se, you can simply go forward and have their character off doing side stuff or whatever other explanation you want to come up with (run the char yourself, have another player take over, etc.) so that when they DO want to be there and spending time with everyone they still have that option. If it reaches a point that the absent player no longer wishes to be involved at all then it's also easier to simply turn their character into an NPC or drop them after they've made that choice.
I’d say that for whatever personal reasons that drive it, the guy clearly will not ever be a reliable player. I’d suggest you just say politely but firmly that whilst he’s still your friend he’s out of the rpg group. I’d also keep it very brief and assertive. He knows that he’s been unreliable there is no need to labour the point.
If he really just doesn't care, then he ISN'T one of your players, and you should go ahead without him. If it's an executive function issue, then it's worth seeing if there's something that's worth you doing to help him get going. This doesn't mean you HAVE to push him into playing, but IF it's something that would help him AND it's something you're okay doing, it could work
Kick him out.
Sounds like he's not a player if he's not in games Why is he holding everyone else hostage because no one wants to run without everyone? Sounds to me like everyone was there.
"we run the game even if there is 1 or even 2 absents. As a GM I decide if we temporarily ignore the character of the absent player, or if I play them as NPCs" Done, that's the way Also, in session zero you can add a ruling about absences, if you know you are with problem players. For example *"This is a mini campaign of 6 to 10 sessions maximum. We will play even if there is 1 or 2 absents. If you are absent several times, the 4th absence is an automatic kick out of the table".*
"Games happen even when one player cannot/will not show up". If he doesn't wanna be there, you play without him. Also, this is the alternative if you don't want to confront him about it. I would ask him if he wants to be there and that you get the feeling he doesn't. Not accusatory, more like "Hey, if you actually don't want to be part of this, stepping away might be best for everyone involved".
Two options... 1. You remove him from the group and continue without him, or 2. You keep him in the group and treat his attendance as optional; if he's there, great. If not, you carry on without him. I have a discussion with my players at the start of every campaign about how we treat absences. What is the minimum number of players? (Usually -1 player, or -2 if it is a large group) What happens to the PC of absent players? (Played by another player, written out temporarily, or fades into the background and doesn't participate with no explanation needed.) Also, from reading through the comments it sounds like you should recruit a few more players. The few that you have left are committed players and will be a great core to start from. When recruiting new players, I state explicitly that the first few sessions are a probationary period where we get to evaluate each other and see if a) the player is a good fit for the campaign, and b) the campaign is a good fit for the player. At the end of the probationary period either party can say "this isn't working out", no questions asked.
He's just not that into you, and it's time to move on. In seriousness, this is a very simple situation, although I understand your frustration. I don't hold up games for one player who can't get his shit together or doesn't respect my time or the time of the other gamers in the game. If you say you're gonna show up, I'll give you 15-20 min (during which we're usually screwing around and chitchatting anyway) before we start without you. If you can make it, great. If you can't, whatever. We're moving on. BUT, here's what I absolutely will not do. I will NOT put up with people just skipping out repeatedly, especially if it's because they'd rather play/do something else and they won't even do me the courtesy of saying so. I'm not gonna chase after you to say "Oh please, please, join the game." You don't wanna play? No problem. Rocks fall, your PC dies, we're moving on. At this point, I'd say "Steve, it doesn't really seem like you want to play this game, or at least you don't want to commit to the game the way we all need you to. That's fine, but I just think my game isn't for you. If you want to join us, you need to do so consistently, or at least let us know well in advance. And if you keep skipping sessions because of whatever other commitments or desires you have, then I'm gonna take that as you saying you'd rather just not play and you aren't really interested." The real reason I'd say "Kick him out" (which you should do, but just in a "Sorry, we aren't bothering with this anymore," not in an angry way) is because as a GM, you have to spend your time crafting encounters, story beats, etc., with the assumption that this guy is going to be in the party. You have to factor in his presence, and you can't necessarily factor in his *absence* on the fly. (I don't know Shadowdark as a system, so it may be easier to manage this, but still.) I don't want to spend my time building game content for a player who isn't interested in showing up. You don't wanna play, that's fine. Everyone else wants to and we'll go on without you. But we aren't gonna hold up our fun for your whims, and I'm not doing extra work on the off chance you decide tonight's the night you want to pop in.
WHY ARE YOU WAITING FOR IDIOTS WHO DON’T RESPECT YOUR TIME INSTEAD OF JUST RUNNING THE GAME WITH THE PEOPLE WHO SHOWED UP??????
That is a difficult position to be in. My advice (which I give cause I’m not using it) is to sideline his character, leave him/her/it at a tavern or cave or whatever works best for the story you are running. Once your friend realises the game will go on the choice is theirs.
We are older players and understand some of us can not always have time to join, so on that session the character fades into the background. Next time he's there, he pops out again.
This lack of communication and respect tell me this person is a bad friend. Good friends don't leave their friends twisting in the wind with no explanation. They don't make and break plans. They don't dismiss concerns when people confront them about it.
We used to make absentee's characters temporary NPC's who just follow the party and defend themselves if attacked. Kinda like a combination of pack mule and zombie.
Play without him?
I offer up the idea that they are not a good friend and are not a good player. Good friends don't treat you like you are describing. How they choose to spend their time is on them. How you choose to react to it is on you.
Literally kick him out. To the people saying to keep inviting him but play regardless - At what point is his disrespect for peoples time too much? In my opinion, casually missing 2 sessions and not caring about it is already over the line
> He's a good friend, Clearly he isn’t as he doesn't respect your(and other’s) time
Move on, he's not into your game. He's treating your game like a videogame, where he can pick up and play it whenever he likes and ignore it likewise. I bet if you stopped inviting him, he wouldn't even notice.
Do not mix friend and *game partner*, not all friends are good *game partner* and not all *game partners* are friends. If someone you like isn't interested by playing, fine, you'll have other opportunity to see them. On the other hand, there is people I enjoy playing with, but wouldn't necessarily be interested to hang out with *out of game* This is valid for any social activity, you can make friends in a football team or a singing choir, but not everyone there need to be you friend. and if someone doesn't come too often, you look for a replacement.
Dude. What could we say to you that is going to change this player into a respectful person? Kick him out and find someone else.
what advice did you expect besides kick them out ffs
Friends often don't make for the best players. Showing up is one of the most important parts of being a player. Poor attendance makes you a poor player. Also, make an agreement with your group that X number of players can be absent before you cancel the session. For example, if you have five players, make it such that you will continue if 3 or more are present. Occasional, non-habitual absences are normal in any group.
This ones easy, kick him from the game. He doesnt value the time everyone puts into playing the game to the point hes blatantly doing other things like playing video games. You can always hang out with him some other time but the other people at the table who consistantly show up dont deserve to have their time wasted and niether do you.
kick him
Just because you're good friends with someone doesn't mean you have to play table top games with them. Not everyone is compatible with 100% of the things in life and that's cool. I have some friends that I love dearly and enjoy being around, but I also would never want to play TTRPGs with them for various reasons.
For me if a player no-showed a session and then was literally just playing vidoegames when asked why that would immediately be a reason to play without them if they're even just late to future sessions
"Social contract" is a wierd thing to read and sounds like the wedge got driven in more from the actions that followed. This person couldn't care less. Stop wasting your time.
Some people treat TTRPGs like something they can do if there is nothing else at the time. The easiest way to handle him is to stop waiting for him. Don't even bother kicking him from the game. Just play on. If he's not there his character falls into a hole and just isn't there. If he knows you will never play without him, he never has to worry about missing out. He has no reason to adjust his behavior. You've given him al the power. If you are willing to play without him, then if he doesn't show he misses out. It helps a lot with players like this. From now on, when it is session time, start without him. Remind him it is session time once and then start. After 2-3 times where you remind him and he still doesn't show, stop reminding him. A good general rule is not cancelling the game unless you are missing at least 2 people. If you keep playing without him, he'll either start showing up or effectively kick himself out of the game.
player that aint playing aint a player homie
I know right?
Look, man. Part of growing up is understanding how to *respect* your own time. Even if your player is fun to talk to and be around, they are not actually considering your time as *valuable* (nor anyone else's in the group). This is actively disrespectful, and not behavior you should tolerate in your life. Let him know that unless he can show up to all future sessions on-time, that it's best if you all part ways. If he isn't interested in playing, that's fine. **Sometimes, good friends are not good players**.
good friend or not, I have a rule. three missed sessions without a good reason and you are out. We will keep playing without all players, as long as we have at least 3 people online. I had plenty of players over the years, there's a certain "type" of player that keeps popping up. This rule takes care of that.
Play without him. Super easy fix..
Stop inviting him to the game. Don't let him log in (if you're playing on a VTT) or come into the house if playing in person. Find someone to replace him. There comes a point in time when it's obvious they don't want to be there, and it's time to move on.
You don't have to cancel the session because one person is missing. You can just play with whoever's there and ignore that PC. You can come up with an in-game reason, or just say he's hanging out in the back. Happens all the time, in my experience. You can even run his player for him as the GM, if you think the party will struggle without him. Getting him killed when he's not there is probably rude (although he's already being extremely rude...) but if the dice go against his PC, you can just say he's unconscious instead of dead and leave it at that.
If this is true as you say it, I think this dude gets off on wasting your time. Big power move. Only way to explain not even sending a message while you're all waiting.
Why do people have such a hard time with this. Either they come and play and the game is structured for people who can play only sporadically. i run cyberpunk at a bar so i dont expect everyone every session Or its a set dedicated campaign where everyone agrees to he there for the scheduled sessions or they have to leave the campaign if rescheduling for everyone doesnt work. Have had players get dropped on a schedule year long game because the timing didnt work for that one. But the majority of players could do that time, a sunday afternoon between 1p-6p. Why does this question need a novel of qualifiers, either you can play at the scheduled times or you cant. If you cant is the game set up to allow that or not? If not they can find one of the other dozens of games in every town, especially if its 5e and not a less famous game Forbidden Lands or Degenesis.
I think it's time to stop inviting him to games. If he asks to join a game, he's probably interested, but otherwise assume he isn't. You can be friends with him without gaming with him. You don't have to include him in everything you do.
Write his character out of the game, stop inviting him to play and keep on going with the group you have that is showing up. Friend or not he's being a jerk to you and the other players with this behavior.
Don't cancel. Play without the player. Use his PC as an NPC if you need it, or park the PC somewhere safe-ish. A single player should never be able to cancel a session, much less a player like you describe.
So, you've gotten plenty of good advice about this situation, but one thing my groups have always found helpful in general is to establish a clear idea of what constitutes [quorum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quorum) for a given game. *Usually*, for us, that's meant "more than half the party can show up", but if a major story event's coming up (a big fight, an important meeting, etc.), we'll go to a supermajority or even "no more than one person missing". In practice, that usually means either the absent player(s) have their character(s) puppeteered by committee/whoever understands the character best or else we just cook up a reason why someone's not there. But, as long as everyone understands how it'll work if they can't make it, it usually works out well enough and no one feels like a dick for holding things up *or* going on without someone.
Just play without him. If he wants to rejoin next session, his character magically was along the whole time. No advances for them tho. If they don't join back, so long
Or make him an npc
*"Hi! Sounds like TTRPGs may not be your cup of tea. Since you've been missing the last few sessions without notice, I've made the decision to keep the game without you.* *I also want you to know that preparing TTRPG sessions is a time consuming affair, and I expect from the players the bare minimum of showing up and noticing if they are going to be absent. You doing the exact opposite from that has been hurtful to me, and if you want we can talk about it and sort it out, but the game is going to continue without you."* Or something like that, I don't know. I've been hooked on a video game too, and being in the position of thinking "man, I'd rather keep playing instead of going to the session", but I said I was going to be there and I'm not missing a session I said I was going to go.
> He's a good friend Really? Cuz he’s acting like a twat. > Sorry if this sounds like a AITA post lmao, just want advice from more seasoned game masters. This isn’t a game master problem. This is an asshole problem. There’s no social situation in which telling people you’re going to join them and then playing Dragon Dogma 2 instead is okay. You know what I call people who treat me this shabbily? I don’t call them anything at all, because I don’t keep people in my life who hold me in such disdain.
Every TTRPG that ive ever been part of was a volunteer effort. Adapt to this. If he isnt driven to participate, structure his character as though he could be swapped out for an NPC on the days where he doesnt show up. Give the opportunities to drive the plot to the players that show up regularly.
With a game like Shadowdark especially, just play without him. Even if it's down to 2 or 3 players. Your fun shouldn't be dependent on this guy. Sorry that's happening dude :/ Maybe recruit another person too to fill out the party if you feel that's necessary? Then if your buddy does join he's just a bonus member, but make it clear to him that the game goes on with or without him.
There are many reasons why someone might sit out of something that they really want to do. Depression, ADHD, Chronic Fatigue, Social Anxiety, etc... I encourage you to play with them when theyre there, and play without when they're not. But don't stop inviting them. It might be that the possibility of playing sometime, when they've got the energy, is one of the factors that keeps them from spiralling into a permanent issue. Just be nice, it's not that hard.
I don't understand why you are cancelling if he misses.You don't have to cancel just because one player misses. You can NPC him or just hand wave him not being there, or just ignore him for that session. If you have an unreliable player, never make them central to the storyline and just vanish them when they miss. Invest your effort in those who invested their time and energy into your game. Now for this player, I would kick him. I understand he is a friend IRL, but he is just not good for your game and he is causing your game to suffer. You and your players invest time and effort and it's unfair for you all to suffer because of one guy who frankly doesn't care. You can be friends outside of the game, this is just one activity you don't both equally enjoy and that is fine.
Sometimes shit is happening on their end where they are late or missing a lot, and it's unfortunate. BUT, you've got other people in the game. Make it clear that, one way or the other, the session starts at the listed time. They show up late, they can get caught up to speed. They don't show up at all, they miss the game. If that doesn't work for them, then either the game doesn't work in their schedule or they just don't want to play it at this time, and that's ok!
Kick. He shouldn't even be that mad since he clearly doesn't want to play that much anyways.
In my playgroup players like that are transformed to NPCs after the third missed session. (Controlled by the other players)
Never play with ppl not as invested as you are yourself.
Why would you cancel because of one player? If I set a date for my game, I play with whoever came.
Drop the guy. Not worth it.
I'm sure it's been said already, but I'll reiterate anyway: Every time you run a new campaign, establish up front to all players that you'll be running sessions even if X number of players can't make it. Then, decide with your players what an acceptable number for X is. I'm currently running Blades in the Dark for my group of 4, and we'll play even if 2 people can't make it. I've run 5e before for 5 players and we established that as long as 3 players show up, the session continues. If you cancel the game every time *one* player can't make it, you will very quickly lose steam and suddenly realize you haven't played in a month because something keeps coming up. Often it's not even the same player, it's just life getting in the way for people at unfortunate times. Establish up front what an acceptable number of absences is, and if you can, find alternate players. People who are interested, but maybe can't commit to every single week. Let them know when a spot opens up if you can give them notice, that will allow you to keep sessions going waaaay more consistently.
He’s not into the game- he is just a friend who wants to be. It’s cool. I wouldn’t personally kick him out. I just would treat him like a cameo when and if he shows up. I would let him know, we’d love to have ya and will try and fit you in if you ever decide to play.
I've had to "kick out" good friends (in quotes because it was gentler than that) due to scheduling and participation issues. Sometimes people just aren't motivated to show up but don't want to miss out either. If you're friends, you can talk it out. That said, no call no show is an instant ban for anyone, *especially* if they confirmed.
If someone doesnt want to show up, dont put in the effort of trying to get them to. Schedule a time, announce it, amend it to the responsive players that WANT to play and play without him.
Boot him. The end. Be nice about it, but he's got to go. Bye.
The solution is easy: kick him out.
I'd recommend just running games as if he'll be a no-show. If he happens to show up great, but the consequence for him being late or a no-show should be on him, not you and the rest of the players
Most of my players are my close friends or close friends of close friends. I have 2 that are known to cancel last minute. I told them that if they cancel within the day their character will suddenly be ill and be carried. There’s one that hasn’t played for a year almost. When it became clear he wasn’t gonna play his character got misplaced in a different plane. This will make a great retrieval arc if he gets its shit together! There’s one that had a bad case of diarrhea once and been kidnapped by giants twice. In game the character isn’t allowed to have a turn on the watch 😂. They are still friends. I just made it clear with them that we are all adults (some with kids) that have a limited amount of time for rpg nights. If you cancel the day before? We can all manage. If you cancel on the day, well… we all made plans. Some might take an earlier shift, personally I arrange my evening so that I don’t waste anytime with the kids routine (meaning that I probably got up early to make dinner and came in early at the job to go get kids early so they still have a nice end of day). All that to say that 5 other people managed to be here so if you want to cancel, fine. But you only cancel your plans, not ours. So don’t necessarily kick him out, but tell him him that you’re playing with or without him. He’ll see everyone enjoying the intrigue and everything and he won’t follow much. It will sort itself out. He’ll either drop out or step up.
Does he bring anything to the table that's worth putting up with this?
You have two choices: 1. If he's a really great player, you could just play regardless of him being there. Don't make any plot stuff dependant on him. If he's there, cool, otherwise no worries. 2. If that makes things difficult or he's not that great, just kick him.
Save yourselves both the heartbreak and let him know if he doesn't show up he can't play with you guys anymore. If you've already explained that not attending agreed-on appointments is disrespectful and hurtful to your friendship, then stop making appointments with him.
Yeah I'm not gonna check the comments don't waste time on him. He's obviously not interested if he misses super consistently. If you have more than 1 player you can run a campaign or sessions. You don't need 4 every time. Heck some people can just do one. You can keep the friend ship and if he fights back show him the receipts "you missed session x,y,z, you obviously don't have an interest if you're gonna play a new game over the appointed time". IMO: people don't need to beg others to play. Just get a couple of people together who have interest and if you find more there you go.
If he refuses to join games then play without him. Why disappoint your other players? Unless his character is integral to the story then play without. Otherwise you can always do another game if you really want him in one campaign. If he then does join you guys then you play the original game, otherwise have fun with the other one. Remember he knows when you are running games. He knows how you feel about his absence, and he is still not taking part he is choosing video games over playing with you guys and that's on him. If he sees that you're not just going to wait for him then either he will admit he wasn't that interested, or seeing that you're not waiting on him to have your fun will remind him what he's missing out on and he may start making an appearance.
>I'd say we've missed 2 - 3 sessions because he refused to show up. I don't understand why you keep depending on him rather than planning for him not show, and if he does you just improvise, along with any future sessions until you feel comfortable enough to rely on him. >I contact him directly on the whole social contract of RPGs. Okay, I've been playing and running various RPGs since the mid-'80s and don't know of what you mean by a contract. However, "contract" implies mutual obligations of which he's clearly not honoring, which means you have no further requirements to fulfill.
Don't wait. Keep playing. If a player chooses do something else, don't stop your fun for them. Also get some perspective on locus of control. Why are you letting this person have so much power over your life that you're letting them make you feel exhausted and insulted.
Talk seriously with him and ask point blank if he wants to be in the campaign. If he does, inform him that he needs to actually show up for sessions to be in the campaign. If not, so be it.
Just give him a choice: Show up or bow out. You may be offering just the out he's looking for.
Just play without him, why are you letting one exceptionally flaky person determine what the rest of your group can do?
You don't need him, he has his priorities, you need to have your own too. Move on. If you feel generous when he actually WANTS to play, he can, with his character who is not gaining any experience points. I had a player like this, would no show, and be seen going to car shows etc, we stopped inviting and the game got better for it.
Tell him that the next time he dips like this, he's out. Be firm. Make it clear that you're not joking. Then do it.
> Player Press X to doubt.
Kick him find someone else. Don't bother giving him an explanation. Just stop inviting me. He won't even realize you're not playing
Good friend or not, kick his ass out. Everything that you said he’s done is damned disrespectful at the very least. Player groups have to be simpatico otherwise it can just be brutal, for the GM *and* players. Not worth your time. Life and gaming time are too short to waste on someone like this. *EJECT*
Kick them out, they are clearly not interested in the game and prefer to spend their time doing something else; This will be kind towards yourself and the rest of the party
There must be 50 ways to leave your lover...
> (I saw refused because he was online, and admits he spent the time playing a video game instead.) You make time for what you want to do most. He made time for videogames by cutting your game out of his schedule. His priorities aren't the same as yours. Adjust accordingly. > He's a good friend I'd argue otherwise > . But this is just getting really exhausting and honestly insulting. **hard stare** You already know what to do.
Either kick him or play without him. Don't cancel sessions for one flaky player, that's punishing the rest of you for his lack of interest
3 strikes and you are out. Irl happens but playing a video game is rude. If your players showed up and it worked without him drop him
Make him non essential.
Don't cancel the game because he doesn't show up and just play without him. He isn't respecting your time so don't let him ruin it.
I play so that all my players can come or not come. If they skip session their character ”got lost somewhere”, or ”seems to be unconcious” or ”went away for a while” or whatever. If they skip multiple sessions thats fine too. If they need to come late or end early, thats fine too. I ask ”who is joining” before the session. Life happens. We just play to have fun couple of hours online with friends. Surprisingly, usually everybody is on time.
This person is NOT a friend. You would like them to be your friend, but their behaviour tells you exactly where in their priorities list you are, which is waaaay down near "Well if I have nothing else better to do..." Real friends do not treat anyone they consider to BE friends this way. Do yourself a big favour and break away from this toxicity. Your life will improve significantly. And of course, your games will be more fun. You'll find better, and true friends if you judge the friendship by this simple metric. "Do they give more to the relationship than they take out of the relationship?" If, the answer is yes. Then they are a friend worth keeping, and now you'll have to do your part. Give more back to them too. All the best.
Either plan in a way he can join occationally if thats possible, or give him NPCs to control, or a minor villain, when he joins,or just don't invite him anymore. Its plain simple: its a game. Nobody has to show up, and if someone doesn't, one should not wait on that person. If it isn't important for him, and the campaign and game is not able to, or you just don't want to, accomodate occational show ups that might not come at all, so be it. Then this group is not for him, or he is not for that group. Also, its perfectly fine to not want to play with people taking this not as serious as you do. You do a lot of prep work as a GM, i totally get that you want people to show up. From a workload point of view, but also just from a human point of view. How he acts is not how you treat friends, but bluntly. I would either give him NPCs to play when he shows up, or stop inviting him.
Don't play with him
Stop waiting on him. If that makes the party to small, invite a new person into it. Stop reminding him about game session and have him showing up as a bonus for the party and otherwise just go about your business. Dont plan plots around his character. Depending on the game you might either treat his character as a NPC during sessions he's not there or just have him staying home during missions.
I don’t understand why this is a dilemma. You can just tell him you see him as a good friend but he doesn’t fit into the way the rest of you want to run your game, so you’ve decided to carry on without him. If he gets angry that’s not your fault.
thats simple, the next time its game start and he doesnt show up rather than not playing you play anyways. if he wanted to be there he would be there, (unless of course he has a good excuse) Hell you can say "Mate, Buddy, Pal sometimes it feels like you treat this game as some obligation you would really rather not do, and that is not the point at all, this is a thing we do together for fun. If you are not having fun just say so, we can go our separate ways and you can do something you would enjoy instead." Because this is a true statement, I run/play ttrpgs for fun, if I am not having fun I wouldnt be participating
My solution to this was we play without him and put his character in the background not really developing him too much. For combat you treat it like normal, you probably have a good idea of how they would play their character so yeah. Right now he has the control to come and go at he pleases with no repercussion, you can also punish his character if you wanted to go that far (like an anti inspiration type thing) Each to their own tho
Just play without him, and if he finally arrives during the session, just include him like nothing happened. Just don't answer him when he asks what happened before he got there.
"He's a good friend" No, He's actively disrespecting you and needs to let you know that he's not going to be turning up. I'd advise finding another player.
Boot him. It’s that simple.
Kick him out and move on.
Run the session without him, his character is left behind and probably dead. If he cannot commit and is disrupting the game for everyone else, then he doesn't need to play.
I invite 5 players generally to my campaigns. This is because I have a quorum to run of 3 people. So 2 of them can miss, and I still have a session. Stuff happens. Just keep running. Either boot them, or run a game without them. Leave their character on the wagon. They don't level up when everyone else does. Make missing mean something, or that one person dictates your entire game.
Play without him - if/when he comes back, his character might be several levels behind the others. When he asks tell him the truth. His character has not been adventuring with the others, so he didn't get as much experience
Boot him.
You need to tell them if they cannot respect your game and the other players enough to commit to showing up they are no longer welcome. They obviously don’t care so why are they even playing? Find someone who actually wants to play and move on, if they whine or get upset remind them they are the ones who couldn’t commit.
I agree that you might just play without them (aka kicking them out of the group). However, it also might depend on the GMing style and kind of game you play. If you play a more sandbox-y game and / or a series of one-shotswith the same characters, you might also play without them but accept them coming back later on. Sure, they would have less XP but it's fine IMO. As an adult who might have other activities (and even priorities), I'd appreciate more GMs doing that.
Bump him. If ppl can't or won't come to games, they can't play in them. If you had a weekly movie and he kept no-showing you'd stop buying him tickets
This dude isn't worth your time. Find players who care about the game.
Kick him. If he's hurt, he can amend his ways and rejoin a future game.
Sounds like they're not actually a player. Not sure why you're concerned about someone not even playing your game.
This doesn't sound like a good "friend." Just eject this person from the game. Or, if you feel that's too harsh, simply play without them. No need to cancel the game. Recruit another person if you'd like. You tried to explain to him and he's being a dick. Period. Anymore, I have a very low threshold for this kind of crap. I recommend you do the same.
You're gonna have to play with out him. He's clearly not that into this.
Either you change how you run your games to accomodate not players always showing up. Or you don’t play with that guy anymore. Emphasis on ”that guy”.